IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v53y2005i2p262-268.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testable implications of subjective expected utility theory

Author

Listed:
  • Zambrano, Eduardo

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Zambrano, Eduardo, 2005. "Testable implications of subjective expected utility theory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 262-268, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:53:y:2005:i:2:p:262-268
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899-8256(04)00156-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ledyard, John O., 1986. "The scope of the hypothesis of Bayesian equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 59-82, June.
    2. Border, Kim C., 1992. "Revealed preference, stochastic dominance, and the expected utility hypothesis," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 20-42, February.
    3. Epstein, Larry G., 2000. "Are Probabilities Used in Markets ?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 86-90, March.
    4. Borgers, Tilman, 1993. "Pure Strategy Dominance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(2), pages 423-430, March.
    5. Green, Edward J. & Park, In-Uck, 1996. "Bayes contingent plans," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 225-236, November.
    6. Nyarko, Yaw, 1997. "Convergence in Economic Models with Bayesian Hierarchies of Beliefs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 266-296, June.
    7. Kin Chung Lo, 2000. "Rationalizability and the savage axioms," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 15(3), pages 727-733.
    8. Pearce, David G, 1984. "Rationalizable Strategic Behavior and the Problem of Perfection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 1029-1050, July.
    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. Banerjee, Priyodorshi & Das, Tanmoy, 2015. "Are Contingent Choices Consistent?," MPRA Paper 66995, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Scott Condie & Jayant V. Ganguli, 2011. "Ambiguity and Rational Expectations Equilibria," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 78(3), pages 821-845.
    3. Kuzmics, Christoph, 2017. "Abraham Wald's complete class theorem and Knightian uncertainty," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 666-673.

    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. Bulat Gafarov & Bruno Salcedo, 2015. "Ordinal dominance and risk aversion," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 287-298, October.
    2. Xiao Luo & Yi-Chun Chen, 2004. "A Unified Approach to Information, Knowledge, and Stability," Econometric Society 2004 Far Eastern Meetings 472, Econometric Society.
    3. Pei, Ting & Takahashi, Satoru, 2019. "Rationalizable strategies in random games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 110-125.
    4. Manili, Julien, 2024. "Order independence for rationalizability," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 152-160.
    5. Battigalli, Pierpaolo, 1997. "On Rationalizability in Extensive Games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 40-61, May.
    6. Alexander Zimper, 2007. "A fixed point characterization of the dominance-solvability of lattice games with strategic substitutes," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 36(1), pages 107-117, September.
    7. Dekel, Eddie & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2015. "Epistemic Game Theory," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    8. Ghirardato, Paolo & Le Breton, Michel, 2000. "Choquet Rationality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 277-285, February.
    9. Yi-Chun Chen & Xiao Luo, 2012. "An indistinguishability result on rationalizability under general preferences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 51(1), pages 1-12, September.
    10. Shupp, Robert & Sheremeta, Roman M. & Schmidt, David & Walker, James, 2013. "Resource allocation contests: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 257-267.
    11. Zimper, Alexander, 2004. "Dominance-Solvable Lattice Games," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 04-18, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    12. Jonathan Weinstein & Muhamet Yildiz, 2004. "Finite-Order Implications of Any Equilibrium," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000000065, David K. Levine.
    13. Stephen Morris & Satoru Takahashi, 2012. "Games in Preference Form and Preference Rationalizability," Working Papers 1420, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Econometric Research Program..
    14. Michael Trost, 2013. "Epistemic characterizations of iterated deletion of inferior strategy profiles in preference-based type spaces," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(3), pages 755-776, August.
    15. Christian Bach & Jérémie Cabessa, 2012. "Common knowledge and limit knowledge," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 423-440, September.
    16. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2005:i:7:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Guarino, Pierfrancesco & Ziegler, Gabriel, 2022. "Optimism and pessimism in strategic interactions under ignorance," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 559-585.
    18. Trost, Michael, 2019. "On the equivalence between iterated application of choice rules and common belief of applying these rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 1-37.
    19. Zimper, Alexander, 2006. "Uniqueness conditions for strongly point-rationalizable solutions to games with metrizable strategy sets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 729-751, September.
    20. Stephen Morris & Satoru Takahashi, 2011. "Common Certainty of Rationality Revisited," Working Papers 1301, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Econometric Research Program..
    21. Chen, Yi-Chun & Long, Ngo Van & Luo, Xiao, 2007. "Iterated strict dominance in general games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 299-315, November.

    More about this item

    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:eee:gamebe:v:53:y:2005:i:2:p:262-268. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622836 .

    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.