Inferring beliefs as subjectively imprecise probabilities

We propose a method for estimating subjective beliefs, viewed as a subjective probability distribution. The key insight is to characterize beliefs as a parameter to be estimated from observed choices in a well-defined experimental task and to estimate that parameter as a random coefficient. The experimental task consists of a series of standard lottery choices in which the subject is assumed to use conventional risk attitudes to select one lottery or the other and then a series of betting choices in which the subject is presented with a range of bookies offering odds on the outcome of some event that the subject has a belief over. Knowledge of the risk attitudes of subjects conditions the inferences about subjective beliefs. Maximum simulated likelihood methods are used to estimate a structural model in which subjects employ subjective beliefs to make bets. We present evidence that some subjective probabilities are indeed best characterized as probability distributions with non-zero variance.

[1]  Yoram Halevy.  Ellsberg Revisited: An Experimental Study , 2005 .

[2]  James C. Cox,et al.  Risk aversion in experiments , 2008 .

[3]  K. Train,et al.  Mixed Logit with Repeated Choices: Households' Choices of Appliance Efficiency Level , 1998, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[4]  J. Hey,et al.  INVESTIGATING GENERALIZATIONS OF EXPECTED UTILITY THEORY USING EXPERIMENTAL DATA , 1994, Experiments in Economics.

[5]  Henry E. Kyburg,et al.  Studies in Subjective Probability , 1965 .

[6]  Dimitris Rizopoulos,et al.  The logistic transform for bounded outcome scores. , 2007, Biostatistics.

[7]  G. Harrison,et al.  Estimating subjective probabilities , 2014, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty.

[8]  K. Train,et al.  On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths , 2000 .

[9]  G. Harrison,et al.  Risk Aversion in the Laboratory , 2008 .

[10]  R. Nau.  Advances in Decision Analysis: Extensions of the Subjective Expected Utility Model , 2007 .

[11]  Arne Risa Hole,et al.  Non-linear mixed logit , 2012 .

[12]  R. L. Winkler,et al.  Scoring Rules for Continuous Probability Distributions , 1976 .

[13]  Robert F. Nau,et al.  Uncertainty Aversion with Second-Order Utilities and Probabilities , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[14]  B. D. Finetti.  La prévision : ses lois logiques, ses sources subjectives , 1937 .

[15]  G. Oehlert.  A note on the delta method , 1992 .

[16]  Charles A. Holt,et al.  Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects , 2002 .

[17]  John D. Hey,et al.  The descriptive and predictive adequacy of theories of decision making under uncertainty/ambiguity , 2010, Experiments in Economics.

[18]  N. Wilcox.  Stochastically more risk averse: A contextual theory of stochastic discrete choice under risk , 2011 .

[19]  B. D. Finetti,et al.  Foresight: Its Logical Laws, Its Subjective Sources , 1992 .

[20]  Catherine C. Eckel,et al.  Sex Differences and Statistical Stereotyping in Attitudes Toward Financial Risk , 2002 .

[21]  Mark J. Machina,et al.  Almost-objective uncertainty , 2001 .

[22]  K. Train.  Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation , 2003 .

[23]  Bruno de Finetti,et al.  Logical foundations and measurement of subjective probability , 1970 .

[24]  H. P. Binswanger.  Attitudes toward Risk: Theoretical Implications of an Experiment in Rural India , 1981 .

[25]  J. Quiggin.  Generalized expected utility theory : the rank-dependent model , 1994 .

[26]  I. Gilboa,et al.  Maxmin Expected Utility with Non-Unique Prior , 1989 .

[27]  N. Wilcox.  Stochastic models for binary discrete choice under risk: a critical primer and econometric comparison , 2008 .

[28]  A. Hole.  Fitting Mixed Logit Models by Using Maximum Simulated Likelihood , 2007 .

[29]  D. Ellsberg.  Decision, probability, and utility: Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms , 1961 .

[30]  William S. Neilson.  A simplified axiomatic approach to ambiguity aversion , 2010 .

[31]  David M. Drukker,et al.  Generating Halton Sequences using Mata , 2006 .

[32]  Uzi Segal,et al.  The Ellsberg Paradox and Risk Aversion: An Anticipated Utility Approach , 1987 .

[33]  Richard A. Epstein,et al.  The Theory of Gambling and Statistical Logic , 1977 .

[34]  Detlof von Winterfeldt,et al.  Advances in decision analysis : from foundations to applications , 2007 .

[35]  Massimo Marinacci,et al.  Differentiating ambiguity and ambiguity attitude , 2004, J. Econ. Theory.

[36]  Kenneth E. Train,et al.  Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation , 2016 .

[37]  L. J. Savage.  Elicitation of Personal Probabilities and Expectations , 1971 .

[38]  Itzhak Gilboa,et al.  Probabilities in Economic Modeling , 2007 .

[39]  Atanu Saha,et al.  Expo-Power Utility: A ‘Flexible’ Form for Absolute and Relative Risk Aversion , 1993 .

[40]  M. Marinacci,et al.  A Smooth Model of Decision Making Under Ambiguity , 2003 .

[41]  I. Gilboa,et al.  Probability and Uncertainty in Economic Modeling, Second Version , 2008 .

[42]  Syngjoo Choi,et al.  Estimating Ambiguity Aversion in a Portfolio Choice Experiment , 2009 .

[43]  Simon Grant,et al.  Intrinsic Preference for Information , 1998 .

[44]  Morten I. Lau,et al.  Eliciting Risk and Time Preferences , 2008 .

[45]  John Aitchison,et al.  Statistical diagnosis when basic cases are not classified with certainty , 1976 .

[46]  Uzi Segal,et al.  Two Stage Lotteries Without the Reduction Axiom , 1990 .

[47]  Haluk Ergin,et al.  A theory of subjective compound lotteries , 2009, J. Econ. Theory.

[48]  Vernon L. Smith,et al.  Measuring Nonmonetary Utilities in Uncertain Choices: The Ellsberg Urn , 1969 .

[49]  Itzhak Gilboa,et al.  Probability and Uncertainty in Economic Modeling , 2008 .