Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/207648 
Year of Publication: 
2019
Series/Report no.: 
Discussion Paper Series No. 672
Publisher: 
University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics, Heidelberg
Abstract: 
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.
Subjects: 
Ellsberg paradox
ambiguity
experiment
JEL: 
C91
C72
D74
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.