Random Utility Models with Ordered Types and Domains

We study random utility models in which heterogeneity of preferences is modeled using an ordered collection of utilities, or types. The paper shows that these models are particularly amenable when combined with domains in which the alternatives of each decision problem are ordered by the structure of the types. We enhance their applicability by: (i) working with arbitrary domains composed of such decision problems, i.e., we do not need to assume any particularly rich data domain, and (ii) making no parametric assumption, i.e., we do not need to formulate any particular assumption on the distribution over the collection of types. We characterize the model by way of two simple properties and show the applicability of our result in settings involving decisions under risk. We also propose a goodness-of- t measure for the model and prove the strong consistency of extremum estimators defined upon it. We conclude by applying the model to a dataset on lottery choices.

[1]  Yusufcan Masatlioglu,et al.  A Random Attention Model , 2017, Journal of Political Economy.

[2]  David S. Ahn,et al.  Progressive Random Choice , 2022, Journal of Political Economy.

[3]  P. Chiappori,et al.  From Aggregate Betting Data to Individual Risk Preferences , 2019, Econometrica.

[4]  J. Tyran,et al.  Robust inference in risk elicitation tasks , 2018, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty.

[5]  J. Mirrlees An Exploration in the Theory of Optimum Income Taxation an Exploration in the Theory of Optimum Income Taxation L Y 2 , 2022 .

[6]  M. Coller,et al.  Eliciting Individual Discount Rates , 1999 .

[7]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Risk and time preferences: linking experimental and household survey data from Vietnam , 2010 .

[8]  Miles S. Kimball,et al.  Preference Parameters and Behavioral Heterogeneity: An Experimental Approach in the Health and Retirement Survey , 1995 .

[9]  Tomáš Jagelka Are Economists’ Preferences Psychologists’ Personality Traits? A Structural Approach , 2023, Journal of Political Economy.

[10]  Miguel A. Ballester,et al.  Single-Crossing Random Utility Models , 2017 .

[11]  Flavio Cunha,et al.  The Identification and Economic Content of Ordered Choice Models with Stochastic Thresholds , 2007, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[12]  Christopher J. Tyson,et al.  Inferring Cognitive Heterogeneity From Aggregate Choices , 2020, Econometrica.

[13]  J. T. Warner,et al.  The Personal Discount Rate: Evidence from Military Downsizing Programs , 2001 .

[14]  Charles A. Holt,et al.  Estimating Risk Preferences from Deductible Choice , 2007 .

[15]  Syngjoo Choi,et al.  Consistency and heterogeneity of individual behavior under uncertainty , 2007 .

[16]  Miguel A. Ballester,et al.  Separating Predicted Randomness from Residual Behavior , 2020 .

[17]  Colin Camerer An experimental test of several generalized utility theories , 1989 .

[18]  S. N. Afriat,et al.  On a system of inequalities in demand analysis , 1973 .

[19]  Faruk Gul,et al.  Random Expected Utility , 2005 .

[20]  Francesca Molinari,et al.  Discrete Choice under Risk with Limited Consideration , 2019, American Economic Review.

[21]  Charles A. Holt,et al.  Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects , 2002 .

[22]  David A. Hensher,et al.  Modeling Ordered Choices , 2010 .

[23]  Miguel A. Ballester,et al.  Random models for the joint treatment of risk and time preferences , 2019 .

[24]  David E. Kaun,et al.  Marketing Signaling: Informational Transfer in Hiring and Related Screening Processes. , 1974 .