Journal of Risk and Uncertainty

, Volume 2, Issue 1, pp 105–117 | Cite as

Decision analysis using lottery-dependent utility

  • Joao L. Becker
  • Rakesh K. Sarin
Article

Abstract

In this article we show how the lottery-dependent expected utility (LDEU) model can be used in decision analysis. The LDEU model is an extension of the classical expected utility (EU) model and yet permits preference patterns that are infeasible in the EU model. We propose a framework for constructing decision trees in a particular way that permits us to use the principle of optimality and thus the divide and conquer strategy for analyzing complex problems using the LDEU model. Our approach may be applicable to some other nonlinear utility models as well. The result is that, if desired, decision analysis can be conducted without assuming the restrictive substitution principle/independence axiom.

Key words

decision analysis Iottery-dependent expected utility decision-tree models 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. BeckerJ.L. and R.K.Sarin. (1987). “Lottery Dependent Utility,” Management Science, 11, 1367–1382.Google Scholar
  2. ChewS.H. and K.R.MacCrimmon. (1979), “Alpha-Nu Choice Theory: A Generalization of Expected Utility Theory,” University of British Columbia, Faculty of Commerce and Business Administration, Vancouver, working paper no. 669.Google Scholar
  3. ChewS.H. (1983). “A Generalization of the Quasilinear Mean with Applications to the Measurement of Income Inequality and Decision Theory Resolving the Allais Paradox,” Econometrica 51, 1065–1092.Google Scholar
  4. Fishburn, P.C. Nonlinear Preference and Utility Theory, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  5. KahnemanD. and A.Tversky. (1979). “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk,” Econometrica 47, 263–291.Google Scholar
  6. LavalleI.H., and K.R.Wapman. (1986). “Rolling Back Decision Trees Requires the Independence Axiom,” Management Science 32, 382–385.Google Scholar
  7. Luce, R.D. (1988). “Rank-Dependent, Subjective Expected Utility Representations,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  8. LuceR.D., and L.Narens. (1985). “Classification of Concatenation Measurement Structures According to Scale Type,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology 29, 1–72.Google Scholar
  9. MachinaM.J. (1982). “Expected Utility' Analysis without the Independence Axiom,” Econometrica 50, 277–323.Google Scholar
  10. vonNeumannJ., and O.Morgenstern. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994; 2nd edition, 1947; 3rd edition, 1953.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joao L. Becker
    • 1
  • Rakesh K. Sarin
  1. 1.Faculdade de, Ciencias EconomicasUFRGSBrazil

Personalised recommendations