Back to Kahneman

Abstract This paper examines Daniel Kahneman’s concept of experienced utility and its roots in Bentham’s hedonic utilitarianism. It focuses on Kahneman’s call for a ‘separate value judgement’ to determine when experienced utility can be used to evaluate temporally extended outcomes (TEOs). Two potential judgements are proposed: comprehensiveness and personal independence. Comprehensiveness means that the measurement of utility captures all relevant aspects of instant utility. Personal independence means that the TEO is fully independent of other TEOs with which it might be combined (or ‘concatenated’). I argue that identifying TEOs meeting these criteria may be challenging, possibly restricting the applicability of experienced utility. I conclude by considering the implications for behavioural science’s quest for an unambiguous, measurable operationalisation of utility.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Behavioural Public Policy
Published
2024-10-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2024.35
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.54
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Back to Kahneman

Daniel Read
1 citations
Behavioural Public Policy
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
0.54
article

Back to Kahneman

Daniel Read
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract This paper examines Daniel Kahneman’s concept of experienced utility and its roots in Bentham’s hedonic utilitarianism. It focuses on Kahneman’s call for a ‘separate value judgement’ to determine when experienced utility can be used to evaluate temporally extended outcomes (TEOs). Two potential judgements are proposed: comprehensiveness and personal independence. Comprehensiveness means that the measurement of utility captures all relevant aspects of instant utility. Personal independence means that the TEO is fully independent of other TEOs with which it might be combined (or ‘concatenated’). I argue that identifying TEOs meeting these criteria may be challenging, possibly restricting the applicability of experienced utility. I conclude by considering the implications for behavioural science’s quest for an unambiguous, measurable operationalisation of utility.

Behavioural Public PolicyVol. 9(2)
University of Warwick (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 34%
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
0.54
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.