Hopes and Fears: the Conflicting Effects of Risk Ambiguity

Theory and Decision 47 (2):157-184 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

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 ‘fear’ effects of ambiguity for small probabilities of suffering a loss and ‘hope’ 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

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A generalization of Specker's theorem on typical ambiguity.Richard Kaye - 1991 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 56 (2):458-466.
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.
An ambiguity test for definite descriptions.Adam Sennet - 2002 - Philosophical Studies 111 (1):81-95.
Aristotle and the ambiguity of ambiguity.K. Jaakko J. Hintikka - 1959 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 2 (1-4):137 – 151.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-02

Downloads
118 (#140,461)

6 months
9 (#144,656)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?