[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/e/c/pca113.html
   My authors  Follow this author

Enrica Carbone

Citations

Many of the citations below have been collected in an experimental project, CitEc, where a more detailed citation analysis can be found. These are citations from works listed in RePEc that could be analyzed mechanically. So far, only a minority of all works could be analyzed. See under "Corrections" how you can help improve the citation analysis.

Working papers

  1. Enrica Carbone & Konstantinos Georgalos & Gerardo Infante, 2016. "Individual vs. Group Decision Making: an Experiment on Dynamic Choice under Risk and Ambiguity," Working Papers 138739716, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.

    Cited by:

    1. Miller, Logan & Rholes, Ryan, 2023. "Joint vs. Individual performance in a dynamic choice problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 897-934.
    2. Anna Trunk & Hendrik Birkel & Evi Hartmann, 2020. "On the current state of combining human and artificial intelligence for strategic organizational decision making," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(3), pages 875-919, November.
    3. Raja R Timilsina & Koji Kotani & Yoshinori Nakagawa & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2019. "Intragenerational deliberation and intergenerational sustainability dilemma," Working Papers SDES-2019-14, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Dec 2019.
    4. Aljoscha Minnich & Andreas Lange, 2023. "Ambiguity Attitudes of Individuals and Groups in Gain and Loss Domains," CESifo Working Paper Series 10781, CESifo.

  2. Enrica Carbone & Xueqi Dong & John Hey, 2015. "Portfolio Choice Under Ambiguity," Discussion Papers 15/03, Department of Economics, University of York.

    Cited by:

    1. Jim Engle-Warnick & Diego Pulido & Marine de Montaignac, 2016. "Trust, ambiguity, and financial decision-making," CIRANO Working Papers 2016s-44, CIRANO.

  3. Butler, Jeffrey & Carbone, Enrica & Conzo, Pierluigi & Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2012. "Reputation and Entry," SITE Working Paper Series 21, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics.

    Cited by:

    1. Decio Coviello & Luigi Moretti, & Spagnolo Giancarlo & Paola Valbonesi, 2018. "Court Efficiency and Procurement Performance," Post-Print hal-01476673, HAL.
    2. Matilde Cappelletti & Leonardo M. Giuffrida, 2024. "Targeted Bidders in Government Tenders," CESifo Working Paper Series 11142, CESifo.
    3. Janne Tukiainen & Sebastian Blesse & Albrecht Bohne & Leonardo M. Giuffrida & Jan Jäässkeläinen & Ari Luukinen & Antti Sieppi, 2021. "What Are the Priorities of Bureaucrats? Evidence from Conjoint Experiments with Procurement Officials," EconPol Working Paper 63, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    4. Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2012. "Reputation, competition, and entry in procurement," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 291-296.
    5. Visa Pitkänen, 2022. "Competition and efficiency in repeated procurements: Lessons from the Finnish rehabilitation markets," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(5), pages 820-835, May.

  4. Enrica Carbone & Gerardo Infante, 2012. "The Effect of a Short Planning Horizon on Intertemporal Consumption Choices," Labsi Experimental Economics Laboratory University of Siena 043, University of Siena.

    Cited by:

    1. Jim Engle-Warnick & Diego Pulido & Marine de Montaignac, 2016. "Trust, ambiguity, and financial decision-making," CIRANO Working Papers 2016s-44, CIRANO.
    2. Pico Bonilla, Claudia Milena & Sandoval Garrido, Luis Eduardo, 2024. "Intertemporal consumption and lifecycle in a pandemic context: an experimental approximation," Revista Tendencias, Universidad de Narino, vol. 25(2), pages 57-85, July.
    3. Enrica Carbone & Konstantinos Georgalos & Gerardo Infante, 2019. "Individual vs. group decision-making: an experiment on dynamic choice under risk and ambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 87(1), pages 87-122, July.
    4. Miller, Logan & Rholes, Ryan, 2023. "Joint vs. Individual performance in a dynamic choice problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 897-934.
    5. Paweł Rokita & Radosław Pietrzyk & Łukasz Feldman, 2014. "Multiobjective Optimization of Financing Household Goals with Multiple Investment Programs," Statistics in Transition new series, Główny Urząd Statystyczny (Polska), vol. 15(2), pages 243-268, March.
    6. Bachmann, Kremena & Lot, Andre & Xu, Xiaogeng & Hens, Thorsten, 2023. "Experimental Research on Retirement Decision-Making: Evidence from Replications," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    7. J Dustin Tracy & Kevin A James & Hillard Kaplan & Stephen Rassenti, 2021. "An investigation of health insurance policy and behavior in a virtual environment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-26, April.

  5. Enrica Carbone & Gerardo Infante, 2012. "Are Groups Better Planners Than Individuals? An Experimental Analysis," Labsi Experimental Economics Laboratory University of Siena 042, University of Siena.

    Cited by:

    1. Pico Bonilla, Claudia Milena & Sandoval Garrido, Luis Eduardo, 2024. "Intertemporal consumption and lifecycle in a pandemic context: an experimental approximation," Revista Tendencias, Universidad de Narino, vol. 25(2), pages 57-85, July.
    2. José J. Domínguez, 2021. "The Effectiveness of Committee Quotas; The Role of Group Dynamics," ThE Papers 21/12, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    3. Enrica Carbone & Konstantinos Georgalos & Gerardo Infante, 2019. "Individual vs. group decision-making: an experiment on dynamic choice under risk and ambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 87(1), pages 87-122, July.
    4. Miller, Logan & Rholes, Ryan, 2023. "Joint vs. Individual performance in a dynamic choice problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 897-934.
    5. Ayala Arad & Kevin P. Grubiak & Stefan P. Penczynski, 2024. "Does communicating within a team influence individuals’ reasoning and decisions?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(1), pages 109-129, March.
    6. Domínguez, José J., 2023. "Diversified committees in hiring processes: Lab evidence on group dynamics," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    7. J Dustin Tracy & Kevin A James & Hillard Kaplan & Stephen Rassenti, 2021. "An investigation of health insurance policy and behavior in a virtual environment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-26, April.

