Decision Making under Uncertainty: A Methodological Note

  • Assia LiberatoreEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 373)


Under uncertainty, the economic agent is far from taking rational decisions, incurring in heuristics and cognitive errors such as reversal of preferences, focal points and so on. Many economists and psychologists have shown that the behavior of the decision maker in the real market is also driven by loss aversion and trust. The purpose of this study is to describe the experimental evidences that diverge from the standard economic decision theory, through a methodological review of the most significant laboratory techniques and field analysis performed in behavioral and experimental economics since the last quarter of the Twentieth Century.


behavioral economics experimental economics bounded rationality loss aversion 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Allais, M.: Le comportement de l’homme rationnel devant le risque, critique des postulats et axiomes de l’école américaine. Econometrica 21, 503–546 (1953)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barberis, N.: Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment. Journal of Economic Perspectives 27(1), 173–196 (2013)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., McCabe, K.: Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior 10, 122–142 (1995)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buchan, N., Croson, R., Robyn, D.: Swift neighbors and persistent strangers: a cross-cultural investigation of trust and reciprocity in social exchange. American Journal of Sociology 108, 168–206 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buschena, D., Zilberman, D.: An Empirical Test of Rubinstein’s Similarity Definitions for Choice Under Risk (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Camerer, C., Babcock, L., Loewenstein, G., Thaler, R.: Labor Supply of New York City Cabdrivers: One Day at a Time. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112(2), 407–441 (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Camerer, C., Loewenstein, G., Rabin, M.: Behavioral Economics: Past, Present, Future. Russel Sage Foundation, Princeton University Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Camerer, C., Loewenstein, G., Prelec, D.: Neuroeconomics: Why Economics Need Brains. The Scandivian Journal of Economics 106(3), 555–579 (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cubitt, R., Sugden, R.: Dynamic Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: An Experimental Investigation of Choices Between Accumulator Gambles. The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 22(2), 103–128 (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cyert, R.M., Simon, H.A., Trow, D.B.: Observation of a Business Decision. Journal of Business 29, 237–248 (1956)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Egidi, M., Rizzello, S.: Cognitive Economics: Foundation and Historical Evolution, Working Paper 04/2003 CESMEP (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gilboa, I., Schmeidler, D.: Case-based decision theory. Quarterly Journal of Economics 110(3), 605–639 (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hsee, C., Leclerc, F.: Will products look more attractive when evaluated jointly or when evaluated separately? Journal of Consumer Research 25, 175–186 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hsee, C., Loewenstein, G., Blount, S., Bazerman, M.: Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of options: a theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin 125(5), 576–590 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jevons, W.: The Theory of Political Economy. Macmillan, London (1871)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Prospect Theory: An analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica 47, 263–291 (1979)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J.L., Thaler, R.: Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: Entitlements in the market. American Economic Review 76, 728–741 (1986)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J.L., Thaler, R.H.: Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem. Journal of Political Economy 98(6), 1325–1348 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Knetsch, J.L.: The Endowment Effect and Evidence of Nonreversible Indifference Curves. American Economic Review 79(5), 1277–1284 (1989)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Köszegi, B.: Rabin A model of reference-dependent preferences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics CXXI (4), 1133–1165 (2006)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Levinthal, D.A., March, J.G.: The Myopia of Learning. Strategic Management Journal (14), 95–112 (1993)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P.: Reversals of preferences between bids and choices in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology (89), 46–55 (1971)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P.: Response-induced reversals of preference in gambling: An extended replication in Las Vegas. Journal of Experimental Psychology 101, 16–20 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    List, J.A.: Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies? Quarterly Journal of Economics 118(1), 41–71 (2003)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    List, J.A.: Neoclassical Theory versus Prospect Theory: Evidence from the Marketplace. Econometrica 72(2), 615–625 (2004)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Loomes, G., Starmer, C., Sugden, R.: Preference reversals and disparities between willingness to pay and willingness to accept in repeated markets. Journal of Economic Psychology 31, 374–387 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Payne, J.W., Bettman, J.R., Johnson, E.J.: Behavioral decision research: A constructive processing perspective. Annual Review of Psychology 43, 87–131 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Plott, C., Zeiler, K.: Exchange Asymmetries Incorrectly Interpreted as Evidence of Endowment Effect Theory and Prospect Theory? American Economic Review 97(4), 1449–1466 (2007)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rubinstein, A.: Similarity and decision-making under risk (Is there a utility theory resolution to the Allais paradox?). Journal of Economic Theory 46, 145–153 (1988)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rumiati, R.: Decidere Il Mulino (2000)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sanfey, A., Rilling, J., Leigh, E., Nystrom, L., Cohen, J.: The Neural Basis of Economic Decision-Making in the Ultimatum Game. Science New Series 300(5626), 1755–1758 (2003)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Schelling, T.: The strategy of conflict. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1960)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Schotter, A.: On the relationship between economic theory and experiments (2009)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Simon, H.A.: Models of Man, Social and Rational: Mathematical Essays on Rational Human Behavior in a Social Setting. John Wiley and Sons, New York (1957)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Simon, H.A.: Rational Decision-making in business organizations. Nobel Memorial Lecture 8 (1978)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Simon, H.A.: The Sciences of the Artificial. The MIT Press (1996)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Slovic, P.: The construction of preferences. American Psychologist 50, 364–371 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Starmer, C.: Experiments in Economics: Should We Trust the Dismal Scientists in White Coats? Journal of Economic Methodology 6, 1–30 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sugden, R., Zamarrón, I.E.: Finding the key: The riddle of focal points. Journal of Economic Psychology 27, 609–621 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sugden, R.: The Changing Relationship between Theory and Experiment in Economics. Philosophy of Science 75, 621–632 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Thaler, R.: Toward a Positive Theory of Consumer Choice. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 1(1), 39–60 (1980)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157), 1124–1131 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model. Quarterly Journal of Economics 106(4), 1039–1061 (1991)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Viner, J.: The Utility Concept in Value Theory and Its Critics. Journal Political Economy 33, 369–387 (1925)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    von Neumann, J., Morgenstern, O.: Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press (S1, 2) (1944)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Advanced StudiedUniversity of Chieti-PescaraChietiItaly

Personalised recommendations