Prior Beliefs and Ambiguity Attitudes in Decision from Experience

References

• Abdellaoui M, L’Haridon O, Paraschiv C (2011b) Experienced vs. described uncertainty: Do we need two prospect theory specifications? Management Sci. 57(10):1879–1895.Link, Google Scholar
• Abdellaoui M, Vossmann F, Weber M (2005) Choice-based elicitation and decomposition of decision weights for gains and losses under uncertainty. Management Sci. 51(9):1384–1399.Link, Google Scholar
• Abdellaoui M, Baillon A, Placido L, Wakker PP (2011a) The rich domain of uncertainty: Source functions and their experimental implementation. Amer. Econom. Rev. 101(2):695–723.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abdellaoui M, Bleichrodt H, Kemel E, L’Haridon O (2017) Measuring beliefs under ambiguity. Working paper, HEC-Paris, Jouy-en-Josas, France.Google Scholar
• Baillon A, Huang Z, Selim A, Wakker PP (2018a) Measuring ambiguity attitudes for all (natural) events. Econometrica 86(5):1839–1858.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baillon A, Bleichrodt H, Keskin U, l’Haridon O, Li C (2018b) The effect of learning on ambiguity attitudes. Management Sci. 64(5):2181–2198.Link, Google Scholar
• Benjamin DJ (2019) Errors in probabilistic reasoning and judgment biases. Bernheim BD, DellaVigna S, Laibson D, eds. Handbook of Behavioral Economics: Applications and Foundations 1, vol. 2 (North-Holland, Amsterdam), 69–186.Google Scholar
• Camerer CF, Ho T-H (1994) Violations of the betweenness axiom and nonlinearity in probability. J. Risk Uncertainty 8:167–196.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carnap R (1945) On inductive logic. Philos. Sci. 12(2):72–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carnap R (1950) Logical Foundations of Probability (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Carnap R (1952) The Continuum of Inductive Methods (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Chew SH, Miao B, Zhong S (2017) Partial ambiguity. Econometrica 85(4):1239–1260.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Croson R, Sundali J (2005) The gambler’s fallacy and the hot hand: Empirical data from casinos. J. Risk Uncertainty 30(3):195–209.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cubitt R, Kopsacheilis O, Starmer C (2019) An inquiry into the nature and causes of the description–experience gap. Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics Working Paper 2019-15, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.Google Scholar
• Dimmock SG, Kouwenberg R, Wakker PP (2016) Ambiguity attitudes in a large representative sample. Management Sci. 62(5):1363–1380.Link, Google Scholar
• Edwards W (1968) Conservatism in human information processing. Kleinmuntz B, ed. Formal Representation of Human Judgment (John Wiley & Sons, New York), 17–52.Google Scholar
• Ellsberg D (1961) Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms. Quart. J. Econom. 75(4):643–669.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ellsberg D (2011) Notes on the origins of the Ellsberg urns (introduction to the symposium issue). Econom. Theory 48:221–227.Google Scholar
• Epstein LG, Halevy Y (2018) Ambiguous correlation. Rev. Econom. Stud. 86(2):668–693.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Erev I, Ert E, Roth AE, Haruvy E, Herzog SM, Hau R, Hertwig R, et al. (2010) A choice prediction competition: Choices from experience and from description. J. Behav. Decision Making 23(1):15–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ert E, Trautmann ST (2014) Sampling experience reverses preferences for ambiguity. J. Risk Uncertainty 49(1):31–42.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fox CR, Clemen RT (2005) Subjective probability assessment in decision analysis: Partition dependence and bias toward the ignorance prior. Management Sci. 51(9):1417–1432.Link, Google Scholar
• Fox CR, Hadar L (2006) “Decisions from experience” = sampling error + prospect theory: Reconsidering Hertwig, Barron, Weber & Erev (2004). Judgment Decision Making 1(2):159–161.Google Scholar
• Fox CR, Levav J (2004) Partition-edit-count: naive extensional reasoning in judgment of conditional probability. J. Experiment. Psych. General 133(4):626–642.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fox CR, Tversky A (1998) A belief-based account of decision under uncertainty. Management Sci. 44(7):879–895.Link, Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer G, Hoffrage U (1995) How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psych. Rev. 102(4):684–704.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glöckner A, Hilbig BE, Henninger F, Fiedler S (2016) The reversed description-experience gap: Disentangling sources of presentation format effects in risky choice. J. Experiment. Psych. General 145(4):486–508.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glöckner A, Fiedler S, Hochman G, Ayal S, Hilbig B (2012) Processing differences between descriptions and experience: A comparative analysis using eye-tracking and physiological measures. Frontiers Psych. 3:173.Google Scholar
• Goldstein WM, Einhorn HJ (1987) Expression theory and the preference reversal phenomena. Psych. Rev. 94(2):236–254.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grether DM (1980) Bayes rule as a descriptive model: The representativeness heuristic. Quart. J. Econom. 95(3):537–557.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hadar L, Fox CR (2009) Information asymmetry in decision from description vs. decision from experience. Judgment Decision Making 4(4):317–325.Google Scholar
