Considering the Pasadena "Paradox"
Nover and Hájek (2004) suggested a variant of the St Petersburg game which they dubbed the Pasadena game. They hold that their game ‘is more paradoxical than the St Petersburg game in several aspects’. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate theoretically and to validate by simulation, that their game does not lead to a paradox at all, let alone in the St Petersburg game sense. Their game does not produce inconsistencies in decision theory.
|Date of creation:||Jun 2006|
|Date of revision:||Jun 2006|
|Publication status:||Published in South African Journal of Economic & Management Sciences NS9.2(2006): pp. 277-284|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany|
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Vivian, Robert William, 2003. "Solving Daniel Bernoulli's St Petersburg Paradox: The Paradox which is not and never was," MPRA Paper 5233, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2003.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:5232. 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: (Joachim Winter)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.