In this paper I attempt to reconcile the apparent definiteness of econometric practice with the vagueness of subjective probabilities assumed in Knightian decision theory. I argue that some standard uses of classical inference are Knightian in spirit, even though the formal justification of classical methods uses the frequentist notion of probability. Classical confidence regions may be viewed as defining sets of posterior means corresponding to a standardized set of prior distributions. Tests of the null hypothesis that a parameter equals a particular value may be viewed as determining whether it is rational, from a Knightian point of view, to act as if the null hypothesis were true. This interpretation of the tests seems to correspond fairly well to practice and to the informal story told by classical statisticians. Hence, one could argue that to this extent classical statisticians act unconsciously as Knightian decision makers. If one accepts this argument, then it is of interest to know what level of uncertainty aversion corresponds to the popular 5% significance level.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)
Larry Epstein & Martin Schneider, 2002.
"Learning Under Ambiguity,"
RCER Working Papers
497, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER), revised Mar 2005.
[Downloadable!]
Other versions: