Randomization advice and ambiguity aversion

Christoph Kuzmics, Brian W. Rogers and Xiannong Zhang

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: 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.

Date: 2023-01, Revised 2024-07
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-cbe, nep-exp and nep-upt
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/2301.03304 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: Randomization advice and ambiguity aversion (2024)
Working Paper: Randomization advice and ambiguity aversion (2023)
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:arx:papers:2301.03304

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().