IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00004830.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Adequate Moods for non-EU Decision Making in a Sequential Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Nathalie Etchart-Vincent

    (CIRED - centre international de recherche sur l'environnement et le développement - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - AgroParisTech - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

In a dynamic (sequential) framework, departures from the independence axiom (IND) are reputed to induce violations of dynamic consistency (DC), which may in turn have undesirable normative consequences. This result thus questions the normative acceptability of non expected-utility (non-EU) models, which precisely relax IND. This paper pursues a twofold objective. The main one is to discuss the normative conclusion: usual arguments linking violations of DC to departures from IND are shown to be actually based on specific (but usually remaining implicit) assumptions which may rightfully be released, so that it is actually possible for a non-EU maximizer to be dynamically consistent and thus avoid normative difficulties. The second objective is to introduce a kind of 'reality principle' (through two other evaluation criteria) in order to mitigate the normative requirement when examining adequate moods for non-EU decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • Nathalie Etchart-Vincent, 2002. "Adequate Moods for non-EU Decision Making in a Sequential Framework," Post-Print halshs-00004830, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00004830
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1015503119317
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00004830
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00004830/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1015503119317?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karni, Edi & Safra, Zvi, 1990. "Behaviorally consistent optimal stopping rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 391-402, August.
    2. R. A. Pollak, 1968. "Consistent Planning," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 35(2), pages 201-208.
    3. McClennen,Edward F., 1990. "Rationality and Dynamic Choice," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521360470, October.
    4. Seidenfeld, Teddy, 1988. "Decision Theory Without “Independence” or Without “Ordering”," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 267-290, October.
    5. Segal, Uzi, 1990. "Two-Stage Lotteries without the Reduction Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(2), pages 349-377, March.
    6. Matthew Rabin & Ted O'Donoghue, 1999. "Doing It Now or Later," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 103-124, March.
    7. Thaler, Richard H & Shefrin, H M, 1981. "An Economic Theory of Self-Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(2), pages 392-406, April.
    8. Schlee, Edward, 1990. "The Value of Information in Anticipated Utility Theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 83-92, March.
    9. Machina, Mark J, 1989. "Dynamic Consistency and Non-expected Utility Models of Choice under Uncertainty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 27(4), pages 1622-1668, December.
    10. Wlodek Rabinowicz, 1997. "On Seidenfeld‘s Criticism of Sophisticated Violations of the Independence Axiom 1," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 279-292, November.
    11. Geir B. Asheim, 1997. "Individual and Collective Time-Consistency," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(3), pages 427-443.
    12. Hammond, Peter J, 1989. "Consistent Plans, Consequentialism, and Expected Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1445-1449, November.
    13. Bernasconi, Michele, 1994. "Nonlinear Preferences and Two-Stage Lotteries: Theories and Evidence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(422), pages 54-70, January.
    14. Border Kim C. & Segal Uzi, 1994. "Dynamic Consistency Implies Approximately Expected Utility Preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 170-188, August.
    15. Segal, Uzi, 1997. "Dynamic Consistency and Reference Points," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 208-219, January.
    16. Karni, Edi & Safra, Zvi, "undated". "Ascending Bid Auctions with Behaviorally Consistent Bidders," Foerder Institute for Economic Research Working Papers 275437, Tel-Aviv University > Foerder Institute for Economic Research.
    17. John Hey & Massimo Paradiso., "undated". "Dynamic Choice and Timing-Independence: an experimental investigation," Discussion Papers 99/26, Department of Economics, University of York.
    18. Schelling, Thomas C, 1984. "Self-Command in Practice, in Policy, and in a Theory of Rational Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(2), pages 1-11, May.
    19. Sarin, Rakesh & Wakker, Peter P, 1998. "Dynamic Choice and NonExpected Utility," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 87-119, November.
    20. Hammond, P.J. & , ., 1987. "Consequentialist foundations for expected utility," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1987016, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    21. Karni, Edi & Schmeidler, David, 1991. "Atemporal dynamic consistency and expected utility theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 401-408, August.
    22. Epstein Larry G. & Le Breton Michel, 1993. "Dynamically Consistent Beliefs Must Be Bayesian," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 1-22, October.
    23. Peter J. Hammond, 1976. "Changing Tastes and Coherent Dynamic Choice," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 43(1), pages 159-173.
    24. Orphanides, Athanasios & Zervos, David, 1998. "Myopia and Addictive Behaviour," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(446), pages 75-91, January.
    25. Teddy Seidenfeld, 2000. "Substitution of indifferent options at choice nodes and admissibility: a reply to Rabinowicz," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 305-310, June.
    26. Cubitt, Robin P & Starmer, Chris & Sugden, Robert, 1998. "Dynamic Choice and the Common Ratio Effect: An Experimental Investigation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(450), pages 1362-1380, September.
    27. Camerer, Colin F, 1989. "An Experimental Test of Several Generalized Utility Theories," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 61-104, April.
    28. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    29. Wlodek Rabinowicz, 2000. "Preference stability and substitution of indifferents: a rejoinder to Seidenfeld," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 311-318, June.
    30. Karni, Edi & Schmeidler, David, 1991. "Utility theory with uncertainty," Handbook of Mathematical Economics, in: W. Hildenbrand & H. Sonnenschein (ed.), Handbook of Mathematical Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 33, pages 1763-1831, Elsevier.
    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. Drouhin, Nicolas, 2015. "A rank-dependent utility model of uncertain lifetime," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 208-224.
    2. Maria J. Ruiz Martos, 2018. "Sequential Common Consequence Effect and Incentives," ThE Papers 18/04, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    3. Maria J. Ruiz Martos, 2017. "Individual Dynamic Choice Behaviour and the Common Consequence Effect," ThE Papers 17/01, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    4. Maria J. Ruiz Martos, 2017. "Random Lottery Incentive Mechanism in Dynamic Choice Experiments," ThE Papers 17/02, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..

