IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pen/papers/20-021.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Subjective Information Choice Processes

Author

Listed:
  • David Dillenberger

    (University of Pennsylvania)

  • R. Vijay Krishna

    (Florida State University)

  • Philipp Sadowski

    (Duke University)

Abstract

We propose a class of dynamic models that capture subjective (and hence unob-servable) constraints on the amount of information a decision maker can acquire, pay attention to, or absorb, via an Information Choice Process (icp). An icp specifies the information that can be acquired about the payo?-relevant state in the current period, and how this choice a?ects what can be learned in the future. In spite of their generality, wherein icps can accommodate any dependence of the information constraint on the history of information choices and state realizations, we show that the constraints imposed by them are identified up to a dynamic extension of Blackwell dominance. All the other parameters of the model are also uniquely identified. Behaviorally, the model is characterized by a novel recursive application of static properties.

Suggested Citation

  • David Dillenberger & R. Vijay Krishna & Philipp Sadowski, 2020. "Subjective Information Choice Processes," PIER Working Paper Archive 20-021, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    • Handle: RePEc:pen:papers:20-021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economics.sas.upenn.edu/system/files/working-papers/20-021%20PIER%20Paper%20Submission.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2006. "Random Expected Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 121-146, January.
    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. Youichiro Higashi & Kazuya Hyogo & Norio Takeoka, 2020. "Costly Subjective Learning," KIER Working Papers 1040, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    2. Krishna, R. Vijay & Sadowski, Philipp, 2021. "Randomly evolving tastes and delayed commitment," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 81-94.

    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. McClellon, Morgan, 2016. "Confidence models of incomplete preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 30-34.
    2. Dagsvik, John K., 2015. "Stochastic models for risky choices: A comparison of different axiomatizations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 81-88.
    3. 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.
    4. Turansick, Christopher, 2022. "Identification in the random utility model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    5. Mira Frick & Ryota Iijima & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2019. "Dynamic Random Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(6), pages 1941-2002, November.
    6. Valkanova, Kremena, 2024. "Revealed preference domains from random choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 288-304.
    7. Liu Shi & Jianying Qiu & Jiangyan Li & Frank Bohn, 2024. "Consciously stochastic in preference reversals," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 255-297, June.
    8. Javier A. Birchenall, 2024. "Random choice and market demand," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(1), pages 165-198, February.
    9. Hill, Brian, 2016. "Incomplete preferences and confidence," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 83-103.
    10. Minardi, Stefania & Savochkin, Andrei, 2015. "Preferences with grades of indecisiveness," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 300-331.
    11. Michalis Drouvelis & Johannes Lohse, 2020. "Cognitive abilities and risk taking: the role of preferences," Discussion Papers 20-02, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    12. Mauersberger, Felix, 2019. "Thompson Sampling: Endogenously Random Behavior in Games and Markets," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203600, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    13. Matthew Ryan, 2021. "Stochastic expected utility for binary choice: a ‘modular’ axiomatic foundation," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 72(2), pages 641-669, September.
    14. Andrew Caplin & Daniel Martin, 2015. "A Testable Theory of Imperfect Perception," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(582), pages 184-202, February.
    15. Vicky Henderson & David Hobson & Matthew Zeng, 2023. "Cautious stochastic choice, optimal stopping and deliberate randomization," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(3), pages 887-922, April.
    16. Matthew Kovach & Gerelt Tserenjigmid, 2022. "Behavioral Foundations of Nested Stochastic Choice and Nested Logit," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(9), pages 2411-2461.
    17. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel A. Ballester & Jay Lu, 2017. "Single‐Crossing Random Utility Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 661-674, March.
    18. B. Douglas Bernheim & Antonio Rangel, 2009. "Beyond Revealed Preference: Choice-Theoretic Foundations for Behavioral Welfare Economics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(1), pages 51-104.
    19. Dagsvik, John K., 2008. "Axiomatization of stochastic models for choice under uncertainty," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 341-370, May.
    20. Blavatskyy, Pavlo R., 2008. "Stochastic utility theorem," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(11), pages 1049-1056, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Dynamic Preferences; Information Choice Process; Dynamic Blackwell Dominance; Rational Inattention; Subjective Markov Decision Process;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D90 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - General

    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:pen:papers:20-021. 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: Administrator (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deupaus.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.