The paradox of the Bayesian experts and state-dependent utility theory
When n individuals satisfy the axioms of subjective expected utility (SEU) theory and these individuals' probabilities or/and utilities are sufficiently diverse, it is impossible to aggregate the individuals' preferences into a (n + 1)-preference which is both Paretian and in agreement with SEU theory. The paper restates this paradox in the framework of Anscombe and Aumann's axiomatization of SEU and investigates the consequences of relaxing their state-independence assumption. The paradox disappears from the pure state-dependent framework but reappears in a different form in a sophisticated variant of state-dependent utility theory which achieves the uniqueness of subjective probabilities. The paper compares this novel impossibility result with the earlier one. It concludes by discussing the foundations of the Pareto principle in both the ex ante and ex post versions.
(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.:
- Mongin, P., "undated".
"Consistent Bayesian aggregation,"
CORE Discussion Papers RP
1176, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Karni, Edi & Schmeidler, David, 1993.
"On the Uniqueness of Subjective Probabilities,"
Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 267-277, April.
- DE MEYER, Bernard & MONGIN , Philippe, 1994.
"A Note on Affine Aggregation,"
CORE Discussion Papers
1994014, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- De Meyer, B. & Mongin, P., "undated". "A note on affine aggregation," CORE Discussion Papers RP 1136, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Bernard De Meyer & Philippe Mongin, 1995. "A note on affine aggregation," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00259707, HAL.
- F J Anscombe & R J Aumann, 2000. "A Definition of Subjective Probability," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7591, David K. Levine.
- John Broome, 1990. "Bolker-Jeffrey Expected Utility Theory and Axiomatic Utilitarianism," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 57(3), pages 477-502.
- Hammond, Peter J, 1981. "Ex-ante and Ex-post Welfare Optimality under Uncertainty," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 48(191), pages 235-250, August.
- Mark J. Schervish & Teddy Seidenfeld & Joseph B. Kadane, 1991. "Shared Preferences and State-Dependent Utilities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(12), pages 1575-1589, December.
- ZHOU, Lin, 1996. "Bayesian Utilitarianism," CORE Discussion Papers 1996011, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Karni, Edi, 1993. "A Definition of Subjective Probabilities with State-Dependent Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 187-198, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:mateco:v:29:y:1998:i:3:p:331-361. 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: (Dana Niculescu)
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.