IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/theord/v61y2006i4p319-328.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Uncommon Priors Require Origin Disputes

Author

Listed:
  • Robin Hanson

Abstract

In standard belief models, priors are always common knowledge. This prevents such models from representing agents’ probabilistic beliefs about the origins of their priors. By embedding standard models in a larger standard model, however, pre-priors can describe such beliefs. When an agent’s prior and pre-prior are mutually consistent, he must believe that his prior would only have been different in situations where relevant event chances were different, but that variations in other agents’ priors are otherwise completely unrelated to which events are how likely. Due to this, Bayesians who agree enough about the origins of their priors must have the same priors. Copyright Springer 2006

Suggested Citation

  • Robin Hanson, 2006. "Uncommon Priors Require Origin Disputes," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 61(4), pages 319-328, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:61:y:2006:i:4:p:319-328
    DOI: 10.1007/s11238-006-9004-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11238-006-9004-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11238-006-9004-4?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. Morris, Stephen, 1995. "The Common Prior Assumption in Economic Theory," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 227-253, October.
    2. Robert J. Aumann, 1998. "Common Priors: A Reply to Gul," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 929-938, 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. Brad Taylor, 2015. "Strategic and expressive voting," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 159-170, June.

    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. Qin, Cheng-Zhong & Yang, Chun-Lei, 2009. "An Explicit Approach to Modeling Finite-Order Type Spaces and Applications," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt8hq7j89k, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    2. Alastair Smith & Allan C. Stam, 2006. "Divergent Beliefs in “Bargaining and the Nature of Warâ€," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(4), pages 614-618, August.
    3. Ellis, Andrew, 2018. "On dynamic consistency in ambiguous games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 241-249.
    4. Aviad Heifetz & Zvika Neeman, 2006. "On the Generic (Im)Possibility of Full Surplus Extraction in Mechanism Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 213-233, January.
    5. Zimper, Alexander, 2014. "On the impossibility of insider trade in rational expectations equilibria," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 109-118.
    6. Werner Güth & Loreto Erviti & Anthony Ziegelmeyer, 2011. "Asymmetric information without common priors: an indirect evolutionary analysis of quantity competition," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 843-852, December.
    7. Robin Cubitt & Robert Sugden, 2005. "Common reasoning in games: a resolution of the paradoxes of ‘common knowledge of rationality’," Discussion Papers 2005-17, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    8. Ian Ayres & Colin Rowat & Nasser Zakariya, 2004. "Optimal two stage committee voting rules," Game Theory and Information 0412006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Halpern, Joseph Y., 2002. "Characterizing the Common Prior Assumption," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 316-355, October.
    10. Cubitt, Robin P. & Sugden, Robert, 2014. "Common Reasoning In Games: A Lewisian Analysis Of Common Knowledge Of Rationality," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 285-329, November.
    11. Robin P. Cubitt & Robert Sugden, 2008. "Common reasoning in games," Discussion Papers 2008-01, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    12. Mark Fey & Kristopher W. Ramsay, 2006. "The Common Priors Assumption," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(4), pages 607-613, August.
    13. Felipe Zurita, 2001. "Speculation in Financial Markets: A Survey," Documentos de Trabajo 197, Instituto de Economia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile..
    14. Ian Ayres & Colin Rowat & Nasser Zakariya, 2004. "Optimal Two Stage Committee Voting Rules," Discussion Papers 04-23, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham, revised Mar 2007.
    15. Eric Van den Steen, 2011. "Overconfidence by Bayesian-Rational Agents," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 884-896, May.
    16. Klaus Nehring, 2003. "Common Priors For Like-Minded Agents," Economics Working Papers 0035, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science.
    17. Robin Cubitt & Robert Sugden, 2005. "Common reasoning in games: a resolution of the paradoxes of ‘common knowledge of rationality’," Discussion Papers 2005-17, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    18. Guarino, Pierfrancesco & Tsakas, Elias, 2021. "Common priors under endogenous uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    19. Corina Birghila & Tim J. Boonen & Mario Ghossoub, 2020. "Optimal Insurance under Maxmin Expected Utility," Papers 2010.07383, arXiv.org.
    20. Cubitt, Robin P. & Sugden, Robert, 2014. "Common Reasoning In Games: A Lewisian Analysis Of Common Knowledge Of Rationality," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 285-329, November.

    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:kap:theord:v:61:y:2006:i:4:p:319-328. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.