Abstract
Recent studies (McCord, 1986; McCord and de Neufville, 1986) indicate that new methods can reduce some of the difficulties encountered when assessing von Neumann-Morgenstern utility functions over single dimensional outcomes (McCord and de Neufville, 1985, 1983; Hershey et al., 1982; Allais, 1979). But the outcomes of realistic decision problems are characterized by more than one dimension or attribute. And although “multi-attribute” utility functions have been used in such problems for some time (Keeney and Raiffa, 1976), there is no data indicating the validity of these functions. Experience with utility functions over one attribute implies that empirical investigations must be performed before any confidence can be placed in an assessed multi-attribute utility function. In this paper we develop a new research instrument, the three-dimensional “assessment cube,” to investigate the sensitivity of two-dimensional utility functions to the parameters used in their assessment. The cube can also be used to determine the validity of the “pricing out” concept (Keeney and Raiffa, 1976) when constructing value functions under certainty. We also present empirical results obtained with this instrument which indicate that the utility functions do, indeed, depend on the values of the assessment parameters and that the “pricing out” method can lead to invalid results.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allais, M., 1979, ‘The So-Called Allais Paradox and Rational Decisions Under Uncertainty,’ in M. Allais and O. Hagen, (eds.), Expected Utility Hypotheses and the Allais Paradox, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland, 427–682.
McCord, M., 1986, ‘Reducing Utility Dependence on Probability: Empirical Disaggregate Results,’ paper presented at the Third International Conference on the Foundations of Utility and Risk Theory, Aix-en-Provence, F, 10–13 June, 1986.
McCord, M., and R. de Neufville: 1986, ‘Lottery Equivalents: Reduction of the Certainty Effect Problem in Utility Assessment,’ Management Science, 32(1), 56–60.
McCord, M., and R. de Neufville: 1985, ‘Assessment Response Surface: Investigating Utility Dependence on Probability,’ Theory and Decision, 18, 263–85.
McCord, M., and R. de Neufville: 1983, ‘Empirical Demonstration that Expected Utility Decision Analysis is not Operational,’ Foundations of Utility and Risk Theory with Applications, in B. P Stigum and F. Wenstop (eds.), D. Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland, 181–99.
Frisch, R.: 1926, ‘Sur un Probléme d’Economie Pure,’ Norsk Matematisk Forenings Skrifter, 1(16), 1–40.
Hershey, J. C., H. C. Kunreuther, and P. J. H. Schoemaker: 1982, ‘Sources of Bias in Assessment Procedures for Utility Functions,’ Management Science, 28(8), 936–54.
Keeney, R. L. and H. Raiffa: 1976, Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preference and Value Tradeoffs, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Pareto, V.: 1927, Manuel d’Economie Politique, 2nd Ed., Marcel Girard, Paris.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1988 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McCord, M.R., Leotsarakos, C. (1988). Investigating Utility and Value Functions with an “Assessment Cube”. In: Munier, B.R. (eds) Risk, Decision and Rationality. Theory and Decision Library, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4019-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4019-2_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-8283-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-4019-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive