Advertisement

Cardinalism pp 105-165 | Cite as

Cardinal Utility: A History of Hedonimetry

Chapter
Part of the Theory and Decision Library book series (TDLA, volume 19)

Abstract

The paper chronicles the scientific use and abuse of cardinal utility during more than two centuries. Surveying the contributions from moral philosophers, economists, psychologists and mathematicians, it is shown that cardinal utility is used as a name not only for one but for a large number of formally distinct concepts. Throughout the years these have become extensively confused, and still are.

Lack of conceptual precision is argued to be the main reason why scientists have disagreed over whether pleasure can be measured, and if so whether such measures can be used for policy purposes.

Keywords

Utility Function Risk Aversion Social Choice Marginal Utility 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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abramovitz, M. (1979) ‘Economic growth and its dicontents’, in Boskin (ed.) (1979).Google Scholar
  2. Adams, E.W. (1960)’ survey of Bernoullian utility theorey’, in Solomon (ed.) (1960).Google Scholar
  3. Alchian, A.A. (1953) ‘The meaning of utility measurement’, American Economic Review 43, 26–50.Google Scholar
  4. Allais, M. (1953) ‘Le comportement de l’homme devant le risque: critique des postulats et axiomes de l’ecole amèricaine’, Econometrica 21, 503–546. Reprinted in English as Allais (1979a).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Allais, M. (1979a) ‘The foundations of a positive theory of choice involving risk and a criticism of the postulates and axioms of the American school’, in Allais/Hagen (eds.) (1979).Google Scholar
  6. Allais, M. (1979b) ‘The so-called Allais paradox and rational decisions under uncertainty’, in Allais/Hagen (eds.) (1979).Google Scholar
  7. Allais, M. (1983) ‘The foundations of the theory of utility and risk. Some central points of the discussions at the Oslo Conference’, in Hagen/Wenstøp (eds.) (1983).Google Scholar
  8. Allais. M. (1986) ‘Determination of cardinal utility according to an intrinsic invariant model’, in Daboni et al. (1986).Google Scholar
  9. Allais, M. and Hagen, O., (eds.) (1979) Expected Utility Hypothesis and the Allais Paradox, Dordrecht, D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  10. Allen, R.G.D. (1935) ‘A note on the determinateness of the utility function’, Review of Economic Studies 2, 155–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Alt, F. (1936) ‘Über die Mäßbarkeit des Nutzens’, Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie 7, 161–169. English translation: On the measurability of utility, in Chipman et al. (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Aoki, M., Chipman, J.S., and Fishburn, P.C. (1971) ‘A selected bibliography of works relating to the theory of preferences, utility and demand’, in Chipman et al. (eds.) (1971).Google Scholar
  13. Armstrong, W.E. (1939) ‘The determinateness of the utility function’, Economic Journal 49, 453–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Armstrong, W.E. (1948) ‘Uncertainty and the utility function’, Economic Journal 58, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Armstrong, W.E. (1951) ‘Utility and the theory of welfare’, Oxford Economic Papers 3, 259–271.Google Scholar
  16. Armstrong, W.E. (1953) ‘A reply’, Oxford Economic Papers 5, 264–270.Google Scholar
  17. Armstrong, W.E. (1955) ‘Concerning marginal utility’, Oxford Economic Papers 7, 170–176.Google Scholar
  18. Armstrong, W.E. (1958) ‘Utility and the ordinalist fallacy’, Review of Economic Studies 25, 172–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Arrow, K.J. (1963) Social Choice and Individual Values, 2nd edn., New Haven, Yale University Press (1st edn., 1951).Google Scholar
  20. Arrow, K.J., Karlin, S., and Suppes, P. (1959) Mathematical Methods in the Social Science, California: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Arrow, K.J. and Intriligator, M.D. (eds.) (1986) Handbook of Mathematical Economics, Amsterdam, North-Holland.Google Scholar
  22. Barten, A.P. (1964) ‘Consumer demand functions under conditions of almost additive preferences’, Econometrica 32, 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Basu, K. (1980) Revealed Preference of Government, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Basu, K. (1981) ‘Determinateness of the utility function: Revisiting a controversy of the thirties’, Review of Economic Studies 49, 307–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Battalio, R.C., Kagel, J.H., and MacDonald, D.N. (1985) ‘Animals’ choices over uncertain outcomes: some initial experimental results’, American Economic Review 75, 597–613.Google Scholar
  26. Baumol, W.J. (1951) ‘The Neumann-Morgenstern utility index: an ordinalist view’, Journal of Political Economy 59, 61–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Baumol, W.J. (1958) ‘The cardinal utility which is ordinal’, Economic Journal 68, 665–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Bell, D.E. (1981) ‘Components of risk aversion’, Proceedings of the ninth IFORS International Conference on Operational Research, Amsterdam, North-Holland.Google Scholar
  29. Bentham, J. See Stark (1952).Google Scholar
