Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorCubitt, Robin
dc.contributor.authorRuiz Martos, Maria J.
dc.contributor.authorStarmer, Chris
dc.date.accessioned2013-11-25T10:47:54Z
dc.date.available2013-11-25T10:47:54Z
dc.date.issued2012-08
dc.identifier.citationTheory and Decision, 73, 2, p. 185-202ca_CA
dc.identifier.issn0040-5833
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10234/76087
dc.description.abstractThis article reports an experiment which tests the principle of separability, i.e. that behaviour in a dynamic choice problem is independent of history and of unreachable eventualities. Although this is a well-known principle of orthodox decision theory and central to conventional economic modelling, it has been questioned on grounds suggested by non-expected utility models of choice under risk and by the psychology of affective influences on risk-taking. Our experimental design, which provides between-subjects tests of separability using three treatments in which the history preceding a decision is manipulated, is inspired by these concerns. We expose separability to a clean and harsh test, but find no evidence that it is violated.ca_CA
dc.format.extent18 p.ca_CA
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfca_CA
dc.language.isoengca_CA
dc.publisherSpringer USca_CA
dc.rights© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2010ca_CA
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/*
dc.subjectSeparabilityca_CA
dc.subjectHistory-independenceca_CA
dc.subjectNon-expected utilityca_CA
dc.subjectRisk and affectca_CA
dc.titleAre bygones bygones?ca_CA
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleca_CA
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11238-010-9233-4
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccessca_CA
dc.relation.publisherVersionhttp://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11238-010-9233-4ca_CA


Ficheros en el ítem

FicherosTamañoFormatoVer

No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem