No label defined (Q4953787)

This paper revisits the Ellsberg paradox. Some cases are analysed. They permit to establish relevant aspects of the rationality of the decision making process. The Bayesian rationality is compared with the observed behaviour. It contradicts the expected preference to decisions based on subjective probabilities. The author derives that the effect of observing a set of results by risk averse devisors is the preference of unambiguous situations. The rationality of using subjective expected utilities is reworked. The attitude in betting is characterised by the mean and the variance of the gain . The betting act for any number of observations may be analysed through this parameters. The results of Ellsberg are derived using them. An example of investment under uncertain profits is discussed with illustration purposes. For the entire collection see [Zbl 0930.00096].