Traditional
economic models assume investors always act rationally, maximizing returns
while minimizing risk through steady preferences. However, real-world decisions
often defy this, blending caution with gambles; this article explores three
landmark theories that reveal why.
A- Friedman-Savage hypothesis (1948 by Milton
Friedman and Leonard Savage)
The Friedman-Savage
hypothesis is a theory in behavioral economics and utility theory designed
to explain a specific contradiction in human behavior: why the same person
might simultaneously buy insurance (to avoid risk) and lottery
tickets (to seek risk).
Proposed by
Milton Friedman and Leonard Savage in 1948, it suggests that an individual’s
attitude toward risk is not constant but changes depending on their level of
wealth.
The Paradox:
Insurance vs. Gambling
Standard
economic theory (the Bernoulli hypothesis) originally suggested that most
people are "risk-averse" because they experience diminishing
marginal utility—each extra dollar provides less satisfaction than the one
before.
- Insurance: A risk-averse person pays a
premium to avoid a large potential loss.
- Gambling: A risk-seeking person pays for a
small chance at a large gain, even if the "expected value" is
negative.
Friedman and
Savage argued that because people often do both, a simple concave utility curve
isn't enough to describe human behavior.
The
"S-Shaped" Utility Function
To resolve
this, they proposed a utility function with a unique, alternating shape:
|
Segment |
Wealth Level |
Marginal Utility |
Behavior |
Example |
|
Lower |
Low Income |
Diminishing |
Risk-Averse |
Buying insurance to protect small assets. |
|
Middle |
Transition |
Increasing |
Risk-Seeking |
Buying lottery tickets to "jump" to a
higher social class. |
|
Upper |
High Income |
Diminishing |
Risk-Averse |
Protecting newly acquired wealth through safe
investments. |
The Visual Curve
If you were to
graph this, the curve looks like an elongated 'S':
- It starts concave (curving
down), representing risk aversion at low income.
- It hits an inflection point and
becomes convex (curving up), representing a "love of
risk" as people try to escape their current socioeconomic status.
- It hits a second inflection point
and becomes concave again at very high wealth levels.
Socioeconomic
Significance
The hypothesis
is often used to explain social mobility.
- People in the lower-middle class
might gamble because a small loss won't change their life, but a massive
win (the lottery) could fundamentally move them into a higher
socioeconomic bracket.
- The "pain" of losing a
few dollars is outweighed by the "utility" of the potential
life-changing jump in status.
B- Harry Markowitz’s Utility Theory (1952 by Harry
Markowitz)
While Friedman
and Savage focused on absolute levels of wealth; Harry Markowitz (the
father of Modern Portfolio Theory, who won a Nobel Prize for Modern Portfolio
Theory) argued that this was unrealistic. Markowitz pointed out that the
Friedman-Savage model implied that people's risk preferences were tied to
absolute wealth levels. He argued instead that people care about changes
in wealth relative to their "current" position. In other words, Markowitz
indicated that if utility depended on absolute wealth, a person’s behavior
would change drastically every time their bank balance moved. Instead, he
proposed that utility is determined by changes in wealth relative to a
person's current position (a reference point).
The
Markowitz Utility Function
Markowitz
suggested a "doubly S-shaped" utility function. Unlike the single
S-curve of Friedman-Savage, Markowitz’s curve centered around the individual's current
wealth.
- Gains: People are risk-averse for small
gains but risk-seeking for large gains (lottery behavior).
- Losses: People are risk-seeking for small losses but risk-averse for large losses (insurance behavior).
C- Prospect Theory (1979, by Daniel Kahneman
and Amos Tversky)
Key Pillars
of Prospect Theory
- Reference Dependence: People do not evaluate outcomes in
isolation. We evaluate them as gains or losses relative to a reference
point (usually the status quo).
- Loss Aversion: This is the most famous finding.
Psychologically, the pain of losing is twice as powerful as the joy of
gaining. Losing Rs 1,00,000 hurts much more than winning Rs 1,00,000
feels good.
- Diminishing Sensitivity: The difference between Rs 0 and Rs
1000 feels huge, but the difference between Rs1,00,000 and Rs 1,01,000
feels marginal. This leads to the "S" shape: concave for gains
(risk aversion) and convex for losses (risk seeking).
- Probability Weighting: People tend to
"overweight" small probabilities (which explains why we buy
lottery tickets) and "underweight" large, certain probabilities.
The Value
Function
The Prospect
Theory curve is asymmetrical. It is steeper for losses than for gains, visually
representing that losses makes larger impact than gains.
|
Comparison of the Three
Theories |
|||
|
Feature |
Friedman-Savage |
Markowitz Theory |
Prospect Theory |
|
Driver of Utility |
Absolute Wealth |
Change in Wealth |
Gains and Losses |
|
Reference Point |
None |
Current Wealth |
Subjective Reference Point |
|
Key Behavioral Insight |
Explains lottery/insurance paradox. |
Utility depends on your "starting point." |
Loss Aversion (Losses > Gains). |
|
Shape of Curve |
Concave-Convex-Concave |
S-shaped on both sides of zero |
Steeper for losses than gains |
Sources
1-
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/256692 (The Utility Analysis of Choices
Involving Risk- by Milton Friedman and L. J. Savage)
2-
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/257177
(The Utility of Wealth by Harry Markowitz)
3-
https://www.econometricsociety.org/publications/econometrica/1979/03/01/prospect-theory-analysis-decision-under-risk (An Analysis of Decision under Risk by
Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky)