Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T02:13:11.601Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Use of Risk and Return Models for Multiattribute Decisions with Decomposable Utilities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Mustafa R. Yilmaz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Normatively oriented approaches to decision making under uncertainty occupy a major portion of the literature of decision analysis. Among the proposed approaches, the Von Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility (EU) theory has been the most prominent model of rational choice despite some controversies that surround this model with respect to its descriptive ability as well as the plausibility of utility assessment in actual decision situations [6], [10]. Although most applications of the EU model have been concerned with decisions involving monetary outcomes, its scope is not limited to any particular class of consequences. The basic appeal of the model is attributable partly to its generality in this regard, and, more importantly, to the apparent reasonableness of its preferential axioms.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , September 1983 , pp. 279 - 285
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1]Fishburn, P.C.Utility Theory for Decision Making. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Fishburn, P.C. “Mean-Risk Analysis with Risk Associated with Below-Target Returns.” American Economic Review, Vol. 67, (03 1977), pp. 116–126.Google Scholar
[3]Fishburn, P.C, and Vickson, R.G.V.. “Theoretical Foundations of Stochastic Dominance.” In Stochastic Dominance, Whitmore, G.A. and Findlay, M.C., eds. Boston, MA: Heath (1978).Google Scholar
[4]Hogan, W.W., and Warren, J.M.. “Toward the Development of an Equilibrium Capital-Market Model Based on Semivariance.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 9, (03 1974), pp. 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Holthausen, D.M. “Risk-Return Model with Risk and Return Measured as Deviations from a Target Return.” American Economic Review, Vol. 71, (03 1981), pp. 182–188.Google Scholar
[6]Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A.. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk.” Econometrica, Vol. 47, (03 1979), pp. 263–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Keeney, J.L., and Raiffa, H.. Decisions with Mutiple Objectives. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (1976).Google Scholar
[8]Markowitz, H.Portfolio Selection. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (1959).Google Scholar
[9]Porter, R.B. “Semivariance and Stochastic Dominance: A Comparison.” American Economic Review, Vol. 64 (03 1974), pp. 200–204.Google Scholar
[10]Schoemaker, P.J.H. “The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, Purposes, Evidence and Limitations.” Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 20, (06 1982), pp. 529–563.Google Scholar