IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Decision making and trade without probabilities

  • John Dickhaut
  • Radhika Lunawat

    ()

  • Kira Pronin

    ()

  • Jack Stecher

    ()

What is a rational decision-maker supposed to do when facing an unfamiliar problem, where there is uncertainty but no basis for making probabilistic assessments? One answer is to use a form of expected utility theory, and assume that agents assign their own subjective probabilities to each element of the (presumably known) state space. In contrast, this paper presents a model in which agents do not form subjective probabilities over the elements of the state space, but nonetheless use new information to update their beliefs about what the elements of the state space are. This model is shown to lead to different predictions about trading behavior in a simple asset market under uncertainty. A controlled laboratory experiment tests the predictions of this model against those of expected utility theory and against the hypothesis that subjects act na¨ıvely and non-strategically. The results suggest that a lack of subjective probabilities does not imply irrational or unpredictable behavior, but instead allows individuals to use both what they know and knowledge of what they do not know in their decision making. Comment un décideur rationnel est-il censé réagir face à un problème qui ne lui est pas familier lorsqu'il existe une certaine incertitude, et en l'absence d'une base sur laquelle effectuer des estimations probabilistes? Une solution consiste à utiliser une forme de la théorie de l'utilité espérée et de présumer que les agents attribuent leurs propres probabilités subjectives à chaque élément de la représentation d'état (sans doute connue). Par contraste, notre article présente un modèle où les agents ne forment pas de probabilités subjectives sur les éléments de la représentation d'état, mais utilisent de nouveaux renseignements afin de mettre à jour leurs croyances sur les éléments formant la représentation d'état. Le comportement des échanges avec ce modèle dans un marché d'actifs simple et incertain nous mène à des prédictions différentes. En utilisant une expé

(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.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00199-011-0644-4
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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.

Article provided by Springer & Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET) in its journal Economic Theory.

Volume (Year): 48 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (October)
Pages: 275-288

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:48:y:2011:i:2:p:275-288
DOI: 10.1007/s00199-011-0644-4
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.springer.com

Web page: http://saet.uiowa.edu/

More information through EDIRC

Order Information: Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/economic+theory/journal/199/PS2

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.:

as in new window
  1. Luca Rigotti & Chris Shannon, 2005. "Uncertainty and Risk in Financial Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(1), pages 203-243, 01.
  2. Luciano Castro & Marialaura Pesce & Nicholas Yannelis, 2011. "Core and equilibria under ambiguity," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(2), pages 519-548, October.
  3. Chen, Kay-Yut & Plott, Charles R., 1998. "Nonlinear Behavior in Sealed Bid First Price Auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 34-78, October.
  4. Scott Condie & Jayant V. Ganguli, 2011. "Ambiguity and Rational Expectations Equilibria," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 78(3), pages 821-845.
  5. Glenn Harrison & John List, 2008. "Naturally occurring markets and exogenous laboratory experiments: A case study of the winner's curse," Framed Field Experiments 00266, The Field Experiments Website.
  6. Bryan Routledge & Stanley Zin, . "Model Uncertainty and Liquidity," GSIA Working Papers 2001-E17, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
  7. Larry Epstein & Martin Schneider, 2005. "Ambiguity, Information Quality and Asset Pricing," RCER Working Papers 519, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
  8. Jack Douglas Stecher & Timothy Shields & John Dickhaut, 2008. "Generating ambiguity in the laboratory," Working Papers 08-10, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
  9. Luciano De Castro & Marialaura Pesce & Nicholas C. Yannelis, 2011. "A new perspective to rational expectations: maximin rational expectations equilibrium," The School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 1107, Economics, The University of Manchester.
  10. David Easley & Aldo Rustichini, 1999. "Choice without Beliefs," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(5), pages 1157-1184, September.
  11. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
  12. Han Ozsoylev & Jan Werner, 2011. "Liquidity and asset prices in rational expectations equilibrium with ambiguous information," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(2), pages 469-491, October.
  13. Scott Condie & Jayant Ganguli, 2011. "Informational efficiency with ambiguous information," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(2), pages 229-242, October.
  14. Shin Hyun Song, 1993. "Logical Structure of Common Knowledge," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 1-13, June.
  15. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
  16. Harsanyi, John C, 1995. "Games with Incomplete Information," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 291-303, June.
  17. Eddie Dekel & Barton L. Lipman & Aldo Rustichini, 1998. "Standard State-Space Models Preclude Unawareness," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(1), pages 159-174, January.
  18. Morris, Stephen, 1996. "The Logic of Belief and Belief Change: A Decision Theoretic Approach," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 1-23, April.
  19. Mark Machina, 2004. "Almost-objective uncertainty," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 24(1), pages 1-54, 07.
  20. David Ahn & Syngjoo Choi & Douglas Gale & Shachar Kariv, 2014. "Estimating ambiguity aversion in a portfolio choice experiment," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 5, pages 195-223, 07.
  21. John Quiggin, 2007. "Ambiguity and the Value of Information: An Almost-objective Events Analysis," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 30(3), pages 409-414, March.
  22. repec:feb:framed:0030 is not listed on IDEAS
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:48:y:2011:i:2:p:275-288. 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.