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|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Recursive Expected Utility and the Separation of Attitudes Towards Risk and Ambiguity: An Experimental Study. [REVIEW]Sujoy Chakravarty & Jaideep Roy - 2009 - Theory and Decision 66 (3):199-228.
Ambiguity Aversion in the Field of Insurance: Insurers' Attitude to Imprecise and Conflicting Probability Estimates. [REVIEW]Laure Cabantous - 2007 - Theory and Decision 62 (3):219-240.
The Impact of Governmental Assistance on Insurance Demand Under Ambiguity: A Theoretical Model and an Experimental Test. [REVIEW]Marielle Brunette, Laure Cabantous, Stéphane Couture & Anne Stenger - 2013 - Theory and Decision 75 (2):153-174.
Similar books and articles
Commonalities in Time and Ambiguity Aversion for Long-Term Risks.Harrell W. Chesson & W. Kip Viscusi - 2003 - Theory and Decision 54 (1):57-71.
The Price for Information About Probabilities and its Relation with Risk and Ambiguity.Giuseppe Attanasi & Aldo Montesano - 2012 - Theory and Decision 73 (1):125-160.
How Much Ambiguity Aversion? Finding Indifferences Between Ellsberg's Risky and Ambiguous Bets.Ken Binmore, Lisa Stewart & Alex Voorhoeve - 2012 - Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 45 (3):215-38.
Ambiguity, Inductive Systems, and the Modeling of Subjective Probability Judgements.Giovanni B. Moneta - 1991 - Philosophical Psychology 4 (2):267 – 285.
Ethics, Ambiguity Aversion, and the Review of Complex Translational Clinical Trials.Jonathan Kimmelman - 2012 - Bioethics 26 (5):242-250.
Ambiguity, Generality, and Indeterminacy: Tests and Definitions. [REVIEW]Brendan S. Gillon - 1990 - Synthese 85 (3):391 - 416.
Nash Equilibrium with Lower Probabilities.Groes Ebbe, Jørgen Jacobsen Hans, Sloth Birgitte & Tranaes Torben - 1998 - Theory and Decision 44 (1):37-66.
A Generalization of Specker's Theorem on Typical Ambiguity.Richard Kaye - 1991 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 56 (2):458-466.
Coping Rationally with Ambiguity: Robustness Versus Ambiguity-Aversion.Klaus Nehring - 2009 - Economics and Philosophy 25 (3):303-334.
Fiduciary Paradox and Psychotherapy.Dennis E. Skocz - 2003 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 10 (1):69-74.
Religious Ambiguity in Hick’s Religious Pluralism.Amir Dastmalchian - 2009 - International Journal of Hekmat 1:75-89.
Apollonius Dyscolus and the Ambiguity of Ambiguity.Catherine Atherton - 1995 - Classical Quarterly 45 (02):441-.
An Ambiguity Test for Definite Descriptions.Adam Sennet - 2002 - Philosophical Studies 111 (1):81-95.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads58 ( #89,342 of 2,158,685 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #354,589 of 2,158,685 )
How can I increase my downloads?