IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/mateco/v101y2022ics0304406822000489.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hybrid decision model and the ranking of experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Karni, Edi
  • Safra, Zvi

Abstract

Departing from the reduction of compound lotteries axiom on multi-stage lotteries, this paper proposes a new hybrid model to analyze decision trees. Applied to multi-stage decision trees induced by experiments, Blackwell’s (1953) definition of the relation “more informative” on the set of information structures is equivalent to experiments being more valuable to a class of non-expected utility preferences. This result extends Blackwell’s theorem and provides new insights regarding the evaluation of information produced by experiments.

Suggested Citation

  • Karni, Edi & Safra, Zvi, 2022. "Hybrid decision model and the ranking of experiments," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:mateco:v:101:y:2022:i:c:s0304406822000489
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jmateco.2022.102700
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304406822000489
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jmateco.2022.102700?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Karni, Edi & Safra, Zvi, 2000. "An extension of a theorem of von Neumann and Morgenstern with an application to social choice theory," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 315-327, November.
    2. Segal, Uzi, 1990. "Two-Stage Lotteries without the Reduction Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(2), pages 349-377, March.
    3. Tomala , Tristan & Gensbittel , Fabien, 2015. "Comparisons of Ambiguous Experiments," HEC Research Papers Series 1074, HEC Paris.
    4. Leshno, Moshe & Spector, Yishay, 1992. "An elementary proof of Blackwell's theorem," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 95-98, December.
    5. Simon Grant & Atsushi Kajii & Ben Polak & Zvi Safra, 2010. "Generalized Utilitarianism and Harsanyi's Impartial Observer Theorem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(6), pages 1939-1971, November.
    6. Schlee, Edward, 1990. "The Value of Information in Anticipated Utility Theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 83-92, March.
    7. Safra, Zvi & Sulganik, Eyal, 1995. "On the Nonexistence of Blackwell's Theorem-Type Results with General Preference Relations," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 187-201, May.
    8. Cremer, Jacques, 1982. "A simple proof of Blackwell's "comparison of experiments" theorem," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 439-443, August.
    9. Kyoungwon Seo, 2009. "Ambiguity and Second-Order Belief," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(5), pages 1575-1605, September.
    10. Sinong Ma & Zvi Safra, 2019. "Fairness and utilitarianism without independence," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 67(1), pages 29-52, February.
    11. Peter Klibanoff & Massimo Marinacci & Sujoy Mukerji, 2005. "A Smooth Model of Decision Making under Ambiguity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(6), pages 1849-1892, November.
    12. Karni, Edi & Schmeidler, David, 1991. "Atemporal dynamic consistency and expected utility theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 401-408, August.
    13. Yoram Halevy, 2007. "Ellsberg Revisited: An Experimental Study," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(2), pages 503-536, March.
    14. Li, Jian & Zhou, Junjie, 2016. "Blackwell's informativeness ranking with uncertainty-averse preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 18-29.
    15. Edi Karni & Zvi Safra, 1989. "Dynamic Consistency, Revelations in Auctions and the Structure of Preferences," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 56(3), pages 421-433.
    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. Khan, M. Ali & Yu, Haomiao & Zhang, Zhixiang, 2024. "On comparisons of information structures with infinite states," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    2. Mark Whitmeyer, 2023. "Blackwell-Monotone Updating Rules," Papers 2302.13956, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2024.

    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. Karni, Edi & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo, 2015. "Ambiguity and Nonexpected Utility," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    2. Evren, Özgür, 2019. "Recursive non-expected utility: Connecting ambiguity attitudes to risk preferences and the level of ambiguity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 285-307.
    3. Roxane Bricet, 2018. "The price for instrumentally valuable information," THEMA Working Papers 2018-10, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    4. Yoram Halevy & Emre Ozdenoren, 2022. "Uncertainty and compound lotteries: calibration," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(2), pages 373-395, September.
    5. Ilke Aydogan & Loïc Berger & Valentina Bosetti & Ning Liu, 2023. "Three Layers of Uncertainty," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 21(5), pages 2209-2236.
    6. Heydari, Pedram, 2024. "Regret, responsibility, and randomization: A theory of stochastic choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    7. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-04071242 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Ilke Aydogan & Lo?c Berger & Valentina Bosetti & Ning Liu, 2018. "Three Layers of Uncertainty: an Experiment," Working Papers 2018.24, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    9. repec:hal:journl:hal-03031751 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Hill, Brian, 2020. "Dynamic consistency and ambiguity: A reappraisal," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 289-310.
    11. Simon Grant & Atsushi Kajii & Ben Polak, 2000. "Preference for Information and Dynamic Consistency," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 263-286, May.
    12. Larry G Epstein & Yoram Halevy, 2019. "Ambiguous Correlation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(2), pages 668-693.
    13. Li, Jian & Zhou, Junjie, 2016. "Blackwell's informativeness ranking with uncertainty-averse preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 18-29.
    14. Polemarchakis, Herakles & Selden, Larry & Song, Xinxi, 2017. "The identification of attitudes towards ambiguity and risk from asset demand," CRETA Online Discussion Paper Series 28, Centre for Research in Economic Theory and its Applications CRETA.
    15. Dean, Mark & Ortoleva, Pietro, 2017. "Allais, Ellsberg, and preferences for hedging," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(1), January.
    16. Ilke Aydogan & Loïc Berger & Valentina Bosetti, 2023. "Unraveling Ambiguity Aversion," Post-Print hal-04370668, HAL.
    17. Wu, Keyu & Fehr, Ernst & Hofland, Sean & Schonger, Martin, 2024. "On the Psychological Foundations of Ambiguity and Compound Risk Aversion," IZA Discussion Papers 17032, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. He, Ying & Dyer, James S. & Butler, John C. & Jia, Jianmin, 2019. "An additive model of decision making under risk and ambiguity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 78-92.
    19. Yang, Chun-Lei & Yao, Lan, 2011. "Ellsberg Paradox and Second-order Preference Theories on Ambiguity: Some New Experimental Evidence," MPRA Paper 28531, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Han Bleichrodt & Jurgen Eichberger & Simon Grant & David Kelsey & Chen Li, 2018. "A Test of Dynamic Consistency and Consequentialism in the Presence of Ambiguity," Discussion Papers 1803, University of Exeter, Department of Economics.
    21. König-Kersting, Christian & Kops, Christopher & Trautmann, Stefan T., 2023. "A test of (weak) certainty independence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    22. Özgür Evren, 2017. "Cautious and Globally Ambiguity Averse," Working Papers w0236, New Economic School (NES).

    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:mateco:v:101:y:2022:i:c:s0304406822000489. 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/jmateco .

    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.