  30. Bergmann, G. and Spence, K.W. (1944) ‘The logic of psychological measurement’, Psychological Review 51, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Bergson (Burk), A. (1954) ‘On the concept of social welfare’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 68, 233–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Bernard, G. (1984) ‘On utility functions. The present state’, Theory and Decision 17, 97–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Bernard, G. (1986) ‘A discussion of the present state of utility theory’, Theory and Decision 20, 173–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Bernardelli, H. (1934) ‘Notes on the determinateness of the utility function’, Review of Economic Studies 2, 69–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Bernardelli, H. (1938) ‘The end of the marginal utility theory’, Economica 5, 192–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Bernardelli, H. (1939) ‘A reply to Mr. Samuelson’s note’, Economica 6, 86–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Bernardelli, H. (1952) ‘A rehabilitation of the classical theory of marginal utility’, Economica 18, 254–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Bernardelli, H. (1954) ‘Comment on Mr. Lancaster’s “refutation”’, Economica 21, 240–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Bernoulli, D. (1738) ‘Specimen theoriae novae de mensura sortis’, Commentarii Academiae Scientarum Imperialis Petropolitanae 5, 175–192. English translation: Exposition of a new theory on the measurement of risk, Econometrica 22, 23-26.Google Scholar
  40. Borch, K. and Mossin, J. (eds.) (1968) Risk and Uncertainty, London, Macmillan.Google Scholar
  41. Borda, J-C. de (1781) ‘Mémoire sur les élections au scrutin’, Mémoires in l’Académie Royale des Sciences, pp. 657-665. English translation in Alfred de Grazia (1953): Mathematical derivation of an election system, Isis 44, 42-51.Google Scholar
  42. Boskin, M. (ed.) (1979) A Festschrift for Tibor Scitovsky, New York, Academic Press.Google Scholar
  43. Bradburn, N.M. (1969) The Structure of Psychological Well-being, Chicago, Aldine.Google Scholar
  44. Bradburn, N.M. and Caplovitz, D. (1965) Reports on Happiness, Chicago, Aldine.Google Scholar
  45. Bridgman, P.W. (1927) The Logic of Modern Psychics, New York, Macmillan.Google Scholar
  46. Broome, J. (1985) ‘A mistaken argument against the expected utility theory of rationality’, Theory and Decision 18, 313–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Brunner, J.K. (1986) Zur Theorie der Steuergerichtigkeit. Normative Fundierung und distributive Konsequenzen der Einkommen-besteuerung, Habilitationsschrift, Linz.Google Scholar
  48. Butts, R. and Hintikka, J. (eds.) (1977) Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, Dordrecht, Reidel.Google Scholar
  49. Buyze, J. (1982) ‘The estimation of welfare levels of a cardinal utility function’, European Economic Review 17, 325–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Camacho, A. (1979) ‘On cardinal utility’, Theory and Decision 10, 131–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Camacho, A. (1980) ‘Approaches to cardinal utility’, Theory and Decision 12, 359–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Camacho, A. (1983) ‘Cardinal utility and decision making under uncertainty’, in Stigum/Wenstøp (eds.) (1983).Google Scholar
  53. Cantril, H. (1965) The Pattern of Human Concerns, New Brunswick, Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Chipman, J. (1971) ‘Introduction to part 2’, in Chipman et al. (eds.) (1971).Google Scholar
  55. Chipman, J., Hurwicz, L., Richter, M.K., and Sonnenschein, H.F. (eds.) (1971) Preferences, Utility and Demand, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  56. Churchman, C.W. and Ratoosh, P. (eds.) (1959) Measurement: Definitions and Theories, New York, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  57. Cohen, M., Jaffray, J.-Y., and Said, T. (1985) ‘Individual behaviour under risk and under uncertainty: An experimental study’, Theory and Decision 18, 203–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Cohen Stuart, A.J. (1989) Bijdrage tot de theorie der progressieve inkomstenbelasting, The Hague. Extract translated as: On progressive taxation, in Musgrave and Peacock (eds.) (1967).Google Scholar
  59. Coombs, C.H. (1950) ‘Psychological scaling without a unit of measurement’, Psychological Review 57, 145–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Coombs, C.H. (1959) ‘Inconsistency of preference as a measure of psychological distance’, in Churchman and Ratoosh (eds.).Google Scholar
  61. Coombs, C.H., and Beardslee, D. (1954) ‘On decision-making under uncertainty’, in Coombs et al. (eds.) (1959).Google Scholar
  62. Coombs, C.H., and Huang, L.C. (1976) ‘Test of the betweenness property of expected utility’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 13, 323–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Coombs, C.H., Davis, R.L., and Thrall, R.M. (eds.) (1954) Decision Processes, New York, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  64. Coote, R. and Rappoport, P. (1984) ‘Were the ordinalists wrong about welfare economics?’, Journal of Economic Literature 22, 507–530.Google Scholar
