Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Decisions with conflicting and imprecise information

Contents:

Author Info

  • Thibault Gajdos
  • Jean-Christophe Vergnaud

Abstract

The most usual procedure when facing decisions in complex settings consists in consulting experts, aggregating the information they provide, and deciding on the basis of this aggregated information. We argue that such a procedure entails a substantial loss, insofar as it precludes the possibility to take into account simultaneously the decision maker’s attitude towards conflict among experts and her attitude towards imprecision of information. We propose to consider directly how a decision maker behaves when using information coming from several sources. We give an axiomatic foundation for a decision criterion that allows to distinguish on a behavioral basis the decision maker’s attitude towards imprecision and towards conflict.

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://eprints.lse.ac.uk/27005/
File Function: Open access version.
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library in its series LSE Research Online Documents on Economics with number 27005.

as in new window
Length: 28 pages
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:27005

Contact details of provider:
Postal: LSE Library Portugal Street London, WC2A 2HD, U.K.
Phone: +44 (020) 7405 7686
Web page: http://www.lse.ac.uk/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

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.:
as in new window
  1. Thibault Gadjos & Jean-Marc Tallon & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2002. "Decision Making with Imprecise Probabilistic Information," Working Papers 2002-33, Centre de Recherche en Economie et Statistique.
  2. repec:hal:journl:halshs-00086021 is not listed on IDEAS
  3. Chateauneuf, Alain, 1991. "On the use of capacities in modeling uncertainty aversion and risk aversion," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 343-369.
  4. Itzhak Gilboa & Dov Samet & David Schmeidler, 2001. "Utilitarian Aggregation of Beliefs and Tastes," Game Theory and Information 0105001, EconWPA.
  5. John C. Harsanyi, 1955. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63, pages 309.
  6. Laure Cabantous & Denis Hilton & Howard Kunreuther & Erwann Michel-Kerjan, 2010. "Is Imprecise Knowledge Better than Conflicting Expertise? Evidence from Insurers’ Decisions in the United States," ICBBR Working Papers 7, International Centre for Behavioural Business Research.
  7. Peter A. Morris, 1974. "Decision Analysis Expert Use," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(9), pages 1233-1241, May.
  8. repec:hal:cesptp:halshs-00266049 is not listed on IDEAS
  9. repec:hal:journl:halshs-00451982 is not listed on IDEAS
  10. Laure Cabantous, 2007. "Ambiguity Aversion in the Field of Insurance: Insurers’ Attitude to Imprecise and Conflicting Probability Estimates," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 62(3), pages 219-240, May.
  11. Gajdos, T. & Hayashi, T. & Tallon, J.-M. & Vergnaud, J.-C., 2008. "Attitude toward imprecise information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 27-65, May.
  12. Mongin Philippe, 1995. "Consistent Bayesian Aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 313-351, August.
  13. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
  14. David Schmeidler, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7662, David K. Levine.
  15. Chambers, Christopher P. & Echenique, Federico, 2012. "When does aggregation reduce risk aversion?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 582-595.
  16. Crès, Hervé & Gilboa, Itzhak & Vieille, Nicolas, 2011. "Aggregation of multiple prior opinions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(6), pages 2563-2582.
  17. Gajdos, T. & Tallon, J.-M. & Vergnaud, J.-C., 2008. "Representation and aggregation of preferences under uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 68-99, July.
  18. Smithson, Michael, 1999. "Conflict Aversion: Preference for Ambiguity vs Conflict in Sources and Evidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 179-198, September.
  19. Laure Cabantous & Denis Hilton & Howard Kunreuther & Erwann Michel-Kerjan, 2011. "Is imprecise knowledge better than conflicting expertise? Evidence from insurers’ decisions in the United States," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 211-232, June.
  20. Peter A. Morris, 1977. "Combining Expert Judgments: A Bayesian Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(7), pages 679-693, March.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Hill, Brian, 2012. "Unanimity and the aggregation of multiple prior opinions," Les Cahiers de Recherche 959, HEC Paris.
  2. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/eu4vqp9ompqllr09iepso50rh is not listed on IDEAS
  3. Jean Desrochers & J. Francois Outreville, 2013. "Uncertainty, Ambiguity and Risk Taking: an experimental investigation of consumer behavior and demand for insurance," ICER Working Papers 10-2013, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
  4. Théodora Dupont-Courtade, 2012. "Insurance demand under ambiguity and conflict for extreme risks: Evidence from a large representative survey," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 12020, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
  5. Aurélien Baillon & Laure Cabantous & Peter Wakker, 2012. "Aggregating imprecise or conflicting beliefs: An experimental investigation using modern ambiguity theories," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 115-147, April.
  6. Itzhak Gilboa, & Nicolas Vieille & Hervé Crès, 2011. "Aggregation of multiple prior opinions," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/eu4vqp9ompq, Sciences Po.
  7. Théodora Dupont-Courtade, 2012. "Insurance demand under ambiguity and conflict for extreme risks : Evidence from a large representative survey," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00718642, HAL.
  8. Laure Cabantous & Denis Hilton & Howard Kunreuther & Erwann Michel-Kerjan, 2011. "Is imprecise knowledge better than conflicting expertise? Evidence from insurers’ decisions in the United States," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 211-232, June.
  9. Nascimento, Leandro, 2012. "The ex-ante aggregation of opinions under uncertainty," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(3), September.

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:ehl:lserod:27005. 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: (Lucy Ayre).

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.