Olivier L’Haridon and Lætitia Placido
Abstract: In a recent paper, Machina (2008) suggested choice problems in the spirit of Ellsberg (1961) which challenge tail-separability, an implication of Choquet Expected Utility (CEU) to a similar extent as the Ellsberg paradox challenged the sure-thing principle implied by Subjective Expected Utility (SEU). We have tested choice behavior for bets on one of Machina’s choice problems, the reflection example. Our results indicate that tail-separability is violated by a large majority of subjects (over 70% of the sample). These empirical findings complement the theoretical analysis of Machina (2008) and, together, they confirm the need for new approaches in the analysis of ambiguity for decision making.
Keywords: ambiguity; Choquet expected utility; experimental economics
25 pages, October 1, 2008
Full text files
f9860639b9b8de76ff246c4730cc3389.pdf![]()
Questions (including download problems) about the papers in this series should be directed to Antoine Haldemann ()
Report other problems with accessing this service to Sune Karlsson ().
RePEc:ebg:heccah:0909This page generated on 2024-09-13 22:19:52.