A test of prospect theory

Toland, Anne; O’Neill, Patrick

doi:10.1016/0167-2681(83)90026-4

Cited by 11 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The framework has been thoroughly tested in different contexts (see e.g. Toland and O'Neill, 1983;Langer and Weber, 2005) and has proven to provide a more accurate description of decision-making under uncertainty than the standard model of expected-utility maximization in many settings where individuals make decisions under uncertainty. For example, Ciccarone and Marchetti (2013) model prospect-theory preferences to study the natural level of output, and Dhami andAl-Nowaihi (2007, 2010) apply it in the context of (optimal) taxation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is your vote vital?

Herrmann

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This thesis was a long time in the making, and it is a relief to finally have finished it. It has its origins in a meeting with the, at the time, outgoing and incoming Research Master coordinators, Richard Jong-A-Pin and Tristan Kohl, respectively. While we were brainstorming ideas for my firstyear research project, I mentioned in passing that 'I have always wondered why people vote'. Given that this was one of Richard's research areas, he picked up on it and offered to be my supervisor for this project. We spent hours exploring and discussing the literature and concluded that there was still much more research to be done on the topic of voter behavior. We also needed an expert in game theory on board, and who better to do it than Bert Schoonbeek. Thus began a fruitful collaboration, which resulted in the paper presented in Chapter 2 of this thesis. It was then only logical to continue with a PhD. I really could not have asked for better supervisors. Bert and Richard, I thank you wholeheartedly for your guidance, support, and patience. The final proposition attached to this thesis is a nod to you: without your counsel, my plans would surely have gone wrong. You guided me in terms of I am able to continue my career here after my PhD. Thanks to my office mates over the years, Bart Claassen, Lennart Stangenberg, Tobias Grohmann, and Francesco Febbraro, for the camaraderie and the occasional welcome distraction. Thank you to my teaching colleagues for showing me the ropes and for the pleasant cooperation. I extend my gratitude to

show abstract