Reexamination on Updating Choquet Beliefs
AbstractEichberger, Grant, and Kelsey (2007) characterize the full Bayesian update rule for capacities. This paper shows that a conditional preference relation represented by the Choquet expected utility with respect to the updated capacity through the rule does not satisfy the axiom of Conditional Certainty Equivalence Consistency. A counterexample is provided and it is proved that a relaxation of the axiom maintains their results.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research in its series KIER Working Papers with number 643.
Date of creation: Nov 2007
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Yoshida-Honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501
Web page: http://www.kier.kyoto-u.ac.jp/eng/index.html
More information through EDIRC
Bayesian update; capacity; conditional preference; Choquet expected utility;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
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.:
- Paolo Ghirardato & Massimo Marinacci, 2000.
"Risk, Ambiguity, and the Separation of Utility and Beliefs,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
7616, David K. Levine.
- Paolo Ghirardato & Massimo Marinacci, 2000. "Risk, Ambiguity and the Separation of Utility and Beliefs," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1143, Econometric Society.
- Massimo Marinacci & Paolo Ghirardato, 2001. "Risk, ambiguity, and the separation of utility and beliefs," ICER Working Papers - Applied Mathematics Series 21-2001, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
- Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2000. "Risk, Ambigity and the Separation of Utility and Beliefs," Working Papers 1085, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Cesaltina Pacheco Pires, 2002. "A Rule For Updating Ambiguous Beliefs," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 137-152, September.
- Jurgen Eichberger & Simon Grant & David Kelsey, 2006.
"Updating Choquet Beliefs,"
0607, Exeter University, Department of Economics.
- Dominiak, Adam & Eichberger, Jürgen & Lefort, Jean-Philippe, 2012. "Agreeable trade with optimism and pessimism," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 119-126.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Akihisa Shibata).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.