IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2406.18463.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Complexity Aversion

Author

Listed:
  • Yuan Gu
  • Chao Hung Chan

Abstract

This paper proposes a model of decision-making under uncertainty in which an agent is constrained in her cognitive ability to consider complex acts. We identify the complexity of an act according to the corresponding partition of state space. The agent ranks acts according to the expected utility net of complexity cost. A key feature of this model is that the agent is able to update her complexity cost function after the arrival of new information. The main result characterizes axiomatically an updating rule for complexity cost function, the Minimal Complexity Aversion representation. According to this rule, the agent measures the complexity cost of an act conditional on the new information by using the cost of another act that gives exactly the same partition of the event but with the lowest ex-ante cost.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuan Gu & Chao Hung Chan, 2024. "Complexity Aversion," Papers 2406.18463, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2406.18463
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2406.18463
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ortoleva, Pietro, 2013. "The price of flexibility: Towards a theory of Thinking Aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 903-934.
    2. Minardi, Stefania & Savochkin, Andrei, 2019. "Subjective contingencies and limited Bayesian updating," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 1-45.
    3. Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Aldo Rustichini, 2006. "Ambiguity Aversion, Robustness, and the Variational Representation of Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(6), pages 1447-1498, November.
    4. Santosh Anagol & Shawn Cole & Shayak Sarkar, 2017. "Understanding the Advice of Commissions-Motivated Agents: Evidence from the Indian Life Insurance Market," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(1), pages 1-15, March.
    5. Mark Egan, 2019. "Brokers versus Retail Investors: Conflicting Interests and Dominated Products," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 74(3), pages 1217-1260, June.
    6. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Mirko Wiederholt, 2015. "Business Cycle Dynamics under Rational Inattention," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 82(4), pages 1502-1532.
    7. Uri Gneezy & John A. List & George Wu, 2006. "The Uncertainty Effect: When a Risky Prospect is Valued Less than its Worst Possible Outcome," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1283-1309.
    8. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean, 2015. "Revealed Preference, Rational Inattention, and Costly Information Acquisition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(7), pages 2183-2203, July.
    9. Yulei Luo, 2008. "Consumption Dynamics under Information Processing Constraints," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 11(2), pages 366-385, April.
    10. Neyman, Abraham, 1985. "Bounded complexity justifies cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoners' dilemma," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 227-229.
    11. Bartosz Mackowiak & Mirko Wiederholt, 2009. "Optimal Sticky Prices under Rational Inattention," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(3), pages 769-803, June.
    12. Filip Matêjka & Alisdair McKay, 2015. "Rational Inattention to Discrete Choices: A New Foundation for the Multinomial Logit Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 272-298, January.
    13. Mengel, Friederike, 2012. "Learning across games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 601-619.
    14. Mador, Galit & Sonsino, Doron & Benzion, Uri, 2000. "On complexity and lotteries' evaluation - three experimental observations," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 625-637, December.
    15. de Oliveira, Henrique & Denti, Tommaso & Mihm, Maximilian & Ozbek, Kemal, 2017. "Rationally inattentive preferences and hidden information costs," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(2), May.
    16. Dillenberger, David & Lleras, Juan Sebastián & Sadowski, Philipp & Takeoka, Norio, 2014. "A theory of subjective learning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 287-312.
    17. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2017. "Coarse Competitive Equilibrium and Extreme Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(1), pages 109-137, January.
    18. Ellis, Andrew, 2018. "Foundations for optimal inattention," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 56-94.
    19. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    20. Paolo Ghirardato, 2002. "Revisiting Savage in a conditional world," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 20(1), pages 83-92.
    21. Sims, Christopher A., 2003. "Implications of rational inattention," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 665-690, April.
    22. Conlisk, John, 1989. "Three Variants on the Allais Example," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 392-407, June.
    23. Abreu, Dilip & Rubinstein, Ariel, 1988. "The Structure of Nash Equilibrium in Repeated Games with Finite Automata," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(6), pages 1259-1281, November.
