Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance
Impact in
- Finance 334
Classified as
- Authors
- Haim Levy
- Journal
- American Economic Review
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w8385944 →Countries where authors are citing Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance
This map shows the geographic impact of Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance
This network shows the impact of Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance.
About Approximating Expected Utility by a Function of Mean and Variance
This paper, published in 1979, received 577 indexed citations . Written by Haim Levy covering the research area of General Decision Sciences, Finance and Management Science and Operations Research. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Finance (334 citations), Economics and Econometrics (273 citations), Management Science and Operations Research (192 citations), General Economics, Econometrics and Finance (76 citations) and General Decision Sciences (69 citations). Published in American Economic Review.
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w8385944.