IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/theord/v86y2019i3d10.1007_s11238-018-09685-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What are axiomatizations good for?

Author

Listed:
  • Itzhak Gilboa

    (HEC, Paris
    Tel-Aviv University)

  • Andrew Postlewaite

    (University of Pennsylvania)

  • Larry Samuelson

    (Yale University)

  • David Schmeidler

    (Tel-Aviv University)

Abstract

Do axiomatic derivations advance positive economics? If economists are interested in predicting how people behave, without a pretense to change individual decision making, how can they benefit from representation theorems, which are no more than equivalence results? We address these questions. We propose several ways in which representation results can be useful and discuss their implications for axiomatic decision theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2019. "What are axiomatizations good for?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 339-359, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:86:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s11238-018-09685-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11238-018-09685-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11238-018-09685-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11238-018-09685-1?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mikaël Cozic & Brian Hill, 2015. "Representation theorems and the semantics of decision-theoretic concepts," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 292-311, September.
    2. Eddie Dekel & Barton L. Lipman, 2010. "How (Not) to Do Decision Theory," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 257-282, September.
    3. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2018. "Economics: Between Prediction And Criticism," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(2), pages 367-390, May.
    4. Yaari, Menahem E, 1987. "The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 95-115, January.
    5. Ivan Moscati, 2016. "Retrospectives: How Economists Came to Accept Expected Utility Theory: The Case of Samuelson and Savage," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 219-236, Spring.
    6. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. I. Gilboa & A. Postlewaite & L. Samuelson & D. Schmeidler, 2015. "Economic models as analogies," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 4.
    8. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    9. Karni, Edi, 1996. "Probabilities and Beliefs," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 249-262, November.
    10. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    11. Gilboa,Itzhak, 2009. "Theory of Decision under Uncertainty," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521741231.
    12. Grether, David M & Plott, Charles R, 1979. "Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(4), pages 623-638, September.
    13. Handa, Jagdish, 1977. "Risk, Probabilities, and a New Theory of Cardinal Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(1), pages 97-122, February.
    14. Sen, Amartya, 1993. "Internal Consistency of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 495-521, May.
    15. Gilboa,Itzhak & Schmeidler,David, 2001. "A Theory of Case-Based Decisions," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521802345, September.
    16. Mikaël Cozic & Brian Hill, 2015. "Representation theorems and the semantics of decision-theoretic concepts," Post-Print hal-01955975, HAL.
    17. Gilboa, Itzhak & Postlewaite, Andrew & Schmeidler, David, 2009. "Is It Always Rational To Satisfy Savage'S Axioms?," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(3), pages 285-296, November.
    18. Jaffray, Jean-Yves, 1975. "Existence of a Continuous Utility Function: An Elementary Proof," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 43(5-6), pages 981-983, Sept.-Nov.
    19. Fishburn, Peter C, 1978. "On Handa's "New Theory of Cardinal Utility" and the Maximization of Expected Return," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 86(2), pages 321-324, April.
    20. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    21. Ramsey, Frank P., 1926. "Truth and Probability," Histoy of Economic Thought Chapters, in: Braithwaite, R. B. (ed.),The Foundations of Mathematics and other Logical Essays, chapter 7, pages 156-198, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.
    22. Daniel Ellsberg, 1961. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 75(4), pages 643-669.
    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. Evan Sadler, 2021. "A Practical Guide to Updating Beliefs From Contradictory Evidence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 415-436, January.
    2. Gilles Boevi Koumou & Georges Dionne, 2022. "Coherent Diversification Measures in Portfolio Theory: An Axiomatic Foundation," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, October.
    3. Denis Bouyssou & Thierry Marchant & Marc Pirlot, 2023. "A theoretical look at Electre Tri-nB and related sorting models," 4OR, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 1-31, March.
    4. Moscati, Ivan, 2021. "On the recent philosophy of decision theory," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115039, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Lorenzo Bastianello & Jos'e Heleno Faro, 2019. "Time discounting under uncertainty," Papers 1911.00370, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2020.
    6. 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.
    7. Jan Dhaene & Rodrigue Kazzi & Emiliano A. Valdez, 2024. "Axiomatic characterizations of some simple risk-sharing rules," Papers 2411.06240, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2024.
    8. Denis Bouyssou & Thierry Marchant & Marc Pirlot, 2020. "A theoretical look at ELECTRE TRI-nB," Working Papers hal-02898131, HAL.
    9. Ganesh Karapakula, 2022. "An Axiomatic Framework for Cost-Benefit Analysis," Papers 2207.13033, arXiv.org.
    10. Ruodu Wang & Ričardas Zitikis, 2021. "An Axiomatic Foundation for the Expected Shortfall," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1413-1429, March.
    11. Aldo Montesano, 2022. "On the economic foundations of decision theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 563-583, October.
    12. Denis Bouyssou & Thierry Marchant & Marc Pirlot, 2020. "A theoretical look at ELECTRE TRI-nB," Working Papers hal-02917994, HAL.
    13. Zhanyi Jiao & Steven Kou & Yang Liu & Ruodu Wang, 2022. "An axiomatic theory for anonymized risk sharing," Papers 2208.07533, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.