  6. Carbone, E., 1997. "Investigation to Stochastic Preference Theory Using Exeprimental Data," University of East Anglia Discussion Papers in Economics 9701, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..

    Cited by:

    1. Yukalov, V.I., 2021. "A resolution of St. Petersburg paradox," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Andreas C Drichoutis & Jayson L Lusk, 2014. "Judging Statistical Models of Individual Decision Making under Risk Using In- and Out-of-Sample Criteria," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-13, July.
    3. V. I. Yukalov, 2021. "A Resolution of St. Petersburg Paradox," Papers 2111.14635, arXiv.org.
    4. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    5. Jochen Jungeilges & Tatyana Ryazanova, 2018. "Output volatility and savings in a stochastic Goodwin economy," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 8(3), pages 355-380, December.
    6. Mador, Galit & Sonsino, Doron & Benzion, Uri, 2000. "On complexity and lotteries' evaluation - three experimental observations," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 625-637, December.
    7. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2018. "A Refinement of Logit Quantal Response Equilibrium," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-14, June.
    8. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy, 2020. "Dual choice axiom and probabilistic choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 25-41, August.

  7. Enrica Carbone & John Hey, "undated". "A Test of the Principle of Optimality," Discussion Papers 99/9, Department of Economics, University of York.

    Cited by:

    1. Muller, Wieland, 2001. "Strategies, heuristics, and the relevance of risk-aversion in a dynamic decision problem," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 493-522, August.
    2. Quemin, Simon & Trotignon, Raphaël, 2021. "Emissions trading with rolling horizons," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    3. John D. Hey, 2005. "Do People (Want To) Plan?," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 52(1), pages 122-138, February.
    4. John D. Hey & Julia A. Knoll, 2018. "How far ahead do people plan?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 12, pages 301-306, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Levesque, Moren & Schade, Christian, 2005. "Intuitive optimizing: experimental findings on time allocation decisions with newly formed ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 313-342, May.
    6. Maria J. Ruiz Martos, 2017. "Individual Dynamic Choice Behaviour and the Common Consequence Effect," ThE Papers 17/01, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    7. Spiro, Daniel, 2014. "Resource prices and planning horizons," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 159-175.
    8. Diasakos, Theodoros M, 2013. "Complexity and Bounded Rationality in Individual Decision Problemsing," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-93, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    9. Miller, Logan & Rholes, Ryan, 2023. "Joint vs. Individual performance in a dynamic choice problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 897-934.
    10. John D. Hey & Julia A. Knoll, 2018. "Strategies in dynamic decision making – An experimental investigation of the rationality of decision behaviour," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 9, pages 223-233, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Amit Kothiyal & Vitalie Spinu & Peter Wakker, 2014. "An experimental test of prospect theory for predicting choice under ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 1-17, February.
    12. David J. Freeman & Kevin Laughren, 2024. "Task completion without commitment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(2), pages 273-298, April.
    13. Antoine Nebout & Marc Willinger, 2014. "Are Non-Expected Utility individuals really Dynamically Inconsistent? Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 14-08, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Jul 2014.
    14. Maria J. Ruiz Martos, 2018. "Sequential Common Consequence Effect and Incentives," ThE Papers 18/04, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    15. Yamamori, Tetsuo & Iwata, Kazuyuki & Ogawa, Akira, 2018. "Does money illusion matter in intertemporal decision making?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 465-473.

  8. John Hey & Enrica Carbone, "undated". "Which Error Theory is Best?," Discussion Papers 99/31, Department of Economics, University of York.

    Cited by:

    1. John Hey, 2018. "Comparing Theories: What Are We Looking For?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 14, pages 331-352, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Andrea Morone, 2004. "Comparison of Mean-Variance theory and Expected-Utility theory through a Laboratory Experiment," Experimental 0402001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Michael Moutoussis & Raymond J Dolan & Peter Dayan, 2016. "How People Use Social Information to Find out What to Want in the Paradigmatic Case of Inter-temporal Preferences," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-17, July.

Articles

  1. Carbone, Enrica & Infante, Gerardo, 2015. "Are groups better planners than individuals? An experimental analysis," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 112-119.
    See citations under working paper version above.
  2. Carbone, Enrica & Duffy, John, 2014. "Lifecycle consumption plans, social learning and external habits: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 413-427.

    Cited by:

