The descriptive and predictive adequacy of theories of decision making under uncertainty/ambiguity

John Hey, Gianna Lotito and Anna Maffioletti

Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 2010, vol. 41, issue 2, 111 pages

Keywords: Ambiguity; Bingo blower; Choquet expected utility; Decision field theory; Decision making; (Subjective) expected utility; (Gilboa and Schmeidler) MaxMin EU; (Gilboa and Schmeidler) MaxMax EU; (Ghirardato) alpha model; MaxMin; MaxMax; Minimum regret; Prospect theory; Uncertainty; D81; C91 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2010
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (96)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11166-010-9102-0 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
Chapter: The descriptive and predictive adequacy of theories of decision making under uncertainty/ambiguity (2018)
Working Paper: The Descriptive and Predictive Adequacy of Theories of Decision Making Under Uncertainty/Ambiguity (2008)
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:kap:jrisku:v:41:y:2010:i:2:p:81-111

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... ry/journal/11166/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s11166-010-9102-0

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Risk and Uncertainty is currently edited by W. Kip Viscusi

More articles in Journal of Risk and Uncertainty from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().