  65. Daboni, L., Montesano, A., and Lines, M. (eds.) Recent Developments in the Foundations of Utility and Risk Theory, Dordrecht, D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  66. David, P.A. and Reder, M.W. (1974) Nations and Households in Economic Growth, New York, Academic Press.Google Scholar
  67. Deaton, A. and Muellbauer, J. (1980) Economics and Consumer Behaviour, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Debreu, G. (1954) ‘Representation of a preference ordering by a numerical function’, in Coombs et al. (eds.) (1959).Google Scholar
  69. Debreu, G. (1958) ‘Stochastic choice and cardinal utility’, Econometrica 26, 440–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Debreu, G. (1959) ‘Topological methods in cardinal utility theory’, in Arrow et al. (eds.) (1959).Google Scholar
  71. Debreu, G. and Koopmans, C. (1982) ‘Additively decomposed quasiconvex functions’, Mathematical Programming 24, 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Diamond, P.A. (1967) ‘Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics and interpersonal comparisons utility. Comment’, Journal of Political Economy 75, 765–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Dyer, J.S. and R.K. Sarin (1979) ‘Group preference aggregation rules based on strength of preference’, Management Science 25, 822–832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Easterlin, R.A. (1974) ‘Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence’, in David and Reder (eds.) (1974).Google Scholar
  75. Edgeworth, F.Y. (1881) Mathematical Psychics, London, Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  76. Edgeworth, F.Y. (1987) ‘The pure theory of taxation’, Economic Journal 7, A modified version occurs in Musgrave and Peacock (eds.) (1967).Google Scholar
  77. Ekman, G. (1964) ‘Is the power law a special case of Fechner law’, Perceptual and Motor Skills 19, 730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Ellsberg, D. (1954) ‘Classic and current notions of “measurable utility’”, Economic Journal 64, 528–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Ellsberg, D. (1961) ‘Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 75, 643–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Fechner, G.T. (1860) Elemente der Psychophysik, Leipzig, Breitkopf und Härtel.Google Scholar
  81. Feiwel, G. (ed.) (1985) Issues in Contemporary Microeconomics and Welfare, London, The Macmillan Press.Google Scholar
  82. Fellner, W. (1968) ‘Operational utility: The theoretical background and a measurement’, in Fellner (ed.) (1968).Google Scholar
  83. Fellner, W. (ed.) (1968) Ten Economic Studies in the Tradition of Irving Fisher, New York, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  84. Finetti, B. de (1977) ‘A short confirmation of my standpoint’, in Allais/Hagen (eds.) (1979).Google Scholar
  85. Fishburn, P.C. (1968) ‘Utility.theory’, Management Science 14, 335–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Fishburn, P.C. (1970a) Utility Theory for Decision Making, New York, John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  87. Fishburn, P.C. (1970b) ‘Utility theory with inexact preferences and degrees of preference’, Synthese 21, 204–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Fishburn, P.C. (1976) ‘Cardinal utility: An interpretive essay’, Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Economiche e Commerciale 22, 1102–1114.Google Scholar
  89. Fisher, I. (1892) ‘Mathematical investigations in the theory of values and prices’, Transactions of Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences 9, 1–124. Reprinted in 1925 by Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  90. Fisher, I. (1918) ‘Is “utility” the most suitable term for the concept it is used to denote?’, American Economic Review 8, 335–337.Google Scholar
  91. Fisher, I. (1927) ‘A statistical method for measuring marginal utility and testing the justice of a progressive income tax’, in Hollander (ed.) (1927).Google Scholar
  92. Friedman, M. (1936) ‘Marginal utility of money and elasticities of demand’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 50, 532–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Friedman, M. (1953) ‘Choice, chance and the personal distribution of income’, Journal of Political Economy 61, 277–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Friedman, M. (1955) ‘What all is utility’, Economic Journal 65, 405–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Friedman, M. (1962) Capitalism and Freedom, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  96. Friedman, M. and Savage, L.J. (1948) ‘The utility analysis of choices involving risk’, Journal of Political Economy 56, 279–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Friedman, M. and Savage, L.J. (1952) ‘The expected utility hypothesis and the measurability of utility’, Journal of Political Economy 60, 463–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Frisch, R. (1926a) ‘Sur un problème d’économie pure’, Norsk Matematisk Forenings Skrifter 16, 1–40. Reprinted in Metroeconomica 9, 79-111. English translation in Chipman et al. (eds.) (1971).Google Scholar
  99. Frisch, R. (1926b) ‘En kvantitativ formulering av den teoretiske økonomikks lover’, Statsøkonomisk Tidsskrift, 299-334.Google Scholar
