Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Book Review

  • Published:
Theory and Decision Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Albers W., Pope R., Selten R., Vogt B. (2000). Experimental evidence for attractions to chance. German Economic Review 1(2): 113–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K.J., (1965). The theory of risk aversion, lecture 2 in Kenneth J. Arrow, Aspects of the Theory of Risk Bearing, Yrjö Jahnssonin säätio, Helsinki.

  • Cyert, R. and March, J. (1963). The behavioral theory of the firm. Prentice Hall.

  • Friedman M., Savage L. (1948). The utility analysis of choices involving risk. Journal of Political Economy 56, 279–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marschak J. (1950). Rational behavior, uncertain prospects, and measurable utility. Econometrica 18, 111–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope, R.E. (1983). The pre-outcome period and the utility of gambling, in Stigum, B.P., and Wenstøp, F. (eds.), Foundations of Utility and Risk Theory with Applications, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 37–177.

  • Pope, R.E. (1984). The utility of gambling and of outcomes: inconsistent first approximations, in Hagen, O. and Wenstøp, F. (eds.), Progress in Utility and Risk Theory, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 251–273.

  • Pope R.E. (1985). Timing Contradictions in von Neumann and Morgenstern’s Axioms and in Savage’s Sure-Thing Proof. Theory and Decision 18, 229–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope, R.E. (1996/7). Debates on the utility of chance: a look back to move forward, Journal for Science of Research (Zeitschrift für Wissenschaftsforschung), 11/12, 43–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Pope, R.E. (1988). The bayesian approach: irreconcilable with expected utility theory? in Munier, B., (ed.), Risk, Decision and Rationality, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 221–230.

  • Pope R.E. (1995). Towards a more precise decision framework, a separation of the negative utility of chance from diminishing marginal utility and the preference for safety. Theory and Decision 39(3): 241–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope R. (2000). Reconciliation with the utility of chance by elaborated outcomes destroys the axiomatic basis of expected utility theory. Theory and Decision 49, 223–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope R.E. (2001). Evidence of deliberate violations of dominance due to secondary satisfactions—attractions to chance. Homo Economicus XIV(2): 47–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, J.W. (1964). Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica 32, 1–2, 122–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey F. (1926). Truth and probability reproduced in 1950. in: Braithwaite R.B. (ed) The Foundations of Mathematics and Other Logical Essays. The Humanities Press, New York, pp 156–184

  • Von Neumann J., Morgenstern O. (1947). Theory of games and economic behaviour (2nd edn.). Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, N-4036, Norway

    Kjell Hausken

Authors
  1. Kjell Hausken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kjell Hausken.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hausken, K. Book Review. Theor Decis 62, 303–309 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-006-9024-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-006-9024-0

Search

Navigation