IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/pseptp/halshs-00754333.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Type indeterminacy - A Model of the KT(Khaneman Tversky)- Man

Author

Listed:
  • Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky

    (PJSE - Paris-Jourdan Sciences Economiques - ENS-PSL - École normale supérieure - Paris - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, PSE - Paris School of Economics - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - ENS-PSL - École normale supérieure - Paris - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement)

  • Schmuel Zamir

    (Center for the Study of Rationality - Hebrew University)

  • Hervé Zwirn

    (IHPST - Institut d'Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences et des Techniques - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - DEC - Département d'Etudes Cognitives - ENS Paris - ENS-PSL - École normale supérieure - Paris - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, CMLA - Centre de Mathématiques et de Leurs Applications - ENS Cachan - École normale supérieure - Cachan - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

In this paper, we propose to use elements of the mathematical formalism of Quantum Mechanics to capture the idea that agents' preferences, in addition to being typically uncertain, can also be indeterminate. They are determined (i.e., realized, and not merely revealed) only when the action takes place. An agent is described by a state that is a superposition of potential types (or preferences or behaviors). This superposed state is projected (or "collapses") onto one of the possible behaviors at the time of the interaction. In addition to the main goal of modeling uncertainty of preferences that is not due to lack of information, this formalism seems to be adequate to describe widely observed phenomena of non-commutativity in patterns of behavior. We explore some implications of our approach in a comparison between classical and type indeterminate rational choice behavior. The potential of the approach is illustrated in two examples.

Suggested Citation

  • Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky & Schmuel Zamir & Hervé Zwirn, 2009. "Type indeterminacy - A Model of the KT(Khaneman Tversky)- Man," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) halshs-00754333, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:pseptp:halshs-00754333
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jmp.2009.01.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erev, Ido & Bornstein, Gary & Wallsten, Thomas S., 1993. "The Negative Effect of Probability Assessments on Decision Quality," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 78-94, June.
    2. Selten, Reinhard, 1998. "Features of experimentally observed bounded rationality," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 413-436, May.
    3. Daniel McFadden, 1986. "The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 275-297.
    4. McFadden, Daniel, 1999. "Rationality for Economists?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 73-105, December.
    5. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2001. "Temptation and Self-Control," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1403-1435, November.
    6. Colin F. Camerer, 1997. "Progress in Behavioral Game Theory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 167-188, Fall.
    7. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    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. Dino Borie, 2013. "Expected utility theory with non-commutative probability theory," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 8(2), pages 295-315, October.
    2. Khrennikov, Andrei, 2015. "Quantum version of Aumann’s approach to common knowledge: Sufficient conditions of impossibility to agree on disagree," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 89-104.
    3. Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky & Jerome Busemeyer, 2012. "Quantum Type Indeterminacy in Dynamic Decision-Making: Self-Control through Identity Management," Games, MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-22, May.
    4. Zabaleta, O.G. & Arizmendi, C.M., 2010. "Quantum dating market," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 389(14), pages 2858-2863.
    5. V. I. Yukalov & D. Sornette, 2012. "Quantum decision making by social agents," Papers 1202.4918, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2015.
    6. Godfrey Cadogan, 2012. "Representation theory for risk on markowitz-tversky-kahneman topology," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(4), pages 1-34.
    7. Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky & François Dubois, 2015. "Transparency in Public Life. A Quantum Cognition Perspective," PSE Working Papers halshs-01064980, HAL.
    8. Ismaël Rafaï & Sébastien Duchêne & Eric Guerci & Irina Basieva & Andrei Khrennikov, 2022. "The triple-store experiment: a first simultaneous test of classical and quantum probabilities in choice over menus," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 387-406, March.
    9. Thomas Boyer-Kassem & Sébastien Duchêne & Eric Guerci, 2016. "Quantum-like models cannot account for the conjunction fallacy," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 81(4), pages 479-510, November.
    10. Jerome R. Busemeyer & Jörg Rieskamp, 2014. "Psychological research and theories on preferential choice," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 3, pages 49-72, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Siegfried K. Berninghaus & Lora R. Todorova & Bodo Vogt, 2012. "How Sensitive is Strategy Selection in Coordination Games?," FEMM Working Papers 120020, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    12. Jerry Busemeyer & Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky, 2009. "TI-games I: An exploration of Type Indeterminacy in strategic decision-making," Working Papers halshs-00566780, HAL.
    13. Loretta Mastroeni & Maurizio Naldi & Pierluigi Vellucci, 2023. "Personal Finance Decisions with Untruthful Advisors: An Agent-Based Model," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 61(4), pages 1477-1522, April.
    14. Aerts, Diederik & Broekaert, Jan & Czachor, Marek & Kuna, Maciej & Sinervo, Barry & Sozzo, Sandro, 2014. "Quantum structure in competing lizard communities," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 281(C), pages 38-51.
    15. Vladimir Ivanovitch Danilov & Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky, 2005. "Non-classical measurement theory: a framework forbehavioral sciences," Working Papers halshs-00590714, HAL.
    16. Adam Brandenburger, 2007. "A Connection Between Correlation in Game Theory and Quantum Mechanics," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000001725, David K. Levine.
    17. John Duffy & Ted Loch-Temzelides, 2021. "A double-slit experiment with human subjects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-7, February.
    18. Emmanuel Haven, 2008. "Private Information and the ‘Information Function’: A Survey of Possible Uses," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 193-228, March.
    19. Boyer-Kassem, Thomas & Duchêne, Sébastien & Guerci, Eric, 2016. "Testing quantum-like models of judgment for question order effect," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 33-46.
    20. V. Danilov & A. Lambert-Mogiliansky, 2010. "Expected utility theory under non-classical uncertainty," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 25-47, February.
    21. Vladimir Danilov, 2009. "Modelling of Non-Commuting Measurements," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, issue 1-2, pages 10-36.
    22. Adam Brandenburger, 2008. "The Relationship Between Classical and Quantum Correlation in Games," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000002312, David K. Levine.
    23. Lora R. Todorova, 2012. "Quantum Risk Preferences in a Laboratory Experiment," FEMM Working Papers 120025, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    24. Jerry Busemeyer & Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky, 2009. "TI-games I: An exploration of Type Indeterminacy in strategic decision-making," PSE Working Papers halshs-00566780, HAL.
    25. Haven, Emmanuel & Sozzo, Sandro, 2016. "A generalized probability framework to model economic agents' decisions under uncertainty," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 297-303.

    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. Teck H. Ho & Noah Lim & Colin Camerer, 2005. "Modeling the Psychology of Consumer and Firm Behavior with Behavioral Economics," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000476, UCLA Department of Economics.
    2. Cameron Hepburn & Stephen Duncan & Antonis Papachristodoulou, 2010. "Behavioural Economics, Hyperbolic Discounting and Environmental Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(2), pages 189-206, June.
    3. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    4. André Lapied & Thomas Rongiconi, 2013. "Ambiguity as a Source of Temptation: Modeling Unstable Beliefs," Working Papers halshs-00797631, HAL.
    5. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    6. Stephan Schulmeister, 2000. "Technical Analysis and Exchange Rate Dynamics," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 25857, April.
    7. Steffen Andersen & Cristian Badarinza & Lu Liu & Julie Marx & Tarun Ramadorai, 2022. "Reference Dependence in the Housing Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(10), pages 3398-3440, October.
    8. Yan, Xiaoming & Zhao, Wenhan & Yu, Yugang, 2022. "Optimal product line design with reference price effects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(3), pages 1045-1062.
    9. Venkatachalam, L., 2008. "Behavioral economics for environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 640-645, November.
    10. Greg Barron & Eldad Yechiam, 2009. "The coexistence of overestimation and underweighting of rare events and the contingent recency effect," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 4(6), pages 447-460, October.
    11. Maria Alessandra Antonelli & Valeria De Bonis & Angelo Castaldo & Alessandrao Gandolfo, 2022. "Sin goods taxation: an encompassing model," Public Finance Research Papers 52, Istituto di Economia e Finanza, DSGE, Sapienza University of Rome.
    12. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    13. Katarina Kostelic, 2020. "Guessing the Game: An Individual’s Awareness and Assessment of a Game’s Existence," Games, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-28, March.
    14. P. Février & L. Wilner, 2012. "Do Consumers Correctly Expect Price Reductions? Testing Dynamic Behavior," Documents de Travail de l'Insee - INSEE Working Papers g2012-03, Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques.
    15. Crawford, VP, 2014. "Boundedly rational versus optimization-based models of strategic thinking and learning in games," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt04h694rz, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    16. Hsiaw, Alice, 2013. "Goal-setting and self-control," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 601-626.
    17. Orlando Gomes, 2011. "The hierarchy of human needs and their social valuation," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 38(3), pages 237-259, February.
    18. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1999. "Experience from a Course in Game Theory: Pre- and Postclass Problem Sets as a Didactic Device," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 155-170, July.
    19. Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2016. "Constructing markets: environmental economics and the contingent valuation controversy," MPRA Paper 78814, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Daniel McFadden, 2014. "The new science of pleasure: consumer choice behavior and the measurement of well-being," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 2, pages 7-48, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Indeterminacy; Non-commutativity; Quantum state;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General
    • C65 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Miscellaneous Mathematical Tools
    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology

    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:hal:pseptp:halshs-00754333. 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: Caroline Bauer (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.