...
首页> 外文期刊>Theory and Decision >Betting on Machina's reflection example: an experiment on ambiguity
【24h】

Betting on Machina's reflection example: an experiment on ambiguity

机译:赌Machina的反思例子:歧义实验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In a recent article, Machina (Am Econ Rev forthcoming, 2008) suggested choice problems in the spirit of Ellsberg (Q J Econ 75:643-669, 1961), which challenge tail-separability, an implication of Choquet expected utility (CELT), to a similar extent as the Ellsberg paradox challenged the sure-thing principle implied by subjective expected utility (SEU). We have tested choice behavior for bets on one of Machina's choice problems, the reflection example. Our results indicate that tail-separability is violated by a large majority of subjects (over 70% of the sample). These empirical findings complement the theoretical analysis of Machina (Am Econ Rev forthcoming, 2008) and, together, they confirm the need for new approaches in the analysis of ambiguity for decision making.
机译:在最近的一篇文章中,Machina(Am Econ即将发行,2008年)本着Ellsberg的精神提出了选择问题(QJ Econ 75:643-669,1961),该问题挑战了尾部可分离性,这是Choquet期望效用(CELT)的含义,程度与Ellsberg悖论对主观预期效用(SEU)所暗示的确定性原则提出了挑战。我们对Machina的一个选择问题(反射示例)下注的选择行为进行了测试。我们的结果表明,大多数受试者(超过样本的70%)违反了尾部可分离性。这些经验性发现补充了Machina的理论分析(Am Econ即将出版,2008年),并且一起证实了在决策模糊性分析中需要新方法的必要性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号