    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. A. Nebout, 2014. "Sequential decision making without independence: a new conceptual approach," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 85-110, June.
    2. Hammond, Peter J & Zank, Horst, 2013. "Rationality and Dynamic Consistency under Risk and Uncertainty," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1033, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    3. John D. Hey & Luca Panaccione, 2018. "Dynamic decision making: what do people do?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 10, pages 235-273, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Simon Grant & Atsushi Kajii & Ben Polak, 2000. "Preference for Information and Dynamic Consistency," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 263-286, May.
    5. ,, 2011. "Dynamic choice under ambiguity," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 6(3), September.
    6. John Hey & Massimo Paradiso., "undated". "Dynamic Choice and Timing-Independence: an experimental investigation," Discussion Papers 99/26, Department of Economics, University of York.
    7. Bleichrodt, Han & Eichberger, Jürgen & Grant, Simon & Kelsey, David & Li, Chen, 2021. "Testing dynamic consistency and consequentialism under ambiguity," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    8. Ludwig, Alexander & Zimper, Alexander, 2006. "Investment behavior under ambiguity: The case of pessimistic decision makers," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 111-130, September.
    9. A. Nebout & D. Dubois, 2014. "When Allais meets Ulysses: Dynamic axioms and the common ratio effect," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 19-49, February.
    10. Maria J. Ruiz Martos, 2017. "Individual Dynamic Choice Behaviour and the Common Consequence Effect," ThE Papers 17/01, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    11. John D. Hey & Gianna Lotito, 2018. "Naive, resolute or sophisticated? A study of dynamic decision making," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 11, pages 275-299, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. Maria J. Ruiz Martos, 2018. "Sequential Common Consequence Effect and Incentives," ThE Papers 18/04, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    13. Edward SchleeE, 1997. "The sure thing principle and the value of information," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 21-36, January.
    14. Dorian Jullien, 2018. "Under Risk, Over Time, Regarding Other People: Language and Rationality within Three Dimensions," Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, in: Including a Symposium on Latin American Monetary Thought: Two Centuries in Search of Originality, volume 36, pages 119-155, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    15. Jean-Marc Tallon & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2006. "Beliefs and Dynamic Consistency," Chapters, in: Richard Arena & Agnès Festré (ed.), Knowledge, Beliefs and Economics, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Tyson, Christopher J., 2008. "Management of a capital stock by Strotz's naive planner," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 2214-2239, July.
    17. Pan, Jinrui & Webb, Craig S. & Zank, Horst, 2015. "An extension of quasi-hyperbolic discounting to continuous time," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 43-55.
    18. André Lapied & Pascal Tocquebeuf, 2007. "Consistent Dynamice Choice And Non-Expected Utility Preferences," Working Papers halshs-00353880, HAL.
    19. Antoine Nebout & Marc Willinger, 2014. "Are Non-Expected Utility individuals really Dynamically Inconsistent? Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 14-08, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Jul 2014.
    20. Bart COCKX & Corinna GHIRELLI & Bruno VAN DER LINDEN, 2013. "Monitoring Job Search Effort with Hyperbolic Time Preferences and Non-Compliance: A Welfare Analysis," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2013006, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00004830. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.