IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpga/0505005.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A new approach to solve old problems

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Harin

    (Modern Humanitarian Academy)

Abstract

Arrangements (agreements, contracts, regulations, bargains, etc.) are widespread economic events and are the fundamental concept of the economic theory. Infringements (breaches, modifications, deviations, changes, etc.) of arrangements are common and have a significant importance for the economic theory. For many years now the arrangement infringements have lacked appropriate attention in the economic theory. This fact caused a number of theoretical and practical problems. In order to solve them a new approach is proposed, which considers the possibility of arrangement infringements. This article gives a simple example and a new result of the approach application.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Harin, 2005. "A new approach to solve old problems," Game Theory and Information 0505005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpga:0505005
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/game/papers/0505/0505005.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Veronika K–bberling & Peter P. Wakker, 2004. "A Simple Tool for Qualitatively Testing, Quantitatively Measuring, and Normatively Justifying Savage's Subjective Expected Utility," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 135-145, March.
    2. Tversky, Amos & Wakker, Peter, 1995. "Risk Attitudes and Decision Weights," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(6), pages 1255-1280, November.
    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. Harin, Alexander, 2010. "Теорема О Существовании Разрывов В Шкале Вероятностей. Ii [Theorem of existence of ruptures in the probability scale. II]," MPRA Paper 22633, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Alexander Harin, 2013. "Data dispersion near the boundaries: can it partially explain the problems of decision and utility theories?," Working Papers hal-00851022, HAL.
    3. Harin, Alexander, 2009. "Разрывы В Шкале Вероятностей. Расчет Величин Разрывов [Ruptures in the probability scale. Calculation of ruptures’ values]," MPRA Paper 16663, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Alexander Harin, 2006. "Principle of Uncertain Future," Microeconomics harin_alexander.34115-061, Socionet.
    5. Alexander Harin, 2005. "A Rational Irrational Man," Public Economics 0511005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Harin, Alexander, 2010. "Теорема О Существовании Разрывов В Шкале Вероятностей. Дискретный Случай [Theorem of existence of ruptures in probability scale. Discrete case]," MPRA Paper 23902, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Alexander Harin, 2005. "Gains and losses. The same or different choices?," International Finance 0508004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Alexander Harin, 2006. "A Rational Irrational Man?," Microeconomics harin_alexander.34115-060, Socionet.
    9. Alexander Harin, 2005. "Gains and losses: the same or different choices? A “non-ideal” economics approach," International Finance 0509002, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. L'Haridon, Olivier, 2009. "Behavior in the loss domain: An experiment using the probability trade-off consistency condition," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 540-551, August.
    2. Chateauneuf, Alain & Eichberger, Jurgen & Grant, Simon, 2007. "Choice under uncertainty with the best and worst in mind: Neo-additive capacities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 538-567, November.
    3. Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February.
    4. Houba, Harold & Tieman, Alexander F. & Brinksma, Rene, 1998. "The Nash bargaining solution for decision weight utility functions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 41-48, July.
    5. Foster, Gigi & Frijters, Paul & Schaffner, Markus & Torgler, Benno, 2018. "Expectation formation in an evolving game of uncertainty: New experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 379-405.
    6. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Peter Klibanoff & Lætitia Placido, 2015. "Experiments on Compound Risk in Relation to Simple Risk and to Ambiguity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1306-1322, June.
    7. Junyi Chai & Zhiquan Weng & Wenbin Liu, 2021. "Behavioral Decision Making in Normative and Descriptive Views: A Critical Review of Literature," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-14, October.
    8. Harin, Alexander, 2015. "An existence theorem for bounds on the expectation of a random variable. Its opportunities for utility theories. V. 2," MPRA Paper 67071, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Syngjoo Choi & Jeongbin Kim & Eungik Lee & Jungmin Lee, 2022. "Probability Weighting and Cognitive Ability," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 5201-5215, July.
    10. Kocher, Martin G. & Krawczyk, Michal & van Winden, Frans, 2014. "‘Let me dream on!’ Anticipatory emotions and preference for timing in lotteries," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 29-40.
    11. Enrico Diecidue & Peter Wakker & Marcel Zeelenberg, 2007. "Eliciting decision weights by adapting de Finetti’s betting-odds method to prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 179-199, June.
    12. Alexander Zimper, 2011. "Re-examining the law of iterated expectations for Choquet decision makers," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 669-677, October.
    13. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Horst Zank, 2023. "Source and rank-dependent utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(4), pages 949-981, May.
    14. Jacquemet, Nicolas & Rullière, Jean-Louis & Vialle, Isabelle, 2008. "Monitoring optimistic agents," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 698-714, November.
    15. Marcello Basili, 2006. "A Rational Decision Rule with Extreme Events," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(6), pages 1721-1728, December.
    16. Alarie, Yves, 2000. "L’importance de la procédure dans les choix de loteries," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 76(3), pages 321-340, septembre.
    17. Birnbaum, Michael H. & Chavez, Alfredo, 1997. "Tests of Theories of Decision Making: Violations of Branch Independence and Distribution Independence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 161-194, August.
    18. Bargiacchi, R., 2006. "Modelling and testing behavior in applications to climate change," Other publications TiSEM 81ad891a-d58b-4eb6-af6a-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Epper, Thomas & Fehr-Duda, Helga, 2017. "A Tale of Two Tails: On the Coexistence of Overweighting and Underweighting of Rare Extreme Events," Economics Working Paper Series 1705, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    20. Julius Pahlke & Sebastian Strasser & Ferdinand Vieider, 2015. "Responsibility effects in decision making under risk," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 125-146, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    risk investment insurance;

    JEL classification:

    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods
    • D - Microeconomics
    • E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics

    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:wpa:wuwpga:0505005. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.