  100. Frisch, R. (1932) New Methods for Measuring Marginal Utility, Tübingen, Verlag von J.C.B. Mohr.Google Scholar
  101. Frisch, R. (1953) ‘Discours’, Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique 40 (Économétrie), 249–255.Google Scholar
  102. Frisch, R. (1959) ‘A complete scheine for computing all direct and cross demand elasticities in a model with many sectors’, Econometrica 27, 177–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Frisch, R. (1964) ‘Dynamic utility’, Econometrica 32, 418–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Gabor, A. and James, S.F. (1958) ‘On measuring utility’, Yorkshire Bulletin of Economic and Social Research 10, 1–18.Google Scholar
  105. Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1936) ‘Marginal utility of money and elasticities of demand’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 50, 533–537. Reprinted in Georgescu-Roegen (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1936) ‘The pure theory of consumer’s behavior’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 50, 133–170. Reprinted in Georgescu-Roegen (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1958) ‘Threshold in choice and in the theory of demand’, Econometrica 26, 157–168. Reprinted in Georgescu-Roegen (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1966) Analytical Economics, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  109. Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1968) ‘Utility’, in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 16, pp. 236–267. The Macmillan Company and the Free Press.Google Scholar
  110. Gärdenfors, P. and Sahlin, N.-E. (1988) Decision, Probability and Utility. Selected Readings, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Hagen, O. (1969)’ separation of cardinal utility and specific utility of risk in theory of choices under uncertainty’, Statsøkonomisk Tidsskrift, 81-107.Google Scholar
  112. Hagen, O. (1972) ‘A new axiomatization of utility under risk’, Teorie A Metoda 4, 55–80.Google Scholar
  113. Hagen, O. and Wenstøp (eds.) (1984) Progress in Utility and Risk Theory, Dordrecht, D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  114. Hansson, B. (1988) ‘Risk aversion as a problem of conjoint measurement’, in Gärdenfors and Sahlin (eds.) (1988).Google Scholar
  115. Harsanyi, J. (1953) ‘Cardinal utility in welfare economics and in the theory of risk-taking’, Journal of Political Economy 61, 434–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Harsanyi, J. (1955) ‘Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics and interpersonal comparisons of utility’, Journal of Political Economy 63, 309–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Harsanyi, J. (1975) ‘Nonlinear social welfare functions’, Theory and Decision 6, 311–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Harsanyi, J. (1977) ‘Non-linear social welfare functionals: a rejoinder to Professor Sen’, in Butts and Hintikka (eds.) (1977).Google Scholar
  119. Harsanyi, J. (1978) ‘Bayesian decision-theory and utilitarianism’, American Economic Review 68, 223–228.Google Scholar
  120. Harsanyi, J. (1983) ‘Use of subjective probabilities in game theory’, in Stigum and Wenstøp (eds.) (1983).Google Scholar
  121. Herstein, I.N. and J. Milnor (1953) ‘An axiomatic approach to measurable utility’, Econometrica 21, 291–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Hicks, J.R. (1954) ‘Robbins on Robertson on utility’, Economica 21, 154–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Hillinger, C. (1969) ‘The measurement of utility’, Review of Economic Studies 36, 111–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Hollander, J.H. (ed.) (1927) Economic Essays Contributed in Honor of John Bates Clark, New York, The Macmillan Company.Google Scholar
  125. Houthakker, H. (1960) ‘Additive preferences’, Econometrica 28, 244–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Hurwicz, L., Schmeidler, D., and Sonnenschein, H. (eds.) (1985) Social Goals and Social Organization: Essays in Memory of Elisha Pazner, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  127. Hutcheson, F. (1728) An Essay on the Nature and Conduct of the Passions and Affections, London, J. Osborn and T. Longman.Google Scholar
  128. Inkeles, A. (1960) ‘The relation of status to experience, perception, and value’, American Journal of Sociology 66, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Jaffray, J.-Y. (1985) ‘Interpersonal level comparability does not imply comparability of utility differences — a comment on Ng’, Theory and Decision 19, 201–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Jevons, W.S. (1871) The Theory of Political Economy, London and New York, Macmillan & Co.Google Scholar
  131. Johansen, L. (1958) ‘Et sett av etterspørselskoeffisienter for en multi-sektor analyse med variable priser’, Memorandum from Department of Economics, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
  132. Kauder, E. (1953) ‘Genesis of the marginal utility theory: from Aristotle to the end of the eighteenth century’, Economic Journal 63, 638–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Kauder, E. (1965) A History of Marginal Utility Theory, New Jersey, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  134. Kanbur, R. (1987) ‘The standard of living: uncertainty, inequality and opportunity’, in Sen (1987).Google Scholar
