위험관리 | Cases and Studies of Risk Management in Lottery & Gambling | 危險管理
- date : 2015-05-20 01:10|hit : 2587
-
- Article] Dynamic Experiments for Estimating Preferences: An Adaptive Method of Eliciting Time and Risk Parameters
-
DocNo of ILP: 788
Doc. Type: Article
Title: Dynamic Experiments for Estimating Preferences: An Adaptive Method of Eliciting Time and Risk Parameters
Authors: Toubia, O; Johnson, E; Evgeniou, T; Delquie, P
Full Name of Authors: Toubia, Olivier; Johnson, Eric; Evgeniou, Theodoros; Delquie, Philippe
Keywords by Author: prospect theory; time discounting; Bayesian statistics; adaptive experimental design; revealed preference
Keywords Plus: PROBABILITY WEIGHTING FUNCTION; PROSPECT-THEORY; CONJOINT-ANALYSIS; EXPERIMENTAL-DESIGN; LOSS AVERSION; HIERARCHICAL BAYES; POLYHEDRAL METHODS; RESPONSE QUALITY; DECISION-MAKING; MECHANICAL TURK
Abstract: We present a method that dynamically designs elicitation questions for estimating risk and time preference parameters. Typically these parameters are elicited by presenting decision makers with a series of static choices between alternatives, gambles, or delayed payments. The proposed method dynamically (i.e., adaptively) designs such choices to optimize the information provided by each choice, while leveraging the distribution of the parameters across decision makers (heterogeneity) and capturing response error. We explore the convergence and the validity of our approach using simulations. The simulations suggest that the proposed method recovers true parameter values well under various circumstances. We then use an online experiment to compare our approach to a standard one used in the literature that requires comparable task completion time. We assess predictive accuracy in an out-of-sample task and completion time for both methods. For risk preferences, our results indicate that the proposed method predicts subjects' willingness to pay for a set of out-of-sample gambles significantly more accurately, while taking respondents about the same time to complete. For time preferences, both methods predict out-of-sample preferences equally well, while the proposed method takes significantly less completion time. For risk and time preferences, average completion time for our approach is approximately three minutes. Finally, we briefly review three applications that used the proposed methodology with various populations, and we discuss the potential benefits of the proposed methodology for research and practice.
Cate of OECD: Economics and business
Year of Publication: 2013
Business Area: gamble
Detail Business: gamble
Country: USA
Study Area:
Name of Journal: MANAGEMENT SCIENCE
Language: English
Country of Authors: [Toubia, Olivier; Johnson, Eric] Columbia Univ, Columbia Business Sch, New York, NY 10027 USA; [Evgeniou, Theodoros] INSEAD, F-77305 Fontainebleau, France; [Delquie, Philippe] George Washington Univ, Sch Business, Washington, DC 20052 USA
Press Adress: Toubia, O (reprint author), Columbia Univ, Columbia Business Sch, New York, NY 10027 USA.
