This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Does Repetition Improve Consistency?

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
John Hey

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Much experimental effort has been expended in attempts to establish the relative superiority of Expected Utility theory and the many recently-developed alternatives as descriptions of the behaviour of subjects in risky choice decision problems. The cumulative evidence shows clearly that there is a great deal of noise in the experimental data, which makes it difficult to identify the ‘best’ description of such behaviour. This paper reports on an experiment which seeks to determine whether such noise is relatively transitory and decays with experience and repetition, and thus whether a clearly ‘best’ theory emerges as a result of such repetition. We find that for some subjects this does indeed appear to be the case, while for other subjects the noise remains high and the identification of the underlying preference function remains difficult. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1011486405114
File Format: text/html
File Function:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Publisher Info
Article provided by Springer in its journal Experimental Economics.

Volume (Year): 4 (2001)
Issue (Month): 1 (June)
Pages: 5-54
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:kap:expeco:v:4:y:2001:i:1:p:5-54

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=102888

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords: expected utility; non-expected utility; decision under risk; repetition; errors;

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
  1. Carbone, Enrica, 1997. "Investigation of stochastic preference theory using experimental data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 305-311, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Karni, Edi & Safra, Zvi, 1987. ""Preference Reversal' and the Observability of Preferences by Experimental Methods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(3), pages 675-85, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Hey, John D & Orme, Chris, 1994. "Investigating Generalizations of Expected Utility Theory Using Experimental Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1291-1326, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Machina, Mark J, 1982. ""Expected Utility" Analysis without the Independence Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 277-323, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Holt, Charles A, 1986. "Preference Reversals and the Independence Axiom," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(3), pages 508-15, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Harless, David W & Camerer, Colin F, 1994. "The Predictive Utility of Generalized Expected Utility Theories," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1251-89, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Robin Cubitt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 1998. "On the Validity of the Random Lottery Incentive System," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 115-131, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)

  1. Jacob K. Goeree & Charles A. Holt & Thomas R. Palfrey, 2000. "Quantal Response Equilibrium and Overbidding in Private-Value Auctions," Virginia Economics Online Papers 345, University of Virginia, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  2. John Hey, 2005. "Why We Should Not Be Silent About Noise," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 325-345, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Andrea Morone, 2008. "Comparison of Mean-Variance Theory and Expected-Utility Theory through a Laboratory Experiment," Economics Bulletin, Economics Bulletin, vol. 3(40), pages 1-7. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  4. Peter Moffatt, 2005. "Stochastic Choice and the Allocation of Cognitive Effort," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 369-388, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Anna Conte & John D Hey & Peter G Moffatt, 2007. "Mixture Models of Choice Under Risk," Discussion Papers 07/06, Department of Economics, University of York. [Downloadable!]
  6. Fiore, Annamaria, 2009. "Experimental Economics: Some Methodological Notes," MPRA Paper 12498, University Library of Munich, Germany. [Downloadable!]
  7. Robin P. Cubitt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2001. "Discovered preferences and the experimental evidence of violations of expected utility theory," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 385-414, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Maxim Pinkovskiy, 2009. "Rational Inattention and Choice Under Risk: Explaining Violations of Expected Utility Through a Shannon Entropy Formulation of the Costs of Rationality," Atlantic Economic Journal, International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 37(1), pages 99-112, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Wilcox, Nathaniel, 2007. "Stochastically more risk averse: A contextual theory of stochastic discrete choice under risk," MPRA Paper 11851, University Library of Munich, Germany. [Downloadable!]
  10. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2007. "Stochastic expected utility theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 259-286, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You too can volunteer for RePEc, for example by encouraging others to use our services.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-7.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.