[
Allais, M. (1953). Le comportement de l'homme rationnel devant le risque: critique des postulats et axiomes de l'école Américaine. Econometrica, 21(4), 503-546.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Allen, R. G. D. (1938). Mathematical analysis for economists. Macmillan.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Amparo, G., Segura, J., & Temme, N. (2007). Numerical methods for special functions. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics. ISBN 978-0-89871-634-4
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Armantier, O., & Treich, N. (2009a). Star-shaped probability weighting functions and overbidding in first-price auctions. Economic Letters, 104, 83-85.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Armantier, O., & Treich, N., (2009b). Subjective probabilities in games: an application to the overbidding puzzle. International Economic Review, 50 (4), pp.1079-1102.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Artzner, P., Delbaen, F., Eber, J. M., & Heath, D. (1999). Coherent measures of risk. Mathematical Finance, 9, 203-228.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Aster, R., Borchers, B., & Thurber, C. (2005). Parameter estimation and inverse problems. Elsevier Academic Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Athey, S. (2001). Single crossing properties and the existence of pure strategy equilibria in games of incomplete information. Econometrica, 69, 861-889.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bali, T. G., Cakici, N., & Whitelaw, R. F. (2011). Maxing out: stocks as lotteries and the cross-section of expected returns. Journal of Financial Economics, 99(2), 427-246.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Barberis, N. C. (2013). Thirty years of prospect theory in economics: a review and assessment. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 27, 173-196. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.27.1.173
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Barberis, N., & Huang, M. (2008). Stocks as lotteries: the implications of probability weighting for security prices. American Economic Review, 98(5), 2066-2100.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Barberis, N., Huang, M., & Santos, T., (2001), Prospect theory and asset prices. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(1), 1-53.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bateman, I. J., & Willis, K. G. (2003). Valuing environmental preferences. theory and practice of the contingent valuation method in the US, EU, and developing countries. Oxford University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Boyer, B., Mitton, T., & Vorkink, K. (2010). Expected idiosyncratic skewness. Review of Financial Studies, 23(1), 169-202.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Chateauneuf A., & Wakker, P. (1999). An axiomatization of cumulative prospect theory for decision under risk. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 18(2), 137-145.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Coursey, D. L., Hovis, J. L., & Schulze, W. D. (1987). The disparity between willingness to accept and willingness to pay measures of value. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 102, 679-690.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cox, J. C., Smith, V. L., & Walker, J. M. (1982), Auction market theory of heterogeneous bidders. Economics Letters, 9(4), 319-325.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cox, J. C., Smith, V. L., & Walker, J. M. (1983a), A test that discriminates between two models of the dutch-first auction non-isomorphism. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 4(2), 205-19.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cox, J. C., Smith, V. L., & Walker, J. M. (1983b). Tests of a heterogeneous bidders theory of first price auctions. Economics Letters, 12(3), 207-212.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cox, J. C., Smith, V. L., & Walker, J. M. (1984). Theory and behavior of multiple unit discriminative auctions. Journal of Finance, 39(4), 983-1010.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cox, J. C., Smith, V. L., & Walker, J. M. (1985). Experimental development of sealed-bid auction theory; calibrating controls for risk aversion. American Economic Review, 75(2), 160-165.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cox, J. C., Smith, V. L., &. Walker, J. M. (1988). Theory and individual behavior of first-price auctions. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1, 61-99.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Currim, I. S., & Sarin, R. K. (1989). Prospect versus utility. Management Science, 35, 22-41.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Diewert, W. E. (1974). A note on aggregation and elasticities of substitution. Canadian Journal of Economics, 7, 12-20.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Dorsey, R., & Razzolini, L. (2003). Explaining overbidding in first price auctions using controlled lotteries. Experimental Economics, 6, 123-140.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. (1992). The cross-section of expected stock returns. The Journal of Finance, 47(2), 427-465.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fama, E. F., & MacBeth, J. D. (1973). Risk, return, and equilibrium: empirical tests. Journal of Political Economy, 81(3), 607-636.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fama, E., & French, R. K. (2004). The capital asset pricing model: theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(3), 25-46.