Axiom Preferences and Choice Mistakes under Risk

Fabian Herweg, Svenja Hippel, Daniel Müller and Fabio Römeis

No 11166, CESifo Working Paper Series from CESifo

Abstract: We investigate whether violations of canonical axioms of choice under risk are mistakes or a manifestation of true preferences. First, we elicit axiom and gamble preferences and then allow subjects to revise their potentially conflicting preferences. Among the behavioral patterns that allow for a clear-cut interpretation on the decision level, we find that roughly 70% of axiom viola-tions are intentional whereas only 30% are mistakes. On the subject level we can clearly categorize almost half of our subjects. Among those, roughly 24%are rational expected utility maximizers, 24% make occasional mistakes, and 52% refute the normative value of these axioms.

Keywords: axiomatic rationality; choice under risk; context-dependent preferences; mistakes; regret theory (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C91 D01 D81 D91 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-cbe, nep-evo, nep-exp and nep-upt
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp11166.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
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:ces:ceswps:_11166

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in CESifo Working Paper Series from CESifo Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Klaus Wohlrabe ().