Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/162964 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2016
Schriftenreihe/Nr.: 
Discussion Paper Series No. 621
Verlag: 
University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics, Heidelberg
Zusammenfassung: 
We run an experiment that gives subjects the opportunity to hedge away ambiguity in an Ellsberg-style experiment. Subjects are asked to make two bets on the same draw from an ambiguous urn, with a coin flip deciding which bet is paid. By modifying the timing of the draw, coin flip, and decision, we are able to test the reversal-of-order axiom, particularly as it relates to the ability of the Random-Lottery Incentive System (RLIS) to prevent cross-task contamination in an ambiguity setting. We find that we cannot reject that the reversal-of-order axiom holds. This suggests that hedging could still be possible when carefully implementing RLIS. However, we also find low levels of ambiguity hedging across the board, suggesting the existence of the hedging possibility does not necessarily represent a common problem in ambiguity experiments.
Schlagwörter: 
Ellsberg paradox
hedging
reversal of order axiom
experiment
JEL: 
C91
C72
D74
Persistent Identifier der Erstveröffentlichung: 
Dokumentart: 
Working Paper

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
243.74 kB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.