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fibich, G., & Gavish, N. (2011). Numerical simulations of asymmetric first-price auctions. Games and Economic Behavior, 73(2), 479-495.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fox, C. R., & Tversky, A. (1998). A belief-based account of decision under uncertainty. Management Sci., 44, 879-895.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fox, C. R., Rogers, B. A., & Tversky, A. (1996). Option traders exhibit sub-additive decision weights. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 13(1), 5-17.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Frittelli, M., & Gianin, E. R. (2002). Putting order in risk measures. Journal of Banking and Finance, 26, 1473-1486.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gayle, W.-R., & Richard J. F. (2008). Numerical solutions of asymmetric, first-price, independent private values auctions. Computational Economics, 32(3), 245-278.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gemignani, M. C. (1990). Elementary topology. Dover.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gibbons, M. R. (1982). Multivariate tests of financial models: a new approach. Journal of Financial Economics, 10(1), 3-27.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Goeree, K. J., Holt, A. C., & Palfrey, R. T. (2002). Quantal response equilibrium and overbidding in private-value auctions. Journal of Economic Theory Volume, 104(1), 247-272.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gonzalez, R., Wu, G. (1999). On the shape of the probability weighting function. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 129-166.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Green, T. C., & Hwang, B. H. (2012). Initial public offerings as lotteries: skewness preference and first-day returns. Management Science, 58(2), 432-444.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hanemann, W. M. (1991). Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: how much can they differ? American Economic Review, 81, 635-647.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Harrison, G. W. (1989). Theory and misbehavior of first-price auctions. American Economic Review, 79, 749-762.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hicks, J. R. (1939). Value and capital: an inquiry into some fundamental principles of economic theory. Clarendon Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hicks, J. R., & Allen, R. G. D. (1934a). A reconsideration of the theory of value. Part I. Economica, 1(1), 52. https://doi.org/10.2307/2548574
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hicks, J. R., & Allen, R. G. D. (1934b). A reconsideration of the theory of value. Part II. A Mathematical theory of individual demand functions. Economica, 1(2).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Horowitz, J. K., & McConnell, K. (2003). Willingness to accept, willingness to pay and the income effect. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 51(4), 537-545.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Horowitz, J. K., & McConnell, K. E. (2002). A review of WTA/WTP studies. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 44, 426-447.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ingersoll, E. J., (1987). Theory of financial decision making. Rowman and Littlefield.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kagel, J. H., & Roth, A. E. (1992). Theory and misbehavior of first-price auctions: comment. The American Economic Review, 82, 1379-1391.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kagel, J., & Levin, D. (2002). Bidding in Common-Value Auctions: A Survey of Experimental Research. In Common value auctions and the winner’s curse, 1, 1-84.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kagel, J., & Levin, D. (2016). Auctions: A survey of experimental research, 1995–2010. In A. Roth, J. Kagel (Eds.), The handbook of experimental economics, Vol. 2. Princeton University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: the endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 193-206
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Keskin, K. (2001). First price auctions under prospect theory with linear probability weighting. Department of Economics, Bilkent University.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Keskin, K. (2015). Inverse S-shaped probability weighting functions in first-price sealed-bid auctions. Review of Economic Design, 20(1), 57-67.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kestelman, H. (1960). Lebesgue measure. Ch. 3 in Modern theories of integration, 2nd rev. ed. Dover.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kilka, M., & Weber, M. (2001). What determines the shape of the probability weighting function under uncertainty? Management Science, 47(12), 1712-1726.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kirchkamp, O., & Reiss, J. (2004). The overbidding-myth and the underbidding-bias in first-price auctions. Sonderforschungsbereich.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kirkegaard, R. (2009). Asymmetric first price auctions. Journal of Economic Theory, 144(4), 1617-1635.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Knez, P., Smith, V., & Williams, A. W. (1985). Individual rationality, market rationality, and value estimation. American Economic Review, 75, 397-402.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kőszegi, B., & Rabin, M. (2006). A model of reference-dependent preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(4), 1133-1165.