    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. Trabelsi, Mohamed Ali, 2006. "Les nouveaux modèles de décision dans le risque et l’incertain : quel apport ? [The new models of decision under risk or uncertainty : What approach?]," MPRA Paper 25442, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Trabelsi, Mohamed Ali, 2006. "Les nouveaux modèles de décision dans le risque et l’incertain : quel apport ? [The new models of decision under risk or uncertainty : What approach?]," MPRA Paper 25442, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Laurent Denant-Boemont & Olivier L’Haridon, 2013. "La rationalité à l'épreuve de l'économie comportementale," Revue française d'économie, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 0(2), pages 35-89.
    4. Bernard, Carole & Ghossoub, Mario, 2009. "Static Portfolio Choice under Cumulative Prospect Theory," MPRA Paper 15446, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Elisabeth Jardin, 1996. "Problèmes d'assurance et utilité décumulative," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 47(4), pages 921-935.
    6. Basili, Marcello & Zappia, Carlo, 2009. "Keynes's "non-numerical" probabilities and non-additive measures," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 419-430, June.
    7. Karni, Edi & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo, 2015. "Ambiguity and Nonexpected Utility," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    8. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Horst Zank, 2023. "Source and rank-dependent utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(4), pages 949-981, May.
    9. Aurélien Baillon & Zhenxing Huang & Asli Selim & Peter P. Wakker, 2018. "Measuring Ambiguity Attitudes for All (Natural) Events," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(5), pages 1839-1858, September.
    10. Leitner, Johannes, 2005. "Dilatation monotonous Choquet integrals," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 994-1006, December.
    11. Sebastian Schweighofer-Kodritsch, 2024. "Bounded Rationality, Beliefs, and Behavior," Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers 0037, Berlin School of Economics.
    12. Wakker, Peter P. & Zank, Horst, 2002. "A simple preference foundation of cumulative prospect theory with power utility," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1253-1271, July.
    13. Thomas Astebro & Frank Fossen & Cédric Gutierrez, 2024. "Entrepreneurs: Clueless, Biased, Poor Heuristics, or Bayesian Machines?," Working Papers hal-04759301, HAL.
    14. 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.
    15. Dorian Jullien & Alexandre Truc, 2024. "Towards a History of Behavioral and Experimental Economics in France," GREDEG Working Papers 2024-23, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    16. Barnett, William A. & Han, Qing & Zhang, Jianbo, 2021. "Monetary services aggregation under uncertainty: A behavioral economics extension using Choquet expectation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 437-447.
    17. Marcello Basili & Carlo Zappia, 2010. "Ambiguity and uncertainty in Ellsberg and Shackle," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(3), pages 449-474.
    18. Belles-Sampera, Jaume & Merigó, José M. & Guillén, Montserrat & Santolino, Miguel, 2013. "The connection between distortion risk measures and ordered weighted averaging operators," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 411-420.
    19. Levy, Haim & Levy, Moshe, 2002. "Experimental test of the prospect theory value function: A stochastic dominance approach," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 1058-1081, November.
    20. Marc Willinger, 1990. "La rénovation des fondements de l'utilité et du risque," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 41(1), pages 5-48.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Axioms; Axiomatization; Representation theorem; Decision theory;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B40 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - General
    • D00 - Microeconomics - - General - - - General

    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:kap:theord:v:86:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s11238-018-09685-1. 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.