    1. Camille Cornand & Frank Heinemann, 2019. "Experiments in macroeconomics: methods and applications," Post-Print halshs-01809937, HAL.
    2. Antinyan, Armenak & Horváth, Gergely & Jia, Mofei, 2020. "Positional concerns and social network structure: An experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    3. Nobuyuki Hanaki & Yuta Shimodaira, 2024. "Wealth preferences and wealth inequality: Experimental evidence," ISER Discussion Paper 1260, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    4. Manger, Mark S. & Matthews, J. Scott, 2021. "Knowing when to splurge: Precautionary saving and Chinese-Canadians," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    5. Thomas Meissner, 2016. "Intertemporal consumption and debt aversion: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(2), pages 281-298, June.
    6. Thiago Fonseca Morello & Luís Fernando Silva e Silva, 2023. "Garnering support for Pigouvian taxation with tax return: a lab experiment," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 25(2), pages 115-142, April.
    7. Brounen, Dirk & Koedijk, Kees G. & Pownall, Rachel A.J., 2016. "Household financial planning and savings behavior," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 95-107.
    8. Carbone, Enrica & Infante, Gerardo, 2015. "Are groups better planners than individuals? An experimental analysis," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 112-119.
    9. Jose Apesteguia & Jörg Oechssler & Simon Weidenholzer, 2020. "Copy Trading," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(12), pages 5608-5622, December.
      • Jose Apesteguia & Jörg Oechssler & Simon Weidenholzer, 2018. "Copy trading," Economics Working Papers 1615, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Sep 2019.
      • Jose Apesteguia & Jörg Oechssler & Simon Weidenholzer, 2018. "Copy Trading," Working Papers 1048, Barcelona School of Economics.
      • Apesteguia, Jose & Oechssler, Jörg & Weidenholzer, Simon, 2018. "Copy Trading," Working Papers 0649, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    10. Duffy, John & Li, Yue, 2019. "Lifecycle consumption under different income profiles: Evidence and theory," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 74-94.
    11. Enrica Carbone & Konstantinos Georgalos & Gerardo Infante, 2019. "Individual vs. group decision-making: an experiment on dynamic choice under risk and ambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 87(1), pages 87-122, July.
    12. Dina Tasneem & Jim Engle-Warnick, 2018. "Decision Rules for Precautionary and Retirement Savings," CIRANO Working Papers 2018s-22, CIRANO.
    13. Tetsuo Yamamori & Kazuyuki Iwata & Akira Ogawa, 2020. "Effect of Longevity on Saving Behavior: An Experimental Study on the Simple Intertemporal Life-Cycle Problem," Working Papers e153, Tokyo Center for Economic Research.
    14. Miller, Logan & Rholes, Ryan, 2023. "Joint vs. Individual performance in a dynamic choice problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 897-934.
    15. Yasufumi Gemma, 2016. "Money Illusion Matters for Consumption-Saving Decision-Making: An Experimental Investigation," IMES Discussion Paper Series 16-E-06, Institute for Monetary and Economic Studies, Bank of Japan.
    16. Dina Tasneem & Marine de Montaignac & Jim Engle-Warnick & Audrey Azerot, 2018. "A Laboratory Study of Nudge with Retirement Savings," CIRANO Working Papers 2018s-23, CIRANO.
    17. Steve Fleetwood, 2021. "A definition of habit for socio-economics," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 79(2), pages 131-165, April.
    18. John Duffy, 2022. "Why macroeconomics needs experimental evidence," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 5-29, January.
    19. Wu, Xuepin & Ma, Yongjun, 2023. "Research on the comparison effect of urban residents' consumption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    20. Mark S. Manger & J. Scott Matthews, 2021. "Knowing When to Splurge: Precautionary Saving and Chinese-Canadians," Papers 2108.00519, arXiv.org.
    21. Lu, Kelin, 2022. "Overreaction to capital taxation in saving decisions," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    22. Bachmann, Kremena & Lot, Andre & Xu, Xiaogeng & Hens, Thorsten, 2023. "Experimental Research on Retirement Decision-Making: Evidence from Replications," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    23. Nadja König, 2016. "Household Debt and Macrodynamics - How do Income Distribution and Insolvency Regulations interact?," Macroeconomics and Finance Series 201603, University of Hamburg, Department of Socioeconomics.
    24. Antinyan, Armenak & Horváth, Gergely & Jia, Mofei, 2020. "Curbing the consumption of positional goods: Behavioral interventions versus taxation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1-21.
    25. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.

  3. Enrica Carbone & Gerardo Infante, 2014. "Comparing behavior under risk and under ambiguity in a lifecycle experiment," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(3), pages 313-322, October.
    See citations under working paper version above.
  4. Ponti, Giovanni & Carbone, Enrica, 2009. "Positional learning with noise," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 225-241, December.

    Cited by:

    1. Antonio Filippin & Paolo Crosetto, 2014. "A reconsideration of gender differences in risk attitudes," Post-Print hal-01997771, HAL.
    2. Cueva, Carlos & Iturbe-Ormaetxe, Iñigo & Mata-Pérez, Esther & Ponti, Giovanni & Sartarelli, Marcello & Yu, Haihan & Zhukova, Vita, 2015. "Cognitive (Ir)reflection: New Experimental Evidence," QM&ET Working Papers 15-6, University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory.
    3. Paolo Crosetto & Antonio Filippin & Janna Heider, 2013. "A Study of Outcome Reporting Bias Using Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," CESifo Working Paper Series 4466, CESifo.
    4. Francesco Feri & Miguel Ángel Meléndez-Jiménez & Giovanni Ponti & Fernando Vega Redondo, 2008. "Error Cascades in Observational Learning: An Experiment on the Chinos Game," Working Papers 2008-21, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    5. Muñoz-Murillo, Melisa & Álvarez-Franco, Pilar B. & Restrepo-Tobón, Diego A., 2020. "The role of cognitive abilities on financial literacy: New experimental evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    6. Feri, Francesco & Meléndez-Jiménez, Miguel A. & Ponti, Giovanni & Vega-Redondo, Fernando & Yu, Haihan, 2020. "Pooling or fooling? An experiment on signaling," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 582-596.

  5. Enrica Carbone, 2008. "Temptations and Dynamic Consistency," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 229-248, March.

    Cited by:

    1. Stephen L. Cheung & Agnieszka Tymula & Xueting Wang, 2022. "Present bias for monetary and dietary rewards," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(4), pages 1202-1233, September.
    2. Laibson, David I., 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," Scholarly Articles 4481499, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    3. Arthur E. Attema & Han Bleichrodt & Kirsten I. M. Rohde & Peter P. Wakker, 2010. "Time-Tradeoff Sequences for Analyzing Discounting and Time Inconsistency," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(11), pages 2015-2030, November.

  6. Enrica Carbone, 2006. "Understanding intertemporal choices," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(8), pages 889-898.

    Cited by:

    1. Nobuyuki Hanaki & Yuta Shimodaira, 2024. "Wealth preferences and wealth inequality: Experimental evidence," ISER Discussion Paper 1260, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    2. John Duffy & Yue Li, 2016. "Lifecycle Consumption Under Different Income Profiles: Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 161702, University of California-Irvine, Department of Economics.
    3. Carbone, Enrica & Duffy, John, 2014. "Lifecycle consumption plans, social learning and external habits: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 413-427.
    4. Thomas Meissner, 2016. "Intertemporal consumption and debt aversion: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(2), pages 281-298, June.
    5. Dina Tasneem & Audrey Azerot & Marine de Montaignac & Jim Engle-Warnick, 2018. "A Laboratory Study of the Effect of Financial Literacy Training on Retirement Savings," CIRANO Working Papers 2018s-24, CIRANO.
    6. T. Ballinger & Eric Hudson & Leonie Karkoviata & Nathaniel Wilcox, 2011. "Saving behavior and cognitive abilities," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(3), pages 349-374, September.
    7. Duffy, John & Li, Yue, 2019. "Lifecycle consumption under different income profiles: Evidence and theory," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 74-94.
    8. Dina Tasneem & Jim Engle-Warnick, 2018. "Decision Rules for Precautionary and Retirement Savings," CIRANO Working Papers 2018s-22, CIRANO.
    9. Miller, Logan & Rholes, Ryan, 2023. "Joint vs. Individual performance in a dynamic choice problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 897-934.
    10. Ngo, Jacqueline & Smith, Alexander, 2020. "A public good game with technological growth," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    11. Dina Tasneem & Marine de Montaignac & Jim Engle-Warnick & Audrey Azerot, 2018. "A Laboratory Study of Nudge with Retirement Savings," CIRANO Working Papers 2018s-23, CIRANO.
    12. Enrica Carbone, 2008. "Temptations and Dynamic Consistency," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 229-248, March.
    13. John Duffy, 2022. "Why macroeconomics needs experimental evidence," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 5-29, January.
    14. Lu, Kelin, 2022. "Overreaction to capital taxation in saving decisions," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    15. Bachmann, Kremena & Lot, Andre & Xu, Xiaogeng & Hens, Thorsten, 2023. "Experimental Research on Retirement Decision-Making: Evidence from Replications," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    16. John Duffy & Enrica Carbone, 2013. "Lifecycle Consumption Plans, Social Learning and External Habits: Experimental Evidence," Working Paper 513, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Sep 2013.

  7. Enrica Carbone, 2005. "Demographics and Behaviour," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(3), pages 217-232, September.

    Cited by:

    1. Fiore, Annamaria, 2009. "Experimental Economics: Some Methodological Notes," MPRA Paper 12498, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Juan Camilo Cárdenas, 2009. "Experiments in Environment and Development," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 157-182, September.
    3. Steffen Huck & Wieland Müller, 2012. "Allais for all: Revisiting the paradox in a large representative sample," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 261-293, June.
    4. Huck, S. & Müller, W., 2007. "Allais for All : Revisiting the Paradox," Other publications TiSEM 07a8abb4-e971-4b54-83d2-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Dina Tasneem & Audrey Azerot & Marine de Montaignac & Jim Engle-Warnick, 2018. "A Laboratory Study of the Effect of Financial Literacy Training on Retirement Savings," CIRANO Working Papers 2018s-24, CIRANO.
    6. Enrica Carbone, 2006. "Understanding intertemporal choices," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(8), pages 889-898.
    7. Carbone, Enrica & Infante, Gerardo, 2015. "Are groups better planners than individuals? An experimental analysis," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 112-119.
    8. Enrica Carbone & Konstantinos Georgalos & Gerardo Infante, 2019. "Individual vs. group decision-making: an experiment on dynamic choice under risk and ambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 87(1), pages 87-122, July.
    9. Vivi Alatas & Lisa Cameron & Ananish Chaudhuri & Nisvan Erkal & Lata Gangadharan, 2009. "Subject pool effects in a corruption experiment: A comparison of Indonesian public servants and Indonesian students," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(1), pages 113-132, March.
    10. Dina Tasneem & Jim Engle-Warnick, 2018. "Decision Rules for Precautionary and Retirement Savings," CIRANO Working Papers 2018s-22, CIRANO.
    11. Miller, Logan & Rholes, Ryan, 2023. "Joint vs. Individual performance in a dynamic choice problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 897-934.
    12. Feltovich, Nick & Ejebu, Ourega-Zoé, 2014. "Do positional goods inhibit saving? Evidence from a life-cycle experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PB), pages 440-454.
    13. Bachmann, Kremena & Lot, Andre & Xu, Xiaogeng & Hens, Thorsten, 2023. "Experimental Research on Retirement Decision-Making: Evidence from Replications," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).

  8. Enrica Carbone & John D. Hey, 2004. "The effect of unemployment on consumption: an experimental analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(497), pages 660-683, July.

