Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/335659 
Autor:innen: 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2025
Quellenangabe: 
[Journal:] Journal of Economic Surveys [ISSN:] 1467-6419 [Volume:] 40 [Issue:] 1 [Publisher:] Wiley [Place:] Hoboken, NJ [Year:] 2025 [Pages:] 304-320
Verlag: 
Wiley, Hoboken, NJ
Zusammenfassung: 
This paper systematically compares dominant frameworks for modeling decision‐making under risk and uncertainty, evaluating their theoretical trade‐offs and practical relevance for economic research. We establish key criteria for model selection—including predictive accuracy, descriptive realism, computational tractability, and ecological validity—to guide researchers in matching frameworks to specific contexts. While classical axiomatic models provide normative benchmarks, our analysis highlights the need for context‐sensitive models. We propose the following three research frontiers: (1) integrating behavioral axioms with machine learning architectures, (2) neuroeconomic validation of decision‐theoretic assumptions, and (3) dynamic models for evolving uncertainty landscapes. The survey provides a structured framework for advancing decision theory while maintaining methodological pluralism in behavioral economics.
Schlagwörter: 
ambiguity
decision theory
expected utility theory
risk
uncertainty
Persistent Identifier der Erstveröffentlichung: 
Creative-Commons-Lizenz: 
cc-by Logo
Dokumentart: 
Article
Dokumentversion: 
Published Version

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
646.48 kB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.