IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/f/pla988.html
   My authors  Follow this author

Thomas Lanzi

Personal Details

First Name:Thomas
Middle Name:
Last Name:Lanzi
Suffix:
RePEc Short-ID:pla988
[This author has chosen not to make the email address public]

Affiliation

Bureau d'Économie Théorique et Appliquée (BETA)

Nancy/Strasbourg, France
https://www.beta-economics.fr/
RePEc:edi:bestrfr (more details at EDIRC)

Research output

as
Jump to: Working papers Articles

Working papers

  1. Franck Bien & Thomas Lanzi & Jérôme Mathis, 2019. "Théorie des jeux et des contrats," Post-Print hal-02313926, HAL.
  2. Claude Fluet & Thomas Lanzi, 2018. "Adversarial Persuasion with Cross-Examination," Cahiers de recherche 1811, Centre de recherche sur les risques, les enjeux économiques, et les politiques publiques.
  3. Franck Bien & Thomas Lanzi, 2017. "Contracting for information: on the effects of the principal's outside option," Working Papers hal-01491912, HAL.
  4. T. Lanzi & J. Mathis, 2005. "Consulting an expert with potentially conflicting preferences," THEMA Working Papers 2005-07, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
  5. T. Lanzi & J. Mathis, 2004. "Argumentation in Sender-Receiver Games," THEMA Working Papers 2004-19, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.

Articles

  1. Franck Bien & Thomas Lanzi, 2018. "L’impact du regret et de la réjouissance sur l’allocation d’actifs risqués," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 128(4), pages 613-639.
  2. Thomas Lanzi & Jerome Mathis, 2011. "How to consult an expert? Opinion versus evidence," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 447-474, April.
  3. Thomas Lanzi & Jerome Mathis, 2008. "Consulting an Expert with Potentially Conflicting Preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 65(3), pages 185-204, November.
  4. Tania Bouglet & Thomas Lanzi & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2006. "Incertitude scientifique et décision publique : le recours au Principe de pré-caution," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 72(2), pages 109-127.

Citations

Many of the citations below have been collected in an experimental project, CitEc, where a more detailed citation analysis can be found. These are citations from works listed in RePEc that could be analyzed mechanically. So far, only a minority of all works could be analyzed. See under "Corrections" how you can help improve the citation analysis.

Working papers

  1. Claude Fluet & Thomas Lanzi, 2018. "Adversarial Persuasion with Cross-Examination," Cahiers de recherche 1811, Centre de recherche sur les risques, les enjeux économiques, et les politiques publiques.

    Cited by:

    1. Jesse Bull & Joel Watson, 2018. "Statistical Evidence and the Problem of Robust Litigation," Working Papers 1801, Florida International University, Department of Economics.

  2. T. Lanzi & J. Mathis, 2005. "Consulting an expert with potentially conflicting preferences," THEMA Working Papers 2005-07, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.

    Cited by:

    1. Miura, Shintaro, 2014. "A characterization of equilibrium set of persuasion games with binary actions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 55-68.
    2. Mathis, Jérôme, 2008. "Full revelation of information in Sender-Receiver games of persuasion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 571-584, November.
    3. Thomas Lanzi & Jerome Mathis, 2011. "How to consult an expert? Opinion versus evidence," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 447-474, April.
    4. Osimani, Barbara, 2012. "Risk information processing and rational ignoring in the health context," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 169-179.

  3. T. Lanzi & J. Mathis, 2004. "Argumentation in Sender-Receiver Games," THEMA Working Papers 2004-19, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.

    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Lanzi & Jerome Mathis, 2011. "How to consult an expert? Opinion versus evidence," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 447-474, April.

Articles

  1. Thomas Lanzi & Jerome Mathis, 2008. "Consulting an Expert with Potentially Conflicting Preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 65(3), pages 185-204, November.
    See citations under working paper version above.
  2. Tania Bouglet & Thomas Lanzi & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2006. "Incertitude scientifique et décision publique : le recours au Principe de pré-caution," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 72(2), pages 109-127.

    Cited by:

    1. Meglena Jeleva & Stéphane Rossignol, 2019. "Optimists, Pessimists, and the Precautionary Principle," Post-Print hal-04256724, HAL.

More information

Research fields, statistics, top rankings, if available.

Statistics

Access and download statistics for all items

Co-authorship network on CollEc

NEP Fields

NEP is an announcement service for new working papers, with a weekly report in each of many fields. This author has had 3 papers announced in NEP. These are the fields, ordered by number of announcements, along with their dates. If the author is listed in the directory of specialists for this field, a link is also provided.
  1. NEP-MIC: Microeconomics (2) 2017-04-09 2018-07-23
  2. NEP-BEC: Business Economics (1) 2006-05-06
  3. NEP-CTA: Contract Theory and Applications (1) 2017-04-09

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. For general information on how to correct material on RePEc, see these instructions.

To update listings or check citations waiting for approval, Thomas Lanzi should log into the RePEc Author Service.

To make corrections to the bibliographic information of a particular item, find the technical contact on the abstract page of that item. There, details are also given on how to add or correct references and citations.

To link different versions of the same work, where versions have a different title, use this form. Note that if the versions have a very similar title and are in the author's profile, the links will usually be created automatically.

Please note that most corrections can 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.