IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/ifweej/20202.html

Statistical foundations of ecological rationality

Author

Listed:
  • Brighton, Henry

Abstract

If we reassess the rationality question under the assumption that the uncertainty of the natural world is largely unquantifiable, where do we end up? In this article the author argues that we arrive at a statistical, normative, and cognitive theory of ecological rationality. The main casualty of this rebuilding process is optimality. Once we view optimality as a formal implication of quantified uncertainty rather than an ecologically meaningful objective, the rationality question shifts from being axiomatic/probabilistic in nature to being algorithmic/predictive in nature. These distinct views on rationality mirror fundamental and long-standing divisions in statistics.

Suggested Citation

  • Brighton, Henry, 2020. "Statistical foundations of ecological rationality," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 14, pages 1-32.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ifweej:20202
    DOI: 10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2020-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2020-2
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/213846/1/1689770554.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2020-2?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chater, Nick & Oaksford, Mike & Nakisa, Ramin & Redington, Martin, 2003. "Fast, frugal, and rational: How rational norms explain behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 63-86, January.
    2. Levin, Yuri & McGill, Jeff, 2009. "Introduction to the special issue on revenue management and dynamic pricing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(3), pages 845-847, September.
    3. David Aikman & Mirta Galesic & Gerd Gigerenzer & Sujit Kapadia & Konstantinos Katsikopoulos & Amit Kothiyal & Emma Murphy & Tobias Neumann, 2014. "Financial Stability Paper No 28: Taking uncertainty seriously - simplicity versus complexity in financial regulation," Bank of England Financial Stability Papers 28, Bank of England.
    4. Victor DeMiguel & Lorenzo Garlappi & Raman Uppal, 2009. "Optimal Versus Naive Diversification: How Inefficient is the 1-N Portfolio Strategy?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(5), pages 1915-1953, May.
    5. Simon, Herbert A, 1978. "Rationality as Process and as Product of Thought," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(2), pages 1-16, May.
    6. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & David Schmeidler, 2012. "Rationality of belief or: why savage's axioms are neither necessary nor sufficient for rationality," Post-Print hal-00745599, HAL.
    7. Brighton, Henry & Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2015. "The bias bias," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1772-1784.
    8. David Aikman & Mirta Galesic & Gerd Gigerenzer & Sujit Kapadia & Konstantinos Katsikopoulos & Amit Kothiyal & Emma Murphy & Tobias Neumann, 2021. "Taking uncertainty seriously: simplicity versus complexity in financial regulation [Uncertainty in macroeconomic policy-making: art or science?]," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 30(2), pages 317-345.
    9. Ravi Jagannathan & Tongshu Ma, 2003. "Risk Reduction in Large Portfolios: Why Imposing the Wrong Constraints Helps," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(4), pages 1651-1683, August.
    10. David J. Hand & Keming Yu, 2001. "Idiot's Bayes—Not So Stupid After All?," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 69(3), pages 385-398, December.
    11. Boland, Lawrence A, 1981. "On the Futility of Criticizing the Neoclassical Maximization Hypothesis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(5), pages 1031-1036, December.
    12. repec:bla:jfinan:v:58:y:2003:i:4:p:1651-1684 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. David C. Schmittlein & Donald G. Morrison & Richard Colombo, 1987. "Counting Your Customers: Who-Are They and What Will They Do Next?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 1-24, January.
    14. Peter S. Fader & Bruce G. S. Hardie & Ka Lok Lee, 2005. "“Counting Your Customers” the Easy Way: An Alternative to the Pareto/NBD Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 275-284, August.
    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. Machina, Mark J & Schmeidler, David, 1992. "A More Robust Definition of Subjective Probability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 745-780, July.
    17. Larry G. Epstein, 1999. "A Definition of Uncertainty Aversion," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(3), pages 579-608.
    18. Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2018. "The Bias Bias in Behavioral Economics," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(3-4), pages 303-336, December.
    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. Riedl, Anna & Vervaeke, John, 2022. "Rationality and Relevance Realization," OSF Preprints vymwu, Center for Open Science.

    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. Forbes, William & Hudson, Robert & Skerratt, Len & Soufian, Mona, 2015. "Which heuristics can aid financial-decision-making?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 199-210.
    2. Brighton, Henry & Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2015. "The bias bias," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1772-1784.
    3. Riedl, Anna & Vervaeke, John, 2022. "Rationality and Relevance Realization," OSF Preprints vymwu, Center for Open Science.
    4. Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February.
    5. Robert Nau, 2001. "De Finetti was Right: Probability Does Not Exist," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 89-124, December.
    6. Maillet, Bertrand & Tokpavi, Sessi & Vaucher, Benoit, 2015. "Global minimum variance portfolio optimisation under some model risk: A robust regression-based approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(1), pages 289-299.
    7. Klaus Nehring, 2006. "Decision-Making in the Context of Imprecise Probabilistic Beliefs," Economics Working Papers 0034, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science.
    8. Amit Kothiyal & Vitalie Spinu & Peter Wakker, 2014. "An experimental test of prospect theory for predicting choice under ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 1-17, February.
    9. Chateauneuf, Alain & Eichberger, Jurgen & Grant, Simon, 2007. "Choice under uncertainty with the best and worst in mind: Neo-additive capacities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 538-567, November.
    10. Aydogan, Ilke & Berger, Loϊc & Bosetti, Valentina & Liu, Ning, "undated". "Three Layers of Uncertainty: an Experiment," ETA: Economic Theory and Applications 274852, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    11. Casadesus-Masanell, Ramon & Klibanoff, Peter & Ozdenoren, Emre, 2000. "Maxmin Expected Utility over Savage Acts with a Set of Priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 35-65, May.
    12. Dietz, Simon & Walker, Oliver, 2017. "Ambiguity and insurance: capital requirements andpremiums," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68469, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Evren, Özgür, 2019. "Recursive non-expected utility: Connecting ambiguity attitudes to risk preferences and the level of ambiguity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 285-307.
    14. Lo, Kin Chung, 2009. "Correlated Nash equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 722-743, March.
    15. Simone Cerreia-Vioglio & Paolo Ghirardato & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Marciano Siniscalchi, 2011. "Rational preferences under ambiguity," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(2), pages 341-375, October.
    16. Igor Kopylov, 2016. "Subjective probability, confidence, and Bayesian updating," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 62(4), pages 635-658, October.
    17. Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Aldo Rustichini, 2006. "Ambiguity Aversion, Robustness, and the Variational Representation of Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(6), pages 1447-1498, November.
    18. Bommier, Antoine, 2017. "A dual approach to ambiguity aversion," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 104-118.
    19. Chambers, Robert G. & Melkonyan, Tigran, 2017. "Ambiguity, reasoned determination, and climate-change policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 74-92.
    20. Ghirardato, Paolo & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2018. "Risk sharing in the small and in the large," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 730-765.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • A12 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Other Disciplines
    • B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General
    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection
    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods
    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques
    • 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:zbw:ifweej:20202. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iwkiede.html .

    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.