An experiment on outcome uncertainty

Abstract We report the evidence of a multi-stage lab experiment on individual decision making under ambiguity, where the latter is characterized by the (partial or) absence of information on some monetary values in the support of the lottery distributions. This complements the standard treatment of uncertainty where decision makers know the monetary prizes, but probabilities are uncertain. We use both a structural and a non-structural approach when analyzing subjects’ behavior under risk, compound risk, and outcome ambiguity. Our main finding is that subjects are risk-averse and ambiguity lovers in that they evaluate more optimistically uncertain payoffs under ambiguity compared to compound risk. We also study how subjects evaluate scenarios with uncertain outcomes: 60% of choices are consistent with the Expected Utility paradigm, while 40% of them are better described by a heuristic we label as “naïve,” in which the order of integration of Expected Utility is reversed (that is, they first form a point estimate of the uncertain payoffs, and then they evaluate the lotteries’ expected utility). Finally, we also find that risk and ambiguity aversion are positively correlated.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty
Published
2025-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-024-09448-0
Primary Topic
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

An experiment on outcome uncertainty

Carmen Herrero, Marcello Sartarelli, Diletta Topazio, J.L. Miguel Alonso et al.
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
article

An experiment on outcome uncertainty

Carmen Herrero, Marcello Sartarelli, Diletta Topazio, J.L. Miguel Alonso, Pedro Albarrán, Giovanni Ponti
article en

Abstract

Abstract We report the evidence of a multi-stage lab experiment on individual decision making under ambiguity, where the latter is characterized by the (partial or) absence of information on some monetary values in the support of the lottery distributions. This complements the standard treatment of uncertainty where decision makers know the monetary prizes, but probabilities are uncertain. We use both a structural and a non-structural approach when analyzing subjects’ behavior under risk, compound risk, and outcome ambiguity. Our main finding is that subjects are risk-averse and ambiguity lovers in that they evaluate more optimistically uncertain payoffs under ambiguity compared to compound risk. We also study how subjects evaluate scenarios with uncertain outcomes: 60% of choices are consistent with the Expected Utility paradigm, while 40% of them are better described by a heuristic we label as “naïve,” in which the order of integration of Expected Utility is reversed (that is, they first form a point estimate of the uncertain payoffs, and then they evaluate the lotteries’ expected utility). Finally, we also find that risk and ambiguity aversion are positively correlated.

Journal of Risk and UncertaintyVol. 70(2)
Goethe University Frankfurt (DE), Universidad Complutense de Madrid (ES), University of Alicante (ES), Universidad Internacional De La Rioja (ES), Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (ES), Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas (ES), Libera Università Internazionale degli Studi Sociali Guido Carli (IT)
Universidad de Alicante, European University Institute, Generalitat Valenciana, Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación
Openalex Percentile: Top 92%
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.