65
Views
2
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Gambling and nonexpected utility: the perils of the power function

&
Pages 79-82 | Published online: 20 Feb 2007
 

Abstract

The use of the power utility function is problematic in expected utility theory. We show that, this is also the case in cumulative prospect theory, where the power function violates the assumption of loss-aversion at small stake levels, so that an optimal model of gambling is precluded. In the case of rank-dependent expected utility it has the counterfactual implication that agents will gamble all of their wealth at actuarially unfair odds.

Notes

1 The model can explain a variety of experimental evidence seemingly inconsistent with expected utility theory, see e.g. Allais and Hagen (Citation1979), Rabin (Citation2000). Also Cain et al (Citation2005) for more on cumulative prospect theory and gambling.

2 In particular the favourite longshot bias see e.g. Golec and Tamarkin (Citation1998).

3 Also see Aloysius (Citation2003).

4 Since wealth can be defined quite generally as one unit, small can be defined relative to wealth.

5 Using the form in Prelec (Citation1998) makes no qualitative difference to the results.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.