Theory and Decision

, Volume 46, Issue 2, pp 159–199

Anxiety and Decision Making with Delayed Resolution of Uncertainty

  • George Wu
Article

Abstract

In many real-world gambles, a non-trivial amount of time passes before the uncertainty is resolved but after a choice is made. An individual may have a preference between gambles with identical probability distributions over final outcomes if they differ in the timing of resolution of uncertainty. In this domain, utility consists not only of the consumption of outcomes, but also the psychological utility induced by an unresolved gamble. We term this utility anxiety. Since a reflective decision maker may want to include anxiety explicitly in analysis of unresolved lotteries, a multiple-outcome model for evaluating lotteries with delayed resolution of uncertainty is developed. The result is a rank-dependent utility representation (e.g., Quiggin, 1982), in which period weighting functions are related iteratively. Substitution rules are proposed for evaluating compound temporal lotteries. The representation is appealing for a number of reasons. First, probability weights can be interpreted as the cognitive attention allocated to certain outcomes. Second, the model disaggregates strength of preference from temporal risk aversion and thus provides some insight into the old debate about the relationship between von Neumann–Morgenstern utility functions and strength of preference value functions.

Decision analysis Risk theory Delayed resolution of uncertainty Rank-dependent utility Stochastic stationarity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Aczél, J. (1966), Lectures on Functional Equations and Their Applications, New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Aumann, R.J. (1962), Utility theory without the completeness axiom, Econometrica30: 445–462.Google Scholar
  3. Bell, D.E. (1981), Components of risk aversion, in J.P. Brans (ed.), Operational Research’ 81, Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 371–378.Google Scholar
  4. Bell, D.E. (1982), Regret in decision making under uncertainty, Operations Research30: 961–981.Google Scholar
  5. Bell, D.E. (1985), Disappointment in decision making under uncertainty, Operations Research33: 1–27.Google Scholar
  6. Bell, D.E. and Raiffa, H. (1988), Marginal value and intrinsic risk aversion, in D.E. Bell, H. Raiffa, and A. Tversky (eds.), Decision Making: Descriptive, Normative, and Prescriptive Interactions, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 384–397.Google Scholar
  7. Bewley, T.F. (1986), Knightian decision theory: Part I, Cowles Foundation. Discussion Paper 807.Google Scholar
  8. Camerer, C.F. and Ho, T.-H. (1994), Violations of the betweenness axiom and nonlinearity in probability, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty8: 167–196.Google Scholar
  9. Cantor, S. (1991), A decision analytic approach to prenatal diagnosis, Ph.D. Dissertation. Decision Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  10. Hong, C.-S., Karni, E. and Safra, Z. (1987), Risk aversion in the theory of expected utility with rank dependent probabilities, Journal of Economic Theory42: 370–381.Google Scholar
  11. Dréze, J. and Modigliani, F. (1972), Consumption decisions under uncertainty, Journal of Economic Theory3: 308–355.Google Scholar
  12. Dyer, J. and Sarin, R.K. (1982), Relative risk aversion, Management Science28: 875–886.Google Scholar
  13. Ellsberg, D. (1954), Classical notions of measurable utility, Economic Journal64: 528–556.Google Scholar
  14. Fishburn, P.C. (1970), Utility Theory for Decision Making,New York: JohnWiley.Google Scholar
  15. Fishburn, P.C. (1991), Nontransitive preferences in decision theory, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty4: 113–134.Google Scholar
  16. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979), Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk, Econometrica47: 263–291.Google Scholar
  17. Keeney, R.L. and Raiffa, H. (1976), Decisions with Multiple Objectives, New York: JohnWiley.Google Scholar
  18. Keeney, R.L. and Winkler, R. (1985), Evaluating decision strategies for equity of public risks, Operations Research33, 955–970.Google Scholar
  19. Koopmans, T.C. (1960), Stationary ordinal utility and impatience, Econometrica28: 287–309.Google Scholar
  20. Kreps, D.M. (1988), Notes on the Theory of Choice, Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  21. Kreps, D.M. and Porteus, E.L. (1978), Temporal resolution of uncertainty and dynamic choice theory, Econometrica46: 185–200.Google Scholar
  22. Loewenstein, G. (1987), Anticipation and the valuation of delayed consumption, Economic Journal97: 666–684.Google Scholar
  23. Loomes, G. and Sugden, R. (1982), Regret theory: an alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty, Economic Journal92: 805–824.Google Scholar
  24. Loomes, G. and Sugden, R. (1986), Disappointment and dynamic consistency in choice under uncertainty, Review of Economic Studies53: 271–282.Google Scholar
  25. Luce, R.D. and Raiffa, H. (1957), Games and Decisions, New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  26. Machina, M.J. (1984), Temporal risk and nature of induced preferences, Journal of Economic Theory33: 199–231.Google Scholar
  27. Machina, M.J. (1989), Dynamic consistency and non-expected utility models of choice under uncertainty, Journal of Economic Literature27: 1622–1668.Google Scholar
  28. Markowitz, H. (1959), Portfolio Selection: Efficient Diversification of Investments, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Marschak, J. (1950), Rational behavior, uncertain prospects, and measurable utility, Econometrica18: 111–141.Google Scholar
  30. Miyamoto, J.M. and Wakker, P. (1996), Multiattribute utility theory without expected utility foundations, Operations Research44: 313–326.Google Scholar
  31. Mossin, J. (1969), A note of uncertainty and preference in a temporal context, American Economic Review59: 172–174.Google Scholar
  32. Pope, R. (1983), The pre-outcome period and the utility of gambling, in B.P.Google Scholar
  33. Stigum and F. Wenstop (eds.), Foundations of Utility and Risk Theory with Applications, Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 137–177.Google Scholar
  34. Pratt J.W. (1964), Risk aversion in the small and in the large, Econometrica32: 122–136.Google Scholar
  35. Prelec, D. (1990), A ‘pseudo-endowment’ effect, and its implication for some recent non-expected utility models, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty3: 247–259.Google Scholar
  36. Prelec, D. (in press), The probability weighting function, Econometrica.Google Scholar
  37. Quiggin, J. (1982), A theory of anticipated utility, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization3: 323–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Raiffa, H. (1986), Back from prospect theory to utility theory, in M. Grauer, M. Thompson, and A. Wierzbicki (eds.), Plural Rationality and Interactive Decision Processes, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 100–113.Google Scholar
  39. Röell, A. (1987), Risk aversion in Quiggin and Yaari's rank-ordermodel of choice under uncertainty, Economic Journal97, 143–159.Google Scholar
  40. Sarin, R.K. (1982), Strength of preference and risky choice, Operations Research30: 982–995.Google Scholar
  41. Segal, U. (1984), Nonlinear decision weights with the independence axiom, UCLA Working Paper No. 353.Google Scholar
  42. Segal, U. (1987), Some remarks on Quiggin's anticipated utility, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization8: 145–154.Google Scholar
  43. Spence, M. and Zeckhauser, R. (1972), The effect of the timing of consumption decisions and the resolution of lotteries on the choice of lotteries, Econometrica40: 401–403.Google Scholar
  44. Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1991), Loss aversion in riskless choice: a reference-dependent model, Quarterly Journal of Economics106: 1039–1061.Google Scholar
  45. Wakker, P.P. (1994), Separating marginal utility and probabilistic risk aversion, Theory and Decision36: 1–44.Google Scholar
  46. Wu, G. (1996), Temporal risk and probability weights: rank-, sign-, and timing dependent utility, Harvard Business SchoolWorking Paper 92-093.Google Scholar
  47. Wu, G. and Gonzalez, R. (1996), Curvature of the probability weighting function, Management Science, 42: 1676–1690.Google Scholar
  48. Yaari, M.E. (1987), The dual theory of choice under risk, Econometrica55: 95–117.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • George Wu
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of BusinessThe University of ChicagoChicagoUSA Phone

Personalised recommendations