Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Risk, Ambiguity, and the Klibanoff Axioms


Author Info

  • Kin Chung Lo

    (Department of Economics, York University)


Machina (2007) formulates a number of experiments, and shows that they can be used to test the Choquet expected utility model. We show that one of them can also be used to test the class of maxmin expected utility preferences in Klibanoff (2001). Those preferences are not Choquet expected utility preferences, and they are not consistent with Choquet expected utility preferences in Machina’s experiment.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by York University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 2007_8.

as in new window
Length: 5 pages
Date of creation: Nov 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:yca:wpaper:2007_8

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, Ontario, M3J 1P3
Phone: (416) 736-5083
Fax: (416) 736-5987
Web page:
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Choquet expected utility; Ellsberg Paradox; Maxmin expected utility; Stochastic independence; Uncertainty;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.



This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.


Access and download statistics


When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:yca:wpaper:2007_8. 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: (Support).

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.