Graduate studies at Western
Erkenntnis 14 (2):159 - 181 (1979)
|Abstract||In the traditional decision theories the role of forecasts is to a large extent swept under the carpet. I believe that a recognition of the connections between forecasts and decisions will be of benefit both for decision theory and for the art of forecasting.In this paper I have tried to analyse which factors, apart from the utilities of the outcomes of the decision alternatives, determine the value of a decision. I have outlined two answers to the question why a decision which is made on the basis of a forecast is better than a decision which is based on a guess. Neither of these answers is universally valid. An assumption which is necessary for the first answer, i.e. Good's result, is that Bayes' rule is accepted as a correct and generally applicable decision principle. The second answer, which was given with the aid of probability intervals, departed from a more general decision principle, the maximin criterion for expected utilities, which was formulated in order to evade some of the criticism against Bayes' rule. However, the argument leading to the ansser is based on the assumption that the probability intervals associated with the states of nature represent certain knowledge. For this reason this answer is only approximatively valid.As a number of quotations in the section on “the weight of evidence” show, it is not sufficient to describe the knowledge about the states of nature by a single number, representing the (subjective) probability of the state, but something else has to be invoked which measures the amount of information on which a decision is based. Several authors have tried to characterize this mysterious quantity, which here was called the weight of evidence. However, there seems to be little agreement as to how this quantity should be measured|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Teddy Seidenfeld (1985). Calibration, Coherence, and Scoring Rules. Philosophy of Science 52 (2):274-294.
Lynda L. Butler (2001). Daniel A. Farber, Eco‐Pragmatism: Making Sensible Environmental Decisions in an Uncertain World:Eco‐Pragmatism: Making Sensible Environmental Decisions in an Uncertain World. Ethics 111 (2):407-409.
Ralph Hertwig (2012). The Psychology and Rationality of Decisions From Experience. Synthese 187 (1):269-292.
Jeffrey S. Miller (2009). Opportunistic Disclosures of Earnings Forecasts and Non-GAAP Earnings Measures. Journal of Business Ethics 89 (1):3 - 10.
Fernando Birman (2009). On the Rationality of Decisions with Unreliable Probabilities. Disputatio 26 (3):97-116.
Clare Chua Chow & Rakesh K. Sarin (2002). Known, Unknown, and Unknowable Uncertainties. Theory and Decision 52 (2):127-138.
Paul Weirich (1983). Conditional Probabilities and Probabilities Given Knowledge of a Condition. Philosophy of Science 50 (1):82-95.
Peter Ayton, Alice Pott & Najat Elwakili (2007). Affective Forecasting: Why Can't People Predict Their Emotions? Thinking and Reasoning 13 (1):62 – 80.
Peter Milne (2008). Bets and Boundaries: Assigning Probabilities to Imprecisely Specified Events. Studia Logica 90 (3):425 - 453.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #170,346 of 741,243 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?