David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Theory and Decision 47 (2):157-184 (1999)
The Ellsberg Paradox documented the aversion to ambiguity in the probability of winning a prize. Using an original sample of 266 business owners and managers facing risks from climate change, this paper documents the presence of departures from rationality in both directions. Both ambiguity-seeking behavior and ambiguity-averse behavior are evident. People exhibit âfearâ effects of ambiguity for small probabilities of suffering a loss and âhopeâ effects for large probabilities. Estimates of the crossover point from ambiguity aversion (fear) to ambiguity seeking (hope) place this value between 0.3 and 0.7 for the risk per decade lotteries considered, with empirical estimates indicating a crossover mean risk of about 0.5. Attitudes toward the degree of ambiguity also reverse at the crossover point
|Keywords||Ambiguity Risk Ellsberg Paradox|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Sujoy Chakravarty & Jaideep Roy (2009). Recursive Expected Utility and the Separation of Attitudes Towards Risk and Ambiguity: An Experimental Study. [REVIEW] Theory and Decision 66 (3):199-228.
Marielle Brunette, Laure Cabantous, Stéphane Couture & Anne Stenger (2013). The Impact of Governmental Assistance on Insurance Demand Under Ambiguity: A Theoretical Model and an Experimental Test. [REVIEW] Theory and Decision 75 (2):153-174.
Similar books and articles
Harrell W. Chesson & W. Kip Viscusi (2003). Commonalities in Time and Ambiguity Aversion for Long-Term Risks. Theory and Decision 54 (1):57-71.
Giuseppe Attanasi & Aldo Montesano (2012). The Price for Information About Probabilities and its Relation with Risk and Ambiguity. Theory and Decision 73 (1):125-160.
Alex Voorhoeve, Ken Binmore & Lisa Stewart (2012). How Much Ambiguity Aversion? Finding Indifferences Between Ellsberg's Risky and Ambiguous Bets. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 45 (3):215-38.
Giovanni B. Moneta (1991). Ambiguity, Inductive Systems, and the Modeling of Subjective Probability Judgements. Philosophical Psychology 4 (2):267 – 285.
Jonathan Kimmelman (2011). Ethics, Ambiguity Aversion, and the Review of Complex Translational Clinical Trials. Bioethics 26 (5):242-250.
Brendan S. Gillon (1990). Ambiguity, Generality, and Indeterminacy: Tests and Definitions. [REVIEW] Synthese 85 (3):391 - 416.
Ebbe Groes, Hans Jørgen Jacobsen, Birgitte Sloth & Torben Tranaes (1998). Nash Equilibrium with Lower Probabilities. Theory and Decision 44 (1):37-66.
Richard Kaye (1991). A Generalization of Specker's Theorem on Typical Ambiguity. Journal of Symbolic Logic 56 (2):458-466.
Klaus Nehring (2009). Coping Rationally with Ambiguity: Robustness Versus Ambiguity-Aversion. Economics and Philosophy 25 (3):303-334.
Dennis E. Skocz (2003). Fiduciary Paradox and Psychotherapy. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 10 (1):69-74.
Amir Dastmalchian (2009). Religious Ambiguity in Hick’s Religious Pluralism. International Journal of Hekmat 1:75-89.
Catherine Atherton (1995). Apollonius Dyscolus and the Ambiguity of Ambiguity. Classical Quarterly 45 (02):441-.
Tomis Kapitan (1996). Incompatibilism and Ambiguity in the Practical Modalities. Analysis 56 (2):102-110.
Adam Sennet (2002). An Ambiguity Test for Definite Descriptions. Philosophical Studies 111 (1):81 - 95.
K. Jaakko J. Hintikka (1959). Aristotle and the Ambiguity of Ambiguity. Inquiry 2 (1-4):137 – 151.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads10 ( #151,147 of 1,099,562 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #123,840 of 1,099,562 )
How can I increase my downloads?