• Hertwig R, Erev I (2009) The description–experience gap in risky choice. Trends Cognitive Sci. 13(12):517–523.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hertwig R, Pleskac TJ (2010) Decisions from experience: Why small samples? Cognition 115:225–237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hertwig R, Barron G, Weber EU, Erev I (2004) Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice. Psych. Sci. 15(8):534–539.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hogarth RM, Einhorn HJ (1992) Order effects in belief updating: The belief adjustment model. Cognitive Psych. 24(1):1–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jeffreys H (1961) The Theory of Probability (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Tversky A (1972) Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psych. 3(3):430–454.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kemel E, Travers M (2016) Comparing attitudes toward time and toward money in experience-based decisions. Theory Decision 80:71–100.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kilka M, Weber M (2001) What determines the shape of the probability weighting function under uncertainty? Management Sci. 47(12):1712–1726.Link, Google Scholar
• Koehler JJ (1996) The base rate fallacy reconsidered: Descriptive, normative, and methodological challenges. Behav. Brain Sci. 19(1):1–17.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kopsacheilis O (2018) The role of information search and its influence on risk references. Theory Decision 84(3):311–339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laplace PS (1814) Essai Philosophique sur les Probabilités (Courcier, Paris).Google Scholar
• Lejarraga T, Hertwig R, Gonzalez C (2012) How choice ecology influences search in decisions from experience. Cognition 124(3):334–342.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li Z, Müller J, Wakker PP, Wang T (2018) The rich domain of ambiguity explored. Management Sci. 64(7):3227–3240.Link, Google Scholar
• Machina MJ, Schmeidler D (1992) A more robust definition of subjective probability. Econometrica 60(4):745–780.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McDowell M, Jacobs P (2017) Meta-analysis of the effect of natural frequencies on Bayesian reasoning. Psych. Bull. 143(12):1273.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Palma Ad, Abdellaoui M, Attanasi G, Ben-Akiva M, Erev I, Fehr-Duda H, Fok D, et al. (2014) Beware of black swans: Taking stock of the description–experience gap in decision under uncertainty. Marketing Lett. 25:269–280.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pratt J, Raiffa H, Schlaifer R (1965) Introduction to Statistical Decision Theory (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Prelec D (1998) The probability weighting function. Econometrica 66(3):497–527.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raiffa H (1968) Decision Analysis (Addison-Wesley, London).Google Scholar
• Rothschild M (1974) Searching for the lowest price when the distribution of prices is unknown. J. Polit. Econom. 82(4):689–711.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schmeidler D, Wakker PP (1987) Expected utility and mathematical expectation. Eatwell J, Milgate M, Newman P, eds. The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics (Macmillan Press, London), 229–232.Crossref, Google Scholar
• See KE, Fox CR, Rottenstreich YS (2006) Between ignorance and truth: Partition dependence and learning in judgment under uncertainty. J. Exp. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 32(6):1385.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stott HP (2006) Cumulative prospect theory’s functional menagerie. J. Risk Uncertainty 32(2):101–130.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trautmann ST, van de Kuilen G (2015) Ambiguity attitudes. Keren G, Wu G, eds. The Wiley–Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making (Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK), 89–116.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Fox CR (1995) Weighing risk and uncertainty. Psych. Rev. 102(2):269.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157):1124–1131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. J. Risk Uncertainty 5(4):297–323.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wagenmakers EJ (2007) A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p-values. Psychonomic Bull. Rev. 14(5):779–804.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wakker PP (2002) Decision-principles to justify Carnap’s updating method and to suggest corrections of probability judgments. Darwiche A, Friedman N, eds. Proc. 18th Conf. Uncertainty Artificial Intelligence (Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco), 544–551. Google Scholar
• Wakker PP (2004) On the composition of risk preference and belief. Psych. Rev. 111(1):236–241.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wakker PP (2010) Prospect Theory: For Risk and Ambiguity (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Winkler RL (1972) An Introduction to Bayesian Inference and Decision (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York).Google Scholar
• Wilks SS (1962) Mathematical Statistics (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Wulff DU, Mergenthaler Canseco M, Hertwig R (2018) A meta-analytic review of two modes of learning and the description-experience gap. Psych. Bull. 144(2):140.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zabell SL (1982) WE Johnson’s” sufficientness” postulate. Ann. Statist. 10(4):1090–1099.Crossref, Google Scholar