IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2508.19585.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Preference for Verifiability

Author

Listed:
  • Hendrik Rommeswinkel

Abstract

Decision makers may face situations in which they cannot observe the consequences that result from their actions. In such decisions, motivations other than the expected utility of consequences may play a role. The present paper axiomatically characterizes a decision model in which the decision maker cares about whether it can be ex post verified that a good consequence has been achieved. Preferences over acts uniquely characterize a set of events that the decision maker expects to be able to verify in case they occur. The decision maker chooses the act that maximizes the expected utility across verifiable events of the worst possible consequence that may have occurred. For example, a firm choosing between different carbon emission reduction technologies may find some technologies to leave ex post more uncertainty about the level of emission reduction than other technologies. The firm may care about proving to its stakeholders that a certain amount of carbon reduction has been achieved and may employ privately obtained evidence to do so. It may choose in expectation less efficient technologies if the achieved carbon reduction is better verifiable using the expected future evidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Hendrik Rommeswinkel, 2025. "Preference for Verifiability," Papers 2508.19585, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2508.19585
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2508.19585
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michel Grabisch, 2016. "Set Functions, Games and Capacities in Decision Making," Theory and Decision Library C, Springer, number 978-3-319-30690-2, September.
    2. Madhav Chandrasekher & Mira Frick & Ryota Iijima & Yves Le Yaouanq, 2022. "Dual‐Self Representations of Ambiguity Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(3), pages 1029-1061, May.
    3. Paolo Ghirardato & Massimo Marinacci, 2001. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Separation of Utility and Beliefs," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 864-890, November.
    4. Kajii, Atsushi & Kojima, Hiroyuki & Ui, Takashi, 2007. "Cominimum additive operators," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 218-230, February.
    5. Ghirardato, Paolo & Pennesi, Daniele, 2020. "A general theory of subjective mixtures," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    6. Bull, Jesse & Watson, Joel, 2004. "Evidence disclosure and verifiability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 1-31, September.
    7. Paolo Ghirardato & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Marciano Siniscalchi, 2003. "A Subjective Spin on Roulette Wheels," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1897-1908, November.
    8. repec:spr:thdchp:978-3-319-30690-2_2 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    10. Yue Wu & Kaifu Zhang & Jinhong Xie, 2020. "Bad Greenwashing, Good Greenwashing: Corporate Social Responsibility and Information Transparency," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(7), pages 3095-3112, July.
    11. Kreps, David M & Porteus, Evan L, 1978. "Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty and Dynamic Choice Theory," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 185-200, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Fabio Bellini & Fabio Maccheroni & Tiantian Mao & Ruodu Wang & Qinyu Wu, 2025. "Disappointment Aversion and Expectiles," Papers 2508.05541, arXiv.org.
    2. Wakker, Peter P. & Yang, Jingni, 2019. "A powerful tool for analyzing concave/convex utility and weighting functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 143-159.
    3. 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.
    4. Aurélien Baillon & Yoram Halevy & Chen Li, 2022. "Experimental elicitation of ambiguity attitude using the random incentive system," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 1002-1023, June.
    5. Ghirardato, Paolo & Pennesi, Daniele, 2020. "A general theory of subjective mixtures," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    6. Ghirardato, Paolo & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo, 2004. "Differentiating ambiguity and ambiguity attitude," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 133-173, October.
    7. Amarante, Massimiliano, 2009. "Foundations of neo-Bayesian statistics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(5), pages 2146-2173, September.
    8. Alon, Shiri & Schmeidler, David, 2014. "Purely subjective Maxmin Expected Utility," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 382-412.
    9. Ghirardato, Paolo & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo, 2005. "Certainty Independence and the Separation of Utility and Beliefs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 129-136, January.
    10. Paolo Ghirardato & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci, 2002. "Ambiguity from the Differential Viewpoint," ICER Working Papers - Applied Mathematics Series 17-2002, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    11. Dean, Mark & Ortoleva, Pietro, 2017. "Allais, Ellsberg, and preferences for hedging," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(1), January.
    12. André Lapied & Pascal Tocquebeuf, 2007. "Consistent Dynamice Choice And Non-Expected Utility Preferences," Working Papers halshs-00353880, HAL.
    13. Lorenzo Bastianello & Vassili Vergopoulos, 2024. "Discounted Subjective Expected Utility in Continuous Time," Papers 2403.15319, arXiv.org.
    14. Chateauneuf, Alain & Faro, José Heleno & Tallon, Jean-Marc & Vergopoulos, Vassili, 2024. "Alpha-maxmin as an aggregation of two selves," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    15. Epstein, Larry G. & Schneider, Martin, 2003. "Recursive multiple-priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 1-31, November.
    16. Paolo Ghirardato & Daniele Pennesi, 2023. "Randomizing without randomness," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(4), pages 1009-1037, May.
    17. Yosuke Hashidate, 2018. "Preferences for Randomization and Anticipated Utility," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-1083, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    18. Wakai, Katsutoshi, 2013. "An alternative axiomatization of intertemporal utility smoothing," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 224-227.
    19. Karni, Edi & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo, 2015. "Ambiguity and Nonexpected Utility," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    20. Baillon, Aurélien & Driesen, Bram & Wakker, Peter P., 2012. "Relative concave utility for risk and ambiguity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 481-489.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2508.19585. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.