IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pit/wpaper/5860.html

Learning the Krepsian State: Exploration Through Consumption

Author

Listed:
  • Roee Teper

Abstract

We take the Krepsian approach to provide a behavioral foundation for a class of responsive subjective learning processes. In contrast to the standard subjective state spacemodels, the resolution of uncertainty regarding the true state is an endogenous process that depends on the decision maker's actions. In addition, there need not be fullresolution of uncertainty between periods. When the decision maker chooses what to consume, she also chooses the information structure to which she will be exposed. When sheconsumes outcomes, she learns her relative preference between them; after each consumption history, the decision maker's information structure is a re nement of the previousinformation structure. We provide the behavioral restrictions corresponding to an innite horizon, recursive representation that exhibits such a learning process. Moreover,through the incorporation of dynamics we are able to identify the set of preferences thedecision maker believes possible after each history of consumption. That is, we identifythe unique subjective state space without appealing to an environment with risk

Suggested Citation

  • Roee Teper, 2016. "Learning the Krepsian State: Exploration Through Consumption," Working Paper 5860, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
  • Handle: RePEc:pit:wpaper:5860
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econ.pitt.edu/sites/default/files/working_papers/WP16-006.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weitzman, Martin L, 1979. "Optimal Search for the Best Alternative," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 641-654, May.
    2. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2005. "The Revealed Preference Theory of Changing Tastes," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(2), pages 429-448.
    3. Itzhak Gilboa & David Schmeidler, 1995. "Case-Based Decision Theory," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 605-639.
    4. Kreps, David M, 1979. "A Representation Theorem for "Preference for Flexibility"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 565-577, May.
    5. Sims, Christopher A., 2003. "Implications of rational inattention," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 665-690, April.
    6. Gilboa,Itzhak & Schmeidler,David, 2001. "A Theory of Case-Based Decisions," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521802345, Enero-Abr.
    7. Farhad Husseinov, 2010. "Monotonic Extension," Working Papers 1004, Department of Economics, Bilkent University.
    8. Higashi, Youichiro & Hyogo, Kazuya & Takeoka, Norio, 2014. "Stochastic endogenous time preference," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 77-92.
    9. Hyogo, Kazuya, 2007. "A subjective model of experimentation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 316-330, March.
    10. Dirk Bergemann & Juuso Valimaki, 2006. "Bandit Problems," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1551, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    11. R. Vijay Krishna & Philipp Sadowski, 2014. "Dynamic Preference for Flexibility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(2), pages 655-703, March.
    12. Takeoka, Norio, 2007. "Subjective probability over a subjective decision tree," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 536-571, September.
    13. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2004. "Self-Control and the Theory of Consumption," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(1), pages 119-158, January.
    14. Eddie Dekel & Barton L Lipman & Aldo Rustichini & Todd Sarver, 2007. "Representing Preferences with a Unique Subjective State Space: A Corrigendum -super-1," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(2), pages 591-600, March.
    15. ,, 2011. "Dynamic choice under ambiguity," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 6(3), September.
    16. Dillenberger, David & Lleras, Juan Sebastián & Sadowski, Philipp & Takeoka, Norio, 2014. "A theory of subjective learning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 287-312.
    17. Asen Kochov, 2015. "Time and No Lotteries: An Axiomatization of Maxmin Expected Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 239-262, January.
    18. Haluk Ergin & Todd Sarver, 2010. "A Unique Costly Contemplation Representation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1285-1339, July.
    19. Kyoungwon Seo, 2009. "Ambiguity and Second-Order Belief," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(5), pages 1575-1605, September.
    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. João V. Ferreira & Nicolas Gravel, 2017. "Choice with Time," AMSE Working Papers 1729, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
    2. Marek Kapera, 2024. "Learning, experimentation and the convergence of the discovered preferences," KAE Working Papers 2024-098, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis.
    3. João V. Ferreira & Nicolas Gravel, 2025. "Revealing preference discovery: a chronological choice framework," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 98(1), pages 1-32, February.
    4. Yosuke Hashidate, 2018. "Preferences for Randomization and Anticipated Utility," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-1083, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    5. Mira Frick & Ryota Iijima & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2019. "Dynamic Random Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(6), pages 1941-2002, November.
    6. Piermont, Evan, 2017. "Introspective unawareness and observable choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 134-152.
    7. Özgür Evren & Farhad Hüsseinov, 2021. "Extension of Monotonic Functions and Representation of Preferences," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 46(4), pages 1430-1451, November.
    8. Mihm, Maximilian & Ozbek, Kemal, 2019. "On the identification of changing tastes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 203-216.
    9. Marek Kapera, 2022. "Learning own preferences through consumption," KAE Working Papers 2022-074, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis.
    10. Krishna, R. Vijay & Sadowski, Philipp, 2021. "Randomly evolving tastes and delayed commitment," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 81-94.
    11. Jason Delaney & Sarah Jacobson & Thorsten Moenig, 2020. "Preference discovery," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(3), pages 694-715, September.

