OPTIMAL INSURANCE DESIGN UNDER RANK‐DEPENDENT EXPECTED UTILITY
- 18 February 2013
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Mathematical Finance
- Vol. 25 (1) , 154-186
Abstract
We consider an optimal insurance design problem for an individual whose preferences are dictated by the rank‐dependent expected utility (RDEU) theory with a concave utility function and an inverse‐S shaped probability distortion function. This type of RDEU is known to describe human behavior better than the classical expected utility. By applying the technique of quantile formulation, we solve the problem explicitly. We show that the optimal contract not only insures large losses above a deductible but also insures small losses fully. This is consistent, for instance, with the demand for warranties. Finally, we compare our results, analytically and numerically, both to those in the expected utility framework and to cases in which the distortion function is convex or concave.Keywords
This publication has 52 references indexed in Scilit:
- Probability weighting functions implied in options pricesJournal of Financial Economics, 2013
- Insurance Market Effects of Risk Management MetricsThe Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, 2010
- A parameter-free analysis of the utility of money for the general population under prospect theoryJournal of Economic Psychology, 2009
- Stocks as Lotteries: The Implications of Probability Weighting for Security PricesAmerican Economic Review, 2008
- Existence and monotonicity of solutions to moral hazard problemsJournal of Mathematical Economics, 2005
- Efficient Risk-Sharing and the Dual Theory of Choice under RiskJournal of Risk and Insurance, 1999
- Weighing risk and uncertainty.Psychological Review, 1995
- Optimal insurance without expected utility: The dual theory and the linearity of insurance contractsJournal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1995
- Violations of the betweenness axiom and nonlinearity in probabilityJournal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1994
- Framing, probability distortions, and insurance decisionsJournal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1993