Theory and Decision

, Volume 79, Issue 4, pp 547–571 | Cite as

Purely subjective extended Bayesian models with Knightian unambiguity

Article
  • 168 Downloads

Abstract

This paper provides a model of belief representation in which ambiguity and unambiguity are endogenously distinguished in a purely subjective setting where objects of choices are, as usual, maps from states to consequences. Specifically, I first extend the maxmin expected utility theory and get a representation of beliefs such that the probabilistic beliefs over each ambiguous event are represented by a non-degenerate interval, while the ones over each unambiguous event are represented by a number. I then consider a class of the biseparable preferences. Two representation results are achieved and can be used to identify the unambiguity in the context of the biseparable preferences. Finally a subjective definition of ambiguity is suggested. It provides a choice theoretic foundation for the Knightian distinction between ambiguity and unambiguity.

Keywords

Knightian distinction Maxmin expected utility  Biseparable preference Unambiguous event 

JEL Classification

D80 D81 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I am deeply indebted to David Schmeidler for inspiration, guidance, and support. I am also thankful for Yaron Azieli, Chew Soo Hong, and Ani Guerdjikova for helpful discussion. This research was supported by ANR and Labex.

References

  1. Alon, S., & Schmeidler, D. (2014). Purely subjective maxmin expected utility. Journal of Economic Theory, 152, 382–412.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amarante, M., & Filiz, E. (2007). Ambiguous events and maxmin expected utility. Journal of Economic Theory, 134(1), 1–33.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anscombe, F., & Aumann, R. (1963). A definition of subjective probability. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 34, 199–205.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Casadesus-Masanell, R., Klibanoff, P., & Ozdenoren, E. (2000). Maxmin expected utility over savage acts with a set of priors. Journal of Economic Theory, 92(1), 35–65.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cerreia-Vioglio, S., Ghirardato, P., Maccheroni, F., Marinacci, M., & Siniscalchi, M. (2011). Rational preferences under ambiguity. Economic Theory, 48, 341–375.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chew, S. H., & Sagi, J. S. (2008). Small worlds: Modeling attitudes toward sources of uncertainty. Journal of Economic Theory, 139(1), 1–24.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. de Finetti, B. (1937). La prevision: Ses lois logiques, ses sources subjectives. Annales de l’ Institute Henri Poincare, 7, 1–68.Google Scholar
  8. Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75(4), 643–669. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1884324.
  9. Epstein, L. G., & Zhang, J. (2001). Subjective probabilities on subjectively unambiguous events. Econometrica, 69(2), 265–306.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ghirardato, P., & Marinacci, M. (2001). Risk, ambiguity, and the separation of utility and beliefs. Mathematics of Operations Research, 26(4), 864–890.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ghirardato, P., & Marinacci, M. (2002). Ambiguity made precise: A comparative foundation. Journal of Economic Theory, 102(2), 251–289.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gilboa, I., & Schmeidler, D. (1989). Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 18(2), 141–153.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Halevy, Y. (2007). Ellsberg revisited: An experimental study. Econometrica, 75(2), 503–536.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hong, C. S., & Karni, E. (1994). Choquet expected utility with a finite state space: Commutativity and Act-independence. Journal of Economic Theory, 62(2), 469–479.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Keynes, J. M. (1921). A treatise on probability. London: Macmillan.MATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Klibanoff, P., Marinacci, M., & Mukerji, S. (2005). A smooth model of decision making under ambiguity. Econometrica, 73(6), 1849–1892.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klibanoff, P., Marinacci, M., & Mukerji, S. (2011). Definitions of ambiguous events and the smooth ambiguity model. Economic Theory, 48, 399–424.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty and profit. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  19. Kobberling, V., & Wakker, P. (2003). Preference foundations for nonexpected utility: A generalized and simplified technique. Mathematics of Operations Research, 28(3), 395–423.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kopylov, I. (2007). Subjective probabilities on “small” domains. Journal of Economic Theory, 133(1), 236–265.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Luce, D. (2000). Utility of gains and losses: Measurement theoretical and experimental approaches. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.Google Scholar
  22. Machina, M. J. (2009). Risk, ambiguity, and the rank-dependence axioms. The American Economic Review, 99(1), 385–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Machina, M. J., & Schmeidler, D. (1992). A more robust definition of subjective probability. Econometrica, 60(4), 745–780.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nakamura, Y. (1990). Subjective expected utility with non-additive probabilities on finite state spaces. Journal of Economic Theory, 51(2), 346–366.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nehring, K. (1999). Capacities and probabilistic beliefs: A precarious coexistence. Mathematical Social Sciences, 38(2), 197–213.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nehring, K. (2006). Is it possible to define subjective probabilities in purely behavioral terms? A comment on Epstein–Zhang (2001). mimeo.Google Scholar
  27. Pfanzagl, J. (1968). Theory of measurement. New York: Wiley.MATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Placido, L., Mohammed, A., Baillon, A., & Wakker, P. (2011). The rich domain of uncertainty: Source functions and their experimental implementation. American Economic Review, 101(2), 695–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Qu, X. (2013). Maxmin expected utility with additivity on unambiguous events. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 49(3), 245–249.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ramsey, F. P. (1931). Truth and probability. In The foundations of mathematics and other logical essays. London: K. Paul, Trench, Trubner, and Co. (Reprinted from Ramsey (1978), Kyburg and Smokler (1980), and Gardenfors and Sahlin (1988)).Google Scholar
  31. Sarin, R., & Wakker, P. (1992). A simple axiomatization of nonadditive expected utility. Econometrica, 60(6), 1255–1272.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Savage, L. J. (1972). The foundations of statistics (2nd ed.). New York: Dover.MATHGoogle Scholar
  33. Schmeidler, D. (1986). Integral representation without additivity. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 97(2), 255–261.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schmeidler, D. (1989). Subjective probability and expected utility without additivity. Econometrica, 57(3), 571–587.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wakker, P. (1984). Cardinal coordinate independence for expected utility. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 28(1), 110–117.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wakker, P. (2004). On the composition of risk preference and beliefs. Psychological Review, 111(1), 236–241.Google Scholar
  37. Wakker, P. (2008). Uncertainty. In L. Blume & S. Durlauf (Eds.), The New Palgrave: A dictionary of economics (Vol. 8). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  38. Wakker, P. P. (2010). Prospect theory for risk and ambiguity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zhang, J. (2002). Subjective ambiguity, expected utility and Choquet expected utility. Economic Theory, 20(1), 159–181.MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LEMMAUniversity of Paris 2ParisFrance

Personalised recommendations