    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. Piermont, Evan & Takeoka, Norio & Teper, Roee, 2016. "Learning the Krepsian state: Exploration through consumption," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 69-94.
    2. Roee Teper, 2016. "Plans of Action," Working Paper 5859, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    3. Higashi, Youichiro & Hyogo, Kazuya & Takeoka, Norio, 2025. "Costly subjective learning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    4. Dillenberger, David & Lleras, Juan Sebastián & Sadowski, Philipp & Takeoka, Norio, 2014. "A theory of subjective learning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 287-312.
    5. Youichiro Higashi & Kazuya Hyogo & Gil Riella, 2024. "Dynamically consistent menu preferences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 78(4), pages 1047-1074, December.
    6. Mihm, Maximilian & Ozbek, Kemal, 2019. "On the identification of changing tastes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 203-216.
    7. André Lapied & Thomas Rongiconi, 2013. "Ambiguity as a Source of Temptation: Modeling Unstable Beliefs," Working Papers halshs-00797631, HAL.
    8. Youichiro Higashi & Kazuya Hyogo & Norio Takeoka, 2020. "Costly Subjective Learning," KIER Working Papers 1040, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    9. Krishna, R. Vijay & Sadowski, Philipp, 2021. "Randomly evolving tastes and delayed commitment," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 81-94.
    10. Youichiro Higashi & Kazuya Hyogo & Gil Riella, 2020. "Dynamically Consistent Menu Preferences," KIER Working Papers 1047, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    11. Youichiro Higashi & Kazuya Hyogo & Norio Takeoka & Hiroyuki Tanaka, 2017. "Comparative impatience under random discounting," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 63(3), pages 621-651, March.
    12. Cooke, Kevin, 2017. "Preference discovery and experimentation," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(3), September.
    13. Higashi, Youichiro & Hyogo, Kazuya & Takeoka, Norio, 2009. "Subjective random discounting and intertemporal choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(3), pages 1015-1053, May.
    14. Mira Frick & Ryota Iijima & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2019. "Dynamic Random Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(6), pages 1941-2002, November.
    15. Riella, Gil, 2013. "Preference for Flexibility and Dynamic Consistency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(6), pages 2467-2482.
    16. Pejsachowicz, Leonardo & Toussaert, Séverine, 2017. "Choice deferral, indecisiveness and preference for flexibility," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 417-425.
    17. Leonardo Pejsachowicz & Séverine Toussaert, 2017. "Choice deferral, indecisiveness and preference for flexibility," Post-Print hal-02862199, HAL.
    18. Lin, Yi-Hsuan, 2022. "Stochastic choice and rational inattention," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    19. Daniele Pennesi, 2020. "Identity and information acquisition," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 610, Collegio Carlo Alberto, revised 2021.
    20. Daniele Pennesi, 2021. "Between Commitment and Flexibility: Revealing Anticipated Regret and Elation," Working papers 071, Department of Economics, Social Studies, Applied Mathematics and Statistics (Dipartimento di Scienze Economico-Sociali e Matematico-Statistiche), University of Torino.

    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:pit:wpaper:5860. 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: Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/depghus.html .

    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.