IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/awi/wpaper/0682.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Test of Information Aversion

Author

Listed:
  • Kops, Christopher
  • Pasichnichenko, Illia

Abstract

The standard Bayesian model implies that information can never have a negative value. We put this implication to the proof. Our paper provides the first test of the value (positive or negative) of information under uncertainty. We show that the “Bayesian implication” stands in conflict with the information-averse behavior that is revealed in our experiment. This behavior demonstrates that the value of truthful and unambiguous information may indeed be negative. Our findings complement predictions from recent theoretical work in showing that negative value of information correlates with ambiguity aversion. This highlights the importance of counseling for decision-making under uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Kops, Christopher & Pasichnichenko, Illia, 2020. "A Test of Information Aversion," Working Papers 0682, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:awi:wpaper:0682
    Note: This paper is part of http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/view/schriftenreihen/sr-3.html
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn=urn:nbn:de:bsz:16-heidok-282444
    File Function: Frontdoor page on HeiDOK
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/28244/7/Kops_2020_dp682.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arthur Snow, 2010. "Ambiguity and the value of information," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 133-145, April.
    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. Berger, Loïc, 2022. "What is partial ambiguity?," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(2), pages 206-220, July.
    2. Kellner, Christian & Thordal-Le Quement, Mark & Riener, Gerhard, 2020. "Reacting to ambiguous messages: An experimental analysis," DICE Discussion Papers 357, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).

    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. Attanasi, Giuseppe Marco & Montesano, Aldo, 2010. "The Price for Information about Probabilities and its Relation with Capacities," TSE Working Papers 10-193, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    2. Hyunjoo Lee & Misuk Lee & Sesil Lim, 2018. "Do Consumers Care about the Energy Efficiency of Buildings? Understanding Residential Choice Based on Energy Performance Certificates," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, November.
    3. Luo, Di & Mishra, Tapas & Yarovaya, Larisa & Zhang, Zhuang, 2021. "Investing during a Fintech Revolution: Ambiguity and return risk in cryptocurrencies," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    4. Huang, Rachel J. & Huang, Yi-Chieh & Tzeng, Larry Y., 2013. "Insurance bargaining under ambiguity," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 812-820.
    5. Noemi Pace & Giuseppe Attanasi & Christian Gollier & Aldo Montesano, 2012. "Eliciting ambiguity aversion in unknown and in compound lotteries: A KMM experimental approach," Working Papers 2012_23, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    6. Peter, Richard & Ying, Jie, 2020. "Do you trust your insurer? Ambiguity about contract nonperformance and optimal insurance demand," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 938-954.
    7. Michael J. Weir & Thomas W. Sproul, 2019. "Identifying Drivers of Genetically Modified Seafood Demand: Evidence from a Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-21, July.
    8. Patrice Loisel & Marielle Brunette & Stéphane Couture, 2022. "Ambiguity, value of information and forest rotation decision under storm risk," Working Papers of BETA 2022-26, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    9. Christophe Courbage & Beatrice Rey, 2016. "On ambiguity apportionment," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 265-275, July.
    10. Roxane Bricet, 2018. "Preferences for information precision under ambiguity," THEMA Working Papers 2018-09, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    11. Linda Thunström & Jonas Nordström & Jason F. Shogren & Mariah Ehmke & Klaas Veld, 2016. "Strategic self-ignorance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 117-136, April.
    12. Russell Golman & David Hagmann & George Loewenstein, 2017. "Information Avoidance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(1), pages 96-135, March.
    13. Michael Hoy & Richard Peter & Andreas Richter, 2014. "Take-up for genetic tests and ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 111-133, April.
    14. Huang, Rachel J., 2012. "Ambiguity aversion, higher-order risk attitude and optimal effort," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 338-345.
    15. Spyros Galanis, 2021. "Dynamic consistency, valuable information and subjective beliefs," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(4), pages 1467-1497, June.
    16. Koufopoulos, Kostas & Kozhan, Roman, 2014. "Welfare-improving ambiguity in insurance markets with asymmetric information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 551-560.
    17. Laure Cabantous & Denis Hilton & Howard Kunreuther & Erwann Michel-Kerjan, 2011. "Is imprecise knowledge better than conflicting expertise? Evidence from insurers’ decisions in the United States," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 211-232, June.
    18. Broll, Udo & Wong, Kit Pong, 2014. "Ambiguity and the incentive to export," Dresden Discussion Paper Series in Economics 01/14, Technische Universität Dresden, Faculty of Business and Economics, Department of Economics.
    19. Andreas Richter & Jörg Schiller & Harris Schlesinger, 2014. "Behavioral insurance: Theory and experiments," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 85-96, April.
    20. Roxane Bricet, 2018. "The price for instrumentally valuable information," THEMA Working Papers 2018-10, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    value of Information; ambiguity aversion; Ellsberg paradox; Ellsberg urn;
    All these keywords.

    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:awi:wpaper:0682. 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: Gabi Rauscher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/awheide.html .

    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.