Role of the St. Petersburg Paradox in Decision-Making

  • Authors

    • Mikhail Samuilovich Gasparian
    • Irina Anatolievna Kiseleva
    • Dmitry Gennadievich Korneev
    • Sergey Arkadyevich Lebedev
    • Viktor Arkadyevich Lebedev
    2018-12-03
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.38.24438
  • St. Petersburg paradox, decision-making, risk, risk assessment.

  • Abstract

    The article considers the appearance and modern interpretations of the St. Petersburg paradox. A review of the main solutions of the St. Petersburg paradox and an attempt to define their significance for the economic theory have been made. The impact of this problem on the economic theory can be seen by the example of such provisions as the principle of diminishing marginal utility, the use of expected utility as a criterion for decision-making in the context of uncertainty, as well as the basics of microeconomics of insurance and risk management, game theory, and some approaches to financial modeling.

     

  • References

    1. [1] M.S. Nelyubina, Nestandartnyye zadachi teorii veroyatnostey [Nonstandard problems of the probability theory], Research and methodological electronic journal "Concept" 25 (2015) 236–240.

      [2] V.S. Diev, Problema vybora i prinyatiya resheniya v mezhdistsiplinarnom kontekste [Problem of choice and decision-making in an interdisciplinary context], Bulletin of the Tomsk State University. Philosophy. Sociology. Political science 2 (22) (2014) 41-51.

      [3] V.V. Kovalev, Korporativnyye finansy i uchet: ponyatiya, algoritmy, pokazateli [Corporate finance and accounting: concepts, algorithms, indicators]: Study guide. Part 1, Prospect, KNORUS, Moscow, 2014.

      [4] A.A. Kudryavtsev, Sankt-Peterburgskiy paradoks i yego znacheniye dlya ekonomicheskoy teorii [St. Petersburg paradox and its significance for the economic theory], Bulletin of the SPSU 5(3) 2013 41-55.

      [5] I.A. Kiseleva, N.E. Simonovich, Innovative methods of decision-making in the context of risks: psychological aspects, Agrarian education and science 2 (2016) 35.

      [6] I.A. Kiseleva, N.E. Simonovich, Competitiveness of an enterprise in the context of globalization of society: impact of the corporate culture, National interests: priorities and security 11 (2014) 39-44.

      [7] C. Menger, Selected texts, Territoriya budushchego, Moscow, 2005.

      [8] D. Bernoulli, Opyt novoy teorii izmereniya zhrebiya [Practice of the new theory of the fortune measurement], Theory of consumer demand. SPb.: School of economics, 1993, pp. 11-27.

      [9] P.A. Vatnik, Daniil Bernulli – economist [Daniel Bernoulli, an economist], Finance and business 2 (2008) 188-194.

      [10] P. A Samuelson, St. Petersburg paradoxes: defanged, dissected and historically described, Journal of Economic Literature 15 (1977) 24–55.

      [11] P. Weirich The St. Petersburg gamble and risk, Theory and Decision 17 (1984) 193–202.

      [12] K. Menger, Das Unsicherheitsmoment in der Wertlehre, Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie V(4) (1934) pp. 459-485.

      [13] J. von Neumann, O. Morgenstern, Teoriya igr i ekonomicheskoye povedeniye [Theory of Games and economic behavior], Science, Moscow, 1970.

      [14] B.B. Basaev, N.V. Gryzunova, I.A. Kiseleva, et al., The Role of Nonprofit Organizations in Alignment of Environmental Interests of Energy Companies and National Economic Security, International Journal of Environmental and Science Education 11(18) (2016) 12680-12689.

      [15] M.V. Karmanov, A.V. Korotkov, N.V. Gryzunova, et al., The strategic analysis of industry-specific competition and environmental risks – an integrated approach, International Journal of Environmental and Science Education 11(18) (2016) 12657-12667.

      [16] G.-L. de. Buffon, Essai d’arithmétique morale, Euvres complètes. T. XV, Verdière et Ladrange, Paris, 1829, 338–447.

      [17] Ch. E. Weber, The St. Petersburg paradox: a resolution for impatient risk seekers, International advances in economic research 4 (1998) 367–373.

      [18] J.Schumpeter, Istoriya ekonomicheskogo analiza [History of economic analysis], School of economics, St. Petersburg, 2001.

      [19] A.P. Algin, Grani ekonomicheskogo riska [Patterns of economic risk], Knowledge, Moscow, 1991.

      [20] C. Alexander, Financial Risk Management and Analysis. - Wiley, Chichester, 1996.

      [21] E.J. Vaugham, Risk management, Wiley, New-York, 1997.

      [22] A. Novoselov, I. Potravny, I. Novoselova, et al., Selection of priority investment projects for the development of the Russian Arctic, Polar Science 14 (2017) 68-77.

      [23] V. Grachev, A. Novoselov, I. Novoselova, et al., New Methods of Assessing Damage to Environmental Pollution, Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism, 1(25) (2018) 105-113.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Samuilovich Gasparian, M., Anatolievna Kiseleva, I., Gennadievich Korneev, D., Arkadyevich Lebedev, S., & Arkadyevich Lebedev, V. (2018). Role of the St. Petersburg Paradox in Decision-Making. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(4.38), 186-190. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.38.24438

    Received date: 2018-12-20

    Accepted date: 2018-12-20

    Published date: 2018-12-03