IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v18y2001i2p289-301.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Characterizing uncertainty aversion through preference for mixtures

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Klibanoff

    (Department of Managerial Economics and Decision Sciences, J. L. Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Northwestern University, 2001 Sheridan Rd., Evanston, IL 60208, USA)

Abstract

Uncertainty aversion is often modelled as (strict) quasi-concavity of preferences over uncertain acts. A theory of uncertainty aversion may be characterized by the pairs of acts for which strict preference for a mixture between them is permitted. This paper provides such a characterization for two leading representations of uncertainty averse preferences; those of Schmeidler [24] (Choquet expected utility or CEU) and of Gilboa and Schmeidler [16] (maxmin expected utility with a non-unique prior or MMEU). This characterization clarifies the relation between the two theories.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Klibanoff, 2001. "Characterizing uncertainty aversion through preference for mixtures," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(2), pages 289-301.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:18:y:2001:i:2:p:289-301
    Note: Received: 20 February 1998/Accepted: 25 March 1999
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00355/papers/1018002/10180289.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. Jewitt, Ian & Mukerji, Sujoy, 2017. "Ordering ambiguous acts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 213-267.
    2. Marciano Siniscalchi, 2009. "Vector Expected Utility and Attitudes Toward Variation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(3), pages 801-855, May.
    3. Treich, Nicolas, 2010. "The value of a statistical life under ambiguity aversion," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 15-26, January.
    4. Thibault Gajdos & Feriel Kandil, 2008. "The ignorant observer," Post-Print halshs-00177374, HAL.
    5. Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2006. "A behavioral characterization of plausible priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 128(1), pages 91-135, May.
    6. Thibault Gajdos & Feriel Kandil, 2008. "The ignorant observer," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(2), pages 193-232, August.
    7. Catherine Hafer & Dimitri Landa, 2013. "Issue Advocacy and Mass Political Sophistication," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 169(1), pages 139-152, March.
    8. Soheil Ghili & Peter Klibanoff, 2021. "If It Is Surely Better, Do It More? Implications for Preferences Under Ambiguity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(12), pages 7619-7636, December.
    9. Klaus Nehring, 2006. "Decision-Making in the Context of Imprecise Probabilistic Beliefs," Economics Working Papers 0034, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science.
    10. Stoye, Jörg, 2015. "Choice theory when agents can randomize," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 131-151.
    11. Kellner, Christian & Le Quement, Mark T. & Riener, Gerhard, 2022. "Reacting to ambiguous messages: An experimental analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 360-378.
    12. LANGE Andreas & TREICH Nicolas, 2007. "Uncertainty, Learning and Ambiguity in Economic Models on Climate Policy: Some Classical Results and New Directions," LERNA Working Papers 07.16.237, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    13. Thibault Gajdos & Feriel Kandil, 2006. "The Ignorant Observer," Post-Print halshs-00115722, HAL.
    14. 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.

    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:spr:sochwe:v:18:y:2001:i:2:p:289-301. 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.