Bivariate Stochastic Dominance and Substitute Risk-(In)dependent Utilities

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.1100.0179

References

  • Abbas A. E. Multiattribute utility copulas. Oper. Res. (2009) 57(6):1367–1383LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Abbas A. E., Howard R. A. Attribute dominance utility. Decision Anal. (2005) 2(4):185–206LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Atkinson A. B., Bourguignon F. The comparison of multi-dimensioned distributions of economic status. Rev. Econom. Stud. (1982) 49(2):183–201CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bordley R. F., LiCalzi M. Decision analysis using targets instead of utility functions. Decisions Econom. Finance (2000) 23(1):53–74CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Brockett P. L., Golden L. L. A class of utility functions containing all the common utility functions. Management Sci. (1987) 33(8):955–964LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Caballe J., Pomansky A. Mixed risk aversion. J. Econom. Theory (1996) 71(2):485–513CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Castagnoli E., LiCalzi M. Expected utility without utility. Theory Decision (1996) 41(3):281–301CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Castagnoli E., LiCalzi M. Benchmarking real-valued acts. Games Econom. Behav. (2006) 57(2):236–253CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Chiu H. W. Skewness preference, risk aversion, and the precedence relations on stochastic changes. Management Sci. (2005) 51(12):1816–1828LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Denuit M., Eeckhoudt L. Stronger measures of higher-order risk attitudes. J. Econom. Theory (2010) . ForthcomingCrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Denuit M., De Vijlder F. E., Lefevre C. Extremal generators and extremal distributions for the continuous s-convex stochastic orderings. Insurance: Math. Econom. (1999) 24(3):201–217CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Denuit M., Eeckhoudt L., Rey B. Some consequences of correlation aversion in decision science. Annal. Oper. Res. (2010) 176(1):259–269CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Denuit M., Lefevre C., Mesfioui M. A class of bivariate stochastic orderings with applications in actuarial sciences. Insurance: Math. Econom. (1999) 24(1–2):31–50CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Denuit M., Lefevre C., Scarsini M. On s-convexity and risk aversion. Theory Decision (2001) 50(3):239–248CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Denuit M., Lefevre C., Shaked M. The s-convex orders among real random variables, with applications. Math. Inequalities Appl. (1998) 1(4):585–613CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Eeckhoudt L., Schlesinger H. Putting risk in its proper place. Amer. Econom. Rev. (2006) 96(1):280–289CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Eeckhoudt L., Rey B., Schlesinger H. A good sign for multivariate risk taking. Management Sci. (2007) 53(1):117–124LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Eeckhoudt L., Schlesinger H., Tsetlin I. Apportioning of risks via stochastic dominance. J. Econom. Theory (2009) 144(3):994–1003CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Ekern S. Increasing nth degree risk. Econom. Lett. (1980) 6(4):329–333CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Epstein L. G., Tanny S. M. Increasing generalized correlation: A definition and some economic consequences. Canadian J. Econom. (1980) 13(1):16–34CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Keeney R. L. Risk independence and multiattribute utility function. Econometrica (1973) 41(1):27–34CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kimball M. S. Precautionary savings in the small and in the large. Econometrica (1990) 58(1):53–73CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kimball M. S., Newman P., Milgate M., Eatwell J. Precautionary motives for holding assets. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Money and Finance (1992) 3(McMillan Press, London) 158–161Google Scholar
  • Manski C. F. Ordinal utility models of decision-making under uncertainty. Theory Decision (1988) 25(1):79–104CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Menezes C. F., Wang H. Increasing outer risk. J. Math. Econom. (2005) 41(7):875–886CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Menezes C., Geiss C., Tressler J. Increasing downside risk. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1980) 70(5):921–932Google Scholar
  • Mosler K. C. Stochastic dominance decision rules when the attributes are utility independent. Management Sci. (1984) 30(11):1311–1322LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Richard S. F. Multivariate risk aversion, utility independence and separable utility functions. Management Sci. (1975) 22(1):12–21LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Tsetlin I., Winkler R. L. On equivalent target-oriented formulations for multiattribute utility. Decision Anal. (2006) 3(2):94–99LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Tsetlin I., Winkler R. L. Multiattribute utility satisfying a preference for combining good with bad. Management Sci. (2009) 55(12):1942–1952LinkGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.