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kőszegi, B., & Rabin, M. (2007). Reference-dependent risk attitudes. American Economic Review, 97(4), 1047-1073.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kőszegi, B., & Rabin, M. (2009). Reference-dependent consumption plans. American Economic Review, 99(3), 909-936.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Krishna, V. (2010). Auction theory. Academic Press, 2nd edition.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lange, A., & Ratan, A. (2010). Multi-dimensional reference-dependent preferences in sealed-bid auctions – how (most) laboratory experiments differ from the field. Games and Economic Behavior, 68, 634-645.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lebrun, B. (1996). Existence of an equilibrium in first price auctions. Economic Theory, 7, 421-443.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Levy, H. (1998). Stochastic dominance: investment decision making under uncertainty. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lintner, J. (1965). The valuation of risky assets and the selection of risky investments in stock portfolios and capital budgets. Review of Economics and Statistics, 47, 13-37.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lucas, R. (1978). Asset prices in an exchange economy. Econometrica, 46, 1419-1446.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Maskin, E., & Riley, J. (2000). Asymmetric auctions. The Review of Economic Studies, 67(3), 413-438.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
McAdams, D. (2003). Isotone equilibrium in games of incomplete information. Econometrica, 71, 1191-1214.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Meucci, A. (2005). Risk and asset allocation. Springer Finance Textbooks.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Munkres, J. R. (2000). Topology: a first course. 2nd ed. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pitcher, C. A. (2008). Investigation of a behavioural model for financial decision making. Magdalen College, University of Oxford.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Prelec, D. (1998). The probability weighting function. Econometrica, 66, 497-527.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ratan, A. (2009). Reference-dependent preferences in first price auctions. Working Paper, University of Maryland.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Reny, P. J. (2011). On the existence of monotone pure strategy equilibria in Bayesian games. Econometrica, 79(2), 499-553.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Roll, Р. (1977). A critique of the asset pricing theory's tests Part I: On past and potential testability of the theory. Journal of Financial Economics, 4(2), 129-176.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Scales, L. E. (1985). Introduction to nonlinear optimization. MacMillan Publishers Ltd.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sharpe, W. F. (1964). Capital asset prices: a theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk. Journal of Finance, 19, 425-442.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Stambaugh, R. F. (1982). On the exclusion of assets from tests of the two-parameter model: a sensitivity analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 10(3), 237-268.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sugden, R. (1999). Alternatives to the neoclassical theory of choice. In I. Bateman, K.G. Willis (Eds.), Valuing environmental preferences. Theory and the practice of contingent valuation method in US, EU and Developing countries.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Thaler, R. H., & Johnson, E. J. (1990). Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: the effects of prior outcomes on risky choice. Management Science, 36, 643-660.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tversky, A., & Fox, C. R. (1995). Weighing risk and uncertainty. Psychological Review, 102(2), 269-283.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: a reference dependent model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(4), 1039-1061.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Tversky, A., & Koehler, D. J. (1994). Support theory: a nonextensional representation of subjective probability. Psychological Review, 101, 547-567.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Uzawa, H. (1962). Production functions with constant elasticities of substitution. The Review of Economic Studies, 29(4).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Vickrey, W. (1961). Counter-speculation, auctions, and competitive sealed tenders. The Journal of Finance, 16(1), 8-37.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Vickrey, W. (1962). Auction and bidding games. In Recent advances in game theory. Princeton, NJ: The Princeton University Conference, 15-27.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wakker, P. (2001). On the composition of risk preference and belief. Working Paper, University of Amsterdam.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wakker, P. (2010). Prospect theory: for risk and ambiguity. Cambridge University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wakker, P., & Tversky, A. (1993). An axiomatization of cumulative prospect theory. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 7(7), 147-176.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Yamai, Y., & Yoshiba, T. (2002). Comparative analyses of expected shortfall and value-at-risk (2): Expected utility maximization and tail risk. Monetary and Economic Studies.
]Search in Google Scholar
and 