Theory and Decision

, Volume 66, Issue 4, pp 301–315

On the Application of Multiattribute Utility Theory to Models of Choice

Article

Abstract

Ellsberg (The Quarterly Journal of Economics 75, 643–669 (1961); Risk, Ambiguity and Decision, Garland Publishing (2001)) argued that uncertainty is not reducible to risk. At the center of Ellsberg’s argument lies a thought experiment that has come to be known as the three-color example. It has been observed that a significant number of sophisticated decision makers violate the requirements of subjective expected utility theory when they are confronted with Ellsberg’s three-color example. More generally, such decision makers are in conflict with either the ordering assumption or the independence assumption of subjective expected utility theory. While a clear majority of the theoretical responses to these violations have advocated maintaining ordering while relaxing independence, a persistent minority has advocated abandoning the ordering assumption. The purpose of this paper is to consider a similar dilemma that exists within the context of multiattribute models, where it arises by considering indeterminacy in the weighting of attributes rather than indeterminacy in the determination of probabilities as in Ellsberg’s example.

Keywords

multiattribute revealed preference descriptive uncertainty methodology 

JEL Classifications

D12 D81 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arlo-Costa, H. and Helzner, J. (2005), Comparative ignornace and the ellsberg phenomenon, in Cozman, F., Nau, R. and Seidenfeld, T. (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Imprecise Probabilities and their Applications, pp. 21–30.Google Scholar
  2. Ellsberg D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 75, 643–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ellsberg, D. (2001), Risk, Ambiguity and Decision, Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Gardenfors P. and Sahlin N. (1982), Unreliable probabilities, risk taking, and decision making. Synthese 53, 361–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kahn B. and Meyer R. (1991), Consumer multiattribute judgments under attribute-weight uncertainty. Journal of Consumer Research 17, 508–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Keeney, R. and Raiffa, H. (1993), Decisions with Multiple Objectives, Cambridge University. The Cambridge edition is a republication of the 1976 work.Google Scholar
  7. Keynes, J. (1921), A Treatise on Probability, MacMillan.Google Scholar
  8. Klein, J. (2007), New york city gifted and talented program test information 2007-2008: For students in pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, 1st grade and 2nd grade, Technical Report, New York City Department of Education.Google Scholar
  9. Knight, F. (1921), Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
  10. Kreps, D. (1988), Notes on the Theory of Choice, Westview.Google Scholar
  11. Kyburg H. (1968), Bets and beliefs. American Philosophical Quarterly 5, 63–78Google Scholar
  12. Levi I. (1974), On indeterminate probabilities. Journal of Philosophy 71, 391–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Levi, I. (1980), The Enterprise of Knowledge, MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Levi I. (1986), The paradoxes of allais and ellsberg. Economics and Philosophy 2, 23–53Google Scholar
  15. Luce, R. and Raiffa, H. (1989), Games and Decisions: Introduction and Critical Survey, Dover Publications. The Dover edition is a republication of the 1957 work.Google Scholar
  16. Ray P. (1973), Independence of irrelevant alternatives. Econometrica 32, 987–991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Seidenfeld T. (1988), Decision theory without ‘independence’ or without ‘ordering’: What is the difference?. Economics and Philosophy 4, 267–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sen, A. (1970), Collective Choice and Social Welfare, Holden Day.Google Scholar
  19. Sen A. (1971), Choice functions and revealed preference. Review of Economic Studies 38(3): 307–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Weber M. (1985), A method of mutliattribute decision making with incomplete information. Management Science 31(11): 1365–1371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wilkie W. and Pessemier E. (1973), Issues in marketing’s use of multi-attribute models. Journal of Marketing Research 10(4): 428–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations