Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Two Stage Lotteries Without the Reduction Axiom

Contents:

Author Info

  • Uzi Segal

Abstract

Preference relations over two-stage lotteries are analyzed. Empirical evidence indicates that decisionmakers do not always behave in accordance with the reduction of compound lotteries axiom, but they seem to satisfy a compound independence axiom. Although the reduction and the compound independence axioms, together with continuity, imply expected utility theory, each of them by itself is compatible with all possible preference relations over simple lotteries. Using these axioms, the author analyzes three different versions of expected utility for two-stage lotteries. The author suggests several different compound dominance axioms as possible replacements of the reduction axiom, which are strictly weaker than the reduction of compound lotteries axiom. Copyright 1990 by The Econometric Society.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.dklevine.com/archive/refs47599.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by David K. Levine in its series Levine's Working Paper Archive with number 7599.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 01 Dec 2000
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cla:levarc:7599

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.dklevine.com/

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

References

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

Citations

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

Cited by:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cla:levarc:7599. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (David K. Levine).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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