24.12.2014 Views

Daniel l. Rubinfeld

Daniel l. Rubinfeld

Daniel l. Rubinfeld

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

152 Part 2 Producers, Consumers, and Competitive Markets<br />

5 Choice Under Uncertainty<br />

53<br />

Probability<br />

OUTCOME 1<br />

DEVIATION<br />

SQUAREO<br />

OUTCOME 2<br />

DEViATION<br />

SQUAREO<br />

AVERAGE<br />

DEVIATION<br />

SQUARED<br />

STANDARD<br />

DEVIATION<br />

0.2<br />

Job 1 2000<br />

Job 2 1510<br />

250,000<br />

100<br />

1000<br />

510<br />

250,000<br />

980,100<br />

250,000<br />

9,900<br />

500<br />

99.50<br />

01<br />

Job 2<br />

Job 1<br />

standard deviation Square<br />

root of the a\'erage of the<br />

squares of the de\'iations of<br />

the payoffs associated with<br />

each outcome fro111 their<br />

expected values.<br />

By themseh'es, de\'iations do not provide a measure of \'ariability Why<br />

Because they are sometimes positive and sometimes negative, and as you can<br />

see from Table 5.2, the a\'erage de\'iation is always 0. 2 To get around this problem,<br />

\ve square each de\·iation, yielding numbers that are always positive. We<br />

then measure variability by calculating the standard deviation: the square root<br />

of the average of the sqlLnrcs of the deviations of the payoffs associated with each<br />

outcome from their expected value 3<br />

Table 5.3 shows the calculation of the standard deviation for our example.<br />

Note that the average of the squared de\'iations under Job 1 is given by<br />

5(5250,000) + 5($250,000) = $250,000<br />

The standard deviation is therefore equal to the square root of 5250,000, or 5500.<br />

Likewise, the a\'crage of the squared de\'iations under Job 2 is given by<br />

.99($100) + .01(5980,100) = 59900<br />

The standard deviation is the square root of 59,900, or 599.50. Thus the second<br />

job is much less risky than the first; the standard deviation of the incomes is<br />

much lo'wer.~<br />

The concept of standard deviation applies equally \vell when there are many<br />

outcomes rather than just two. Suppose, for example, that the first job yields<br />

incomes ranging from 51000 to 52000 in increments of $100 that are all equally<br />

likely. The second job yields incomes from $1300 to $1700 (again in increments of<br />

5100) that are also equally likely. Figure 5.1 sho'ws the alternatives graphically. (If<br />

there had been only two equally probable outcomes, then the figure would be<br />

drawn as two vertical lines, each 'with a height of 0.5.)<br />

You can see from Figure 5.1 that the first job is riskier than the second. The<br />

"spread" of possible payoffs for the first job is much greater than the spread for<br />

the second. As a result, the standard deviation of the payoffs associated with the<br />

first job is greater than that associated \vith the second.<br />

In this particular example, all payoffs are equally likely. Thus the curves<br />

describing the probabilities for each job are flat. In rnany cases, hO\·..,e\'er, some<br />

51000 51300 52000 Income<br />

The dish-ibution of payoffs associated with Job 1 has a o-reater spread and a £reater<br />

standard deviation than the distribution of payoffs associated with Job 2. Botl; distributions<br />

are flat because all outcomes are equally likely.<br />

- &¥i&& ~ ±<br />

payoffs are more likely than others. Figme 5.2 shows a situation in which the<br />

most extrerne payoffs are the least likely. Again, the salary from Job 1 has a<br />

greater standard deviation. From this point on, we will use the standard deviation<br />

of payoffs to measure degree of risk.<br />

Decision Mal

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!