The impact of statistical learning on violations of the sure-thing principle
This paper experimentally tests whether violations of Savage's (1954) subjective expected utility theory decrease if the ambiguity of an uncertain decision situation is reduced through statistical learning. Because our data does not show such a decrease, existing models which formalize ambiguity within an Anscombe-Aumann (1963) framework--thereby reducing to expected utility theory in the absence of ambiguity--are violated. In contrast, axiomatic models of prospect theory can accommodate our experimental findings because they allow for violations of von Neumann and Morgenstern's (1947) independence axiom whenever uncertain decision situations transform into risky decision situations for which probabilities are known.
|Date of creation:||Oct 2013|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: PRETORIA, 0002|
Phone: (+2712) 420 2413
Fax: (+2712) 362-5207
Web page: http://www.up.ac.za/economics
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.:
- Alexander Zimper & Alexander Ludwig, 2009.
"On attitude polarization under Bayesian learning with non-additive beliefs,"
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,
Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 181-212, October.
- Alexander Zimper & Alexander Ludwig, 2008. "On attitude polarization under Bayesian learning with non-additive beliefs," Working Papers 104, Economic Research Southern Africa.
- Itzhak Gilboa & David Schmeidler, 1989.
"Maxmin Expected Utility with Non-Unique Prior,"
- Larry Epstein & Martin Schneider, 2006.
"Learning Under Ambiguity,"
RCER Working Papers
527, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
- Gijs Kuilen & Peter Wakker, 2006. "Learning in the Allais paradox," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 155-164, December.
- Viscusi, W. Kip, 1985. "A Bayesian perspective on biases in risk perception," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 17(1-2), pages 59-62.
- George Wu & Richard Gonzalez, 1999. "Nonlinear Decision Weights in Choice Under Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(1), pages 74-85, January.
- Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
- David Schmeidler, 1989.
"Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
7662, David K. Levine.
- Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-87, May.
- Ghirardato, Paolo & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo, 2004. "Differentiating ambiguity and ambiguity attitude," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 133-173, October.
- Mark Machina, 2004. "Almost-objective uncertainty," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 24(1), pages 1-54, 07.
- Alexander Zimper, 2011. "Do Bayesians learn their way out of ambiguity?," Working Papers 240, Economic Research Southern Africa.
- Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
- Itzhak Gilboa, 1987.
"Expected Utility with Purely Subjective Non-Additive Probabilities,"
- Gilboa, Itzhak, 1987. "Expected utility with purely subjective non-additive probabilities," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 65-88, February.
- Wakker,Peter P., 2010.
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521765015, November.
- repec:hal:journl:hal-00609214 is not listed on IDEAS
- Massimo Marinacci, 2002. "Learning from ambiguous urns," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 143-151, January.
- Viscusi, W Kip & O'Connor, Charles J, 1984. "Adaptive Responses to Chemical Labeling: Are Workers Bayesian Decision Makers?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 942-56, December.
- Starmer, Chris & Sugden, Robert, 1991. "Does the Random-Lottery Incentive System Elicit True Preferences? An Experimental Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 971-78, September.
- George Wu & Richard Gonzalez, 1996. "Curvature of the Probability Weighting Function," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(12), pages 1676-1690, December.
- Mohammed Abdellaoui & Aurelien Baillon & Laetitia Placido & Peter P. Wakker, 2011.
"The Rich Domain of Uncertainty: Source Functions and Their Experimental Implementation,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 695-723, April.
- Mohammed Abdellaoui & Laetitia Placido & Aurélien Baillon & P.P. Wakker, 2011. "The Rich Domain of Uncertainty: Source Functions and Their Experimental Implementation," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00609214, HAL.
- Wakker, Peter & Tversky, Amos, 1993. "An Axiomatization of Cumulative Prospect Theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 147-75, October.
- Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February.
- Wakker, Peter P, 2001. "Testing and Characterizing Properties of Nonadditive Measures through Violations of the Sure-Thing Principle," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(4), pages 1039-59, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pre:wpaper:201364. 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: (Rangan Gupta)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.