SHOULD AGRICULTURAL AND RESOURCE ECONOMISTS CARE THAT THE SUBJECTIVE EXPECTED UTILITY HYPOTHESIS IS FALSE?

Woodward, Richard T.

Found an issue? Give us feedback

https://dx.doi.org/1...arrow_drop_down

https://dx.doi.org/10.22004/ag...

Other literature type . 1998

Data sources: Datacite

SHOULD AGRICULTURAL AND RESOURCE ECONOMISTS CARE THAT THE SUBJECTIVE EXPECTED UTILITY HYPOTHESIS IS FALSE?

descriptionPublicationkeyboard_double_arrow_right Other literature type 01 Jan 1998 English Publisher:Unknown

Authors: Woodward, Richard T.; Woodward, Richard T.;

doi: 10.22004/ag.econ.20941

SHOULD AGRICULTURAL AND RESOURCE ECONOMISTS CARE THAT THE SUBJECTIVE EXPECTED UTILITY HYPOTHESIS IS FALSE?

- Summary
- Subjects
- Metrics

Abstract

This paper argues that the subjective expected utility (SEU) hypothesis has serious limitations in both positive and normative analysis. In addition to experimental evidence, we discuss examples where alternatives to the SEU model provide a richer framework for the study problems of choice under uncertainty.

Keywords

Research Methods/ Statistical Methods

Impact byBIP!

	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).	0
	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.	Average