Decision Theory

  • Thorsten Hens
  • Marc Oliver Rieger
Part of the Springer Texts in Business and Economics book series (STBE)


How should we decide? And how do we decide? These are the two central questions of Decision Theory: in the prescriptive (rational) approach we ask how rational decisions should be made, and in the descriptive (behavioral) approach we model the actual decisions made by individuals. Whereas the study of rational decisions is classical, behavioral theories have been introduced only in the late 1970s, and the presentation of some very recent results in this area will be the main topic for us. In later chapters we will see that both approaches can sometimes be used hand in hand, for instance, market anomalies can be explained by a descriptive, behavioral approach, and these anomalies can then be exploited by hedge fund strategies which are based on rational decision criteria.


Utility Function Risk Aversion Prospect Theory Stochastic Dominance Expected Utility Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. [AB03]
    C.D. Aliprantis and O. Burkinshaw, Locally Solid Riesz Spaces with Applications to Economics, Mathematical surveys and monographs, vol. 105, American Mathematical Society, 2003.Google Scholar
  2. [Abd00]
    M. Abdeallaoui, Parameter-Free Elicitation of Utilities and Probability Weighting Functions, Management Science 46 (2000), 1497–1512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [Arr74]
    K.J. Arrow, The Use of Unbounded Utility Functions in Expected-Utility Maximization: Response, The Quarterly Journal Of Economics 88 (1974), no. 1, 136–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [Aum77]
    R.J. Aumann, The St. Petersburg Paradox: A Discussion of Some Recent Comments, Journal of Economic Theory 14 (1977), no. 2, 443–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [BC97]
    M.H. Birnbaum and A. Chavez, Tests of Theories of Decision Making: Violations of Branch Independence and Distribution Independence, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 71 (1997), no. 2, 161–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [BE92]
    L. Blume and D. Easley, Evolution and Market Behavior, Journal of Economic Theory 58 (1992), no. 1, 9–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [Ber38]
    D. Bernoulli, Specimen Theoriae de Mensura Sortis, Commentarii Academiae Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae (Proceedings of the royal academy of science, St. Petersburg) (1738).Google Scholar
  8. [Bir05]
    M.H. Birnbaum, A Comparison of Five Models that Predict Violations of First-Order Stochastic Dominance in Risky Decision Making, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 31 (2005), no. 3, 263–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [Bla05]
    P.R. Blavatskyy, Back to the St. Petersburg Paradox?, Management Science 51 (2005), no. 4, 677–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [BN98]
    M.H. Birnbaum and J.B. Navarrete, Testing Descriptive Utility Theories: Violations of Stochastic Dominance and Cumulative Independence, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 17 (1998), 49–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [BP00]
    H. Bleichrodt and J.L. Pinto, A Parameter-Free Elicitation of the Probability Weighting Function in Medical Decision Analysis, Management science 46 (2000), 1485–1496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [CH94]
    C. Camerer and T.H. Ho, Violations of the Betweenness Axiom and Nonlinearity in Probability, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 8 (1994), 167–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [DGHP05]
    E. De Giorgi, T. Hens, and T. Post, Prospect Theory and the Size and Value Premium Puzzles, NHH Finance & Management Science Discussion Paper No. 20/2005, 2005.Google Scholar
  14. [Ell61]
    D. Ellsberg, Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 75 (1961), no. 4, 643–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [Fel50]
    W. Feller, An Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications, 3 ed., vol. 1, Wiley India Pvt. Ltd., 1950.Google Scholar
  16. [Fel69]
    M.S. Feldstein, Mean-Variance Analysis in the Theory of the Firm under Uncertainty, Review of Economic Studies 36 (1969), 5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [Gol04]
    C. Gollier, The Economics of Risk and Time, The MIT Press, 2004.Google Scholar
  18. [GR07]
    A. Gerber and K.I.M. Rohde, Anomalies in Intertemporal Choice?, Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 07–12 (2007).Google Scholar
  19. [HW07a]
    T. Hens and M. Wang, Hat Finance eine kulturelle Dimension?, Finanzmärkte – Effizienz und Sicherheit (Brigitte Strebel-Aerni, ed.), Schulthess, 2007.Google Scholar
  20. [Ing07]
    J. Ingersoll, Non-Monotonicity of the Tversky-Kahneman Probability-Weighting Function: A Cautionary Note, European Financial Management (2007).Google Scholar
  21. [JB03]