    Cited by:

    1. Rostam-Afschar, Davud & Meissner, Thomas, 2014. "Do tax cuts increase consumption? An experimental test of Ricardian Equivalence," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100348, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    2. Enrica Carbone, 2005. "Demographics and Behaviour," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(3), pages 217-232, September.
    3. Roberto Ricciuti, 2005. "Bringing Macroeconomics into the Lab," Labsi Experimental Economics Laboratory University of Siena 004, University of Siena.
    4. Nobuyuki Hanaki & Yuta Shimodaira, 2024. "Wealth preferences and wealth inequality: Experimental evidence," ISER Discussion Paper 1260, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    5. Luhan, Wolfgang J. & Scharler, Johann, 2013. "Monetary Policy, Inflation Illusion and the Taylor Principle – An Experimental Study," Ruhr Economic Papers 402, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    6. Battaglini, Marco & Nunnari, Salvatore & Palfrey, Thomas R, 2016. "The Political Economy of Public Debt: A Laboratory Study," CEPR Discussion Papers 11357, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F., 2012. "A test of independence of discounting from quality of life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 22-34.
    8. Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Keldenich, Klemens, 2012. "The More You Know? – Consumption Behavior and the Communication of Economic Information," Ruhr Economic Papers 387, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    9. Enrica Carbone & Gerardo Infante, 2012. "The Effect of a Short Planning Horizon on Intertemporal Consumption Choices," Labsi Experimental Economics Laboratory University of Siena 043, University of Siena.
    10. Carbone, Enrica & Duffy, John, 2014. "Lifecycle consumption plans, social learning and external habits: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 413-427.
    11. Thomas Meissner, 2016. "Intertemporal consumption and debt aversion: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(2), pages 281-298, June.
    12. Luhan, Wolfgang J. & Scharler, Johann, 2014. "Inflation illusion and the Taylor principle: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 94-110.
    13. Dina Tasneem & Audrey Azerot & Marine de Montaignac & Jim Engle-Warnick, 2018. "A Laboratory Study of the Effect of Financial Literacy Training on Retirement Savings," CIRANO Working Papers 2018s-24, CIRANO.
    14. T. Parker Ballinger & Michael G. Palumbo & Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2003. "Precautionary saving and social learning across generations: an experiment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(490), pages 920-947, October.
    15. Enrica Carbone & John Hey & Tibor Neugebauer, 2021. "An Experimental Comparison of Two Exchange Economies: Long-Lived Asset vs. Short-Lived Asset," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6946-6962, November.
    16. Enrica Carbone, 2006. "Understanding intertemporal choices," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(8), pages 889-898.
    17. Carbone, Enrica & Infante, Gerardo, 2015. "Are groups better planners than individuals? An experimental analysis," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 112-119.
    18. Sinitskaya, Ekaterina, 2014. "Computational modeling of an economy using elements of artificial intelligence," ISU General Staff Papers 201401010800005291, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    19. T. Ballinger & Eric Hudson & Leonie Karkoviata & Nathaniel Wilcox, 2011. "Saving behavior and cognitive abilities," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(3), pages 349-374, September.
    20. Enrique Fatás & Juan A. Lacomba & Francisco M. Lagos & Ana I. Moro, 2008. "Experimental tests on consumption, savings and pensions," ThE Papers 08/14, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    21. Gary Charness & Peter J. Kuhn, 2010. "Lab Labor: What Can Labor Economists Learn from the Lab?," NBER Working Papers 15913, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Duffy, John & Li, Yue, 2019. "Lifecycle consumption under different income profiles: Evidence and theory," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 74-94.
    23. Enrica Carbone & Konstantinos Georgalos & Gerardo Infante, 2019. "Individual vs. group decision-making: an experiment on dynamic choice under risk and ambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 87(1), pages 87-122, July.
    24. Ferruccio Ponzano & Roberto Ricciuti, 2018. "Growth and Inequality in an Experimental AK Model," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 4(2), pages 313-330, July.
    25. Tomoki Kitamura & Yasuhiro Yonezawa & Munenori Nakasato, 2010. "Saving Behavior under the Influence of Income Risk: An Experimental Study," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 30(2), pages 967-974.
    26. Enrique Fatás & Juan Lacomba & Francisco Lagos & Ana Moro-Egido, 2013. "An experimental test on dynamic consumption and lump-sum pensions," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 393-413, November.
    27. Dina Tasneem & Jim Engle-Warnick, 2018. "Decision Rules for Precautionary and Retirement Savings," CIRANO Working Papers 2018s-22, CIRANO.
    28. Tetsuo Yamamori & Kazuyuki Iwata & Akira Ogawa, 2020. "Effect of Longevity on Saving Behavior: An Experimental Study on the Simple Intertemporal Life-Cycle Problem," Working Papers e153, Tokyo Center for Economic Research.
    29. Gechert, Sebastian & Siebert, Jan, 2022. "Preferences over wealth: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 1297-1317.
    30. M. I. Lau & T. Neugebauer & U. Schmidt, 2014. "Preface," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(3), pages 287-290, October.
    31. Geiger, Martin & Luhan, Wolfgang J. & Scharler, Johann, 2016. "When do fiscal consolidations lead to consumption booms? Lessons from a laboratory experiment," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 1-20.
    32. Kendall, Chad & Oprea, Ryan, 2018. "Are biased beliefs fit to survive? An experimental test of the market selection hypothesis," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 342-371.
    33. Enrica Carbone & John Hey & Tibor Neugebauer, 2018. "An Experimental Comparison of Two Exchange Mechanisms, An Asset Market versus a Credit Market," Discussion Papers 18/08, Department of Economics, University of York.
    34. Miller, Logan & Rholes, Ryan, 2023. "Joint vs. Individual performance in a dynamic choice problem," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 897-934.
    35. Enrique Fatas & Juan A. Lacomba & Francisco Lagos, 2007. "An Experimental Test On Retirement Decisions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(3), pages 602-614, July.
    36. Arns, Jürgen & Bhattacharya, Kaushik, 2005. "Modelling Aggregate Consumption Growth with Time-Varying Parameters," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers 15/2005, University of Bonn, Bonn Graduate School of Economics (BGSE).
    37. Ferruccio Ponzano & Roberto Ricciuti, 2012. "An Experimental AK Model of Growth," CESifo Working Paper Series 3744, CESifo.
    38. Orland, Andreas & Roos, Michael W.M., 2019. "Price-setting with quadratic adjustment costs: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 88-116.
    39. Ngo, Jacqueline & Smith, Alexander, 2020. "A public good game with technological growth," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    40. Petr Frejlich & Helena Chytilová & Vojtěch Kotrba & Pavel Kotrba, 2023. "Experimentální ověření platnosti Barrovy-Ricardovy ekvivalence [Experimental Verification of Barro-Ricardo Equivalence Theorem]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2023(4), pages 366-389.
    41. Dina Tasneem & Marine de Montaignac & Jim Engle-Warnick & Audrey Azerot, 2018. "A Laboratory Study of Nudge with Retirement Savings," CIRANO Working Papers 2018s-23, CIRANO.
    42. John Duffy, 2022. "Why macroeconomics needs experimental evidence," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 5-29, January.
    43. Halim, Edward & Riyanto, Yohanes E. & Roy, Nilanjan, 2022. "Sharing idiosyncratic risk even though prices are “wrong”," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    44. Pavan, Marina & Barreda-Tarrazona, Iván, 2020. "Should I default on my mortgage even if I can pay? Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    45. Sebastian Gechert & Jan Siebert, 2019. "Preferences over wealth," IMK Working Paper 200-2019, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
    46. Feltovich, Nick & Ejebu, Ourega-Zoé, 2014. "Do positional goods inhibit saving? Evidence from a life-cycle experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PB), pages 440-454.
    47. Bachmann, Kremena & Lot, Andre & Xu, Xiaogeng & Hens, Thorsten, 2023. "Experimental Research on Retirement Decision-Making: Evidence from Replications," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    48. Koehler, Derek J. & Langstaff, Jesse & Liu, Wu-Qi, 2015. "A simulated financial savings task for studying consumption and retirement decision making," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 89-97.
    49. John Duffy & Enrica Carbone, 2013. "Lifecycle Consumption Plans, Social Learning and External Habits: Experimental Evidence," Working Paper 513, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Sep 2013.

