 |
|
| HAL: hal-00645887, version 1 |
| Detailed view |  Export this paper |
 |
| Theory and Decision 69, 3 (2008) 375-393 |
|
|
|
|
| Betting on Machina's reflection example : An experiment on Ambiguity |
|
|
| Laetitia Placido 1, 2Olivier L'Haridon 3, 4 |
|
|
| (2008-12-16) |
|
|
|
| In a recent article,Machina (Am Econ Rev forthcoming, 2008) suggested choice problems in the spirit of Ellsberg (Q J Econ 75:643-669, 1961), which challenge tail-separability, an implication of Choquet expected utility (CEU), to a similar extent as theEllsberg 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 (Am Econ Rev forthcoming, 2008) and, together, they confirm the need for new approaches in the analysis of ambiguity for decision making. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1: | Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne (CES) |
|
|
|
CNRS : UMR8174 – Université Paris I - Panthéon-Sorbonne |
|
|
| 2: | Paris School of Economics |
|
|
|
Université Paris I - Panthéon-Sorbonne |
|
|
| 3: | Groupement de Recherche et d'Etudes en Gestion à HEC (GREGH) |
|
|
|
GROUPE HEC – CNRS : UMR2959 |
|
|
| 4: | Université Paris 4, Paris-Sorbonne (UP4) |
|
|
|
Université Paris IV - Paris Sorbonne – Ministère de l'Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche Scientifique |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Subject | : | Humanities and Social Sciences/Economies and finances |
|
|
| Machina paradox – Choquet expected utility |
|
| hal-00645887, version 1 | |
| http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00645887 | |
| oai:hal.archives-ouvertes.fr:hal-00645887 | |
| From: Laetitia Placido | |
| Submitted on: Monday, 28 November 2011 17:38:08 | |
| Updated on: Monday, 28 November 2011 17:38:08 | |
