Comment on Ellsberg’s two-color experiment, portfolio inertia and ambiguity

Journal article: The final step in the proof of Proposition 1 (p.311) of Mukerji and Tallon (2003) may not hold in general because $varepsilon>0$ in the proof cannot be chosen independently of $w,z$. We point out by a counterexample that the axioms they impose are too weak for Proposition 1. We introduce a modified set of axioms and re-establish the proposition

Author(s)

Youichiro Higashi, Sujoy Mukerji, Norio Takeoka, Jean-Marc Tallon

Journal
  • International Journal of Economic Theory
Date of publication
  • 2008
Pages
  • 433-444
Version
  • 1
Volume
  • 4