Strategic Ambiguity and Decision-making: An Experimental Study

Dudley Cooke and Sara le Roux
Additional contact information
Dudley Cooke: Department of Economics, University of Exeter

No 1605, Discussion Papers from University of Exeter, Department of Economics

Abstract: We conducted a set of experiments to compare the effect of ambiguity in single person decisions and games. Our results suggest that ambiguity has a bigger impact in games than in ball and urn problems. We ?nd that ambiguity has the opposite effect in games of strategic substitutes and complements. This con?rms a theoretical prediction made by Eichberger and Kelsey (2002). The experiments also test whether subjects' ?perception of ambiguity differs when faced by a local opponent as opposed to a foreign one. Our results show that there is little evidence of more in?uence of ambiguity on behaviour when faced by foreign subjects.

Keywords: Ambiguity; Choquet expected utility; strategic complements; strategic substitutes; Ellsberg urn. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C72 C91 D03 D81 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-cbe, nep-exp, nep-gth, nep-hpe and nep-upt
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (37)

Downloads: (external link)
https://exetereconomics.github.io/RePEc/dpapers/DP1605.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: Strategic ambiguity and decision-making: an experimental study (2018)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:exe:wpaper:1605

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Discussion Papers from University of Exeter, Department of Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sebastian Kripfganz ().