IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00870185.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On Keynes's conception of the Weight of Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Alberto Feduzi

    (Department of Economics - University of Rome III, CAM - University of Cambridge [UK])

Abstract

Various modern decision theories seek to capture the intuition behind Keynes's conception of evidential weight. Keynes was nevertheless hesitant about the practical relevance of weight in the process of rational decision making because of the 'stopping problem' of finding a rational principle to decide where to stop the process of acquiring information in forming a probability judgment before making a decision. This paper discusses the relevance of the stopping problem by way of an inquiry into the nature, properties and implications for rational decision making of Keynes's conception of evidential weight. It is argued that in practical choice situations the decision maker often decides where to stop the process of acquiring information by following Keynes's advice to consider the degree of completeness of the available information before making a decision. This method implies that the decision maker is able to arrive at an assessment of the dimension of what may be called her 'relevant ignorance'. By considering some examples of how the acquisition of new evidence may affect the decision maker's behaviour, it is argued that it is in fact possible to talk reasonably about relevant ignorance, or what are sometimes called 'unknown unknowns', and that this concept might explain a range of human behaviours. While this concept does not provide a rational principle to solve the stopping problem, it does provide a method of inquiry for dealing with a number of paradoxes not solvable within the Bayesian approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Alberto Feduzi, 2010. "On Keynes's conception of the Weight of Evidence," Post-Print hal-00870185, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00870185
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2010.05.002
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-00870185
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-00870185/document
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jebo.2010.05.002?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. Dekel, Eddie & Lipman, Barton L. & Rustichini, Aldo, 1998. "Recent developments in modeling unforeseen contingencies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 523-542, May.
    2. Fioretti, Guido, 2001. "Von Kries and the other ‘German logicians’: non-numerical probabilities before Keynes," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 245-273, October.
    3. J. Barkley Rosser, 2001. "Alternative Keynesian and Post Keynesian Perspective on Uncertainty and Expectations," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 545-566, July.
    4. Camerer, Colin & Weber, Martin, 1992. "Recent Developments in Modeling Preferences: Uncertainty and Ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 325-370, October.
    5. Modica, Salvatore & Rustichini, Aldo, 1999. "Unawareness and Partitional Information Structures," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 265-298, May.
    6. Winslow, E G, 1989. "Organic Interdependence, Uncertainty and Economic Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(398), pages 1173-1182, December.
    7. Anand, Paul, 1991. "The Nature of Rational Choice and The Foundations of Statistics," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 199-216, April.
    8. Runde, Jochen, 1990. "Keynesian Uncertainty and the Weight of Arguments," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 275-292, October.
    9. Backhouse,Roger E. & Bateman,Bradley W. (ed.), 2006. "The Cambridge Companion to Keynes," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521840903.
    10. Kelsey, David, 1994. "Maxmin Expected Utility and Weight of Evidence," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(3), pages 425-444, July.
    11. Fontana, Giuseppe & Gerrard, Bill, 2004. "A Post Keynesian theory of decision making under uncertainty," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 619-637, October.
    12. Backhouse,Roger E. & Bateman,Bradley W. (ed.), 2006. "The Cambridge Companion to Keynes," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521600606.
    13. Craig R. Fox & Amos Tversky, 1995. "Ambiguity Aversion and Comparative Ignorance," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 585-603.
    14. Feduzi, Alberto, 2007. "On the relationship between Keynes's conception of evidential weight and the Ellsberg paradox," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 545-565, October.
    15. Bateman, Bradley W., 1987. "Keynes's Changing Conception of Probability," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 97-119, April.
    16. Daniel Ellsberg, 1961. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 75(4), pages 643-669.
    17. David Dequech, 1999. "Expectations and Confidence under Uncertainty," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 415-430, March.
    18. Ramsey, Frank P., 1926. "Truth and Probability," Histoy of Economic Thought Chapters, in: Braithwaite, R. B. (ed.),The Foundations of Mathematics and other Logical Essays, chapter 7, pages 156-198, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.
    19. Cottrell, Allin, 1993. "Keynes's Theory of Probability and Its Relevance to His Economics: Three Theses," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 25-51, April.
    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. Tubadji, Annie & Huang, Haoran & Webber, Don J, 2021. "Cultural proximity bias in AI-acceptability: The importance of being human," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    2. Ricardo Crespo & Daniel Heymann & Pablo Schiaffino, 2015. "Dealing with uncertainty evolving beliefs, rationalizations & the origins of economic crises," Documentos de trabajo del Instituto Interdisciplinario de Economía Política IIEP (UBA-CONICET) 2015-8, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas, Instituto Interdisciplinario de Economía Política IIEP (UBA-CONICET).

    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. Feduzi, Alberto, 2010. "On Keynes's conception of the weight of evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 338-351, November.
    2. Basili, Marcello & Zappia, Carlo, 2009. "Keynes's "non-numerical" probabilities and non-additive measures," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 419-430, June.
    3. Feduzi, Alberto, 2007. "On the relationship between Keynes's conception of evidential weight and the Ellsberg paradox," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 545-565, October.
    4. Marcello Basili & Carlo Zappia, 2007. "The weight of argument and non-additive measures: a note," Department of Economic Policy, Finance and Development (DEPFID) University of Siena 003, Department of Economic Policy, Finance and Development (DEPFID), University of Siena.
    5. David Dequech, 2008. "Varieties of uncertainty: a survey of the economic literature," Anais do XXXVI Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 36th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 200807211223070, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    6. Muchlinski, Elke, 2011. "Die Rezeption der John Maynard Keynes Manuskripte von 1904 bis 1911. Anregungen für die deutschsprachige Diskussion," Discussion Papers 2011/7, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    7. Marcello Basili & Carlo Zappia, 2010. "Ambiguity and uncertainty in Ellsberg and Shackle," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(3), pages 449-474.
    8. Bethany J. Weber & Wah Pheow Tan, 2012. "Ambiguity aversion in a delay analogue of the Ellsberg Paradox," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(4), pages 383-389, July.
    9. Laurent Denant-Boemont & Olivier L’Haridon, 2013. "La rationalité à l'épreuve de l'économie comportementale," Revue française d'économie, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 0(2), pages 35-89.
    10. Sergio Almeida & Marcos Rangel, 2016. "Probabilistic Sophistication, Sources Of Uncertainty, And Cognitive Ability: Experimental Evidence," Anais do XLII Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 42nd Brazilian Economics Meeting] 131, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:4:p:383-389 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Carlo Zappia, 2012. "Re-reading Keynes after the crisis: probability and decision," Department of Economics University of Siena 646, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    13. Olga Metzger & Thomas Spengler, 2019. "Modeling rational decisions in ambiguous situations: a multi-valued logic approach," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 271-290, April.
    14. Dequech, David, 2000. "Confidence and action: a comment on Barbalet," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 503-515, November.
    15. Nagisa Shiiba & Hide-Fumi Yokoo & Voravee Saengavut & Siraprapa Bumrungkit, 2023. "Ambiguity Aversion And Individual Adaptation To Climate Change: Evidence From A Farmer Survey In Northeastern Thailand," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(01), pages 1-29, February.
    16. Mercè Roca & Robin Hogarth & A. Maule, 2006. "Ambiguity seeking as a result of the status quo bias," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 175-194, May.
    17. Fox, Craig R. & Weber, Martin, 2002. "Ambiguity Aversion, Comparative Ignorance, and Decision Context," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 476-498, May.
    18. Salmon, Timothy C. & Shniderman, Adam, 2019. "Ambiguity in criminal punishment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 361-376.
    19. Michaël Lainé, 2016. "Uncertainty, Probability and Animal Spirit [Incertitude, probabilités et esprits animaux]," Post-Print hal-02942874, HAL.
    20. Cédric Gutierrez & Emmanuel Kemel, 2021. "Measuring natural source dependence," Working Papers hal-03330409, HAL.
    21. Stefan Trautmann & Ferdinand Vieider & Peter Wakker, 2008. "Causes of ambiguity aversion: Known versus unknown preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 225-243, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    D81; B21; uncertainty; weight of evidence; decision making; Keynes;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • B21 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Microeconomics

    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:hal:journl:hal-00870185. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.