IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pen/papers/08-017.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Supplementary Appendix for ‘Non-Bayesian Updating: A Theoretical Framework’

Author

Listed:
  • Larry G. Epstein

    (Department of Economics, Boston University)

  • Jawwad Noor

    (Department of Economics, Boston University)

  • Alvaro Sandroni

    (Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania)

Abstract

This appendix applies the model in †Non-Bayesian Updating: A Theoretical Frame-Work†to address the question: What do non-Bayesian updaters learn?

Suggested Citation

  • Larry G. Epstein & Jawwad Noor & Alvaro Sandroni, 2008. "Supplementary Appendix for ‘Non-Bayesian Updating: A Theoretical Framework’," PIER Working Paper Archive 08-017, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    • Handle: RePEc:pen:papers:08-017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economics.sas.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/filevault/working-papers/08-017.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mitchel Y. Abolafia (ed.), 2005. "Markets," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2788.
    2. Kalai, Ehud & Lehrer, Ehud, 1993. "Rational Learning Leads to Nash Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(5), pages 1019-1045, September.
    3. Lawrence Blume & David Easley, 2006. "If You're so Smart, why Aren't You Rich? Belief Selection in Complete and Incomplete Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(4), pages 929-966, July.
    4. Alvaro Sandroni, 2000. "Do Markets Favor Agents Able to Make Accurate Predicitions?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(6), pages 1303-1342, November.
    5. N/A, 1996. "Note:," Foreign Trade Review, , vol. 31(1-2), pages 1-1, January.
    6. Alvaro Sandroni, 2005. "Efficient markets and Bayes’ rule," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(4), pages 741-764, November.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Kwon, Seokbeom & Motohashi, Kazuyuki, 2017. "How institutional arrangements in the National Innovation System affect industrial competitiveness: A study of Japan and the U.S. with multiagent simulation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 221-235.
    2. Igor Kopylov & Jawwad Noor, 2018. "Commitments and weak resolve," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 66(1), pages 1-19, July.
    3. KWON Seokbeom & MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2015. "How Institutional Arrangements in the National Innovation System Affect Industrial Competitiveness: A study of Japan and the United States with multiagent simulation," Discussion papers 15065, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    4. He, Xue Dong & Xiao, Di, 2017. "Processing consistency in non-Bayesian inference," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 90-104.
    5. Epstein Larry G & Noor Jawwad & Sandroni Alvaro, 2010. "Non-Bayesian Learning," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-20, January.
    6. Sun, Lan, 2016. "Hypothesis testing equilibrium in signaling games," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 557, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giulio Bottazzi & Pietro Dindo & Daniele Giachini, 2019. "Momentum and reversal in financial markets with persistent heterogeneity," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 455-487, December.
    2. Giulio Bottazzi & Pietro Dindo & Daniele Giachini, 2018. "Long-run heterogeneity in an exchange economy with fixed-mix traders," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 66(2), pages 407-447, August.
    3. Saki Bigio & Eduardo Zilberman, 2020. "Speculation-Driven Business Cycles," Working Papers Central Bank of Chile 865, Central Bank of Chile.
    4. Dindo, Pietro & Massari, Filippo, 2020. "The wisdom of the crowd in dynamic economies," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(4), November.
    5. Zeckhauser, Richard Jay & Tran, Ngoc-Khanh, 2011. "The Behavior of Savings and Asset Prices When Preferences and Beliefs are Heterogeneous," Scholarly Articles 5027955, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Leonid Kogan & Stephen A. Ross & Jiang Wang & Mark M. Westerfield, 2006. "The Price Impact and Survival of Irrational Traders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(1), pages 195-229, February.
    7. Amir, Rabah & Evstigneev, Igor V. & Hens, Thorsten & Schenk-Hoppe, Klaus Reiner, 2005. "Market selection and survival of investment strategies," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1-2), pages 105-122, February.
    8. Ani Guerdjikova & John Quiggin, 2018. "Intertemporal Portfolio Choice with Incorrect Beliefs and Aversion to Surprise," Post-Print hal-02086151, HAL.
    9. Daniele Giachini, 2018. "Rationality and Asset Prices under Belief Heterogeneity," LEM Papers Series 2018/07, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    10. Beker, Pablo & Chattopadhyay, Subir, 2010. "Consumption dynamics in general equilibrium: A characterisation when markets are incomplete," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(6), pages 2133-2185, November.
    11. Alexis Akira Toda & Kieran James Walsh & Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh, 2020. "The Equity Premium and the One Percent [Stock return predictability: Is it there?]," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 33(8), pages 3583-3623.
    12. Witte, Björn-Christopher, 2012. "Fund managers - Why the best might be the worst: On the evolutionary vigor of risk-seeking behavior," Economics Discussion Papers 2012-20, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    13. Chueh-Yung Tsao & Ya-Chi Huang, 2018. "Revisiting the issue of survivability and market efficiency with the Santa Fe Artificial Stock Market," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 13(3), pages 537-560, October.
    14. Peter A. F. Fraser‐Mackenzie & Tiejun Ma & Ming‐Chien Sung & Johnnie E. V. Johnson, 2019. "Let's Call it Quits: Break‐Even Effects in the Decision to Stop Taking Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(7), pages 1560-1581, July.
    15. Brock, W.A. & Hommes, C.H. & Wagener, F.O.O., 2009. "More hedging instruments may destabilize markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(11), pages 1912-1928, November.
    16. Michael Mandler, 2014. "IRRATIONALITY‐PROOFNESS: MARKETS VERSUS GAMES(forthcoming in the International Economic Review)," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 55(2), pages 443-458, May.
    17. Cvitanic Jaksa & Malamud Semyon, 2010. "Relative Extinction of Heterogeneous Agents," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-23, February.
    18. Andrew W. Lo & H. Allen Orr & Ruixun Zhang, 2018. "The growth of relative wealth and the Kelly criterion," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 49-67, April.
    19. Thorsten Hens & Klaus Reiner Schenk-Hoppé & Martin Stalder, 2002. "An Application of Evolutionary Finance to Firms Listed in the Swiss Market Index," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 138(IV), pages 465-487, December.
    20. YiLi Chien & Harold L. Cole & Hanno Lustig, 2014. "Implications of heterogeneity in preferences, beliefs and asset trading technologies for the macroeconomy," Working Papers 2014-14, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Non-Bayesian Learning;

    JEL classification:

    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pen:papers:08-017. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Administrator (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deupaus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.