1999•CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology)Open access

The Impossibility of Compromise: Convexity and Uniqueness in Decision Making under Risk and Uncertainty

Paolo Ghirardato, Mássimo Marinacci

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

The main set of results of the paper shows that for expected utility preferences, agreement of two preferences on one (non-extreme) indifference class implies their equality. We show that, besides expected utility preferences under (objective) risk, this uniqueness property holds for subjective expected utility preferences under uncertainty, in both Anscombe-Aumann's (partially subjective) and Savage's (fully subjective) frameworks. For these two frameworks, we present an analogous result for beliefs, showing that if two decision makers agree on a likelihood indifference class, they must have identical probabilities. The second part of the paper shows two different sets of consequences of the uniqueness results. First, we study the preference aggregation results of the type pioneered by Harsanyi. We show that under the assumptions of those results, the existence of a weak form of agreement among the agents implies that all their preferences are identical. Then, we study the models which extend expected utility to incorporate ambiguity aversion, and show that for a class of these models a very weak condition is surprisingly equivalent to expected utility maximizing behavior.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The main set of results of the paper shows that for expected utility preferences, agreement of two preferences on one (non-extreme) indifference class implies their equality. We show that, besides expected utility preferences under (objective) risk, this uniqueness property holds for subjective expected utility preferences under uncertainty, in both Anscombe-Aumann's (partially subjective) and Savage's (fully subjective) frameworks. For these two frameworks, we present an analogous result for beliefs, showing that if two decision makers agree on a likelihood indifference class, they must have identical probabilities. The second part of the paper shows two different sets of consequences of the uniqueness results. First, we study the preference aggregation results of the type pioneered by Harsanyi. We show that under the assumptions of those results, the existence of a weak form of agreement among the agents implies that all their preferences are identical. Then, we study the models which extend expected utility to incorporate ambiguity aversion, and show that for a class of these models a very weak condition is surprisingly equivalent to expected utility maximizing behavior.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The main set of results of the paper shows that for expected utility preferences, agreement of two preferences on one (non-extreme) indifference class implies their equality. We show that, besides expected utility preferences under (objective) risk, this uniqueness property holds for subjective expected utility preferences under uncertainty, in both Anscombe-Aumann's (partially subjective) and Savage's (fully subjective) frameworks. For these two frameworks, we present an analogous result for beliefs, showing that if two decision makers agree on a likelihood indifference class, they must have identical probabilities. The second part of the paper shows two different sets of consequences of the uniqueness results. First, we study the preference aggregation results of the type pioneered by Harsanyi. We show that under the assumptions of those results, the existence of a weak form of agreement among the agents implies that all their preferences are identical. Then, we study the models which extend expected utility to incorporate ambiguity aversion, and show that for a class of these models a very weak condition is surprisingly equivalent to expected utility maximizing behavior.

Key concepts: Uniqueness, Subjective expected utility, Ambiguity aversion, Ambiguity, Expected utility hypothesis, Impossibility, Mathematical economics, Preference

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Impossibility of Compromise: Convexity and Uniqueness in Decision Making under Risk and Uncertainty — Research Paper | ScholarLens