IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Updating Choquet Beliefs

  • Jurgen Eichberger

    (Alfred Weber Institut, Universitat HeidelbergAuthor-Name:)

  • Simon Grant

    (Rice University, Texas and Australian National University)

  • David Kelsey

    (Department of Economics, University of Exeter)

We apply Pires’s coherence property between unconditional and conditional preferences that admit a CEU representation. In conjunction with consequentialism (only those outcomes on states which are still possible can matter for conditional preference) this implies that the conditional preference may be obtained from the unconditional preference by taking the Full Bayesian Update of the capacity. Attitudes towards sequential versus simultaneous resolution of uncertainty for a simple bet are analyzed. We show that for a class of recursive CEU preferences which exhibit both optimism and pessimism, a 'good-news' signal is preferred to no signal which is preferred to a 'bad-news' signal.

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: http://people.exeter.ac.uk/cc371/RePEc/dpapers/DP0607.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Exeter University, Department of Economics in its series Discussion Papers with number 0607.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:exe:wpaper:0607
Contact details of provider: Postal: Streatham Court, Rennes Drive, Exeter EX4 4PU
Phone: (01392) 263218
Fax: (01392) 263242
Web page: http://business-school.exeter.ac.uk/about/departments/economics/

More information through EDIRC

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. Dow, James & Werlang, Sergio Ribeiro da Costa, 1992. "Uncertainty Aversion, Risk Aversion, and the Optimal Choice of Portfolio," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(1), pages 197-204, January.
  2. Gilboa Itzhak & Schmeidler David, 1993. "Updating Ambiguous Beliefs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 33-49, February.
  3. Mukerji, S. & Tallon, J.-M., 1999. "Ambiguity Aversion and Incompleteness of Financial Markets," Papiers d'Economie Mathématique et Applications 1999-28, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
  4. Marciano Siniscalchi, 2006. "Dynamic Choice Under Ambiguity," Discussion Papers 1430, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  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. Grant, Simon & Eichberger, Jürgen & Kelsey, David, 2004. "CEU Preferences and Dynamic Consistency," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 04-47, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
  7. Epstein, Larry G. & Schneider, Martin, 2003. "Recursive multiple-priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 1-31, November.
  8. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-87, May.
  9. Wakker, Peter P, 2001. "Testing and Characterizing Properties of Nonadditive Measures through Violations of the Sure-Thing Principle," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(4), pages 1039-59, July.
  10. Wang, Tan, 2003. "Conditional preferences and updating," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 286-321, February.
  11. Eichberger, Jurgen & Kelsey, David, 2002. "Strategic Complements, Substitutes, and Ambiguity: The Implications for Public Goods," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 436-466, October.
  12. Costis Skiadas, 1997. "Conditioning and Aggregation of Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(2), pages 347-368, March.
  13. Eichberger, Jurgen & Kelsey, David, 2000. "Non-Additive Beliefs and Strategic Equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 183-215, February.
  14. Mukerji, Sujoy & Tallon, Jean-Marc, 2004. "Ambiguity aversion and the absence of wage indexation," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 653-670, April.
  15. Denneberg, Dieter, 2002. "Conditional expectation for monotone measures, the discrete case," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 105-121, April.
  16. Mukerji, S., 1997. "Ambiguity aversion and incompleteness of contractual form," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 9715, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
  17. André Lapied & Robert Kast, 2009. "Updating Choquet valuation and discounting information arrivals," Working Papers halshs-00410532, HAL.
  18. Cesaltina Pacheco Pires, 2002. "A Rule For Updating Ambiguous Beliefs," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 137-152, September.
  19. Ehud Lehrer, 2004. "Updating Non-Additive Probabilities -- A Geometric Approach," Game Theory and Information 0405010, EconWPA.
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:exe:wpaper:0607. 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: (Carlos Cortinhas)

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.