Hedging, ambiguity, and the reversal of order axiom
We ran experiments that gave subjects a straight-forward and simple opportunity to hedge away ambiguity in an Ellsberg-style experiment. Subjects had to make bets on the combined outcomes of a fair coin and a draw from an ambiguous urn. By modifying the timing of the draw, coin flip, and decision, w...
Gespeichert in:
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
|---|---|
| Dokumenttyp: | Article (Journal) |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
26 July 2019
|
| In: |
Games and economic behavior
Year: 2019, Jahrgang: 117, Pages: 380-387 |
| ISSN: | 1090-2473 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.geb.2019.07.007 |
| Online-Zugang: | Verlag, lizenzpflichtig, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geb.2019.07.007 Verlag, Volltext: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825619301058 
|
| Verfasserangaben: | Jörg Oechssler, Hannes Rau, Alex Roomets |
| Zusammenfassung: | We ran experiments that gave subjects a straight-forward and simple opportunity to hedge away ambiguity in an Ellsberg-style experiment. Subjects had to make bets on the combined outcomes of a fair coin and a draw from an ambiguous urn. By modifying the timing of the draw, coin flip, and decision, we are able to test the reversal-of-order axiom. Our main result is that the reversal-of-order axiom seems to hold. We also confirm low levels of ambiguity hedging despite the relative obviousness of the opportunity. |
|---|---|
| Beschreibung: | Gesehen am 02.09.2019 |
| Beschreibung: | Online Resource |
| ISSN: | 1090-2473 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.geb.2019.07.007 |