The descriptive and predictive adequacy of theories of decision making under uncertainty/ambiguity

Journal of Risk and Uncertainty

Volumn 41, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 81-111

  Hey, John D ^a,b   Lotito, Gianna ^c   Maffioletti, Anna ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b LUISS UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN PIEDMONT   (Italy)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TURIN   (Italy)

Author keywords

(Ghirardato) alpha model; (Gilboa and Schmeidler) MaxMax EU; (Gilboa and Schmeidler) MaxMin EU; (Subjective) expected utility; Ambiguity; Bingo blower; Choquet expected utility; Decision field theory; Decision making; MaxMax; MaxMin; Minimum regret; Prospect theory; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955175827     PISSN: 08955646     EISSN: 15730476     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11166-010-9102-0     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Ahn, D., Choi, S., Gale, D. & Kariv, S. (2007). Estimating ambiguity aversion in a portfolio choice problem, research paper, http://www. nyu. edu/econ/user/galed/papers. html.
2. Busemeyer, J., & Townsend, J. (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychological Review, 100, 432-459.
3. Choquet, G. (1955). Theory of capacities. Annales de L'institut Fourier (Grenoble), 5, 131-295.
4. Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity and the Savage axioms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75, 643-669.
5. Fox, C. R., & Tversky, A. (1995). Ambiguity aversion and comparative ignorance. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 585-603.
6. Ghirardato, P., Maccheroni, F., & Marinacci, M. (2004). Differentiating ambiguity and ambiguity attitude. Journal of Economic Theory, 118, 133-173.
7. Gilboa, I., & Schmeidler, D. (1989). Maxmin expected utility with a non-unique prior. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 18, 141-153.
8. Greiner, B. (2004) The online recruitment system ORSEE 2. 0 - A guide for the organization of experiments in economics, University of Cologne Discussion Paper (www. orsee. org).
9. Halevy, Y. (2007). Ellsberg revisited: An experimental study. Econometrica, 75, 503-536.
10. Hey, J. D., & Lee, J. (2005). Do subjects separate (or are they sophisticated)? Experimental Economics, 8, 233-265.
11. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
12. Klibanoff, P., Marinacci, M., & Mukerji, S. (2005). A smooth model of decision making under ambiguity. Econometrica, 73, 1849-1892.
13. Luce, R. D., & Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and decisions. New York: Wiley.
14. Moffatt, P. G., & Peters, S. A. (2001). Testing for the presence of a tremble in economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 4, 221-228.
15. Savage, L. J. (1951). The theory of statistical decision. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 46, 55-67.
16. Savage, L. J. (1954). Foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley.
17. Segal, U. (1987). The Ellsberg Paradox and risk aversion: An anticipated utility approach. International Economic Review, 28, 175-202.
18. Stoye, J. (2008). Axioms for minimax regret choice correspondences. Working Paper: New York University.
19. Vuong, Q. (1989). Likelihood ratio tests for model selection and non-nested hypotheses. Econometrica, 57, 307-333.
20. Wilcox, N. (2008). Stochastic models for binary discrete choice under risk: A critical primer and econometric comparison. In J. C. Cox & G. W. Harrison (Eds.), Research in experimental economics vol. 12: Risk aversion in experiments (pp. 197-292). Bingley: Emerald.
21. Wilcox, N. (2009). Stochastically more risk averse: A contextual theory of stochastic discrete choice under risk. Journal of Econometrics, corrected proof, available online.