IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joecth/v68y2019i1d10.1007_s00199-018-1121-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consequentialism and dynamic consistency in updating ambiguous beliefs

Author

Listed:
  • Takao Asano

    (Okayama University)

  • Hiroyuki Kojima

    (Teikyo University)

Abstract

By proposing the notions of upper-constrained dynamic consistency and lower-constrained dynamic consistency that are weaker axioms than dynamic consistency, this paper axiomatizes the Dempster–Shafer updating rule and naive Bayes’ updating rule within the framework of Choquet expected utility. Based on the notion of conditional comonotonicity, this paper also provides an axiomatization of consequentialism under Choquet expected utility. Furthermore, based on the idea of the mean-preserving rule, this paper provides a unified approach for distinguishing capacity updating rules (the Dempster–Shafer updating rule, naive Bayes’ updating rule, and Fagin–Halpern updating rule) according to the degree of dynamic consistency.

Suggested Citation

  • Takao Asano & Hiroyuki Kojima, 2019. "Consequentialism and dynamic consistency in updating ambiguous beliefs," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 68(1), pages 223-250, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:68:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s00199-018-1121-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s00199-018-1121-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00199-018-1121-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00199-018-1121-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:dau:papers:123456789/7333 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Elyès Jouini & Clotilde Napp, 2004. "Conditional comonotonicity," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 27(2), pages 153-166, December.
    3. Wang, Tan, 2003. "Conditional preferences and updating," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 286-321, February.
    4. Gilboa Itzhak & Schmeidler David, 1993. "Updating Ambiguous Beliefs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 33-49, February.
    5. Hammond, Peter J, 1989. "Consistent Plans, Consequentialism, and Expected Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1445-1449, November.
    6. Paolo Ghirardato, 2002. "Revisiting Savage in a conditional world," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 20(1), pages 83-92.
    7. Ghirardato, Paolo & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo, 2004. "Differentiating ambiguity and ambiguity attitude," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 133-173, October.
    8. ,, 2011. "Dynamic choice under ambiguity," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 6(3), September.
    9. Gilboa,Itzhak, 2009. "Theory of Decision under Uncertainty," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521517324.
    10. Dominiak, Adam & Duersch, Peter & Lefort, Jean-Philippe, 2012. "A dynamic Ellsberg urn experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 625-638.
    11. Mohammed Abdellaoui & John D. Hey (ed.), 2008. "Advances in Decision Making Under Risk and Uncertainty," Theory and Decision Library C, Springer, number 978-3-540-68437-4, July.
    12. Epstein Larry G. & Le Breton Michel, 1993. "Dynamically Consistent Beliefs Must Be Bayesian," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 1-22, October.
    13. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    14. Adam Dominiak & Jean-Philippe Lefort, 2011. "Unambiguous events and dynamic Choquet preferences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 46(3), pages 401-425, April.
    15. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    16. , & ,, 2007. "Updating preferences with multiple priors," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 2(3), September.
    17. Eichberger, Jurgen & Grant, Simon & Kelsey, David, 2007. "Updating Choquet beliefs," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(7-8), pages 888-899, September.
    18. Machina, Mark J, 1989. "Dynamic Consistency and Non-expected Utility Models of Choice under Uncertainty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 27(4), pages 1622-1668, December.
    19. Takao Asano & Hiroyuki Kojima, 2015. "An axiomatization of Choquet expected utility with cominimum independence," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 78(1), pages 117-139, January.
    20. Epstein, Larry G. & Schneider, Martin, 2003. "Recursive multiple-priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 1-31, November.
    21. repec:dau:papers:123456789/7323 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Cesaltina Pacheco Pires, 2002. "A Rule For Updating Ambiguous Beliefs," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 137-152, September.
    23. Sarin, Rakesh & Wakker, Peter P, 1998. "Dynamic Choice and NonExpected Utility," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 87-119, November.
    24. repec:dau:papers:123456789/7357 is not listed on IDEAS
    25. Kajii, Atsushi & Kojima, Hiroyuki & Ui, Takashi, 2007. "Cominimum additive operators," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 218-230, February.
