IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ecm/emetrp/v71y2003i6p1897-1908.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Subjective Spin on Roulette Wheels

Author

Listed:
  • Paolo Ghirardato
  • Fabio Maccheroni
  • Massimo Marinacci
  • Marciano Siniscalchi

Abstract

We provide a simple behavioral definition of 'subjective mixture' of acts for a large class of (not necessarily expected-utility) preferences. Subjective mixtures enjoy the same algebraic properties as the 'objective mixtures' used to great advantage in the decision setting introduced by Anscombe and Aumann (1963). This makes it possible to formulate mixture-space axioms in a fully subjective setting. For illustration, we present simple subjective axiomatizations of some models of choice under uncertainty, including Bewley's model of choice with incomplete preferences (2002). Copyright The Econometric Society 2003.

Suggested Citation

  • Paolo Ghirardato & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Marciano Siniscalchi, 2003. "A Subjective Spin on Roulette Wheels," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1897-1908, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecm:emetrp:v:71:y:2003:i:6:p:1897-1908
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Peter Klibanoff & Emre Ozdenoren, 1998. "Maximum Expected Utility over Savage Acts with a Set of Priors," Discussion Papers 1218, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    2. Casadesus-Masanell, Ramon & Klibanoff, Peter & Ozdenoren, Emre, 2000. "Maxmin Expected Utility over Savage Acts with a Set of Priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 35-65, May.
    3. Casadesus-Masanell, Ramon & Klibanoff, Peter & Ozdenoren, Emre, 2000. "Maxmin expected utility through statewise combinations," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 49-54, January.
    4. Truman F. Bewley, 1986. "Knightian Decision Theory: Part 1," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 807, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    5. Hong Chew Soo & Karni Edi, 1994. "Choquet Expected Utility with a Finite State Space: Commutativity and Act-Independence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 469-479, April.
    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. Veronika Köbberling & Peter P. Wakker, 2003. "Preference Foundations for Nonexpected Utility: A Generalized and Simplified Technique," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 395-423, August.
    2. Casadesus-Masanell, Ramon & Klibanoff, Peter & Ozdenoren, Emre, 2000. "Maxmin expected utility through statewise combinations," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 49-54, January.
    3. Alain Chateauneuf & Luciano De Castro, 2011. "Ambiguity Aversion and Absence of Trade," Discussion Papers 1535, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    4. Xiangyu Qu, 2015. "Purely subjective extended Bayesian models with Knightian unambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 547-571, December.
    5. Luciano Castro & Alain Chateauneuf, 2011. "Ambiguity aversion and trade," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(2), pages 243-273, October.
    6. Paolo Ghirardato & Massimo Marinacci, 2001. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Separation of Utility and Beliefs," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 864-890, November.
    7. Ozdenoren, Emre, 2002. "Completing the State Space with Subjective States," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 531-539, August.
    8. Dean, Mark & Ortoleva, Pietro, 2017. "Allais, Ellsberg, and preferences for hedging," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(1), January.
    9. Gul, Faruk & Pesendorfer, Wolfgang, 2020. "Calibrated uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    10. Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February.
    11. Marciano Siniscalchi, 2009. "Vector Expected Utility and Attitudes Toward Variation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(3), pages 801-855, May.
    12. Dong, Xueqi, 2021. "Uncertainty Aversion and Convexity in Portfolio Choice," MPRA Paper 108264, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Eisei Ohtaki & Hiroyuki Ozaki, 2014. "Optimality in a Stochastic OLG Model with Ambiguity," Working Papers e069, Tokyo Center for Economic Research.
    14. Horie, Mayumi, 2013. "Reexamination on updating Choquet beliefs," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 467-470.
    15. Gilboa, Itzhak & Marianacci, Massimo, 2011. "Ambiguity and the Bayesian Paradigm," Foerder Institute for Economic Research Working Papers 275755, Tel-Aviv University > Foerder Institute for Economic Research.
    16. R. Luce & A. Marley, 2005. "Ranked Additive Utility Representations of Gambles: Old and New Axiomatizations," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 21-62, January.
    17. Klaus Nehring, 2006. "Decision-Making in the Context of Imprecise Probabilistic Beliefs," Economics Working Papers 0034, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science.
    18. Pivato, Marcus & Vergopoulos, Vassili, 2017. "Subjective expected utility representations for Savage preferences on topological spaces," MPRA Paper 77359, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. José Faro, 2013. "Cobb-Douglas preferences under uncertainty," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 54(2), pages 273-285, October.
    20. Takao Asano, 2010. "Portfolio Inertia and Epsilon-Contaminations," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 341-365, March.

    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:ecm:emetrp:v:71:y:2003:i:6:p:1897-1908. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/essssea.html .

    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.