随机化建议和模糊厌恶

IF 1.3 2区 经济学 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Christoph Kuzmics, Brian W. Rogers, Xiannong Zhang
{"title":"随机化建议和模糊厌恶","authors":"Christoph Kuzmics, Brian W. Rogers, Xiannong Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s11166-024-09436-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We design and implement lab experiments to evaluate the normative appeal of behavior arising from models of ambiguity-averse preferences. We report two main empirical findings. First, we demonstrate that behavior reflects an incomplete understanding of the problem, providing evidence that subjects do not act on the basis of preferences alone. Second, additional clarification of the decision making environment pushes subjects’ choices in the direction of ambiguity aversion models, regardless of whether or not the choices are also consistent with subjective expected utility, supporting the position that subjects find such behavior normatively appealing.</p>","PeriodicalId":48066,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Randomization advice and ambiguity aversion\",\"authors\":\"Christoph Kuzmics, Brian W. Rogers, Xiannong Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11166-024-09436-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>We design and implement lab experiments to evaluate the normative appeal of behavior arising from models of ambiguity-averse preferences. We report two main empirical findings. First, we demonstrate that behavior reflects an incomplete understanding of the problem, providing evidence that subjects do not act on the basis of preferences alone. Second, additional clarification of the decision making environment pushes subjects’ choices in the direction of ambiguity aversion models, regardless of whether or not the choices are also consistent with subjective expected utility, supporting the position that subjects find such behavior normatively appealing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48066,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-024-09436-4\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-024-09436-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们设计并实施了实验室实验,以评估模糊厌恶偏好模型所产生的行为的规范性吸引力。我们报告了两个主要的经验发现。首先,我们证明了行为反映了对问题的不完全理解,提供了被试并非仅根据偏好行事的证据。其次,对决策环境的额外澄清会促使受试者的选择朝着模糊厌恶模型的方向发展,而不管这些选择是否也符合主观预期效用,这支持了受试者认为这种行为具有规范吸引力的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Randomization advice and ambiguity aversion

Randomization advice and ambiguity aversion

We design and implement lab experiments to evaluate the normative appeal of behavior arising from models of ambiguity-averse preferences. We report two main empirical findings. First, we demonstrate that behavior reflects an incomplete understanding of the problem, providing evidence that subjects do not act on the basis of preferences alone. Second, additional clarification of the decision making environment pushes subjects’ choices in the direction of ambiguity aversion models, regardless of whether or not the choices are also consistent with subjective expected utility, supporting the position that subjects find such behavior normatively appealing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
10.60%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty (JRU) welcomes original empirical, experimental, and theoretical manuscripts dealing with the analysis of risk-bearing behavior and decision making under uncertainty. The topics covered in the journal include, but are not limited to, decision theory and the economics of uncertainty, experimental investigations of behavior under uncertainty, empirical studies of real world risk-taking behavior, behavioral models of choice under uncertainty, and risk and public policy. Review papers are welcome. The JRU does not publish finance or behavioral finance research, game theory, note length work, or papers that treat Likert-type scales as having cardinal significance. An important aim of the JRU is to encourage interdisciplinary communication and interaction between researchers in the area of risk and uncertainty. Authors are expected to provide introductory discussions which set forth the nature of their research and the interpretation and implications of their findings in a manner accessible to knowledgeable researchers in other disciplines. Officially cited as: J Risk Uncertain
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信