IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Second order beliefs models of choice under imprecise risk: non-additive second order beliefs vs. nonlinear second order utility

  • Giraud, Raphaël


    (Department of Economics, University of Paris 8, LED)

This paper discusses models of choice under imprecise objective probabilistic information featuring beliefs about beliefs -- second order beliefs. A new model, called Second Order Dual Expected Utility (SODEU) featuring non-additive second order beliefs is introduced, axiomatized and systematically contrasted with the leading alternative model of this kind, the Second Order Subjective Expected Utility (SOSEU) model (Klibanoff, Marinacci, Mukerji, 2005; Nau, 2006; Seo, 2009) for which, for the sake of comparison, we provide a new axiomatization, dispensing with the complex constructs used in extant axiomatizations. Ambiguity attitude and attitude toward information in general are discussed and characterized.

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: no

Article provided by Econometric Society in its journal Theoretical Economics.

Volume (Year): 9 (2014)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)

in new window

Handle: RePEc:the:publsh:569
Contact details of provider: Web page:

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. Paolo Ghirardato & Massimo Marinacci, 2000. "Risk, Ambiguity and the Separation of Utility and Beliefs," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1143, Econometric Society.
  2. Thibault Gajdos & Jean-Marc Tallon & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2002. "Decision Making with Imprecise Probabilistic Information," ICER Working Papers - Applied Mathematics Series 18-2003, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research, revised May 2003.
  3. Raphaël Giraud & Jean-Marc Tallon, 2009. "Are beliefs a matter of taste? A case for objective imprecise information," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 09086, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
  4. Thibault Gajdos & Takashi Hayashi & Jean-Marc Tallon & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2006. "Attitude toward imprecise information," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00130179, HAL.
  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. Peter Klibanoff & Massimo Marinacci & Sujoy Mukerji, 2002. "A smooth model of decision making under ambiguity," ICER Working Papers - Applied Mathematics Series 11-2003, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research, revised Apr 2003.
  7. Gollier, Christian, 2009. "Portfolio Choices and Asset Prices: The Comparative Statics of Ambiguity Aversion," TSE Working Papers 09-068, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
  8. Larry G. Epstein, 2010. "A Paradox for the “Smooth Ambiguity” Model of Preference," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(6), pages 2085-2099, November.
  9. Peter Klibanoff & Massimo Marinacci & Sujoy Mukerji, 2012. "On the Smooth Ambiguity Model: A Reply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(3), pages 1303-1321, 05.
  10. Yaari, Menahem E, 1987. "The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 95-115, January.
  11. 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.
  12. repec:hal:journl:halshs-00451982 is not listed on IDEAS
  13. Zhou, Lin, 1999. "Subjective probability theory with continuous acts," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 121-130, August.
  14. David Schmeidler, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7662, David K. Levine.
  15. Leandro Nascimento & Gil Riella, 2013. "Second-order ambiguous beliefs," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(3), pages 1005-1037, April.
  16. David S. Ahn, 2008. "Ambiguity Without a State Space," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 75(1), pages 3-28.
  17. Kyoungwon Seo, 2009. "Ambiguity and Second-Order Belief," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(5), pages 1575-1605, 09.
  18. Amarante, Massimiliano, 2009. "Foundations of neo-Bayesian statistics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(5), pages 2146-2173, September.
  19. Simone Cerreia-Vioglio & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Luigi Montrucchio, 2010. "Singed Integral Representations of Comonotonic Additive Functionals," Working Papers 366, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
  20. Nehring, Klaus, 2009. "Imprecise probabilistic beliefs as a context for decision-making under ambiguity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(3), pages 1054-1091, May.
  21. Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February.
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:the:publsh:569. 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: (Martin J. Osborne)

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.