Consistent Dynamice Choice And Non-Expected Utility Preferences
Pursuing works from Sarin and Wakker (1998), we study how NonExpected Utility models could be consistently applied to multi-stage decision problems. Concerning multiple priors model, we remove the argument that dynamic consistency, consequentialism and model consistency (sequential consistency in Sarin and Wakker (1998)) can all be preserved. Like Choquet expected utility, deviation of expected utility is only allowed over the final stage. Moreover, it's proved for the two models that if we also assume reduction of compound acts, then an expected utility representation exists in all stages.
|Date of creation:||01 Oct 2007|
|Date of revision:|
|Note:||View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00353880/en/|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/|
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.:
- Uzi Segal, 2000.
"Two Stage Lotteries Without the Reduction Axiom,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
7599, David K. Levine.
- Volij, Oscar, 1994. "Dynamic Consistency, Consequentialism and The Reduction of Compound Lotteries," Staff General Research Papers 10569, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Kreps, David M & Porteus, Evan L, 1978.
"Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty and Dynamic Choice Theory,"
Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 185-200, January.
- David M Kreps & Evan L Porteus, 1978. "Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty and Dynamic Choice Theory," Levine's Working Paper Archive 625018000000000009, David K. Levine.
- Eichberger, Jurgen & Grant, Simon & Kelsey, David, 2005.
"CEU preferences and dynamic consistency,"
Mathematical Social Sciences,
Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 143-151, March.
- Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Peter Klibanoff & Emre Ozdenoren, 1998. "Maximum Expected Utility over Savage Acts with a Set of Priors," Discussion Papers 1218, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Klibanoff, Peter & Hanany, Eran, 2007. "Updating preferences with multiple priors," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 2(3), September.
- Adam Dominiak & Jean-Philippe Lefort, 2011.
"Unambiguous events and dynamic Choquet preferences,"
Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 401-425, April.
- Dominiak, Adam & Lefort, Jean-Philippe, 2009. "Unambiguous Events and Dynamic Choquet Preferences," Working Papers 0489, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
- Paolo Ghirardato, 2002. "Revisiting Savage in a conditional world," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 83-92.
- Wang, Tan, 2003. "Conditional preferences and updating," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 286-321, February.
- Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
- Paolo Ghirardato & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Marciano Siniscalchi, 2001.
"A subjective spin on roulette wheels,"
ICER Working Papers - Applied Mathematics Series
17-2001, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research, revised Aug 2001.
- Jurgen Eichberger & Simon Grant & David Kelsey, 2006.
"Updating Choquet Beliefs,"
0607, Exeter University, Department of Economics.
- Sarin, Rakesh & Wakker, Peter P, 1998. "Dynamic Choice and NonExpected Utility," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 87-119, November.
- 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.
- Itzhak Gilboa & David Schmeidler, 1991.
"Updating Ambiguous Beliefs,"
924, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Schmeidler, D. & Karni, E., 1990.
"A Temporal Dynamic Consistency And Expected Utility Theory,"
39-90, Tel Aviv.
- Karni, Edi & Schmeidler, David, 1991. "Atemporal dynamic consistency and expected utility theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 401-408, August.
- Hammond, P.J. & , ., 1987. "Consequentialist foundations for expected utility," CORE Discussion Papers 1987016, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Larry G. Epstein & Martin Schneider, 2001.
RCER Working Papers
485, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
- Kiyohiko G. Nishimura & Hiroyuki Ozaki, 2003. "A Simple Axiomatization of Iterated Choquet Objectives," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-219, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
- Alain Chateauneuf & Robert Kast & AndrÃ© Lapied, 2001. "Conditioning Capacities and Choquet Integrals: The Role of Comonotony," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 367-386, December.
- Machina, Mark J, 1989. "Dynamic Consistency and Non-expected Utility Models of Choice under Uncertainty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 27(4), pages 1622-68, December.
- Volij, Oscar, 1994. "Dynamic consistency, consequentialism and reduction of compound lotteries," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 121-129, October.
- Wakker, Peter, 1989. "Continuous subjective expected utility with non-additive probabilities," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 1-27, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-00353880. 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: (CCSD)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.