Abstract
Chechile and Cooke (1997) experimentally tested a broad class of utility models subsumed under the Miyamoto (1988, 1992) generic utility theory. The Chechile and Cooke study required participants to match on each trial, a fully specified reference gamble to a partially specified comparison gamble by adjusting the probability of a win on the comparison gamble. The Chechile and Cooke experiment, however, contained a subset of trials which were intrinsically unmatchable. In such cases, the participants could only give an extreme probability (either 0 or 1). In this paper, those extreme trials were omitted and the results from the experiment reanalyzed. Despite the mismatch problem, the conclusions of the Chechile and Cooke experiment were again supported. For nine implementations of generic utility there is model failure due to the systematic variation of a parameter that should be a constant.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
