Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.07793 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866913138738200576 |
|---|---|
| author | Cooper, Crispin Fredrich, Ana Reggiani, Tommaso Poortinga, Wouter |
| author_facet | Cooper, Crispin Fredrich, Ana Reggiani, Tommaso Poortinga, Wouter |
| contents | How should well-being be prioritised in society, and what trade-offs are people willing to make between fairness and personal well-being? We investigate these questions using a stated preference experiment with a nationally representative UK sample (n = 300), in which participants evaluated life satisfaction outcomes for both themselves and others under conditions of uncertainty. Individual-level utility functions were estimated using an Expected Utility Maximisation (EUM) framework and tested for sensitivity to the overweighting of small probabilities, as characterised by Cumulative Prospect Theory (CPT). A majority of participants displayed concave (risk-averse) utility curves and showed stronger aversion to inequality in societal life satisfaction outcomes than to personal risk. These preferences were unrelated to political alignment, suggesting a shared normative stance on fairness in well-being that cuts across ideological boundaries. The results challenge use of average life satisfaction as a policy metric, and support the development of nonlinear utility-based alternatives that more accurately reflect collective human values. Implications for public policy, well-being measurement, and the design of value-aligned AI systems are discussed. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2509_07793 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Individual utilities of life satisfaction reveal inequality aversion unrelated to political alignment Cooper, Crispin Fredrich, Ana Reggiani, Tommaso Poortinga, Wouter General Economics Economics Artificial Intelligence Computers and Society How should well-being be prioritised in society, and what trade-offs are people willing to make between fairness and personal well-being? We investigate these questions using a stated preference experiment with a nationally representative UK sample (n = 300), in which participants evaluated life satisfaction outcomes for both themselves and others under conditions of uncertainty. Individual-level utility functions were estimated using an Expected Utility Maximisation (EUM) framework and tested for sensitivity to the overweighting of small probabilities, as characterised by Cumulative Prospect Theory (CPT). A majority of participants displayed concave (risk-averse) utility curves and showed stronger aversion to inequality in societal life satisfaction outcomes than to personal risk. These preferences were unrelated to political alignment, suggesting a shared normative stance on fairness in well-being that cuts across ideological boundaries. The results challenge use of average life satisfaction as a policy metric, and support the development of nonlinear utility-based alternatives that more accurately reflect collective human values. Implications for public policy, well-being measurement, and the design of value-aligned AI systems are discussed. |
| title | Individual utilities of life satisfaction reveal inequality aversion unrelated to political alignment |
| topic | General Economics Economics Artificial Intelligence Computers and Society |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.07793 |