A Microeconometric Test of Alternative Stochastic Theories of Risky Choice
By G. Loomes, P. Moffatt, Robert Sugden. 2002
254 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, General Decision Sciences
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a63ff3f55d75f877603c3576600220a53b634924
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Economics and Econometrics
- Stephane Hess
- Joan L. Walker
- Moshe E. Ben-Akiva
- Chandra R. Bhat
- Kenneth Train
- Ulrich Schmidt
- Daniel McFadden
- David A. Hensher
In General Decision Sciences
- Ulrich Schmidt
- Jacinto Braga
- C. Starmer
- Robert Sugden
- Pavlo R. Blavatskyy
- Ganna Pogrebna
- Peter P. Wakker
- Moshe E. Ben-Akiva
Citations in the corpus
- Eliciting Risk and Time Preferences (2008, unknown): “There are several species of “errors” in use, reviewed by Hey (1995, 2002), Loomes and Sugden (1995), Ballinger and Wilcox (1997), and Loomes, Moffatt, and Sugden (2002).”
- Preference Anomalies, Preference Elicitation and the Discovered Preference Hypothesis (2005, methodology): “Loomes et al. (2002) econometrically fitted several models to the choice data and the best fit was provided by a version of rank-dependent expected utility theory which relaxes the independence axiom of EUT.”
- Third-generation prospect theory (2008, methodology): “In fact, models of this kind have already been estimated using experimental data (e.g. Tversky and Kahaneman 1992; Loomes, Moffatt and Sugden 2002).”
- Stochastic Utility Theorem (2008, background): “Carbone (1997) and Loomes et al. (2002) find that this constant error model fails to explain the experimental data and it is essentially “inadequate as a general theory of stochastic choice”.”
- Models of Stochastic Choice and Decision Theories: Why Both are Important for Analyzing Decisions (2010, methodology): “A less common procedure is to select one or two decision theories and to estimate them in conjunction with several models of stochastic choice (e.g. Carbone, 1997; Loomes et al., 2002).”
- Transitive in Our Preferences, But Transitive in Different Ways: An Analysis of Choice Variability (2014, background): “Such a conclusion would also raise the substantive questions of whether DMs are better fit by “mixture models” or by fixed preference with random error models, or by some combination thereof (Davis-Stober & Brown, 2011; Loomes et al., 2002).”
- Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk (2000, background): “However, Loomes, Moffat, and Sugden (1998) investigate the possibility of two more sophisticated error theories that extend either the Fechner model or the random preference model to allow the possibility of trembles.”