Size doesn't really matter: Ambiguity aversion in Ellsberg urns with few balls

Experimental Psychology

Volumn 55, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 31-37

  Pulford, Briony D ^a,b   Colman, Andrew M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Ambiguity effect; Ellsberg paradox; Payoff variance; Urn size effect

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COLOR VISION; DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HIGH RISK BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; LEARNING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; PERCEPTION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ATTENTION; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COLOR PERCEPTION; DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; PROBABILITY LEARNING; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RISK-TAKING; SIZE PERCEPTION;

EID: 40549083316     PISSN: 16183169     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169.55.1.31     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Becker, S.W., & Brownson, F.O. (1964). What price ambiguity? Or the role of ambiguity in decision-making. Journal of Political Economy, 72, 62-73.
2. Butler, G., & Mathews, A. (1983). Cognitive-processes in anxiety. Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy, 5, 51-62.
3. Butler, G., & Mathews, A. (1987). Anticipatory anxiety and risk perception. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 11, 551-565.
4. Camerer, C.F. (1995). Individual decision making. In J.H. Kagel & A.E. Roth (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economics (pp. 587-703). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5. Camerer, C.F., & Weber, M. (1992). Recent developments in modeling preferences: Uncertainty and ambiguity. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 325-370.
6. Curley, S.P., & Yates, J.F. (1989). An empirical evaluation of descriptive models of ambiguity reactions in choice situations. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 33, 397-427.
7. Denes-Raj, V., & Epstein, S. (1994). Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: When people behave against their better judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 819-829.
8. Einhorn, H.J., & Hogarth, R.M. (1985). Ambiguity and uncertainty in probabilistic inference. Psychological Review, 92, 433-461.
9. Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75, 643-669.
10. Fellner, W. (1961). Distortion of subjective probabilities as a reaction to uncertainty. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75, 670-689.
11. Frisch, D., & Baron, J. (1988). Ambiguity and rationality. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 1, 149-157.
12. Freeston, M.H., Rhéaume, J., Letarte, H., Dugas, M.J., & Ladouceur, R. (1994). Why do people worry? Personality and Individual Differences, 17, 791-802.
13. Furnham, A. (1994). A content, correlational and factor analytic study of four tolerance of ambiguity questionnaires. Personality and Individual Differences, 16, 403-410.
14. Ghosh, D., & Ray, M.R. (1997). Risk, ambiguity, and decision choice: Some additional evidence. Decision Sciences, 28, 81-104.
15. Keren, G., & Gerritsen, L.E.M. (1999). On the robustness and possible accounts of ambiguity aversion. Acta Psychologica, 103, 149-172.
16. Keynes, J.M. (1921). A treatise on probability. London: Macmillan.
17. Knight, F.H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty and profit. Boston: Houghton, Schaffner & Marx.
18. Krähmer, D., & Stone, R. (2006). Regret and ambiguity aversion. Retrieved June 15,2006, from the Freie Universität Berlin web site: http://sites.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bester/kraehmer/regret-and-ellsberg- 130206.pdf
19. Raiffa, H. (1961). Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms: Comment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75, 690-694.
20. Rode, C., Cosmides, L., Hell, W., & Tooby, J. (1999). When and why do people avoid unknown probabilities in decisions under uncertainty? Testing some predictions from optimal foraging theory. Cognition, 72, 269-304.
21. Savage, L.J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley.
22. Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1971). Comparison of Bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information processing in judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 6, 649-744.
23. Stephens, D.W., & Krebs, J.R. (1986). Foraging theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
24. Tetlock, P.E. (1991). An alternative metaphor in the study of judgment and choice: People as politicians. Theory and Psychology, 4, 451-475.