IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Anticipated regret as an explanation of uncertainty aversion

  • Daniel Krähmer


  • Rebecca Stone


Registered author(s):

    The paper provides a psychological explanation of uncertainty aversion based on the fear of regret. We capture an agent’s regret using a reference-dependent utility function in which the agent’s utility depends on the performance of his chosen option relative to the performance of the option that would have been best ex post. An uncertain option is represented as a compound lottery. The basic idea is that selecting a compound lottery reveals information, which alters the ex post assessment of what the best choice would have been, inducing regret. We provide sufficient conditions under which regret implies uncertainty aversion in the sense of quasi-concave preferences over compound lotteries. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2013

    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:
    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 in its journal Economic Theory.

    Volume (Year): 52 (2013)
    Issue (Month): 2 (March)
    Pages: 709-728

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:52:y:2013:i:2:p:709-728
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    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. Jürgen Eichberger & David Kelsey, 2008. "Are the Treasures of Game Theory Ambiguous?," Working Papers 0469, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics, revised Jul 2008.
    2. Uzi Segal, 1989. "Two-Stage Lotteries Without the Reduction Axiom," UCLA Economics Working Papers 552, UCLA Department of Economics.
    3. Ghirardato, Paolo & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo, 2004. "Differentiating ambiguity and ambiguity attitude," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 133-173, October.
    4. Rabin, Matthew, 1997. "Psychology and Economics," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt8jd5z5j2, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    5. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    6. Paul R. Milgrom, 1981. "Good News and Bad News: Representation Theorems and Applications," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(2), pages 380-391, Autumn.
    7. Michael R. Baye & Dan Kovenock & Casper G. de Vries, 2009. "Contests with Rank-Order Spillovers," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 09-066/2, Tinbergen Institute.
    8. José Apesteguía & Miguel A. Ballester, 2004. "A Theory Of Reference-Dependent Beavior," Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra 0402, Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra.
    9. Uzi Segal, 1985. "The Ellsberg Paradox and Risk Aversion: An Anticipated Utility Approach," UCLA Economics Working Papers 362, UCLA Department of Economics.
    10. Geanakoplos, John & Pearce, David & Stacchetti, Ennio, 1989. "Psychological games and sequential rationality," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 60-79, March.
    11. David E. Bell, 1983. "Risk Premiums for Decision Regret," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(10), pages 1156-1166, October.
    12. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2011. "Loss aversion," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 127-148, January.
    13. Dominiak, Adam & Schnedler, Wendelin, 2010. "Attitudes towards Uncertainty and Randomization: An Experimental Study," Working Papers 0494, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    14. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-87, May.
    15. Peter Klibanoff & Massimo Marinacci & Sujoy Mukerji, 2005. "A Smooth Model of Decision Making under Ambiguity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(6), pages 1849-1892, November.
    16. Halevy, Yoram, 2005. "Ellsberg Revisited: an Experimental Study," working papers halevy-05-07-26-11-51-13, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 25 Feb 2014.
    17. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    18. Hayashi, Takashi, 2008. "Regret aversion and opportunity dependence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 242-268, March.
    19. Robert F. Nau, 2006. "Uncertainty Aversion with Second-Order Utilities and Probabilities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(1), pages 136-145, January.
    20. repec:oup:restud:v:75:y:2008:i:1:p:3-28 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:52:y:2013:i:2:p:709-728. 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 (Christopher F Baum)

    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.