  135. Kaneko, M. (1982) ‘The optimal progressive income tax’, Mathematical Social Sciences 3, 193–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Kapteyn, A. and Wansbeek, T. (1985) ‘The individual welfare function. A review’, Journal of Economic Psychology 6, 333–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Kapteyn, A. and Wansbeek, T. (1985b) ‘The individual welfare function. A rejoinder’, Journal of Economic Psychology 6, 375–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Kemp, M.C. and Ng, Y.-K. (1976) ‘On the existence of social welfare functions, social orderings and social decision functions’, Economica 43, 59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Kemp, M.C. and Ng, Y.-K. (1977) ‘More on social welfare functions: The incompatibility of individualism and ordinalism’, Economica 44, 89–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Kemp, M.C. and Ng, Y.-K. (1982) ‘The incompatibility of individualism and ordinalism’, Mathematical Social Sciences 3, 33–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Kennedy, C. (1954) ‘Concerning utility’, Economica 21, 17–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Krantz, D.H., Luce, R.D., Suppes, P., and Tversky, A. (1971) Foundations of Measurement, New York and London, Academic Press.Google Scholar
  143. Kraus, O. (1903) ‘Die Aristotelische Werttheorie in ihrer Beziehungen zu den Lehren der modernen Psychologenschule’, Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft 61, 573–592.Google Scholar
  144. Krelle, W (1968) Präferenz-und Entscheidungstheorie, Tübingen, J.C.B. Mohr.Google Scholar
  145. Krzysztofowicz, R. (1983) ‘The risk attitude hypothesis of utility theory’, in Stigum/Wenstøp (eds.) (1983).Google Scholar
  146. Lancaster, K. (1953) ‘A refutation of Mr. Bernardelli’, Economica 19, 259–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Lancaster, K. (1954) ‘Rejoinder to Mr. Bernardelli’, Economica 21, 242–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Lange, O. (1934) ‘The determinateness of the utility function’, Review of Economic Studies 1, 218–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Lange, O. (1934) ‘Notes on the determinateness of the utility function’, (3), Review of Economic Studies 2, 75–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Lerner, A.P. (1946) The Economics of Control, New York, The Macmillan Company.Google Scholar
  151. Lerner, A.P. (1977) ‘Marginal cost pricing in the 1930’s’, American Economic Review (Papers and Proceedings) 67, 235–239.Google Scholar
  152. Leinfellner, W. (1968) ‘Generalization of classical decision theory’, in Borch and Mossin (eds.) (1968).Google Scholar
  153. Little, I.M.D. (1957) A Critique of Welfare Economics, 2nd edn., Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  154. Luce, R.D. (1956) ‘Semiorders and a theory of utility discrimination’, Econometrica 24, 178–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Luce, R.D. (1958) ‘A probabilistic theory of utility’, Econometrica 26, 193–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. Luce, R.D. (1959) ‘A probabilistic theory of utility and its relationship to Fechnerian scaling’, in Churchman and Ratoosh (eds.) (1959).Google Scholar
  157. Luce, R.D., Bush, R.R., and Galanter, E. (eds.) (1965) Handbook of Mathematical Psychology vol. 3, New York, J. Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  158. Luce, R.D. and Raiffa, H. (1957) Games and Decision, New York, J. Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  159. Luce, R.D. and Suppes, P. (1965) ‘Preference, utility and subjective probability’, in Luce, Bush and Galanter (eds.) (1965).Google Scholar
  160. MacCrimmon, K.R. and Larsson, S. (1979) Utility theory: axioms versus “paradoxes”, in Allais and Hagen (eds.).Google Scholar
  161. Machina, M. (1987) ‘The choice under uncertainty: problems solved and unsolved’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 1, 121–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Majumdar, T. (1957) ‘Armstrong and the utility measurement controversy’, Oxford Economic Papers 9, 30–40.Google Scholar
  163. Majumdar, T. (1958a) ‘Behaviourist cardinalism in utility theory’, Economica 25, 26–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Majumdar, T. (1958b) The Measurement of Utility, London, Macmillan & Co.Google Scholar
  165. Majumdar, T. (1958b) The Measurement of Utility, London, Macmillan & Co.Google Scholar
  166. Majumdar, T. (1960) ‘A reply’, Economica 27, 253–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Marschak, J. (1950) ‘Rational behavior, uncertain prospects and measurable utility’, Econometrica 18, 111–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. Marshall, A. (1920) Principles of Economics, 8th edn., London, Macmillan & Co.Google Scholar
  169. Markowitz, A. (1952) ‘Utility of wealth’, Journal of Political Economy 60, 151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Marx, W. (1949) ‘The law of diminishing marginal utility of income’, Kyklos 3, 254–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Mayston, D.J. (1982) ‘The generation of a social welfare function under ordinal preferences’, Mathematical Social Sciences 3, 109–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. McCord, M.R. and de Neufvill, R. (1983) ‘Empirical demonstration that expected utility decision analysis is not operational’, in Stigum and Wenstøp (eds.) (1983).Google Scholar
