Multiattribute Utility Satisfying a Preference for Combining Good with Bad

An important challenge in multiattribute decision analysis is the choice of an appropriate functional form for the utility function. We show that if a decision maker prefers more of any attribute to less and prefers to combine good lotteries with bad, as opposed to combining good with good and bad with bad, her utility function should be a weighted average (a mixture) of multiattribute exponential utilities (“mixex utility”). In the single-attribute case, mixex utility satisfies properties typically thought to be desirable and encompasses most utility functions commonly used in decision analysis. In the multiattribute case, mixex utility implies aversion to any multivariate risk. Risk aversion with respect to any attribute decreases as that attribute increases. Under certain restrictions, such risk aversion also decreases as any other attribute increases, and a multivariate one-switch property is satisfied. One of the strengths of mixex utility is its ability to represent cases where utility independence does not hold, but mixex utility can be consistent with mutual utility independence and take on a multilinear form. An example illustrates the fitting of mixex utility to preference assessments.

[1]  Robert L. Winkler,et al.  Decision Making with Multiattribute Performance Targets: The Impact of Changes in Performance and Target Distributions , 2007, Oper. Res..

[2]  Larry G. Epstein,et al.  Increasing Generalized Correlation: A Definition and Some Economic Consequences , 1980 .

[3]  D. E. Bell One-switch utility functions and a measure of risk , 1988 .

[4]  Richard J. Zeckhauser,et al.  Proper risk aversion , 1987 .

[5]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs , 1976 .

[6]  S. Karlin,et al.  Classes of orderings of measures and related correlation inequalities. I. Multivariate totally positive distributions , 1980 .

[7]  Miles S. Kimball Precautionary Saving in the Small and in the Large , 1989 .

[8]  J. Caballe,et al.  Mixed Risk Aversion , 1995 .

[9]  William Feller,et al.  An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications , 1967 .

[10]  Patrick L. Brockett,et al.  A class of utility functions containing all the common utility functions , 1987 .

[11]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decisionmaking , 1992 .

[12]  Michel Denuit,et al.  The safest dependence structure among risks , 1999 .

[13]  Peter C. Fishburn,et al.  Strong One-Switch Utility , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[14]  Louis Eeckhoudt,et al.  Putting risk in its proper place , 2006 .

[15]  J. Campbell,et al.  The New Palgrave Dictionary of Money and Finance , 1994 .

[16]  Louis Eeckhoudt,et al.  Apportioning of Risks via Stochastic Dominance , 2008, J. Econ. Theory.

[17]  Miles S. Kimball,et al.  Precautionary Motives for Holding Assets , 1991 .

[18]  Marco Scarsini,et al.  Dominance Conditions for Multivariate Utility Functions , 1988 .

[19]  C. Gollier The economics of risk and time , 2001 .

[20]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[21]  Louis Eeckhoudt,et al.  A Good Sign for Multivariate Risk Taking , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[22]  David Lindley,et al.  A Class of Utility Functions , 1976 .

[23]  A. Müller,et al.  Comparison Methods for Stochastic Models and Risks , 2002 .

[24]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  A theory of auctions and competitive bidding , 1982 .

[25]  Michel Denuit,et al.  Some consequences of correlation aversion in decision science , 2010, Ann. Oper. Res..

[26]  Ali E. Abbas,et al.  One-Switch Independence for Multiattribute Utility Functions , 2011, Oper. Res..

[27]  Christian Gollier,et al.  Risk Vulnerability and the temper-ing E ect of Background Risk , 1996 .

[28]  S. Richard Multivariate Risk Aversion, Utility Independence and Separable Utility Functions , 1975 .