Publications (116) View all
-
Article: Dynamic decision making: what do people do?
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Potentially dynamically-inconsistent individuals create particular problems for economics, as their behaviour depends upon whether and how they attempt to resolve their potential inconsistency. This paper reports on the results of a new experiment designed to help us distinguish between the different types that may exist. We classify people into four types: myopic, naïve, resolute and sophisticated. We implement a new and simple experimental design in which subjects are asked to take two sequential decisions (interspersed by a random move by Nature) concerning the allocation of a given sum of money. The resulting data enables us to classify the subjects. We find that the majority are resolute, a significant few are sophisticated, rather few are naïve and similarly few are myopic. KeywordsDynamic inconsistency–Sequential choice–Myopic–Naïve–Resolute–SophisticatedJournal of Risk and Uncertainty 04/2012; 42(2):85-123. · 1.53 Impact Factor -
Article: An Experimental Analysis of Optimal Renewable Resource Management: The Fishery
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This paper experimentally studies the extraction decisions of a sole owner in a fishery, the population dynamics of which behave according to the standard deterministic logistic growth model. Four treatments were implemented which differed in the level of information supplied to the subjects. Compared to the theoretic benchmark, the data reveal that efficiency losses increase as the information on population dynamics and stock size deteriorates. Three common patterns of behaviour are identified. The distribution of these patterns is significantly affected by the informational setting.Environmental and Resource Economics 04/2012; 44(2):263-285. · 1.52 Impact Factor -
Article: The Explanatory and Predictive Power of Non Two-Stage Probability Theories of Decision Making Under Ambiguity
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Representing ambiguity in the laboratory using a Bingo Blower (which is transparent and not manipulable) and asking the subjects a series of allocation questions (which are more efficient than pairwise choice questions), we obtain data from which we can estimate by maximum likelihood methods (with explicit assumptions about the errors made by the subjects) a significant subset of the empirically relevant models of behaviour under ambiguity, and compare their relative explanatory and predictive abilities. Our results suggest that not all recent models of behaviour represent a major improvement in explanatory and predictive power, particularly the more theoretically sophisticated ones.ERN: Experimental Individual Decision Making (Topic). 09/2011; -
Article: Circles and triangles an experimental estimation of indifference lines in the marschak‐machina triangle
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: An experiment in which 68 subjects are asked 60 pairwise preference questions involving random prospects from 4 Marschak-Machina Triangles is used to estimate 3 preference functional: Subjective Expected Utility, Difference Regret and Generalized Regret. The Difference Regret formulation fits significantly worse than the other two but Generalized Regret does not appear to fit significantly better than SEU, at least for the majority of the subjects.Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 05/2011; 3(4):279 - 305. · 2.84 Impact Factor -
Chapter: Georges-Louis Leclerc de Buffon’s ‘Essays on Moral Arithmetic’
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We offer a translation into English of the original French version published in 1777 of Buffon’s Essai d’Arithmetique Morale. In this classic work, Buffon discusses degrees of certainty, probability, the moral value of money, the different evaluations of gains and of losses; moreover, he proposes repeated experiments to determine the moral value of a game. Our hope is that this remarkable work, which anticipates and relates to many aspects discussed in more recent literature, reaches a broader audience than the French original reaches today. Our belief is that we are first to translate this classic work completely. Remaining errors are ours.12/2009: pages 245-282;
