Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 1701.08567

Decision structure of risky choice

Abstract

As we know, there is a controversy about the decision making under risk between economists and psychologists. We discuss to build a unified theory of risky choice, which would explain both of compensatory and non-compensatory theories. For risky choice, according to cognition ability, we argue that people could not build a continuous and accurate subjective probability world, but several order concepts, such as small, middle and large probability. People make decisions based on information, experience, imagination and other things. All of these things are so huge that people have to prepare some strategies. That is, people have different strategies when facing to different situations. The distributions of these things have different decision structures. More precisely, decision making is a process of simplifying the decision structure. However, the process of decision structure simplifying is not stuck in a rut, but through different path when facing problems repeatedly. It is why preference reversal always happens when making decisions. The most efficient way to simplify the decision structure is calculating expected value or making decisions based on one or two dimensions. We also argue that the deliberation time at least has four parts, which are consist of substitution time, first order time, second order time and calculation time. Decision structure also can simply explain the phenomenon of paradoxes and anomalies. JEL Codes: C10, D03, D81

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Lamb Wubin, Naixin Ren. 2017-03-22. Decision structure of risky choice. https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.08567

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

The time interpretation of expected utility theory

Economic models often maximise expectation values of wealth or utility. In non-ergodic settings, these can differ from time-averages, so that maximising expected outcomes need not maximise – and can systematically reduce – long-run wealth or utility. Ergodicity economics highlights this problem and models individual agents as maximising wealth in the long run, known as growth optimality. Two instances where expected utility maximisation maps to growth optimality are known: linear utility does this for additive wealth dynamics; and logarithmic utility for multiplicative wealth dynamics. Here we show that the mapping holds more generally when the utility function coincides with the ergodicity transformation in the growth optimal model. This mapping offers a theoretical basis for choosing utility functions and suggests the testable hypothesis that wealth dynamics are predictive of risk preferences.

econ.GN

Monetary Regimes and Trade before the Classical Gold Standard: Evidence from the Latin Monetary Union

This paper reexamines the trade effects of the Latin Monetary Union (LMU), a 19th century agreement to standardize gold and silver coinage among several European countries. The LMU provides a useful setting for studying whether monetary arrangements fostered trade before the classical gold standard, when gold, silver, bimetallic, and paper regimes coexisted. Because some countries already shared other monetary standards, treating all non-member pairs as a single control group mixes pairs with and without alternative forms of monetary coordination. I classify pairs by standard and estimate the LMU effect relative to pairs without a common standard, bringing the comparison closer to those used in the literature on the gold standard and contemporary currency unions. The results suggest that the LMU increased trade between its members by approximately 30\% during its early years, when bimetallism was still credible. These effects subsequently faded, converging to zero by the end of the 1870s. More broadly, these findings also highlight the importance of accounting for the existing monetary regimes when estimating the trade effects of other international policies.

econ.GN

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN