IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joecth/v15y2000i3p727-733.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rationalizability and the savage axioms

Author

Listed:
  • Kin Chung Lo

    (Department of Economics, York University, Toronto, Ontario, CANADA M3J 1P3)

Abstract

Suppose there is a finite set of acts defined on a finite state space and a decision maker chooses an act from the set. In this setting, the subjective expected utility model is observationally indistinguishable from all models of preference that satisfy Savage's axiom P3. The result has implications also for rationalizability in strategic games.

Suggested Citation

  • Kin Chung Lo, 2000. "Rationalizability and the savage axioms," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 15(3), pages 727-733.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:15:y:2000:i:3:p:727-733
    Note: Received: September 18, 1998; revised version: January 29, 1999
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00199/papers/0015003/00150727.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jeremy Bulow & Paul Klemperer, 1998. "The Tobacco Deal," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 29(1998 Micr), pages 323-394.
    2. Yi-Chun Chen & Xiao Luo, 2012. "An indistinguishability result on rationalizability under general preferences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 51(1), pages 1-12, September.
    3. Zambrano, Eduardo, 2005. "Testable implications of subjective expected utility theory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 262-268, November.
    4. Stephen Morris & Satoru Takahashi, 2012. "Games in Preference Form and Preference Rationalizability," Working Papers 1420, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Econometric Research Program..
    5. Epstein, Larry G., 2000. "Are Probabilities Used in Markets ?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 86-90, March.
    6. Kuzmics, Christoph, 2014. "Inferring preferences from choices under uncertainty," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 462, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    7. Christoph Kuzmics & Brian W. Rogers & Xiannong Zhang, 2022. "An Ellsberg paradox for ambiguity aversion," Graz Economics Papers 2022-05, University of Graz, Department of Economics.
    8. Bulat Gafarov & Bruno Salcedo, 2015. "Ordinal dominance and risk aversion," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 287-298, October.
    9. Wang, Tao & Deng, Xiaoyang & Sheng, Shibin & Jia, Yu, 2024. "Mitigating the damage of a global pandemic on the international buyer-supplier relationship: Evidence from Chinese suppliers," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Revealed preference; Rationalizability; Expected utility; Ellsberg Paradox.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:spr:joecth:v:15:y:2000:i:3:p:727-733. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.