Range-Fixed Trade-Off Method: A Preference Elicitation Approach Considering the Dependence of Probability Weighting on Outcome Range

Among existing preference elicitation methods, the trade-off method offers an advantage over others in mitigating the influence of probability weighting on preferences, as it does not require assuming a specific form for the probability weighting function. However, when accounting for the dependence of probability weighting on the choice-set outcome range (CSOR), the conventional trade-off method may lead to improper elicitation of preferences due to its inability to control the CSOR. In order to concurrently circumvent the impacts of the CSOR and probability weighting on preferences in the elicitation procedure, we introduce the Range-Fixed Trade-off Method (RFTM) and provide its full derivation and concrete implementation steps under the framework of rank-dependent utility theory (RDU). The RFTM not only retains the advantages of the conventional trade-off method but also evades the effects of the CSOR on preferences by fixing the CSOR. The results of empirical investigations into the efficacy of RFTM indicate that, compared to the existing trade-off method, utility functions derived from RFTM exhibit a lower degree of risk aversion. This result is compatible with existing experimental observations and conclusions, thus implying that RFTM can effectively elicit individual preferences, thereby preventing or mitigating the bias in preferences arising from CSOR variations in the conventional trade-off approach. Furthermore, the experimental results demonstrate that the probability weighting function remains nonlinear even within a fixed CSOR. This indicates that, under the premise of preferences depending on the CSOR, non-expected utility theories still hold promising development prospects in the future. In summary, RFTM not only provides a more effective and reliable approach for preference elicitation but also makes it feasible to study the impact of changes in the CSOR on preferences, thereby providing methodological support for the future development of CSOR-dependent non-expected utility theories.

• Publication year

  2026

• Venue

  Systems

• Publication date

  2026-01-27

• Fields of study

  Not labeled

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.3390/systems14020127
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• Classification and identification of medical insurance fraud: a case-based reasoning approach

  2025cited by this paper
• Large group decision-making with a rough integrated asymmetric cloud model under multi-granularity linguistic environment

  2024cited by this paper
• A contextual range-dependent model for choice under risk

  2024cited by this paper
• Dynamic prospect theory: Two core decision theories coexist in the gambling behavior of monkeys and humans

  2023cited by this paper
• A simple non-parametric method for eliciting prospect theory's value function and measuring loss aversion under risk and ambiguity

  2021cited by this paper
• Accommodating stake effects under prospect theory

  2017cited by this paper
• Target-Adjusted Utility Functions and Expected-Utility Paradoxes

  2016cited by this paper
• Cautious Expected Utility and the Certainty Effect

  2015cited by this paper
• Range-Dependent Utility

  2013cited by this paper
• Rationality on the rise: Why relative risk aversion increases with stake size

  2010cited by this paper
• Third-generation prospect theory

  2008cited by this paper
• An Empirical Test of Gain-Loss Separability in Prospect Theory

  2008cited by this paper
• G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences

  2007cited by this paper
• Is Probability Weighting Sensitive to the Magnitude of Consequences? An Experimental Investigation on Losses

  2004cited by this paper
• Parameter-Free Elicitation of Utility and Probability Weighting Functions

  2000cited by this paper
• z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments

  1999cited by this paper
• On the shape of the probability weighting function.

  1999cited by this paper
• The Probability Weighting Function

  1998cited by this paper
• Eliciting von Neumann-Morgenstern Utilities When Probabilities Are Distorted or Unknown

  1996cited by this paper
• Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty

  1992cited by this paper
• The effect on the preference-reversal phenomenon of using choice indifferences

  1990cited by this paper
• Probability Versus Certainty Equivalence Methods in Utility Measurement: Are they Equivalent?

  1985cited by this paper
• A theory of anticipated utility

  1982cited by this paper
• Le comportement de l'homme rationnel devant le risque : critique des postulats et axiomes de l'ecole americaine

  1953cited by this paper
• The Utility of Wealth

  1952cited by this paper
• You have printed the following article : Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk

  year unknowncited by this paper

• No citing papers are available for this paper.