LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Publisher: Springer
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: ems
Recent literature on optimal investment has stressed the difference between the impact of risk and the impact of ambiguity - also called Knightian uncertainty - on investors' decisions. In this paper, we show that a decision maker's attitude towards ambiguity is similarly crucial for investment decisions. We capture the investor's individual ambiguity attitude by applying alpha-MEU preferences to a standard investment problem. We show that the presence of ambiguity often leads to an increase in the subjective project value, and entrepreneurs are more eager to invest. Thereby, our investment model helps to explain differences in investment behavior in situations which are objectively identical.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Ahn, D., Choi, S., Gale, D., and Kariv, S. 2007. Estimating ambiguity aversion in a portfolio choice experiment. UC Berkeley Working Paper.
    • Al-Najjar, N. I. and Weinstein, J. 2009. The ambiguity aversion literature: a critical assessment. Economics and Philosophy, 25:249{284.
    • Chateauneuf, A., Eichberger, J., and Grant, S. 2007. Choice under uncertainty with the best and worst in mind: Neo-additive capacities. Journal of Economic Theory, 137:538{567.
    • Chen, Z. and Epstein, L. 2002. Ambiguity, risk, and asset returns in continuous time. Econometrica, 70(4):1403{1443.
    • Choi, U. J., Kim, K., and Kwak, M. 2009. Investment under ambiguity and regime-switching environment. Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), working paper.
    • DeBondt, W. F. and Thaler, R. H. 1995. Handbook in Operations Research and Management Science: Finance, chapter Financial Decision-Making in Markets and Firms: A Behavioral Perspective, pages 385{410. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
    • Dixit, A. K. and Pindyck, R. S. 1994. Investment under Uncertainty. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
    • Gysler, M., Kruse, J. B., and Schubert, R. 2002. Ambiguity and gender di erences in nancial decision making: An experimental examination of competence and con dence e ects. Center for Economic Research, Swiss Federal Insitute of Technology, working paper.
    • Hannay, E. and Klibano , P. 2006. Updating preferences with multiple priors. Theoretical Economics, 2:261{298.
    • Heath, C. and Tversky, A. 1991. Preference and belief: Ambiguity and competence in choice under uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 4(1):5{28.
    • Karatzas, I. and Kou, S. G. 1998. Hedging american contigent claims with constraint portfolios. Finance and Stochastics, 2:215{258.
    • Kilka, M. and Weber, M. 1998. What determines the shape of the probability weighting function under uncertainty? Management Science, 47:1712{1726.
    • Klibano , P., Marinacci, M., and Mukerji, S. 2005. A smooth model of decision making under ambiguity. Econometrica, 73(6):1849{1892.
    • Klibano , P., Marinacci, M., and Mukerji, S. 2009. Recursive smooth ambiguity preferences. Journal of Economic Theory, 144(3):930{976.
    • Knight, F. H. 1921. Risk, Uncertainty, and Pro t. Houghton Mi in Company, Boston, MA.
    • Kopylov, I. 2008. Subjective probability and con dence. UC Irvine, working paper.
    • Marinacci, M. 2002. Probabilistic sophistication and multiple priors. Econometrica, 70(2):755{ 764.
    • McDonald, R. and Siegel, D. 1986. The value of waiting to invest. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 101(4):707{728.
    • Miao, J. and Wang, N. 2007. Risk, uncertainty, and option exercise. Boston University and Columbia Business Scholl, working paper.
    • Nishimura, K. G. and Ozaki, H. 2004a. An axiomatic approach to -contamination. Economic Theory, 27:333{340.
    • Nishimura, K. G. and Ozaki, H. 2004b. Search and knightian uncertainty. Journal of Economic Theory, 119(2).
    • Nishimura, K. G. and Ozaki, H. 2007. Irreversible investment and knightian uncertainty. Journal of Economic Theory, 136(1):668{694.
    • Olszewski, W. 2007. Preferences over sets of lotteries. Review of Economic Studies, 74:567{595.
    • Riedel, F. 2009. Optimal stopping with multiple priors. Econometrica, 77(3):857{908.
    • Sarin, R. and Wakker, P. 1998. Dynamic choice and non expected utility. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 17:87{119.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article