IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v1y1955i3-4p259-270.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Axiomatization of Utility Based on the Notion of Utility Differences

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Suppes

    (Stanford University, Stanford, California)

  • Muriel Winet

    (Stanford University, Stanford, California)

Abstract

In the literature of economics the notion of utility differences has been much discussed in connection with the theory of measurement of utility. However, to the best of our knowledge, no adequate axiomatization for this difference notion has yet been given at a level of generality and precision comparable to the von Neumann and Morgenstern construction of a probabilistic scheme for measuring utility. (The early study of Wiener is not axiomatically oriented.) The purpose of this paper is to present an axiomatization of this notion and to establish the expected representation theorem guaranteeing measurement unique up to a linear transformation.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Suppes & Muriel Winet, 1955. "An Axiomatization of Utility Based on the Notion of Utility Differences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3-4), pages 259-270, 04-07.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:1:y:1955:i:3-4:p:259-270
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1.3-4.259
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1.3-4.259
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1.3-4.259?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Minardi, Stefania & Savochkin, Andrei, 2015. "Preferences with grades of indecisiveness," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 300-331.
    2. Gerard Debreu, 1957. "Stochastic Choice and Cardinal Utility," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 39, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    3. Tserenjigmid, Gerelt, 2019. "Choosing with the worst in mind: A reference-dependent model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 631-652.
    4. Georgios Gerasimou, 2019. "Simple Preference Intensity Comparisons," Discussion Paper Series, School of Economics and Finance 201905, School of Economics and Finance, University of St Andrews, revised 27 Apr 2020.
    5. Jean Baccelli & Philippe Mongin, 2016. "Choice-based cardinal utility: a tribute to Patrick Suppes," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 268-288, July.
    6. Jean-Sébastien Lenfant, 2018. "Probabilising the consumer: Georgescu-Roegen, Marschak and Quandt on the modelling of the consumer in the 1950s," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 36-72, January.
    7. Herweg, Fabian & Weinschenk, Philipp, 2022. "Multi-attribute heuristics and intertemporal choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 174-181.
    8. Pivato, Marcus, 2013. "Multiutility representations for incomplete difference preorders," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 196-220.
    9. M. Kaneko, 1984. "On interpersonal utility comparisons," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 1(3), pages 165-175, October.
    10. Tserenjigmid, Gerelt, 2015. "Theory of decisions by intra-dimensional comparisons," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PA), pages 326-338.
    11. Simone Cerreia-Vioglio & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Aldo Rustichini, 2023. "Multinomial Logit Processes and Preference Discovery: Inside and Outside the Black Box," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(3), pages 1155-1194.
    12. S. Cerreia-Vioglio & F. Maccheroni & M. Marinacci & A. Rustichini, 2017. "Multinomial logit processes and preference discovery: inside and outside the black box," Working Papers 615, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    13. Herweg, Fabian & Müller, Daniel, 2021. "A comparison of regret theory and salience theory for decisions under risk," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    14. Gianmarco Caldini, 2022. "On the notion of measurable utility on a connected and separable topological space: an order isomorphism theorem," Papers 2301.01271, arXiv.org.
    15. Marcus Pivato, 2015. "Social choice with approximate interpersonal comparison of welfare gains," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(2), pages 181-216, September.
    16. Roberts, Blaine, 1969. "An extension of utility theory," ISU General Staff Papers 196901010800004596, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    17. Georgios Gerasimou, 2017. "Preference intensity representation and revelation," Discussion Paper Series, School of Economics and Finance 201716, School of Economics and Finance, University of St Andrews, revised 01 Jun 2019.
    18. Simone Cerreia-Vioglio & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci, 2020. "Multinomial logit processes and preference discovery: outside and inside the black box," Working Papers 663, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:1:y:1955:i:3-4:p:259-270. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.