  9. Enrica Carbone & John Hey, 2001. "A Test of the Principle of Optimality," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 263-281, May.
    See citations under working paper version above.
  10. Carbone, Enrica & Hey, John D, 2000. "Which Error Story Is Best?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 161-176, March.

    Cited by:

    1. Birnbaum, Michael H. & Gutierrez, Roman J., 2007. "Testing for intransitivity of preferences predicted by a lexicographic semi-order," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 96-112, September.
    2. John Hey & Andrea Morone & Ulrich Schmidt, 2009. "Noise and bias in eliciting preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 213-235, December.
    3. Adam S. Booij & Bernard M.S. Van Praag & Gijs Van De Kuilen & Bernard M.S. van Praag, 2009. "A Parametric Analysis of Prospect Theory's Functionals for the General Population," CESifo Working Paper Series 2609, CESifo.
    4. Olivier L'Haridon & Mohammed Abdellaoui & A. Driouchi, 2011. "Risk aversion elicitation: reconciling tractability and bias minimization," Post-Print hal-00609543, HAL.
    5. Sarah Jacobson & Ragan Petrie, 2009. "Learning from mistakes: What do inconsistent choices over risk tell us?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 143-158, April.
    6. Andreas C Drichoutis & Jayson L Lusk, 2014. "Judging Statistical Models of Individual Decision Making under Risk Using In- and Out-of-Sample Criteria," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-13, July.
    7. Muye Chen & Michel Regenwetter & Clintin P. Davis-Stober, 2021. "Collective Choice May Tell Nothing About Anyone’s Individual Preferences," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, March.
    8. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    9. Michael Birnbaum & Ulrich Schmidt, 2008. "An experimental investigation of violations of transitivity in choice under uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 77-91, August.
    10. Birnbaum, Michael H. & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2006. "Empirical Tests of Intransitivity Predicted by Models of Risky Choice," Economics Working Papers 2006-10, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    11. Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2022. "Chance theory: A separation of riskless and risky utility," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 1-32, August.
    12. Booij, Adam S. & van Praag, Bernard M.S., 2009. "A simultaneous approach to the estimation of risk aversion and the subjective time discount rate," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(1-2), pages 374-388, May.
    13. Birnbaum, Michael H., 2007. "Tests of branch splitting and branch-splitting independence in Allais paradoxes with positive and mixed consequences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 154-173, March.
    14. Birnbaum, Michael H., 2004. "Tests of rank-dependent utility and cumulative prospect theory in gambles represented by natural frequencies: Effects of format, event framing, and branch splitting," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 40-65, September.
    15. Rebecca Westphal & Didier Sornette, 2024. "How Market Intervention can Prevent Bubbles and Crashes: An Agent Based Modelling Approach," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 64(3), pages 1315-1356, September.
    16. John Hey, 2005. "Why We Should Not Be Silent About Noise," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(4), pages 325-345, December.
    17. Serge Blondel, 2002. "Testing Theories of Choice Under Risk: Estimation of Individual Functionals," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 251-265, May.
    18. Meraner, Manuela & Musshoff, Oliver & Finger, Robert, 2018. "Using involvement to reduce inconsistencies in risk preference elicitation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 22-33.
    19. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2007. "Stochastic expected utility theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 259-286, June.
    20. Schmidt, Ulrich & Neugebauer, Tibor, 2003. "An Experimental Investigation of the Role of Errors for Explaining Violations of Expected Utility," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-279, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    21. Pace, Noemi & Daidone, Silvio, 2024. "Impact of development interventions on individual risk preferences: Evidence from a field-lab experiment and survey data," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    22. Michael Birnbaum & Ulrich Schmidt, 2010. "Testing transitivity in choice under risk," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 599-614, October.
    23. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    24. Estepa-Mohedano, Lorenzo & Espinosa, María Paz, 2023. "Comparing risk elicitation in lotteries with visual or contextual aids," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    25. Golo-Friedrich Bauermeister & Daniel Hermann & Oliver Musshoff, 2018. "Consistency of determined risk attitudes and probability weightings across different elicitation methods," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(4), pages 627-644, June.
    26. Gijs Kuilen & Peter Wakker, 2006. "Learning in the Allais paradox," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 155-164, December.
    27. Estepa-Mohedano, Lorenzo & Espinosa, Maria Paz, 2021. "Comparing risk elicitation in lotteries with visual or contextual framing aids," MPRA Paper 108440, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    28. Henry Stott, 2006. "Cumulative prospect theory's functional menagerie," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 101-130, March.
    29. David M. Bruner, 2017. "Does decision error decrease with risk aversion?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(1), pages 259-273, March.
    30. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy, 2024. "Harmonic choice model," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 49-69, February.
    31. Raffaello Seri & Samuele Centorrino & Michele Bernasconi, 2019. "Nonparametric Estimation and Inference in Economic and Psychological Experiments," Papers 1904.11156, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2019.
    32. Marley, A. A. J., 2002. "Random utility models and their applications: recent developments," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 289-302, July.

