IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joecth/v20y2002i1p159-181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subjective ambiguity, expected utility and Choquet expected utility

Author

Listed:
  • Jiankang Zhang

    () (Department of Economics, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6, CANADA)

Abstract

Using the Savage set up, this paper provides a simple axiomatization of the Choquet Expected Utility model where the capacity is an inner measure. Two attractive features of the model are its specificity and the transparency of its axioms. The key axiom states that the decision-maker uses unambiguous acts to approximate ambiguous ones. In addition, the notion of `ambiguity' is subjective and derived from preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiankang Zhang, 2002. "Subjective ambiguity, expected utility and Choquet expected utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 20(1), pages 159-181.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:20:y:2002:i:1:p:159-181
    Note: Received: March 23, 2000; revised version: April 24, 2001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00199/papers/2020001/20200159.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Adam Dominiak & Jean-Philippe Lefort, 2011. "Unambiguous events and dynamic Choquet preferences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 46(3), pages 401-425, April.
    2. Enrico G. De Giorgi & Ola Mahmoud, 2016. "Diversification preferences in the theory of choice," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 39(2), pages 143-174, November.
    3. Ehud Lehrer, 2012. "Partially Specified Probabilities: Decisions and Games," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 70-100, February.
    4. Peter Klibanoff & Massimo Marinacci & Sujoy Mukerji, 2011. "Definitions of ambiguous events and the smooth ambiguity model," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(2), pages 399-424, October.
    5. Zhang, Jiankang, 1999. "Qualitative probabilities on [lambda]-systems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 11-20, July.
    6. Massimiliano Amarante & Fabio Maccheroni, 2006. "When an Event Makes a Difference," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 119-126, May.
    7. Takao Asano, 2004. "Portfolio Inertia under Ambiguity," ISER Discussion Paper 0609, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    8. Yaarit Even & Ehud Lehrer, 2014. "Decomposition-integral: unifying Choquet and the concave integrals," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(1), pages 33-58, May.
    9. Dominiak, Adam & Lefort, Jean-Philippe, 2015. "“Agreeing to disagree” type results under ambiguity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 119-129.
    10. repec:dau:papers:123456789/8575 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Asano, Takao, 2006. "Portfolio inertia under ambiguity," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 223-232, December.
    12. repec:dau:papers:123456789/7323 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Kopylov, Igor, 2007. "Subjective probabilities on "small" domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 236-265, March.
    14. Yehuda Izhakian & Zur Izhakian, 2015. "Decision making in phantom spaces," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 58(1), pages 59-98, January.
    15. Klaus Nehring, 2006. "Is it Possible to Define Subjective Probabilities in Purely Behavioral Terms? A Comment on Epstein-Zhang (2001)," Economics Working Papers 0067, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science.
    16. Luciano Castro & Alain Chateauneuf, 2011. "Ambiguity aversion and trade," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(2), pages 243-273, October.
    17. Gul, Faruk & Pesendorfer, Wolfgang, 2015. "Hurwicz expected utility and subjective sources," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PA), pages 465-488.
    18. Dominiak, Adam & Lee, Min Suk, 2017. "Coherent Dempster–Shafer equilibrium and ambiguous signals," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 42-54.
    19. Alain Chateauneuf & Luciano De Castro, 2011. "Ambiguity Aversion and Absence of Trade," Discussion Papers 1535, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    20. André, Eric, 2016. "Crisp monetary acts in multiple-priors models of decision under ambiguity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 153-161.
    21. Xiangyu Qu, 2015. "Purely subjective extended Bayesian models with Knightian unambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 547-571, December.
    22. Qu, Xiangyu, 2013. "Maxmin expected utility with additivity on unambiguous events," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 245-249.
    23. Amarante, Massimiliano & Filiz, Emel, 2007. "Ambiguous events and maxmin expected utility," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 1-33, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Ambiguity; Expected utility; Choquet expected utility; Capacity; Inner measure; $lambda $-system.;

    JEL classification:

    • C69 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Other
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:spr:joecth:v:20:y:2002:i:1:p:159-181. 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). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.