Certainty Independence and the Separation of Utility and Beliefs
Economists often operate under an implicit assumption that the tastes of a decision maker are constant, while his beliefs change with the availability of new information. It is therefore customary to seek representations of preferences which cleanly separate the taste component, called ‘utility,’ from the beliefs component. We show that a complete separation of utility from the other components of the representation is possible only if the decision maker’s preferences satisfy a mild but not completely innocuous condition, called ‘certainty independence.’ We prove that the preferences that obtain such separation are a subset of the biseparable preferences.nonatomic probability measures, we extend some of these results to the case of individuals with decreasing marginal evaluations.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
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.:
- Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989.
"Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior,"
Journal of Mathematical Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
- Paolo Ghirardato & Massimo Marinacci, 2000.
"Risk, Ambiguity and the Separation of Utility and Beliefs,"
Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers
1143, Econometric Society.
- 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.
- Paolo Ghirardato & Massimo Marinacci, 2000. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Separation of Utility and Beliefs," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7616, David K. Levine.
- 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.
- F J Anscombe & R J Aumann, 2000. "A Definition of Subjective Probability," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7591, David K. Levine.
- Paolo Ghirardato & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Marciano Siniscalchi, 2001.
"A subjective spin on roulette wheels,"
ICER Working Papers - Applied Mathematics Series
17-2001, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research, revised Aug 2001.
- David Schmeidler, 1989.
"Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
7662, David K. Levine.
- Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-87, May.
- Larry G. Epstein, 1999. "A Definition of Uncertainty Aversion," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 66(3), pages 579-608.
- Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jetheo:v:120:y:2005:i:1:p:129-136. 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: (Shamier, Wendy)
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.