380 likes | 518 Views
Decision Making Under Uncertainty. Econ 301. Bernoulli Game. How much would you pay for a gamble that paid you for the nth head in a sequence of coin tosses ending at the first tail? For example if the sequence is HHHT you get 1+2+4. If the sequence is HHHHT you get 1+2+4+8.
E N D
Decision Making Under Uncertainty Econ 301
Bernoulli Game • How much would you pay for a gamble that paid you for the nth head in a sequence of coin tosses ending at the first tail? • For example if the sequence is HHHT you get 1+2+4. If the sequence is HHHHT you get 1+2+4+8
Bernoulli Game • What is the expected value of this bet? • How much would you pay to participate?
Expected Utility Theory • Expected Utility Theory is a resolution of St. Petersburg Paradox • While EV is infinite, expected utility is finite (and possibly small because of diminishing marginal utility of money).
Probability Review • A probability is a number between 0 and 1 that indicates that a particular outcome will occur. • How is probability estimated? • Frequencies: If we know a history with which a particular outcome occurred we can use frequency as an estimate of probability.
Probability Review • n is the number of times a particular outcome occurred out of N total times an event occurred. • A house either burns down or doesn’t. If n=13 similar houses burned in your neighborhood of N=1000 homes, you might estimate the probability of your house burning down as 13/1000=1.3%
Probability Review If we don’t have a history to estimate frequency, we could use available information to form subjective probability (our own best estimate that a particular outcome will occur). What kind of information will you use to form subjective probabilities?
Probability Review • Estimates of subjective probabilities are often biased because people tend to • Overweigh probabilities of unlikely events • A typical American’s chance of dying from a shark attach is 1 in 350 million; a bee sting 1 in 6 million; falling into a hole 1 in 2.8 million; a handgun 1 in 1.9 million; lightning 1 in 600,000; homicide, 1 in 15,000; flu, 1 in 3025; cancer 1 in 514; heart disease, 1 in 384 • Overall people tend to overestimate likelihood of deaths from infrequent causes and underestimate likelihood of deaths from common causes. • Use law of “small numbers” (like in the coin toss on Friday) • Framing
Probability Review • Probability distribution relates the probability of occurrence to each possible outcome.
Expected value maximization is a good approximation for a lot of problems • Expected value and expected utility maximization are the same under risk neutrality.
Expected Value: an example • Outdoor concert • V=$15 if doesn’t rain • V=$-5 if it rains • 50% chance of rain; needs to decide whether to schedule a concert before finding out the weather • EV= Pr(no rain)V(no rain)+Pr(rain)V(rain)= • .5*15+.5(-5)=$5
Expected Value • What if you could get information before scheduling a concert • V(rain)=0 (because don’t schedule) • V(no rain)=$15 • EV=.5(15)+.5(0)=7.5 • Expected gain from perfect information is the difference between EV with information and EV without information: 7.5-5=2.5 or the savings from not hiring the band if it rains .5*5=2.5
Variance • Variance measures the spread of a probability distribution. • Formally, the variance is the probability-weighted average of the squares of the differences between the observed outcome and the expected value.
Variance • Variance = .5(15-5)^2+.5(-5-5)^2=100 • Standard deviation=10 • Holding the expected value constant, the smaller the standard deviation (or variance), the smaller the risk. • Indoor concert: with no rain V=$10 and with rain V=0. • EV=.5*10+.5*0=5 (the same as before),
Variance • but variance = .5(10-5)^2+.5(0-5)^2=25 • Variance is lower if holds concert indoors. • Where will he hold the concert? • To know an answer to this question, we need to know his attitude towards risk. • Even if he dislikes risk, he might prefer a riskier option if it has a higher expected value.
Expected Utility • John Von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern (1944) propose a standard utility model to incorporate risk. • Treat utility as a cardinal measure (not an ordinal measure like we did before). • A rational person maximizes expected utility
Expected Utility • For example, EU of an outdoor concert is • EU=Pr(no rain)U(Vno rain)+Pr(rain)U(Vrain)= .5U(15)+.5U(-5) Expected value is a probability weighted average of a monetary value, whereas expected utility is a probability weighted average of the utility from that monetary value.
Risk Attitudes • What is a fair bet? • A fair bet is a lottery with expected value of zero. • For example, pay $1 if a coin comes up H and win $1 if a coin comes up T (expected value zero) • In contrast a bet in which you pay $1 if you lose and receive $2 if you win is an unfair bet that favors you.
Risk attitudes • Someone is unwilling to make a fair bet is risk averse. • A person who is indifferent about making a fair bet is risk-neutral • A person who makes a fair bet is risk preferring.
Utility Function for Wealth • U(W) is concave • U’(W)>0 • U’’(W)<0 • Diminishing marginal utility of wealth. • A person whose utility function is concave is risk averse (picks a less risky choice if both choices have the same expected value).
Example • Status Quo • W=$40 • U(40)=120 • Or buy a vase which has V=10 with probability .5 and V=$70 with probability .5 • EV=.5(10)+.5(70)=40 • Buying a vase is a fair bet because has the same EV as status quo
Example • U(10)=70, U(70)=140 • EU=.5(70)+.5(140)=105 • U(40)=120>105 (prefers status quo) • Risk premium is an amount a risk averse person would be willing to pay to avoid risk. • U(26)=105. therefore indifferent between buying a vase and having $26 for sure. Risk premium is $40-$26=$14 to avoid bearing a risk of buying a vase.
A risk averse person chooses a riskier option only if it has a sufficiently higher expected value. • Risk neutral person has a constant marginal utility of wealth (linear utility) • A risk neutral person chooses an option with the highest expected value
A person with an increasing marginal utility of wealth is risk-loving.
Experiments to Measure Risk AttitudesHolt and Laury (AER, 2002)
If choose A1 • U(3000)>.8U(4000)+.2U(0) • If choose C2, • .25U(3000)+.75U(0)<.2U(4000)+.8U(0) • But first choice of A1 implies that: • .25U(3000)>.8*.25U(4000)+.2*.25U(0) • A contradiction…
Allais Paradox • Allais paradox is by far the most severe evidence against Expected Utility Theory.