Which Error Story Is Best?
Two recent papers, Harless and Camerer (1994) and Hey and Orme (1994) are both addressed to the same question: which is the "best" theory of decision making under risk? As an essential part of their separate approaches to an answer to this question, both sets of authors had to make an assumption about the underlying stochastic nature of their data. In this context this implied an assumption about the "errors" made by the subjects in the experiments generating the data under analysis. The two different sets of authors adopted different assumptions: the purpose of this current paper is to compare and contrast these two different error stories--in an attempt to discover which of the two is "best." Copyright 2000 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jrisku:v:20:y:2000:i:2:p:161-76. 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: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.