IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/canzdp/263711.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assessing Starmer's Evidence for New Theories of Choice: A Subjectivist's Comment

Author

Listed:
  • Fountain, John

Abstract

Inferences derived from Starmer's (1992) experimental evidence concerning Expected Utility (EUT), Fanning Out (FO), and Fanning In (Fl) theories are both incomplete and incorrect A subjectivist Bayesian approach based on calculating posterior probability distributions for experimental outcomes is used to quantify the degree of support for each theory and to make coherent inferences about the relative performance of FO and H theories in explaining violations of EUT.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:ags:canzdp:263711
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.263711
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/263711/files/canterbury-nz-059.pdf
Download Restriction: no
File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/263711/files/canterbury-nz-059.pdf?subformat=pdfa
Download Restriction: no
File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.263711?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
---><---

More about this item

Keywords

;

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:ags:canzdp:263711. 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.

We have no bibliographic 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.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

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.