  173. McCord, M.R. and de Neufville, R. (1984) ‘Utility dependence on probability’, Large Scale Systems 6, 91–103.Google Scholar
  174. McCord, M.R. and de Neufville, R. (1985) ‘Assessment response surface: investigating utility dependence on probability’, Theory and Decision 18, 263–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. Mellon, W.G. (1960) ‘Comment on “A general theory of measurement — applications to utility’”, Naval Research Logistics Quarterly 7, 285–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. Mill, J.S. (1848) Principles of Political Economy (edited with an introduction by W.J. Ashley, 1917), London, Longmans Green.Google Scholar
  177. Mitchell, W.C. (1918) ‘Bentham’s felicific calculus’, Political Science Quarterly 33, 161–183. Reprinted in Page (ed.) (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. Montmarquette, C. and Biais, A. (1987) ‘A survey measure of risk aversion’, Economics Letters 25, 27–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  179. Mosteller, F. and Nogee, P. (1951) ‘An experimental measurement of utility’, Journal of Political Economy 59, 371–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  180. Musgrave, R.A. and Peacock, A.T. (1967) Classics in the Theory of Public Finance, New York, Macmillan.Google Scholar
  181. Mueller, D.C. (1973) ‘Constitutional democracy and social welfare’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 87, 60–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  182. Mueller, D.C., Tollison, R.D., and Willett, T.D. (1974) ‘The utilitarian contract: a generalization of Rawls’ theory of justice’, Theory and Decision 4, 345–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. Möller, R. (1983) Interpersonelle Nutzenvergleiche. Wissenschaftliche Möglichkeit und politische Bedeutung, Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
  184. Ng, Y.-K. (1975) ‘Bentham or Bergson? Finite sensibility, utility functions and social welfare functions’, Review of Economic Studies 42, 545–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  185. Ng, Y.-K. (1979) Welfare Economics, Introduction and Development of Basic Concepts, London, The Macmillan Press.Google Scholar
  186. Ng, Y.-K. (1982) ‘Beyond Pareto optimality: the necessity of interpersonal cardinal utilities in distributional judgements and social choice’, Journal of Economics 42, 207–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  187. Ng, Y.-K. (1984a) ‘Interpersonal level comparability implies comparability of utility differences’, Theory and Decision 17, 141–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  188. Ng, Y.-K. (1984b) ‘Expected subjective utility: is the Neumann-Morgenstern utility the same as the neoclassical’s?’, Social Choice and Welfare 1, 177–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  189. Ng, Y.-K. (1985)’ some fundamental issues in social welfare’, in Feiwel (ed.) (1985).Google Scholar
  190. Ng, Y.-K. (1986) ‘Beyond Pareto optimality. A response to Christian Seidl’, Journal of Economics 46, 311–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  191. Ozga, S.A. (1956) ‘Measurable utility and probability — a simplified rendering’, Economic Journal 66, 419–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  192. Paine, N.R. (1975) ‘Introspective utility and the group choice problem’, Theory and Decision 6, 357–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  193. Page, A.N. (1968) Utility Theory. A Book of Readings, New York, J. Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  194. Pareto, V. (1911) ‘Economie mathématique’, in Encyclopédie des Sciences Mathématiques, Tome 1, vol. 4, Fasc. 4, Paris. English translation: Mathematical Economics, in International Economic Papers 5 (1955), 58-102.Google Scholar
  195. Pareto, V. (1927) Manuel D’Economie Politique, 2. printing (1st printing 1909, Italian edition 1906), Paris: V. Giard et E. Briére. English translation: Manual of Political Economy, London, The Macmillan Press 1971.Google Scholar
  196. Parks, R.P. (1976) ‘An impossibility theorem for fixed preferences: a dictatorial Bergson-Samuelson welfare function’, Review of Economic Studies 43, 447–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  197. Pattanaik, P.P. (1968) ‘Risk, impersonality and the social welfare function’, Journal of Political Economy 76, 1152–1169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  198. Pearce, I.F. (1961) ‘An exact method of consumer demand analysis’, Econometrica 29, 499–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  199. Pfanzagl, J. (1959) ‘A general theory of measurement: applications to utility’, Naval Research Logistics Quarterly 6, 283–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  200. Phelps, E. (ed.) (1973) Economic Justice, Harmondsworth, Penguin Education.Google Scholar
  201. Phelps-Brown, E.H. (1934) ‘Notes on the determinateness of the utility function’, Review of Economic Studies 2, 66–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  202. Ramsey, F. (1926) ‘Truth and probability’, in Ramsey (1931).Google Scholar
