Adam Smith on lotteries: an interpretation and formal restatement

References

• Allais, M. 1953. “Le Comportement de L’Homme Rationnel Devant le Risque: Critique Des Postulats et Axiomes de L’École Américaine.” Econometrica 21 (4): 503–546. doi:10.2307/1907921.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashraf, N., C. F. Camerer, and G. Loewenstein. 2005. “Adam Smith, Behavioral Economist.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 19 (3): 131–145. doi:10.1257/089533005774357897.
   Google Scholar
• Bernoulli, J. 1713. Ars Conjectandi [English Translation: The Art of Conjecturing]. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Blaug, M. 1962. Economic Theory in Retrospect. 5th ed., 1996. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Bréban, L. 2011. Elements for a Moral Theory of Decision: Adam Smith on Happiness and Deliberation. PhD diss., PHARE, University Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne.
   Google Scholar
• Bréban, L. 2012. “Sensitivity to Prosperity and Adversity: What Would a Smithian Function of Happiness Look like?” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 19 (4): 551–586. doi:10.1080/09672567.2010.540341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bréban, L. 2014. “Smith on Happiness: Towards a Gravitational Theory.” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 21 (3): 359–351. doi:10.1080/09672567.2012.683021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chateauneuf, A., and M. Cohen. 1994. “Risk-Seeking with Diminishing Marginal Utility in a Non-Expected Utility Model.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 9 (1): 77–91. doi:10.1007/BF01073404.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chateauneuf, A., M. Cohen, and I. Meiljilson. 2005. “More Pessimism than Greediness: A Characterization of Monotone Risk Aversion in the Rank Dependent Expected Utility Model.” Economic Theory 25:649–667. doi:10.1007/s00199-003-0451-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chew, S.-H., E. Karni, and Z. Safra. 1987. “Risk Aversion in the Theory of Expected Utility with Rank Dependent Preferences.” Journal of Economic Theory 42:370–381. doi:10.1016/0022-0531(87)90093-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, M. 1995. “Risk-Aversion Concepts in Expected- and Non-Expected-utility Models.” The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance Theory 20 (1): 73–91. doi:10.1007/BF01098959.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, M. 2015. “Risk Perception, Risk Attitude and Decision: a Rank-Dependent Approach.” Mathematical Population Studies 22 (1): 53–70. doi:10.1080/08898480.2013.836425.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daston, L. 1988. Classical Probability in the Enlightment. Princeton: Princeton University Press. doi:10.1086/ahr/96.5.1520-a.
   Google Scholar
• Diaye, M.-A., and A. Lapidus. 2012. “Pleasure and Belief in Hume’s Decision Process.” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 19 (3): 355–384. doi:10.1080/09672567.2010.540339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eeckhoudt, L., and H. Schlesinger. 2006. “Putting Risk in Its Proper Place.” American Economic Review 96 (1): 280–289. doi:10.1257/000282806776157777.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goovaerts, M. J., F. E. C. De Vylder, and J. Haezendonck. 1984. Insurance Premiums. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
   Google Scholar
• Hacking, I. 1971. “Jacques Bernoulli’s Art of Conjecturing.” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 22 (3): 209–229. doi:10.1093/bjps/22.3.209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hadar, J., and W. R. Russell. 1969. “Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospect.” American Economic Review 59 (1): 25–34. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1811090.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanoch, G., and H. Levy. 1969. “Efficiency Analysis of Choices Involving Risk.” Review of Economic Studies 36 (3): 335–346. doi:10.2307/2296431.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollander, S. 1999. “Jeremy Bentham and Adam Smith on the Usury Laws: A ‘Smithian’ Reply to Bentham and a New Problem.” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 6 (4): 523–551. doi:10.1080/10427719900000042.
   Google Scholar
• Hume, D., 1739–1740. A Treatise of Human Nature: Being an Attempt to Introduce the Experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects, edited by L. A. Selby-Bigge [1888] and P.H. Nidditch [1978]. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk.” Econometrica 47 (2): 263–291. doi:10.2307/1914185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimball, M. S. 1990. “Precautionary Savings in the Small and in the Large.” Econometrica 58 (1): 53–73. doi:10.2307/2938334.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leloup, S. 2000. “Pour en Finir Avec L’Usure – L’Enjeu de la Controverse Entre Adam Smith et Jeremy Bentham.” Revue Économique 51 (4): 913–936. doi:10.2307/3502896.
   Google Scholar
• Levy, D. M. 1987. “Adam Smith’s Case for Usury Laws.” History of Political Economy 19 (3): 387–400. doi:10.1215/00182702-19-3-387.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levy, D. M. 1999. “Adam Smith’s Katallactic Model of Gambling: Approbation from the Spectator.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 21 (1): 81–91. doi:10.1017/S1053837200002868.
   Google Scholar
• Levy, H. 2006. Stochastic Dominance. 2nd ed. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Menezes, C., C. Geiss, and J. Tressler. 1980. “Increasing Downside Risk.” American Economic Review 70 (5): 921–932.
   Google Scholar
• Paganelli, M. P. 2003. “In Medio Stat Virtus: An Alternative View of Usury in Adam Smith’s Thinking.” History of Political Economy 35 (1): 21–48. doi:10.1215/00182702-35-1-21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pradier, P. C. 2006. La Notion de Risque en Économie. Paris: La Découverte.
   Google Scholar
• Quiggin, J. C. 1982. “A Theory of Anticipated Utility.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 3:324–343. doi:10.1016/0167-2681(82)90008-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rees, A. 1975. “Compensating Wage Differentials.” In Essays on Adam Smith, edited A. Skinner and T. Wilson, 336–349. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rothschild, M., and J. E. Stiglitz. 1970. “Increasing Risk: I. A Definition.” Journal of Economic Theory 2 (3): 225–243. doi:10.1016/0022-0531(70)90038-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schumpeter, J. A. 1954. History of Economic Analysis. London: Routledge, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A. 1759–90. The Theory of Moral Sentiments, edited by David D. Raphael and Alec L. Macfie. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A. 1762–3; 1766. Lectures on Jurisprudence, edited by Ronald L. Meek, David D. Raphael and Peter G. Stein. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, edited by Roy H. Campbell and Andrew. S. Skinner. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A. 1977. The Correspondence of Adam Smith, edited by Ernest. C. Mossner and Ian S. Ross. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977.
   Google Scholar
• Wakker, P. P. 2010. Prospect Theory – For Risk and Ambiguity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Whitmore, G. A. 1970. “Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance.” American Economic Review 60 (3): 457–459.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaari, M. 1987. “The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk.” Econometrica 55 (1): 95–116. doi:10.2307/1911158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaras, K. 1989. “Dominances Stochastiques Pour Deux Classes de Fonctions D’Utilité.” Rairo – Operations Research 23 (1): 57–65. doi:10.1051/ro/1989230100571.
   Google Scholar