
doi: 10.1162/rest_a_01358
handle: 11565/4057216
Abstract We report the results of two experiments designed to better understand the mechanisms driving decision making under ambiguity. We elicit individual preferences over different sources of uncertainty, entailing different degrees of complexity, from subjects with different sophistication levels. We show that (1) ambiguity aversion is robust to sophistication, but the strong relationship previously reported between attitudes toward ambiguity and compound risk is not and (2) Ellsberg ambiguity attitude can be partly explained by attitudes toward complexity for less sophisticated subjects only. Overall, regardless of the subject’s sophistication level, the main driver of Ellsberg ambiguity attitude is a specific treatment of unknown probabilities.
AMBIGUITY AVERSION, REDUCTION OF COMPOUND RISK, MODEL UNCERTAINTY, COMPLEXITY, Ambiguity aversion, model uncertainty, reduction of compound risk, complexity, [QFIN] Quantitative Finance [q-fin]
AMBIGUITY AVERSION, REDUCTION OF COMPOUND RISK, MODEL UNCERTAINTY, COMPLEXITY, Ambiguity aversion, model uncertainty, reduction of compound risk, complexity, [QFIN] Quantitative Finance [q-fin]
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 4 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