    E.T. Jaynes and G.L. Bretthorst, Probability Theory: the Logic of Science, Cambridge University Press, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [Kar78]
    U.S. Karmarkar, Subjectively Weighted Utility: A Descriptive Extension of the Expected Utility Model, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 21 (1978), 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [KDS99]
    D. Kahneman, E. Diener, and N. Schwarz, Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology, Russell Sage Foundation, 1999.Google Scholar
  24. [Kni21]
    F.H. Knight, Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1921.Google Scholar
  25. [KR95]
    G. Keren and P. Roelofsma, Immediacy and Certainty in Intertemporal Choice, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 63 (1995), no. 3, 287–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [KT79]
    D. Kahneman and A. Tversky, Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk, Econometrica 47 (1979), no. 2, 263–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [KW01]
    M. Kilka and M. Weber, What Determines the Shape of the Proability Weighting Function Under Uncertainty?, Management Science 47 (2001), no. 12, 1712–1726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [Len04]
    Y. Lengwiler, A Monetary Policy Simulation Game, The Journal of Economic Education 35 (2004), no. 2, 175–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [Lév05]
    H. Lévy, Stochastic Dominance: Investment Decision Making Under Uncertainty, Springer Verlag, 2005.Google Scholar
  30. [Mar52]
    H.M. Markowitz, Portfolio Selection, Journal of Finance 7 (1952), no. 1, 77–91.Google Scholar
  31. [Mar91]
    H.M. Markowitz, Portfolio Selection: Efficient Diversification of Investments, 2nd ed., Blackwell Publishers, 1991.Google Scholar
  32. [Men34]
    K. Menger, Das Unsicherheitsmoment in der Wertlehre, Journal of Economics 51 (1934), 459–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [MS92]
    R.C. Merton and P.A. Samuelson, Continuous-Time Finance, Blackwell Pub, 1992.Google Scholar
  34. [Pra64]
    J.W. Pratt, Risk Aversion in the Small and in the Large, Econometrica 32 (1964), no. 1/2, 122–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. [Pre98]
    D. Prelec, The Proability Weighting Function, Econometrica 66 (1998), 497–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. [Qui82]
    J. Quiggin, A Theory of Anticipated Utility, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 3 (1982), no. 4, 323–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. [Rab00]
    Matthew Rabin, Risk aversion and expected-utility theory: A calibration theorem, Econometrica 68 (2000), 1281–1292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. [RT02]
    M. Rabin and R.H. Thaler, Response from Matthew Rabin and Richard H. Thaler, The Journal of Economic Perspectives 16 (2002), no. 2, 229–230.Google Scholar
  39. [Rub03]
    A. Rubinstein, Economics and Psychology? The Case of Hyperbolic Discounting, International Economic Review 44 (2003), no. 4, 1207–1216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. [RW06]
    M.O. Rieger and M. Wang, Cumulative Prospect Theory and the St. Petersburg Paradox, Economic Theory 28 (2006), no. 3, 665–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. [RW08]
    —————, Prospect Theory for Continuous Distributions, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 36 (2008), 83–102.Google Scholar
  42. [Sin02]
    H.W. Sinn, Weber’s Law and the Biological Evolution of Risk Preferences: the Selective Dominance of the Logarithmic Utility Function, CESifo, 2002.Google Scholar
  43. [TF95]
    A. Tversky and C.R. Fox, Weighing Risk and Uncertainty, Psychological Review 102 (1995), no. 2, 269–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. [TK92]
    A. Tversky and D. Kahneman, Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5 (1992), 297–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. [vNM53]
    J. von Neumann and O. Morgenstern, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, 3 ed., Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1953.Google Scholar
  46. [Wak93]
    P.P. Wakker, Unbounded Utility Functions for Savage’s “Foundations of Statistics,” and other Models, Mathematics of Operationas Research 18 (1993), 446–485.Google Scholar
  47. [WG96]
    G. Wu and R. Gonzalez, Curvature of the Probability Weighting Function, Management Science 42 (1996), 1676–1690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. [WRH16]
    M. Wang, M.O. Rieger, and T. Hens, How Time Preferences Differ: Evidence from 53 Countries, Journal of Economic Psychology 52 (2016), 115–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. [ZK09]
    V. Zakalmouline and S. Koekebakker, A Generalization of the Mean-Variance Analysis, European Financial Management 15 (2009), no. 5, 934–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thorsten Hens
    • 1
  • Marc Oliver Rieger
    • 2
  1. 1.University of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.University of TrierTrierGermany

Personalised recommendations