Journal of Economic Methodology 8 (3):385-414 (2001)
The discovered preference hypothesis appears to insulate expected utility theory (EU) from disconfirming experimental evidence. It asserts that individuals have coherent underlying preferences, which experiments may not reveal unless subjects have adequate opportunities and incentives to discover which actions best satisfy their preferences. We identify the confounding effects to be expected in experiments, were that hypothesis true, and consider how they might be controlled for. We argue for a design in which each subject faces just one distinct choice task for real. We review the results of some tests of EU which have used this design. These tests reveal the same violations of the independence axiom as other studies have found. We conclude that the discovered preference hypothesis does not justify scepticism about the reality of these effects.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Citations of this work BETA
A Parametric Analysis of Prospect Theory's Functionals for the General Population.Adam S. Booij, Bernard M. S. Van Praag & Gijs van de Kuilen - 2010 - Theory and Decision 68 (1-2):115-148.
Experiments and the Domain of Economic Theory.Robin Cubitt - 2005 - Journal of Economic Methodology 12 (2):197-210.
Are Bygones Bygones?Robin Cubitt, Maria Ruiz-Martos & Chris Starmer - 2012 - Theory and Decision 73 (2):185-202.
Economics in the Lab: Completeness Vs. Testability.Francesco Guala - 2005 - Journal of Economic Methodology 12 (2):185-196.
Subjective Probability Weighting and the Discovered Preference Hypothesis.Gijs van de Kuilen - 2009 - Theory and Decision 67 (1):1-22.
Similar books and articles
Testing the Effects of Similarity on Risky Choice: Implications for Violations of Expected Utility.David E. Buschena & David Zilberman - 1999 - Theory and Decision 46 (3):253-280.
To Have One's Cake and Eat It, Too: Sequential Choice and Expected-Utility Violations.Wlodek Rabinowicz - 1995 - Journal of Philosophy 92 (11):586-620.
Testing the Intransitivity Explanation of the Allais Paradox.Ebbe Groes, Hans JØrgen Jacobsen, Birgitte Sloth & Torben Tranæs - 1999 - Theory and Decision 47 (3):229-245.
Lottery Dependent Utility: A Reexamination.Ulrich Schmidt - 2001 - Theory and Decision 50 (1):35-58.
Representation Theorems and Realism About Degrees of Belief.Lyle Zynda - 2000 - Philosophy of Science 67 (1):45-69.
From Outcomes to Acts: A Non-Standard Axiomatization of the Expected Utility Principle.Martin Peterson - 2004 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 33 (4):361-378.
Experimental Tests of Rationality.Daniel Read - 2009 - In Paul Anand, Prasanta Pattanaik & Clemens Puppe (eds.), The Handbook of Rational and Social Choice. Oxford University Press.
Revealed Preference and Expected Utility.Stephen A. Clark - 2000 - Theory and Decision 49 (2):159-174.
Must Rational Intentions Maximize Utility?Ralph Wedgwood - forthcoming - Philosophical Explorations.
Experimenter Philosophy: The Problem of Experimenter Bias in Experimental Philosophy.Brent Strickland & Aysu Suben - 2012 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 3 (3):457-467.
Facts, Norms and Expected Utility Functions.Pradier Pierre-Charles, David Teira & Jallais Sophie - 2008 - History of the Human Sciences 21 (2):45-62.
When Coherent Preferences May Not Preserve Indifference Between Equivalent Random Variables: A Price for Unbounded Utilities.Teddy Seidenfeld, Mark Schervish & Joseph Kadane - unknown -
Preference Stability and Substitution of Indifferents: A Rejoinder to Seidenfeld.Wlodek Rabinowicz - 2000 - Theory and Decision 48 (4):311-318.
Expected Utility and Constrained Maximization: Problems of Compatibility. [REVIEW]Hans Lottenbach - 1994 - Erkenntnis 41 (1):37 - 48.
Added to index2012-02-20
Total downloads14 ( #316,719 of 2,030,138 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #246,089 of 2,030,138 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.