  11. Carbone, Enrica, 1997. "Discriminating between Preference Functionals: A Monte Carlo Study," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 29-54, October.

    Cited by:

    1. Healy, Paul J. & Park, Hyoeun, 2023. "Model selection accuracy in behavioral game theory: A simulation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    2. John Hey, 2018. "Comparing Theories: What Are We Looking For?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 14, pages 331-352, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Andrea Morone, 2004. "Comparison of Mean-Variance theory and Expected-Utility theory through a Laboratory Experiment," Experimental 0402001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Cheng-Min Feng & Chao-Chung Kang & Haider Ali Khan, 2002. "On Modelling Negotiations within a Dynamic Multi-objective Programming Framework: Analysis of Risk Measurement with an Application to Large BOT Projects," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-161, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.

  12. Carbone, Enrica, 1997. "Investigation of stochastic preference theory using experimental data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 305-311, December.

    Cited by:

    1. John Hey & Andrea Morone & Ulrich Schmidt, 2009. "Noise and bias in eliciting preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 213-235, December.
    2. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    3. David M. Bruner, 2009. "Changing the Probability versus Changing the Reward," Working Papers 09-04, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    4. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2012. "Probabilistic choice and stochastic dominance," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 50(1), pages 59-83, May.
    5. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy & Ganna Pogrebna, 2010. "Models of stochastic choice and decision theories: why both are important for analyzing decisions," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(6), pages 963-986.
    6. Yukalov, V.I., 2021. "A resolution of St. Petersburg paradox," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    7. Andreas C Drichoutis & Jayson L Lusk, 2014. "Judging Statistical Models of Individual Decision Making under Risk Using In- and Out-of-Sample Criteria," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-13, July.
    8. Egil Matsen & Bjarne Strøm, 2006. "Joker: Choice in a simple game with large stakes," Working Paper Series 8307, Department of Economics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
    9. Birnbaum, Michael H., 2004. "Tests of rank-dependent utility and cumulative prospect theory in gambles represented by natural frequencies: Effects of format, event framing, and branch splitting," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 40-65, September.
    10. Wilcox, Nathaniel, 2007. "Stochastically more risk averse: A contextual theory of stochastic discrete choice under risk," MPRA Paper 11851, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. John Hey, 2018. "Comparing Theories: What Are We Looking For?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 14, pages 331-352, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. John Hey, 2005. "Why We Should Not Be Silent About Noise," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(4), pages 325-345, December.
    13. David Buschena & David Zilberman, 2000. "Generalized Expected Utility, Heteroscedastic Error, and Path Dependence in Risky Choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 67-88, January.
    14. John Hey, 2001. "Does Repetition Improve Consistency?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 4(1), pages 5-54, June.
    15. Andrea Morone, 2004. "Comparison of Mean-Variance theory and Expected-Utility theory through a Laboratory Experiment," Experimental 0402001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. John K. Dagsvik, 2006. "Axiomatization of Stochastic Models for Choice under Uncertainty," Discussion Papers 465, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    17. V. I. Yukalov, 2021. "A Resolution of St. Petersburg Paradox," Papers 2111.14635, arXiv.org.
    18. Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
    19. Blavatskyy, Pavlo R., 2008. "Stochastic utility theorem," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(11), pages 1049-1056, December.
    20. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    21. John K. Dagsvik, 2005. "Choice under Uncertainty and Bounded Rationality," Discussion Papers 409, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    22. Jochen Jungeilges & Tatyana Ryazanova, 2018. "Output volatility and savings in a stochastic Goodwin economy," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 8(3), pages 355-380, December.
    23. Henry Stott, 2006. "Cumulative prospect theory's functional menagerie," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 101-130, March.
    24. David M. Bruner, 2017. "Does decision error decrease with risk aversion?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(1), pages 259-273, March.
    25. Mador, Galit & Sonsino, Doron & Benzion, Uri, 2000. "On complexity and lotteries' evaluation - three experimental observations," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 625-637, December.
    26. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2018. "A Refinement of Logit Quantal Response Equilibrium," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-14, June.
    27. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy, 2020. "Dual choice axiom and probabilistic choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 25-41, August.

  13. Hey, John D. & Carbone, Enrica, 1995. "Stochastic choice with deterministic preferences: An experimental investigation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 161-167, February.

