Savage vs. Anscombe-Aumann: an experimental investigation of ambiguity frameworks
The Savage and the Anscombe-Aumann frameworks are the two most popular approaches used when modeling ambiguity. The former is more flexible, but the latter is often preferred for its simplicity. We conduct an experiment where subjects place bets on the joint outcome of an ambiguous urn and a fair co...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book/Monograph Working Paper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Heidelberg
Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg
October 2019
|
| Series: | Discussion paper series / University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics
no. 672 |
| In: |
Discussion paper series (no. 672)
|
| DOI: | 10.11588/heidok.00027276 |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Resolving-System, kostenfrei: https://doi.org/10.11588/heidok.00027276 Verlag, kostenfrei: http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/27276/4/Oechssler_2019.pdf Resolving-System, kostenfrei: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/207648 Resolving-System, kostenfrei, Volltext: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:bsz:16-heidok-272764 
|
| Author Notes: | Jörg Oechssler and Alex Roomets |
| Summary: | The Savage and the Anscombe-Aumann frameworks are the two most popular approaches used when modeling ambiguity. The former is more flexible, but the latter is often preferred for its simplicity. We conduct an experiment where subjects place bets on the joint outcome of an ambiguous urn and a fair coin. We document that more than a third of our subjects make choices that are incompatible with Anscombe-Aumann for any preferences, while the Savage framework is flexible enough to accountfor subjects' behaviors. |
|---|---|
| Physical Description: | Online Resource |
| DOI: | 10.11588/heidok.00027276 |