Camerer, Colin F. (1990) Comment on Noll and Krier, "Some Implications of Cognitive Psychology for Risk Regulation". Journal of Legal Studies, 19 (2). pp. 791-799. ISSN 0047-2530 http://resolver.caltech.edu/CaltechAUTHORS:20110217-073632045
- Published Version
See Usage Policy.
Use this Persistent URL to link to this item: http://resolver.caltech.edu/CaltechAUTHORS:20110217-073632045
We have known about systematic violations of the expected utility (EU) theory of choice for almost forty years, since Maurice Allais got Jimmie Savage to violate his own "sure-thing principle" (or "independence axiom") while making hypothetical choices over lunch in Paris. Savage was victimized by some combination of wine and intuition. The wine's effect is gone, but the intuition is not: devotion to EU sometimes produces unappealing choices.
|Additional Information:||© 1990 The University of Chicago.|
|Official Citation:||Comment on Noll and Krier, "Some Implications of Cognitive Psychology for Risk Regulation" Colin F. Camerer The Journal of Legal Studies Vol. 19, No. 2, The Law and Economics of Risk (Jun., 1990), pp. 791-799 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/724392|
|Usage Policy:||No commercial reproduction, distribution, display or performance rights in this work are provided.|
|Deposited By:||Tony Diaz|
|Deposited On:||09 Mar 2011 18:47|
|Last Modified:||26 Dec 2012 12:56|
Repository Staff Only: item control page