
doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3423534
Ellsberg (1961) proposes two alternative frames to elicit individuals' preferences for ambiguity. Through an experiment, we find that Ellsberg's three-color one-urn frame induces very different revealed preferences than the two-color two-urn frame. In both frames, we document ambiguity aversion for likely gains and (weak) ambiguity seeking for unlikely gains. The intensity of both these attitudes, however, is strongly curbed in the three-color frame. These findings may imply that perceived probabilities are biased toward uniformly distributed states and consequences, introducing a tension between them in the three-color frame. Surprisingly, we find that subjects who are simply asked to fill urns with colored bingo chips for a fixed payment also reveal a similar uniformity bias. We argue that both urn fillers and incentivized decision makers are influenced by similar perceptually salient features of probability intervals. Our findings have important implications for decision theory, and, by extension, for economic, financial, political, and medical decisions.
| 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). | 6 | |
| 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. | Average | |
| 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. | Top 10% |