    26. Horie, Mayumi, 2013. "Reexamination on updating Choquet beliefs," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 467-470.
    27. Hanany Eran & Klibanoff Peter, 2009. "Updating Ambiguity Averse Preferences," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-53, November.
    28. repec:dau:papers:123456789/344 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Spyros Galanis, 2021. "Dynamic consistency, valuable information and subjective beliefs," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(4), pages 1467-1497, June.
    2. Łukasz Balbus, 2020. "On recursive utilities with non-affine aggregator and conditional certainty equivalent," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(2), pages 551-577, September.
    3. Andrea Cinfrignini & Davide Petturiti & Barbara Vantaggi, 2023. "Envelopes of equivalent martingale measures and a generalized no-arbitrage principle in a finite setting," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 321(1), pages 103-137, February.
    4. Lorenzo Bastianello & José Heleno Faro, 2023. "Choquet expected discounted utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(4), pages 1071-1098, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Spyros Galanis, 2021. "Dynamic consistency, valuable information and subjective beliefs," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(4), pages 1467-1497, June.
    2. Takao Asano & Hiroyuki Kojima, 2018. "Consequentialism and Dynamic Consistency in Updating Ambiguous Beliefs," KIER Working Papers 987, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    3. Dominiak, Adam & Duersch, Peter & Lefort, Jean-Philippe, 2012. "A dynamic Ellsberg urn experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 625-638.
    4. Faro, José Heleno & Lefort, Jean-Philippe, 2019. "Dynamic objective and subjective rationality," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(1), January.
    5. Heyen, Daniel, 2018. "Ambiguity aversion under maximum-likelihood updating," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 80342, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Georgalos, Konstantinos, 2021. "Dynamic decision making under ambiguity: An experimental investigation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 28-46.
    7. Gumen, Anna & Savochkin, Andrei, 2013. "Dynamically stable preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(4), pages 1487-1508.
    8. Daniel Heyen, 2018. "Ambiguity aversion under maximum-likelihood updating," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(3), pages 373-386, May.
    9. Han Bleichrodt & Jurgen Eichberger & Simon Grant & David Kelsey & Chen Li, 2018. "A Test of Dynamic Consistency and Consequentialism in the Presence of Ambiguity," Discussion Papers 1803, University of Exeter, Department of Economics.
    10. Konstantinos Georgalos, 2019. "An experimental test of the predictive power of dynamic ambiguity models," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 59(1), pages 51-83, August.
    11. Alexander Zimper, 2011. "Do Bayesians Learn Their Way Out of Ambiguity?," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(4), pages 269-285, December.
    12. José Heleno Faro & Ana Santos, 2023. "Updating variational (Bewley) preferences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(1), pages 207-228, January.
    13. Lapied, André & Toquebeuf, Pascal, 2012. "Dynamically consistent CEU preferences on f-convex events," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 252-256.
    14. Bleichrodt, Han & Eichberger, Jürgen & Grant, Simon & Kelsey, David & Li, Chen, 2021. "Testing dynamic consistency and consequentialism under ambiguity," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    15. Dominiak, Adam & Lefort, Jean-Philippe, 2015. "“Agreeing to disagree” type results under ambiguity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 119-129.
    16. Zimper, Alexander, 2012. "Asset pricing in a Lucas fruit-tree economy with the best and worst in mind," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 610-628.
    17. Ellis, Andrew, 2018. "On dynamic consistency in ambiguous games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 241-249.
    18. André Lapied & Pascal Tocquebeuf, 2007. "Consistent Dynamice Choice And Non-Expected Utility Preferences," Working Papers halshs-00353880, HAL.
    19. Adam Dominiak & Jean-Philippe Lefort, 2011. "Unambiguous events and dynamic Choquet preferences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 46(3), pages 401-425, April.
    20. André Lapied & Pascal Toquebeuf, 2011. "Dynamically consistent CEU preferences," Working Papers halshs-00856193, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Dynamic consistency; Consequentialism; Choquet expected utility; Conditional comonotonicity; Conditional preferences; Dempster–Shafer updating rule; Naive Bayes’ updating rule; Fagin–Halpern updating rule;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D90 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:68:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s00199-018-1121-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.