  203. Ramsey, F. (1931) The Foundations of Mathematics and Other Logical Essays, New York, Harcourt Brace & Co.Google Scholar
  204. Rappoport, P. (1988) ‘Reply to Professor Hennipman’, Journal of Economic Literature 26, 86–91.Google Scholar
  205. Ratchford, B.T. (1985) ‘The individual welfare function. A comment’, Journal of Economic Psychology 6, 365–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  206. Robbins, L. (1932) An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science, London, Macmillan & Co.Google Scholar
  207. Robbins, L. (1953) ‘Robertson on utility and scope: a comment’, Ecconomica 20, 99–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  208. Robertson, D.H. (1951) ‘Utility and all that’, Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies 19, 348–385. Reprinted in Robertson (1952).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  209. Robertson, D.H. (1952) Utility and All That and Other Essays, London, George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  210. Robertson, D.H. (1954) ‘Utility and all what’, Economic Journal 64, 665–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  211. Rothenberg, J. (1953) ‘Marginal preference and the theory of welfare’, Oxford Economic Papers 5, 248–263.Google Scholar
  212. Rothenberg, J. (1961) The Measurement of Social Welfare, New Jersey, Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  213. Rothschild, M. and Stiglitz J. (1970) ‘Increasing risk I: a definition’, Journal of Economic Theory 2, 225–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  214. Rudin, W. (1976) Principles of Mathematical Analysis, International Student Edition, McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  215. Runes, D.D. (ed.) (1962) Dictionary of Philosophy, Littlefield, Adams & Co.Google Scholar
  216. Ryle, G. (1949) Concepts of Mind, London, Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  217. Sandmo, A. (1983) ‘Ex post welfare economics and the theory of merit goods’, Economica 50, 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  218. Samuelson, P.A. (1937) ‘On the measurement of utility’, Review of Economic Studies 4, 155–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  219. Samuelson, P.A. (1938) ‘The numerical representation of ordered classifications and the concept of utility’, Review of Economic Studies 6, 65–70. Reprinted in Stiglitz (ed.) (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  220. Samuelson, P.A. (1950) ‘Probability and the attempts to measure utility’, The Economic Review (Keizai Kenku) 1, 167–173. Reprinted in Stiglitz (ed.) (1966).Google Scholar
  221. Samuelson, P.A. (1947) Foundations of Economic Analysis, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  222. Samuelson, P.A. (1977) ‘Reaffirming the existence of “reasonable” social welfare functions’, Economica 44, 81–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  223. Sarin, R.K. (1982) ‘Strength of preference and risky choice’, Operations Research 30, 982–997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  224. Savage, L.J. (1954) The Foundations of Statistics, New York, John Wiley & Sons. 2nd revised edition, New York, Dover Publications, 1972.Google Scholar
  225. Schoemaker, P.J.H. (1982) ‘The expected utility model: Its variants, purposes, evidence and limitations’, Journal of Economic Literature 20, 529–563.Google Scholar
  226. Schultz, H. (1933) ‘Frisch on the measurement of utility’, Journal of Political Economy 41, 95–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  227. Scott, D. (1964) ‘Measurement structures and linear inequalities’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1, 233–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  228. Seidl, C. (1986) ‘Beyond Pareto optimality? A comment to Yew-Kwang Ng’, Journal of Economics 46, 305–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  229. Sen, A.K. (1970) Collective Choice and Social Welfare, San Francisco, Holden-Day.Google Scholar
  230. Sen, A.K. (1974) ‘Informational bases of alternative welfare approaches. Aggregation and income distribution’, Journal of Public Economics 3, 387–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  231. Sen, A.K. (1977) ‘Non-linear social welfare functionals: A reply to professor Harsanyi’, in Butts and Hintikka (eds.) (1977).Google Scholar
  232. Sen, A.K. (1979) ‘Interpersonal comparisons of welfare’, in Boskin (ed.) (1979).Google Scholar
  233. Sen, A.K. (1986)’ social choice theory’, in Arrow and Intriligator (eds.) (1986).Google Scholar
  234. Sen, A.K. (1987) The Standard of Living, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  235. Simon, J.L. (1974) ‘Interpersonal welfare comparisons can be made and used fro redistribution decisions’, Kyklos 27, 63–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  236. Sinn, H.-W. (1983) Economic Decisions under Uncertainty, Amsterdam, North-Holland.Google Scholar
  237. Sinn, H.-W. (1985) ‘Psychophysical laws in risk theory’, Journal of Economic Psychology 6, 185–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  238. Solomon, H. (ed.) (1960) Mathematical Thinking in the Measurement of behavior, Glencoe.Google Scholar
