IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cwl/cwldpp/2355.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Extreme Points of First-Order Stochastic Dominance Intervals: Theory and Applications

Author

Abstract

We characterize the extreme points of first-order stochastic dominance (FOSD) intervals and show how these intervals are at the heart of many topics in economics. Using knowledge of these extreme points, we characterize the distributions of posterior quantiles under a given prior, leading to an analogue of a classical result regarding the distribution of posterior means. We apply this analogue to various economic subjects, including the psychology of judgement, political economy, and Bayesian persuasion. In addition, FOSD intervals provide a common structure to security design. We use the extreme points to unify and generalize seminal results in that literature when either adverse selection or moral hazard pertains.

Suggested Citation

  • Kai Hao Yang & Alexander K. Zentefis, 2023. "Extreme Points of First-Order Stochastic Dominance Intervals: Theory and Applications," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2355, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    • Handle: RePEc:cwl:cwldpp:2355
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cowles.yale.edu/sites/default/files/2023-02/d2355.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Whitmore, G A, 1970. "Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 457-459, June.
    2. Emir Kamenica, 2019. "Bayesian Persuasion and Information Design," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 249-272, August.
    3. Anne-Katrin Roesler & Balázs Szentes, 2017. "Buyer-Optimal Learning and Monopoly Pricing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(7), pages 2072-2080, July.
    4. Roland G. Fryer Jr. & Richard Holden, 2011. "Measuring the Compactness of Political Districting Plans," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(3), pages 493-535.
    5. John Bradbury & W. Crain, 2005. "Legislative district configurations and fiscal policy in American States," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 125(3), pages 385-407, December.
    6. Stephen Coate & Brian Knight, 2007. "Socially Optimal Districting: A Theoretical and Empirical Exploration," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(4), pages 1409-1471.
    7. Bruno Biais & Thomas Mariotti, 2005. "Strategic Liquidity Supply and Security Design," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(3), pages 615-649.
    8. repec:bla:jfinan:v:58:y:2003:i:5:p:2059-2086 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Catherine Casamatta, 2003. "Financing and Advising: Optimal Financial Contracts with Venture Capitalists," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(5), pages 2059-2085, October.
    10. Klaus M. Schmidt, 1997. "Managerial Incentives and Product Market Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(2), pages 191-213.
    11. Cho, Seok-ju & Duggan, John, 2009. "Bargaining foundations of the median voter theorem," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 851-868, March.
    12. Piotr Dworczak & Giorgio Martini, 2019. "The Simple Economics of Optimal Persuasion," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(5), pages 1993-2048.
    13. Paul W. Grimes, 2002. "The Overconfident Principles of Economics Student: An Examination of a Metacognitive Skill," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 15-30, January.
    14. Peter DeMarzo & Darrell Duffie, 1999. "A Liquidity-Based Model of Security Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(1), pages 65-100, January.
    15. Timothy Besley & Ian Preston, 2007. "Electoral Bias and Policy Choice: Theory and Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(4), pages 1473-1510.
    16. Innes, Robert D., 1990. "Limited liability and incentive contracting with ex-ante action choices," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 45-67, October.
    17. G. Hanoch & H. Levy, 1969. "The Efficiency Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 36(3), pages 335-346.
    18. Samuelson, William F, 1984. "Bargaining under Asymmetric Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 995-1005, July.
    19. SHOR, BORIS & McCARTY, NOLAN, 2011. "The Ideological Mapping of American Legislatures," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(3), pages 530-551, August.
    20. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
    21. Belayet Hossain & Panagiotis Tsigaris, 2015. "Are grade expectations rational? A classroom experiment," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 199-212, April.
    22. McCarty, Nolan & Poole, Keith T. & Rosenthal, Howard, 2001. "The Hunt for Party Discipline in Congress," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(3), pages 673-687, September.
    23. Nachman, David C & Noe, Thomas H, 1994. "Optimal Design of Securities under Asymmetric Information," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 7(1), pages 1-44.
    24. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    25. Erik Hoelzl & Aldo Rustichini, 2005. "Overconfident: Do You Put Your Money On It?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(503), pages 305-318, April.
    26. Hart, Oliver, 1995. "Firms, Contracts, and Financial Structure," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198288817.
    27. John N. Friedman & Richard Holden, 2020. "Optimal Gerrymandering in a competitive environment," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 347-367, October.
    28. Moore, Don A., 2007. "Not so above average after all: When people believe they are worse than average and its implications for theories of bias in social comparison," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 42-58, January.
    29. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
    30. Paul R. Milgrom, 1981. "Good News and Bad News: Representation Theorems and Applications," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(2), pages 380-391, Autumn.
    31. John N. Friedman & Richard T. Holden, 2008. "Optimal Gerrymandering: Sometimes Pack, but Never Crack," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 113-144, March.
    32. Gerhard Winkler, 1988. "Extreme Points of Moment Sets," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 581-587, November.
    33. Vasiliki Skreta, 2006. "Sequentially Optimal Mechanisms -super-1," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 73(4), pages 1085-1111.
    34. Simon Loertscher & Ellen V. Muir, 2022. "Monopoly Pricing, Optimal Randomization, and Resale," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(3), pages 566-635.
    35. Eduardo Borensztein & Paolo Mauro, 2004. "The case for GDP-indexed bonds [‘World income components: measuring and exploiting risk-sharing opportunities’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 19(38), pages 166-216.
    36. Colin F. Camerer, 1997. "Progress in Behavioral Game Theory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 167-188, Fall.
    37. Jeffrey R. Lax & Justin H. Phillips, 2009. "How Should We Estimate Public Opinion in The States?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 107-121, January.
    38. Matthew Gentzkow & Emir Kamenica, 2016. "A Rothschild-Stiglitz Approach to Bayesian Persuasion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 597-601, May.
    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. Anton Kolotilin & Alexander Wolitzky, 2020. "The Economics of Partisan Gerrymandering," Discussion Papers 2020-12, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    2. Anton Kolotilin & Roberto Corrao & Alexander Wolitzky, 2022. "Persuasion with Non-Linear Preferences," Papers 2206.09164, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.

