Abstract
Often the preferences of decision-makers are sufficiently inconsistent so as to preclude the existence of a utility function in the classical sense. Several alternatives for dealing with this situation are discussed. One alternative, that of modifying classical demands on utility functions, is emphasized and described in the context of the theory of measurement developed in recent years by behavioral scientists. The measurement theory approach is illustrated by discussing the concept of the dimension of a partial order. Even if we cannot assign numerical utility or worth values which reflect preferences in the classical utility function sense, from the measurement theory point of view we can still learn a lot about the preferences by finding several measures of worth so that a given alternative x is preferred to an alternative y if and only if x is ranked higher than y on each of the worth scales. If such measures can be found, it follows that the preferences define a partial order, and the smallest number of such scales needed is called the dimension of the partial order. If one-dimensional preferences (those amenable to classical utility assignments) cannot be found, then the next best thing is to search for partially ordered preferences with as small a dimension as possible. Several conditions under which a partial order is two-dimensional are described.
Similar content being viewed by others
Bibliography
W. E. Armstrong, ‘A Note on the Theory of Consumer's Behavior’, Oxford Economic Papers 2 (1950) 119–122.
W. E. Armstrong, ‘The Determinateness of the Utility Function’, Economics Journal 49 (1939) 453–467.
W. E. Armstrong, ‘Uncertainty and the Utility Function’, Economics Journal 58 (1948) 1–10.
W. E. Armstrong, ‘Utility and the Theory of Welfare’, Oxford Economic Papers 3 (1951) 259–271.
K. A. Baker, Fishburn P. C., and Roberts, F. S., ‘A New Characterization of Partial Orders of Dimension Two’, Annals of New York Academy of Science 175 (1970) 23–24.
K. A. Baker, Fishburn P. C., and Roberts F. S., Partial Orders of Dimension 2. Interval Orders, and Interval Graphs, The Rand Corporation, P-4376, June 1970.
G. Birkhoff, Lattice Theory, American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, 1967.
H. D. Block and Marschak J., ‘Random Orderings and Stochastic Theories of Responses’, Contributions to Probability and Statistics (ed. by I. Olkin, S. Ghurye, W. Hoeffding, W. Madow, and H. Mann), Stanford, California, 1959, 97–132.
N. C. Dalkey, The Delphi Method: An Experimental Study of Group Opinion, The Rand Corporation, RM-5888-PR, June 1969.
Z. Domotor, Probabilistic Relational Structures and Their Applications, Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences, Stanford University, Technical Report 144, 1969.
B. Dushnik and Miller, E. W., ‘Partially Ordered Sets’, American Journal of Mathematics 63 (1941) 600–610.
P. C. Fishburn, Interval Orders, Mimeographed, 1969.
P. C. Fishburn, ‘Intransitive Indifference in Preference Theory: A Survey’, Operations Research 18 (1970) 207–228.
P. C. Fishburn, ‘Intransitive Indifference with Unequal Indifference Intervals’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 7 (1970) 144–149.
P. C. Fishburn, ‘Utility Theory’, Management Science 14 (1968) 335–378.
P. C. Fishburn, Utility Theory for Decision Making, New York, 1970.
M. Friedman, ‘The Use of Ranks to Avoid the Assumption of Normality Implicit in the Analysis of Variance’, Journal of American Statistical Association 32 (1937) 675–699.
T. Hiraguchi, ‘On the Dimension of Orders’, Scientific Reports Kanazawa University 4 (1955) 1–20.
P. W. Holland, Semiorder Theory I: Characterization of Semiorders, Dept. of Statistics, Harvard University, NS 44, 1966.
P. W. Holland, Semiorder Theory H: Linear Semiorders, Dept. of Statistics, Harvard University, NS 45, 1966.
J. G. Kemeny and Snell J. L., Mathematical Models in the Social Sciences, Chap. II, ‘Preference Rankings: An Axiomatic Approach’, Waltham, Mass., 1962.
M. G. Kendall, Rank Correlation Methods, New York, 1962.
D. H. Krantz, ‘Extensive Measurement in Semiorders’, Philosopy of Science 34 (1967) 348–362.
D. H. Krantz, ‘A Survey of Measurement Theory’, Mathematics of the Decision Sciences, Part II (ed. by G. B. Dantzig and A. F. Veinott), American Mathematical Society Lectures in Applied Mathematics, Vol. 12, Providence, Rhode Island, 1968.
R. D. Luce, ‘Semiorders and a Theory of Utility Discrimination’, Econometrica 24 (1956) 178–191.
R. D. Luce and Suppes, P., ‘Preference, Utility, and Subjective Probability’, Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, III (ed. by R. D. Luce, R. R. Bush, and E. Galanter), New York, 1965, 249–410.
J. Marschak, ‘Actual versus Consistent Decision Behavior’, Behavioral Science 9 (1964) 103–110.
A. N. Milgram, ‘Partially Ordered Sets, Separating Systems and Inductiveness’, Reports of a Mathematical Colloquium, Second Series, No. 1 (ed. by K. Menger), South Bend, Indiana, 1939.
J. R. Miller, Assessing Alternative Transportation Systems, The Rand Corporation, RM-5865-DOT, April 1969
O. Ore, Theory of Graphs, American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications, Vol. 38, 1962.
H. Raiffa, Preferences for Multi-attributed Alternatives, The Rand Corporation, RM-5868-DOT/RC, April 1969.
F. S. Roberts, ‘Homogeneous Families of Semiorders and the Theory of Probabilistic Consistency’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 8 (1971) 248–263.
F. S. Roberts, ‘Indifference Graphs’, Proof Techniques in Graph Theory (ed. by F. Harary), New York, 1969, 139–146.
F. S. Roberts, ‘On Nontransitive Indifference’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 7 (1970) 243–258.
F. S. Roberts, ‘On the Boxicity and the Cubicity of a Graph’, in Recent Progress in Combinatorics (ed. by W. T. Tutte), New York, 1969, 301–310.
F. S. Roberts, ‘On the Compatibility between a Graph and a Simple Order’, Journal of Combinatorial Theory 11 (1971) 28–38.
D. Scott and Suppes P., ‘Foundational Aspects of Theories of Measurement’, Journal of Symbolic Logic 23 (1958) 113–128.
P. Suppes and Zinnes J., ‘Basic Measurement Theory’, Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, I, (ed. by R. D. Luce, R. R. Bush, and E. Galanter), New York, 1963, 1–76.
E. Szpilrajn, ‘Sur l'extension de l'ordre partiel’, Fundamenta Mathematicae 16 (1930) 386–389.
J. von Neumann, and Morgenstern O., Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Princeton, New Jersey 1953.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The author acknowledges the helpful comments of Joel Spencer and Ralph Strauch. He also thanks Kirby Baker and Peter Fishburn for permission to quote freely from earlier joint work on two-dimensional partial orders.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Roberts, F.S. What if utility functions do not exist?. Theor Decis 3, 126–139 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00141052
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00141052