Email Address: ot2107@columbia.edu; ejj3@columbia.edu; theodoros.evgeniou@insead.edu; delquie@gwu.edu
Citaion:
Funding: National Institute on Aging [3R01AG027934-04]
Lists of Citation: Abdellaoui M, 2007, MANAGE SCI, V53, P1659, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1070.0711; Abdellaoui M, 2008, J RISK UNCERTAINTY, V36, P245, DOI 10.1007/s11166-008-9039-8; Abernethy J, 2008, IEEE T KNOWL DATA EN, V20, P145, DOI 10.1109/TKDE.2007.1031; ALLENBY GM, 1995, J MARKETING RES, V32, P152, DOI 10.2307/3152044; ALLENBY GM, 1995, J MARKETING RES, V32, P392, DOI 10.2307/3152175; Allenby GM, 1999, J ECONOMETRICS, V89, P57; Andrews RL, 2002, J MARKETING RES, V39, P87, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.39.1.87.18936; Andrews RL, 2002, J MARKETING RES, V39, P479, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.39.4.479.19124; Angeletos GM, 2001, J ECON PERSPECT, V15, P47, DOI 10.1257/jep.15.3.47; Ansari A, 2003, J MARKETING RES, V40, P131, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.40.2.131.19224; Appelt KC, 2011, TIME RETIRE WHY AM C; Ashraf N, 2006, Q J ECON, V121, P635, DOI 10.1162/qjec.2006.121.2.635; Baucells M, 2012, MANAGE SCI, V58, P831, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1110.1450; Benhabib J, 2010, GAME ECON BEHAV, V69, P205, DOI 10.1016/j.geb.2009.11.003; Bruhin A, 2010, ECONOMETRICA, V78, P1375, DOI 10.3982/ECTA7139; Buhrmester M, 2011, PERSPECT PSYCHOL SCI, V6, P3, DOI 10.1177/1745691610393980; Camerer CF, 2004, ROUNDTABLE SER BEHAV, P1; Carney D, 2011, STABLE TRANSIENT INF; CASEY JT, 1995, ORGAN BEHAV HUM DEC, V61, P123, DOI 10.1006/obhd.1995.1010; Cavagnaro DR, 2012, OPTIMAL DECISION STI; Chaloner K, 1995, STAT SCI, V10, P273, DOI 10.1214/ss/1177009939; DeGroot MH, 1970, OPTIMAL STAT DECISIO; Deutskens E, 2004, MARKET LETT, V15, P21, DOI 10.1023/B:MARK.0000021968.86465.00; Ding M, 2007, J MARKETING RES, V44, P214, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.44.2.214; Dzyabura D, 2011, MARKET SCI, V30, P801, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1110.0660; Ebert JEJ, 2007, MANAGE SCI, V53, P1423, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0671; Engle R., 1994, HDB ECONOMETRICS, VIV, P2111, DOI 10.1016/S1573-4412(05)80005-4; Evgeniou T, 2007, MARKETING SCI, V26; FORD I, 1989, TECHNOMETRICS, V31, P49, DOI 10.2307/1270364; Frederick S, 2002, J ECON LIT, V40, P351, DOI 10.1257/002205102320161311; Gaechter S, 2011, MEASURING INDIVIDUAL; Galesic M, 2009, PUBLIC OPIN QUART, V73, P349, DOI 10.1093/poq/nfp031; Wu G, 1996, MANAGE SCI, V42, P1676, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.42.12.1676; GREEN PE, 1972, J MARKETING RES, V9, P65, DOI 10.2307/3149608; Greene WH, 2000, ECONOMETRIC ANAL; Harrison GW, 2002, AM ECON REV, V92, P1606, DOI 10.1257/000282802762024674; HARRISON GW, 1986, ECON LETT, V21, P7, DOI 10.1016/0165-1765(86)90111-4; HEY JD, 1994, ECONOMETRICA, V62, P1291, DOI 10.2307/2951750; Hsee CK, 2004, J EXP PSYCHOL GEN, V133, P23, DOI 10.1037/0096-3445.133.1.23; Barberis N, 2001, Q J ECON, V116, P1, DOI 10.1162/003355301556310; Huber J, 1996, J MARKETING RES, V33, P307, DOI 10.2307/3152127; Jarnebrant P, 2009, MANAGE SCI, V55, P1832, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1090.1076; Johnson EJ, 2011, TIME PREFERENCES MOR; KAHNEMAN D, 1979, ECONOMETRICA, V47, P263, DOI 10.2307/1914185; KAMAKURA WA, 1989, J MARKETING RES, V26, P379, DOI 10.2307/3172759; Kim J., 2004, REV MARKETING SCI, V2, p[1, 455]; KUHFELD WF, 1994, J