This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

A Smooth Model of DecisionMaking Under Ambiguity

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Sujoy Mukerji
Peter Klibanoff

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

We propose and axiomatize a model of preferences over acts such that the decision maker evaluates acts according to the expectation (over a set of probability measures) of an increasing transformation of an act`s expected utility. This expectation is calculated using a subjective probability over the set of probability measures that the decision maker thinks are relevant given her subjective information. A key feature of our model is that it achieves a separation between ambiguity, identified as a characteristic of the decision maker`s subjective information, and ambiguity attitude, a characteristic of the decision maker`s tastes. We show that attitudes towards risk are characterized by the shape of the von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function, as usual, while attitudes towards ambiguity are characterized by the shape of the increasing transformation applied to expected utilities. We show that the negative exponential form of this transformation is the special case of constant ambiguity aversion. Ambiguity itself is defined behaviorally and is shown to be characterized by properties of the subjective set of measures. This characterization of ambiguity is formally related to the definitions of subjective ambiguity advanced by Epstein-Zhang (2001) and Ghirardato-Marinacci (2002). One advantage of this model is that the well-developed machinery for dealing with risk attitudes can be applied as well to ambiguity attitudes. The model is also distinct from many in the literature on ambiguity in that it allows smooth, rather than kinked, indifference curves. This leads to different behavior and improved tractability, while still sharing the main features (e.g. Ellsberg`s Paradox, etc.). The Maxmin EU model (e.g., Gilboa and Schmeidler (1989)) with a given set of measures may be seen as an extreme case of our model with infinite ambiguity aversion. Two illustrative applications to portfolio choice are offered.

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 file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.economics.ox.ac.uk/Research/wp/pdf/paper113.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by University of Oxford, Department of Economics in its series Economics Series Working Papers with number 113.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2002
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:oxf:wpaper:113

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Manor Rd. Building, Oxford, OX1 3UQ
Email:
Web page: http://www.economics.ox.ac.uk/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Mark George).

Related research
Keywords: ambiguity uncertainty ambiguity aversion uncertainty aversion Ellsberg Paradox

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General
D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

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.:

  1. Larry G. Epstein & JianJun Miao, 2001. "A Two-Person Dynamic Equilibrium under Ambiguity," RCER Working Papers 478, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER). [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  2. Epstein, Larry G & Wang, Tan, 1994. "Intertemporal Asset Pricing Under Knightian Uncertainty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(2), pages 283-322, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Kreps, David M & Porteus, Evan L, 1978. "Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty and Dynamic Choice Theory," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 185-200, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Ghirardato, Paolo & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity from the Differential Viewpoint," Working Papers 1130, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-87, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Epstein, Larry G & Zhang, Jiankang, 2001. "Subjective Probabilities on Subjectively Unambiguous Events," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 265-306, March.
    Other versions:
  8. Paolo Ghirardato & Massimo Marinacci, 2000. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Separation of Utility and Beliefs," Levine's Bibliography 7616, UCLA Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  9. Segal, Uzi, 1987. "The Ellsberg Paradox and Risk Aversion: An Anticipated Utility Approach," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 28(1), pages 175-202, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  10. Sarin, Rakesh K & Wakker, Peter, 1992. "A Simple Axiomatization of Nonadditive Expected Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(6), pages 1255-72, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Zengjing Chen & Larry Epstein, 2002. "Ambiguity, Risk, and Asset Returns in Continuous Time," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 1403-1443, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  12. Segal, Uzi, 1990. "Two-Stage Lotteries without the Reduction Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(2), pages 349-77, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  13. Simon Grant & Atsushi Kajii & Ben Polak, 2000. "Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty and Recursive Non-Expected Utility Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(2), pages 425-434, March.
    Other versions:
Full references

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.)
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? A tutorial is available.

This page was last updated on 2008-8-5.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.