  239. Stark, W. (1947) ‘Diminishing utility reconsidered’, Kyklos 1, 312–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  240. Stark, W. (ed.) (1952) Jeremy Bentham’s Economic Writings, vol. 1-3, London, George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  241. Stevens, J.C. (1968) ‘Psychophysics’, in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences.Google Scholar
  242. Stevens, S.S. (1951) ‘Mathematics, measurement and psychophysics’, in Stevens (ed.) (1968).Google Scholar
  243. Stevens, S.S. (1959) ‘Measurement, psychophysics and utility’, in Churchman and Ratoosh (eds.) (1959).Google Scholar
  244. Stevens, S.S. (1951) Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, New York, J. Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  245. Stigler, G. (1950) ‘The development of utility theory’, Journal of Political Economy 58, 307–327 and 373-396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  246. Stiglitz, J.E. (ed.) (1966) The Collected Scientific Papers of Paul Samuelson, Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  247. Stiglitz, J.E. (1982) ‘Utilitarianism and horizontal equity. The case for random taxation’, Journal of Public Economics 18, 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  248. Stigum, B. and Wenstøp, F. (1983) Foundations of Utility and Risk Theory with Applications, Dordrecht, D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  249. Strotz, R.H. (1953) ‘Cardinal Utility’, American Economic Review 43, 384–397.Google Scholar
  250. Stuart, H.W. (1895) ‘The hedonistic interpretation of subjective value’, Journal of Political Economy 4, 64–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  251. Suppes, P. and Winet, M. (1955) ‘An axiomatization of utility based on the notion of utility differences’, Management Science 1, 259–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  252. Svensson, L.-G. (1985) ‘The utilitarian criterion, finite sensibility, and the weak majority preference principle. A further analysis’, Social Choice and Welfare 2, 23–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  253. Tinnes, D.J. (1918) ‘Why not valure?’, American Economic Review 8, 585–586.Google Scholar
  254. Tversky, A. (1967) ‘A general theory of polynomial conjoint measurement’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 4, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  255. Van de Stadt, H., Antonides, G., and van Praag, B.M.S. (1984) ‘Empirical testing of the expected utility model’, Journal of Economic Psychology 5, 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  256. Van Heerwarden, F.G. and Kapteyn, A. (1981) ‘Empirical comparison of the shape of welfare functions’, European Economic Review 15, 261–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  257. Van Praag, B.M.S. (1968) Individual Welfare Functions and Consumer Behavior, Amsterdam, North-Holland.Google Scholar
  258. Van Praag, B.M.S. (1985) ‘Linking economics with psychology. An economist’s view’, Journal of Economic Psychology 6, 289–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  259. Vickrey, W.S. (1945) ‘Measuring marginal utility by reaction to risk’, Econometrica 13, 319–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  260. Vickrey, W.S. (1960) ‘Utility, strategy, and social decision rules’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 74, 507–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  261. Vickrey, W.S. (1961) ‘Risk, utility and social policy’, Social Research 28, 205–217. Reprinted in Phelps (ed.) (1973).Google Scholar
  262. Viner, J. (1925) ‘The utility concept in value theory and its critics’, Journal of Political Economy 33, 369–387 and 638-659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  263. Von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern, O. (1947) Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, 2nd edn., Princeton, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  264. Waldner, I. (1972) ‘The empirical meaningfulness of interpersonal utility comparisons’, The Journal of Philosophy 69, 87–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  265. Wakker, P. (1984) ‘Cardinal coordinate independence for expected utility’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 28, 110–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  266. Weber, E.H. (1846) Die Lehre vom Tastsinne und Gemeingefühle auf Versuche gegründet, Braunschweig, F. Wieweg und Sohn.Google Scholar
  267. Weldon, J.C. (1950) ‘A note on measures of utility’, Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science 16, 227–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  268. Wilson, W. (1967) ‘Correlates of avowed happiness’, Psychological Bulletin 67, 294–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  269. Young, H.P. (1987) ‘Progressive taxation and the equal sacrifice principle’, Journal of Public Economics 32, 203–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  270. Young, H.P. (1990) ‘Progressive taxation and equal sacrifice’, American Economic Review 80, 253–266.Google Scholar
  271. Zeuthen, F. (1937) ‘On the determinateness of the utility function’, Review of Economic Studies 4, 236–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1994

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations