IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Definitions of Ambiguous Events and the Smooth Ambiguity Model

  • Sujoy Mukerji
  • Peter Klibanoff and Massimo Marinacci

We examine a variety of preference-based definitions of ambiguous events in the context of the smooth ambiguity model.� We first consider the definition proposed in Klibanoff, Marinacci, and Mukerji (2005) based on the classic Ellsberg two-urn paradox (Ellsberg (1961)), and show that it satisfies several desirable properties.� We then compare this definition with those of Nehring (1999), Epstein and Zhang (2001), Zhang (2002) and Ghirardato and Marinacci (2002).� Within the smooth ambiguity model, we show that Ghirardato and Marinacci (2002) would identify the same set of ambiguous and unambiguous events as our definition while Epstein and Zhang (2001) and Zhang (2002) would yield a different classification.� Moreover, we discuss and formally identify two key sources of the differences compared to Epstein and Zhang (2001) and Zhang (2002).� The more interesting source is that these two definitions can confound non-constant ambiguity attitude and the ambiguity of an event.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Oxford, Department of Economics in its series Economics Series Working Papers with number 525.

in new window

Date of creation: 01 Jan 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:oxf:wpaper:525
Contact details of provider: Postal: Manor Rd. Building, Oxford, OX1 3UQ
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

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:oxf:wpaper:525. 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: (Caroline Wise)

The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Caroline Wise to update the entry or send us the correct address

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.