    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. Kai Hao Yang & Alexander K. Zentefis, 2023. "Monotone Function Intervals: Theory and Applications," Papers 2302.03135, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    2. Kai Hao Yang & Alexander K. Zentefis, 2022. "Gerrymandering and the Limits of Representative Democracy," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2328, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    3. Anton Kolotilin & Alexander Wolitzky, 2020. "The Economics of Partisan Gerrymandering," Discussion Papers 2020-12, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    4. Mark Armstrong & Jidong Zhou, 2022. "Consumer Information and the Limits to Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(2), pages 534-577, February.
    5. Roman Inderst & Holger M. Mueller, 2006. "Informed Lending and Security Design," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(5), pages 2137-2162, October.
    6. Inderst, Roman & Mueller, Holger, 2003. "Credit Risk Analysis and Security Design," CEPR Discussion Papers 3686, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Andrei Gomberg & Romans Pancs & Tridib Sharma, 2023. "Electoral Maldistricting," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(3), pages 1223-1264, August.
    8. Glode, Vincent & Opp, Christian C. & Zhang, Xingtan, 2018. "Voluntary disclosure in bilateral transactions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 652-688.
    9. Azarmsa, Ehsan & Cong, Lin William, 2020. "Persuasion in relationship finance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(3), pages 818-837.
    10. Stenzel, André, 2018. "Security design with interim public information," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 113-130.
    11. Bruno Biais & Thomas Mariotti, 2005. "Strategic Liquidity Supply and Security Design," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(3), pages 615-649.
    12. Zhou, Jidong, 2021. "Mixed bundling in oligopoly markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    13. Fong, Wai Mun, 2010. "A stochastic dominance analysis of yen carry trades," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 1237-1246, June.
    14. Fong, Wai Mun & Lean, Hooi Hooi & Wong, Wing Keung, 2008. "Stochastic dominance and behavior towards risk: The market for Internet stocks," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 194-208, October.
    15. Loubergé, Henri & Malevergne, Yannick & Rey, Béatrice, 2020. "New Results for additive and multiplicative risk apportionment," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 140-151.
    16. Nowak, Maciej, 2004. "Preference and veto thresholds in multicriteria analysis based on stochastic dominance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(2), pages 339-350, October.
    17. W. Wong & R. Chan, 2008. "Prospect and Markowitz stochastic dominance," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 105-129, January.
    18. Courage Ose Eburajolo & Sunday Oseiweh Ogbeide, 2021. "An Empirical Analysis of Stochastic Dominance and Portfolio Selection in the Stock Market: Evidence from Nigeria," Business & Management Compass, University of Economics Varna, issue 4, pages 412-428.
    19. Al-Khazali, Osamah, 2014. "Revisiting fast profit investor sentiment and stock returns during Ramadan," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 158-170.
    20. Nisani, Doron & Shelef, Amit & Sonenshine, Ralph & David, Or, 2024. "The mutual funds puzzle and the elusive von Neumann-Morgenstern preference relation," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).

    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:cwl:cwldpp:2355. 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: Brittany Ladd (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cowleus.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.