IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/theord/v43y1997i3p279-292.html

On Seidenfeld‘s Criticism of Sophisticated Violations of the Independence Axiom 1

Author

Listed:
  • Wlodek Rabinowicz

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Wlodek Rabinowicz, 1997. "On Seidenfeld‘s Criticism of Sophisticated Violations of the Independence Axiom 1," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 279-292, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:43:y:1997:i:3:p:279-292
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1004920611437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1004920611437
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1004920611437?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McClennen,Edward F., 1990. "Rationality and Dynamic Choice," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521360470, August.
    2. Geir B. Asheim, 1997. "Individual and Collective Time-Consistency," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(3), pages 427-443.
    3. McClennen, Edward F., 1988. "Ordering and Independence," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 298-308, October.
    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. Fumagalli, Roberto, 2021. "Rationality, preference satisfaction and anomalous intentions: why rational choice theory is not self-defeating," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112446, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Roberto Fumagalli, 2021. "Rationality, preference satisfaction and anomalous intentions: why rational choice theory is not self-defeating," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 91(3), pages 337-356, October.
    3. Nathalie Etchart, 2002. "Adequate Moods for non-eu Decision Making in a Sequential Framework," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 1-28, February.

    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. Nathalie Etchart, 2002. "Adequate Moods for non-eu Decision Making in a Sequential Framework," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 1-28, February.
    2. Katie Steele, 2010. "What are the minimal requirements of rational choice? Arguments from the sequential-decision setting," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(4), pages 463-487, April.
    3. Pan, Jinrui & Webb, Craig S. & Zank, Horst, 2015. "An extension of quasi-hyperbolic discounting to continuous time," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 43-55.
    4. Konstantinos Georgalos, 2016. "Dynamic decision making under ambiguity," Working Papers 112111041, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    5. Lagunoff, Roger, 2006. "Credible communication in dynastic government," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1-2), pages 59-86, January.
    6. Beckmann, Klaus, 2007. "Jon Elster und das Zeitinkonsistenz-Problem," Discussion Papers 2007-21, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    7. Wlodek Rabinowicz, 2000. "Preference stability and substitution of indifferents: a rejoinder to Seidenfeld," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 311-318, June.
    8. Ales, Laurence & Sleet, Christopher, 2014. "Revision proofness," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 324-355.
    9. Christian Koboldt, 1996. "Consistent planning, backwards induction, and rule-governed behavior," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 35-48, March.
    10. Simon Grant & Atsushi Kajii & Ben Polak, 2000. "Preference for Information and Dynamic Consistency," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 263-286, May.
    11. Trautmann, Stefan T. & Wakker, Peter P., 2010. "Process fairness and dynamic consistency," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 109(3), pages 187-189, December.
    12. Eran Hanany & Peter Klibanoff, 2008. "Updating Ambiguity Averse Preferences," Discussion Papers 1468, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    13. Dennis C. Mueller, 2006. "Democracy, Rationality and Morality," Papers on Economics and Evolution 2006-15, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    14. Volinskiy, Dmitriy & Bergstrom, John C. & Cornwell, Christopher M. & Holmes, Thomas P., 2010. "A Pseudo-Sequential Choice Model for Valuing Multi-Attribute Environmental Policies or Programs in Contingent Valuation Applications," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 9-21, February.
    15. Li, Chen & Turmunkh, Uyanga & Wakker, Peter P., 2020. "Social and strategic ambiguity versus betrayal aversion," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 272-287.
    16. Dag Sommervoll, 2013. "Sweet self-deception," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 73-88, May.
    17. Asheim, Geir B., 2007. "Procrastination, partial naivete, and behavioral welfare analysis," Memorandum 02/2007, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    18. John Hey & Massimo Paradiso., "undated". "Dynamic Choice and Timing-Independence: an experimental investigation," Discussion Papers 99/26, Department of Economics, University of York.
    19. Michèle Cohen & Johanna Etner & Meglena Jeleva, 2008. "Dynamic Decision Making when Risk Perception Depends on Past Experience," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 173-192, March.
    20. Wataru Nozawa, 2018. "On nonexistence of reconsideration-proof equilibrium with state variables," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(2), pages 253-273, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:kap:theord:v:43:y:1997:i:3:p:279-292. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.