    24. Peter Moffatt & Stefania Sitzia & Daniel Zizzo, 2015. "Heterogeneity in preferences towards complexity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 147-170, October.
    25. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    26. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1986. "Finite automata play the repeated prisoner's dilemma," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 83-96, June.
    27. Ben-Porath Elchanan, 1993. "Repeated Games with Finite Automata," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 17-32, February.
    28. Dekel, Eddie & Lipman, Barton L & Rustichini, Aldo, 2001. "Representing Preferences with a Unique Subjective State Space," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(4), pages 891-934, July.
    29. David S. Ahn & Haluk Ergin, 2010. "Framing Contingencies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(2), pages 655-695, March.
    30. Doron Sonsino & Uri Benzion & Galit Mador, 2002. "The Complexity Effects on Choice with Uncertainty — Experimental Evidence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(482), pages 936-965, October.
    31. , G. & , & ,, 2007. "Coarse contingencies and ambiguity," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 2(4), December.
    32. Haluk Ergin & Todd Sarver, 2010. "A Unique Costly Contemplation Representation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1285-1339, July.
    33. Doron Sonsino & Marvin Mandelbaum, 2001. "On Preference for Flexibility and Complexity Aversion: Experimental Evidence 1," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 197-216, December.
    34. Christopher A. Sims, 2006. "Rational Inattention: Beyond the Linear-Quadratic Case," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 158-163, May.
    35. Jay Lu, 2016. "Random Choice and Private Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 1983-2027, November.
    36. Huck, Steffen & Weizsacker, Georg, 1999. "Risk, complexity, and deviations from expected-value maximization: Results of a lottery choice experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 699-715, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Saponara, Nick, 2022. "Revealed reasoning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    2. Ellis, Andrew, 2018. "Foundations for optimal inattention," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 56-94.
    3. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    4. Lin, Yi-Hsuan, 2022. "Stochastic choice and rational inattention," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    5. Pennesi, Daniele, 2015. "Costly information acquisition and the temporal resolution of uncertainty," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 115-122.
    6. Youichiro Higashi & Kazuya Hyogo & Norio Takeoka, 2020. "Costly Subjective Learning," KIER Working Papers 1040, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    7. de Oliveira, Henrique & Denti, Tommaso & Mihm, Maximilian & Ozbek, Kemal, 2017. "Rationally inattentive preferences and hidden information costs," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(2), May.
    8. Galanis, Spyros, 2018. "Financial complexity and trade," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 219-230.
    9. Daniele Pennesi, 2020. "Identity and information acquisition," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 610, Collegio Carlo Alberto, revised 2021.
    10. Florian H. Schneider & Martin Schonger, 2019. "An Experimental Test of the Anscombe–Aumann Monotonicity Axiom," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1667-1677, April.
    11. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Riella, Gil, 2013. "Preference for Flexibility and Dynamic Consistency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(6), pages 2467-2482.
    13. Ellison, Martin & Macaulay, Alistair, 2021. "A rational inattention unemployment trap," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    14. Pasten, Ernesto & Schoenle, Raphael, 2016. "Rational inattention, multi-product firms and the neutrality of money," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1-16.
    15. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2017. "Coarse Competitive Equilibrium and Extreme Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(1), pages 109-137, January.
    16. Valenzuela-Stookey, Quitzé, 2023. "Subjective complexity under uncertainty," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 76-93.
    17. Saint-Paul, Gilles, 2017. "A “quantized” approach to rational inattention," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 50-71.
    18. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Mirko Wiederholt, 2015. "Business Cycle Dynamics under Rational Inattention," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 82(4), pages 1502-1532.
    19. Frank Huettner, & Tamer Boyaci, & Yalcin Akcay, 2016. "Consumer choice under limited attention when alternatives have different information costs," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-16-04_R2, ESMT European School of Management and Technology, revised 28 Feb 2018.
    20. Tsakas, Elias, 2018. "Robust scoring rules," Research Memorandum 023, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2406.18463. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.