    Cited by:

    1. Caliari, Daniele, 2023. "Rationality is not consistency," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2023-304, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    2. Addison Pan, 2022. "Empirical tests of stochastic binary choice models," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 93(2), pages 259-280, September.
    3. Wilcox, Nathaniel, 2007. "Stochastically more risk averse: A contextual theory of stochastic discrete choice under risk," MPRA Paper 11851, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. John Hey, 2018. "Comparing Theories: What Are We Looking For?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 14, pages 331-352, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Charles Mason & Jason Shogren & Chad Settle & John List, 2005. "Investigating Risky Choices Over Losses Using Experimental Data," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 187-215, September.
    6. Blavatskyy, Pavlo, 2018. "Fechner’s strong utility model for choice among n>2 alternatives: Risky lotteries, Savage acts, and intertemporal payoffs," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 75-82.
    7. John Hey, 2005. "Why We Should Not Be Silent About Noise," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 8(4), pages 325-345, December.
    8. Blavatskyy, Pavlo, 2016. "Probability weighting and L-moments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 255(1), pages 103-109.
    9. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2007. "Stochastic expected utility theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 259-286, June.
    10. Erick Delage & Daniel Kuhn & Wolfram Wiesemann, 2019. "“Dice”-sion–Making Under Uncertainty: When Can a Random Decision Reduce Risk?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(7), pages 3282-3301, July.
    11. Andrea Morone, 2004. "Comparison of Mean-Variance theory and Expected-Utility theory through a Laboratory Experiment," Experimental 0402001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Ferro, Giuseppe M. & Kovalenko, Tatyana & Sornette, Didier, 2021. "Quantum decision theory augments rank-dependent expected utility and Cumulative Prospect Theory," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    13. Hey, John D., 1995. "Experimental investigations of errors in decision making under risk," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 633-640, April.
    14. Bhattacharya, Mihir & Mukherjee, Saptarshi & Sonal, Ruhi, 2020. "Consumer equilibrium, random choice and hemi-Bayesian revision rule," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    15. Blavatskyy, Pavlo R., 2008. "Stochastic utility theorem," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(11), pages 1049-1056, December.
    16. Chew, Soo Hong & Miao, Bin & Shen, Qiang & Zhong, Songfa, 2022. "Multiple-switching behavior in choice-list elicitation of risk preference," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    17. Caliari, Daniele, 2023. "Behavioural welfare analysis and revealed preference: Theory and experimental evidence," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2023-303, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    18. John A. Clithero & Jae Joon Lee & Joshua Tasoff, 2019. "Supervised Machine Learning for Eliciting Individual Demand," Papers 1904.13329, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2021.
    19. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    20. Jochen Jungeilges & Tatyana Ryazanova, 2018. "Output volatility and savings in a stochastic Goodwin economy," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 8(3), pages 355-380, December.
    21. Michalis Drouvelis & Johannes Lohse, 2020. "Cognitive abilities and risk taking: the role of preferences," Discussion Papers 20-02, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    22. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy, 2024. "Harmonic choice model," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 49-69, February.
    23. Marley, A. A. J., 2002. "Random utility models and their applications: recent developments," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 289-302, July.
    24. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy, 2020. "Dual choice axiom and probabilistic choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 25-41, August.

  14. Enrica Carbone & John D. Hey, 1995. "A Comparison of the Estimates of Expected Utility and Non-Expected-Utility Preference Functionals," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 20(1), pages 111-133, June.

    Cited by:

    1. Bruno Jullien & Bernard Salanié, 1997. "Estimating Preferences under Risk : The Case of Racetrack Bettors," Working Papers 97-39, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    2. Nuno Garoupa, 1998. "Crime and punishment: Further results," Economics Working Papers 344, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    3. Felix Holzmeister & Matthias Stefan, 2019. "The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in)consistency?," Working Papers 2019-19, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    4. Holzmeister, Felix & Stefan, Matthias, 2019. "The Risk Elicitation Puzzle Revisited: Across-Methods (In)consistency?," OSF Preprints pj9u2, Center for Open Science.
    5. Felix Holzmeister & Matthias Stefan, 2021. "The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in)consistency?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(2), pages 593-616, June.

  15. Carbone, Enrica & Hey, John D, 1994. "Discriminating between Preference Functionals: A Preliminary Monte Carlo Study," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 223-242, May.

    Cited by:

    1. David M. Bruner, 2009. "Changing the Probability versus Changing the Reward," Working Papers 09-04, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    2. John Hey & Enrica Carbone, "undated". "Which Error Theory is Best?," Discussion Papers 99/31, Department of Economics, University of York.
    3. Healy, Paul J. & Park, Hyoeun, 2023. "Model selection accuracy in behavioral game theory: A simulation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    4. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    5. John Hey, 2018. "Comparing Theories: What Are We Looking For?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 14, pages 331-352, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Bertrand Munier, 1995. "Méthodes expérimentales d'évaluation des théories du risque," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 46(3), pages 939-949.
    7. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    8. Henry Stott, 2006. "Cumulative prospect theory's functional menagerie," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 101-130, March.
    9. David M. Bruner, 2017. "Does decision error decrease with risk aversion?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(1), pages 259-273, March.

Books

  1. Enrica Carbone & Chris Starmer (ed.), 2007. "New Developments in Experimental Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, volume 0, number 3945.

    Cited by:

    1. Pessali, Huascar & Berger, Bruno, 2010. "A teoria da perspectiva e as mudanças de preferência no mainstream: um prospecto lakatoseano [Prospect theory and preference change in the mainstream of economics: a Lakatosian prospect]," MPRA Paper 26104, University Library of Munich, Germany.

IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.