IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpga/9509002.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Reconciling Some Conflicting Evidence on Decision Making under Uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Edward J. Green

    (Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis)

Abstract

Laboratory experiments concerning decision under uncertainty tend to uncover systematic violations of Bayesian rationality. When models that posit Bayesian rationality are compared to non-experimental data, though, they fit the data well. One possible explanation is that an agent's global pattern of choices may not be rationalizable, but that the pattern may satisfy weak conditions sufficent to rationalize the limited range of choices required by any particular decision protocol. Examples of such patterns are constructed here. An agent who adopts a protocol acts rationally, but an experimenter induces irrationality by imposing distinct protocols in various phases of the experiment.

Suggested Citation

  • Edward J. Green, 1995. "Reconciling Some Conflicting Evidence on Decision Making under Uncertainty," Game Theory and Information 9509002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpga:9509002
    Note: 10 pages, plain TeX
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/game/papers/9509/9509002.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/game/papers/9509/9509002.ps.gz
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Green, Edward J. & Park, In-Uck, 1996. "Bayes contingent plans," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 225-236, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Banerjee, Priyodorshi & Das, Tanmoy, 2015. "Are Contingent Choices Consistent?," MPRA Paper 66995, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Eran Shmaya & Leeat Yariv, 2016. "Experiments on Decisions under Uncertainty: A Theoretical Framework," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(7), pages 1775-1801, July.
    3. Zambrano, Eduardo, 2005. "Testable implications of subjective expected utility theory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 262-268, November.
    4. Markus Pasche, 1998. "An Approach to Robust Decision Making: The Rationality of Heuristic Behavior," Working Paper Series B 1998-10, Friedrich Schiller University of Jena, School of of Economics and Business Administration.
    5. Edward SchleeE, 1997. "The sure thing principle and the value of information," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 21-36, January.
    6. Gilboa, Itzhak & Wang, Fan, 2019. "Rational status quo," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 289-308.
    7. Edward J. Green & In-Uck Park, 1995. "Three contributions to the theory of decision under uncertainty," Working Papers 558, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty

    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:9509002. 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.