IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/rqfnac/v56y2021i3d10.1007_s11156-020-00915-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reformulating prospect theory to become a von Neumann–Morgenstern theory

Author

Listed:
  • Jack Clark Francis

    (City University of New York (CUNY))

Abstract

This paper reformulates Kahneman–Tversky’s (KT’s) cumulative prospect theory to become a von Neumann–Morgenstern (vNM) theory that is compatible with many existing economic, finance, psychology and decision theories. This vNM theory has the following desirable characteristics: consistently increasing utility of wealth, loss aversion, concave over favorable outcomes, convex over unfavorable outcomes, consistent preference for positively skewed outcomes and it spans the real line between $$ - \infty $$ - ∞ and $$ \infty $$ ∞ . The weighted probabilities in KT’s cumulative prospect theory do not align with the vNM requirement that the probabilities sum to one; nevertheless, important advantages are gained from this vNM assumption.

Suggested Citation

  • Jack Clark Francis, 2021. "Reformulating prospect theory to become a von Neumann–Morgenstern theory," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 965-985, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:rqfnac:v:56:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s11156-020-00915-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11156-020-00915-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11156-020-00915-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11156-020-00915-8?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mehra, Rajnish & Prescott, Edward C., 1985. "The equity premium: A puzzle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 145-161, March.
    2. Terrance Odean., 1996. "Volume, Volatility, Price and Profit When All Trader Are Above Average," Research Program in Finance Working Papers RPF-266, University of California at Berkeley.
    3. Shlomo Benartzi & Richard H. Thaler, 1995. "Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(1), pages 73-92.
    4. Fred D. Arditti, 1967. "Risk And The Required Return On Equity," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 22(1), pages 19-36, March.
    5. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    6. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "The Utility of Wealth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60(2), pages 151-151.
    7. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang & Richard H. Thaler, 2006. "Individual Preferences, Monetary Gambles, and Stock Market Participation: A Case for Narrow Framing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1069-1090, September.
    8. Richard H. Thaler, 2008. "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 15-25, 01-02.
    9. Andrea Frazzini, 2006. "The Disposition Effect and Underreaction to News," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(4), pages 2017-2046, August.
    10. Arie Harel & Jack Clark Francis & Giora Harpaz, 2018. "Alternative utility functions: review, analysis and comparison," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 785-811, October.
    11. Birru, Justin & Wang, Baolian, 2016. "Nominal price illusion," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(3), pages 578-598.
    12. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2001. "Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Individual Stock Returns," NBER Working Papers 8190, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Grinblatt, Mark & Han, Bing, 2005. "Prospect theory, mental accounting, and momentum," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 311-339, November.
    14. Nicholas Barberis & Abhiroop Mukherjee & Baolian Wang, 2016. "Prospect Theory and Stock Returns: An Empirical Test," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 29(11), pages 3068-3107.
    15. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    16. Conrad, Jennifer & Kapadia, Nishad & Xing, Yuhang, 2014. "Death and jackpot: Why do individual investors hold overpriced stocks?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(3), pages 455-475.
    17. Alex Imas, 2016. "The Realization Effect: Risk-Taking after Realized versus Paper Losses," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(8), pages 2086-2109, August.
    18. Meir Statman & Steven Thorley & Keith Vorkink, 2006. "Investor Overconfidence and Trading Volume," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 19(4), pages 1531-1565.
    19. William F. Sharpe, 1964. "Capital Asset Prices: A Theory Of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions Of Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 19(3), pages 425-442, September.
    20. Li, Yan & Yang, Liyan, 2013. "Prospect theory, the disposition effect, and asset prices," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 715-739.
    21. Black, Fischer & Scholes, Myron S, 1973. "The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 637-654, May-June.
    22. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2001. "Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Individual Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(4), pages 1247-1292, August.
    23. Friend, Irwin & Blume, Marshall E, 1975. "The Demand for Risky Assets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(5), pages 900-922, December.
    24. Shefrin, Hersh & Statman, Meir, 1985. "The Disposition to Sell Winners Too Early and Ride Losers Too Long: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 40(3), pages 777-790, July.
    25. Levy, H & Markowtiz, H M, 1979. "Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(3), pages 308-317, June.
    26. repec:bla:jfinan:v:53:y:1998:i:6:p:1887-1934 is not listed on IDEAS
    27. Kraus, Alan & Litzenberger, Robert H, 1976. "Skewness Preference and the Valuation of Risk Assets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1085-1100, September.
    28. Nicholas C. Barberis, 2013. "Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 173-196, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Guido Max Mantovani & Gregory Gadzinski, 2022. "How to Rate the Financial Performance of Private Companies? A Tailored Integrated Rating Methodology Applied to North-Eastern Italian Districts," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-18, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    2. Li An & Huijun Wang & Jian Wang & Jianfeng Yu, 2020. "Lottery-Related Anomalies: The Role of Reference-Dependent Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 473-501, January.
    3. Wang, Huijun & Yan, Jinghua & Yu, Jianfeng, 2017. "Reference-dependent preferences and the risk–return trade-off," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 395-414.
    4. David Hirshleife, 2015. "Behavioral Finance," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 133-159, December.
    5. Neszveda, G., 2019. "Essays on behavioral finance," Other publications TiSEM 05059039-5236-42a3-be1b-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    7. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    8. Allen, Franklin & Vayanos, Dimitri & Vives, Xavier, 2014. "Introduction to financial economics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 1-14.
    9. Barberis, Nicholas & Xiong, Wei, 2012. "Realization utility," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 251-271.
    10. EOM, Cheoljun & EOM, Yunsung & PARK, Jong Won, 2024. "Intermediate cross-sectional prospect theory value in stock markets: A novel method," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    11. Nicholas C. Barberis & Lawrence J. Jin & Baolian Wang, 2020. "Prospect Theory and Stock Market Anomalies," NBER Working Papers 27155, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Arjun Chatrath & Rohan A. Christie‐David & Hong Miao & Sanjay Ramchander, 2019. "Losers and prospectors in the short‐term options market," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(6), pages 721-743, June.
    13. Nicholas Barberis & Lawrence J. Jin & Baolian Wang, 2021. "Prospect Theory and Stock Market Anomalies," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 76(5), pages 2639-2687, October.
    14. Adam Zaremba & Jacob Koby Shemer, 2018. "Price-Based Investment Strategies," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-319-91530-2, July.
    15. Pasquariello, Paolo, 2014. "Prospect Theory and market quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 276-310.
    16. Guo, Jing & He, Xue Dong, 2021. "A new preference model that allows for narrow framing," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    17. Li An & Huijun Wang & Jian Wang & Jianfeng Yu, 2015. "Lottery-related anomalies: the role of reference-dependent preferences," Globalization Institute Working Papers 259, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
    18. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    19. Arvanitis, Stelios & Scaillet, Olivier & Topaloglou, Nikolas, 2020. "Spanning analysis of stock market anomalies under prospect stochastic dominance," Working Papers unige:134101, University of Geneva, Geneva School of Economics and Management.
    20. Olapeju Comfort Ogunmokun & Oluwasoye P. Mafimisebi & Demola Obembe, 2023. "Prospect theory and bank credit risk decision-making behaviour: a systematic literature review and future research agenda," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 1-25, April.

    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:kap:rqfnac:v:56:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s11156-020-00915-8. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://springer.com .

    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.