MARKETING RES, V31, P545, DOI 10.2307/3151882; Laibson D, 1997, Q J ECON, V112, P443, DOI 10.1162/003355397555253; LASKEY KB, 1987, MANAGE SCI, V33, P965, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.33.8.965; Lenk PJ, 1996, MARKET SCI, V15, P173, DOI 10.1287/mksc.15.2.173; Levav J, 2010, J POLIT ECON, V118, P274; Liu EM, 2011, RISK PREFERENCES PES; LOEWENSTEIN G, 1991, AM ECON REV, V81, P347; LUCE RD, 1958, ECONOMETRICA, V26, P193, DOI 10.2307/1907587; McFadden D., 1974, FRONTIERS ECONOMETRI, P105; Meier S, 2010, AM ECON J-APPL ECON, V2, P193, DOI 10.1257/app.2.1.193; Meier S, 2009, DISCOUNTING DEFAULTI; Nilsson H, 2011, J MATH PSYCHOL, V55, P84, DOI 10.1016/j.jmp.2010.08.006; O'Donoghue T, 1999, AM ECON REV, V89, P103, DOI 10.1257/aer.89.1.103; Paolacci G, 2010, JUDGM DECIS MAK, V5, P411; PHELPS ES, 1968, REV ECON STUD, V35, P185, DOI 10.2307/2296547; Prelec D, 1998, ECONOMETRICA, V66, P497, DOI 10.2307/2998573; Qiu JY, 2011, MANAGE SCI, V57, P193, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.1100.1260; Rossi PE, 2003, MARKET SCI, V22, P304, DOI 10.1287/mksc.22.3.304.17739; Rossi PE, 2005, BAYESIAN STAT MARKET; Sandor Z, 2001, J MARKETING RES, V38, P430, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.38.4.430.18904; Sapienza P, 2009, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V106, P15268, DOI 10.1073/pnas.0907352106; Sawtooth Software, 1996, ACA SYST AD CONJ AN; SRINIVAS.V, 1973, PSYCHOMETRIKA, V38, P473, DOI 10.1007/BF02291490; Stanton SJ, 2011, PSYCHOL SCI, V22, P447, DOI 10.1177/0956797611401752; STARMER C, 1991, AM ECON REV, V81, P971; STEINBERG DM, 1984, TECHNOMETRICS, V26, P71, DOI 10.2307/1268097; Stott HP, 2006, J RISK UNCERTAINTY, V32, P101, DOI 10.1007/s11166-006-8289-6; Tanaka T, 2010, AM ECON REV, V100, P557, DOI 10.1257/aer.100.1.557; Thaler R., 1985, MARKET SCI, V4, P199, DOI DOI 10.1287/MKSC.4.3.199; Tom SM, 2007, SCIENCE, V315, P515, DOI 10.1126/science.1134239; Toubia O., 2007, CONJOINT MEASUREMENT, P231, DOI 10.1007/978-3-540-71404-0_12; Toubia O, 2007, MARKET SCI, V26, P596, DOI 10.1287/mksc.1060.0257; Toubia O, 2003, MARKET SCI, V22, P274; Toubia O, 2004, J MARKETING RES, V41, P116, DOI 10.1509/jmkr.41.1.116.25082; Trope Y, 2007, J CONSUM PSYCHOL, V17, P83, DOI 10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70013-X; TVERSKY A, 1992, J RISK UNCERTAINTY, V5, P297, DOI 10.1007/BF00122574; Vohs KD, 2008, J PERS SOC PSYCHOL, V94, P883, DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.94.5.883; Wakker P, 1996, MANAGE SCI, V42, P1131, DOI 10.1287/mnsc.42.8.1131; Wang SW, 2010, DYNAMICALLY OPTIMIZE; Weber EU, 2007, PSYCHOL SCI, V18, P516, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01932.x; Zauberman G, 2003, J CONSUM RES, V30, P405, DOI 10.1086/378617
Number of Citaion: 87
Publication: INFORMS
City of Publication: CATONSVILLE
Address of Publication: 5521 RESEARCH PARK DR, SUITE 200, CATONSVILLE, MD 21228 USA
ISSN: 0025-1909
29-Character Source Abbreviation: MANAGE SCI
ISO Source Abbreviation: Manage. Sci.
Volume: 59
Version: 3
Start of File: 613
End of File: 640
DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1120.1570
Number of Pages: 28
Web of Science Category: Management; Operations Research & Management Science
Subject Category: Business & Economics; Operations Research & Management Science
Document Delivery Number: 103LT
Unique Article Identifier: WOS:000315918600006
[이 게시물은 HyeJung Mo…님에 의해 2015-05-20 17:09:59 GAMBLING에서 이동 됨]
- reply : 0
-
- list
-
- prev
- next