https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Index en-au 5 https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:34789 Wed 08 May 2019 12:59:09 AEST ]]> https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:33075 Wed 04 Sep 2019 09:54:48 AEST ]]> https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:33189 worse worst-case outcome in favor of a better best-case outcome—and portfolio choice using expected utility theory (EUT). The key tradeoff in our satisficing task can also be stated in reverse: to consider accepting less attractive potential upside gains in order to improve worst-case outcomes. Risk preferences are elicited by asking subjects to choose an acceptable worst-case portfolio outcome from a continuum of binary gambles, each with its own support and unique minimum. The worst-case aspiration represents the smallest low-state payoff in the binary gamble that the subject is willing to accept. We show analytically and empirically that choosing a most preferred worst-case aspiration maps into a logically equivalent—but psychologically distinct—process of expected utility maximization (i.e., allocating one's savings over a binary risky asset and risk-free bond using the EUT framework with a unique risk-acceptance parameter under CARA or CRRA risk preferences).]]> Tue 11 Sep 2018 12:49:58 AEST ]]> https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:29811 Sat 24 Mar 2018 07:40:51 AEDT ]]> https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:29294 Sat 24 Mar 2018 07:34:25 AEDT ]]> https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:29665 Sat 24 Mar 2018 07:32:22 AEDT ]]> https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:33744 Fri 15 Oct 2021 10:59:43 AEDT ]]>