The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ambiguity Aversion, Robustness, and the Variational Representation of Preferences
Abstract
We characterize, in the Anscombe–Aumann framework, the preferences for which there are a utility functionu on outcomes and an ambiguity indexc on the set of probabilities on the states of the world such that, for all acts f and g, . The function u represents the decision maker's risk attitudes, while the index c captures his ambiguity attitudes. These preferences include the multiple priors preferences of Gilboa and Schmeidler and the multiplier preferences of Hansen and Sargent. This provides a rigorous decision-theoretic foundation for the latter model, which has been widely used in macroeconomics and finance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
“Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms.”
Ellsberg, D. (1961) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/1884324 · Cited by 7,891
Neural systems responding to degrees of uncertainty in human decision-making
Hsu, M., Bhatt, M., Adolphs, R., Tranel, D., & Camerer, C. F. (2005) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1115327 · Cited by 1,411
On the robustness and possible accounts of ambiguity aversion
Keren, G., & Gerritsen, L. E. M. (1999) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/s0001-6918(99)00034-7 · Cited by 165 · cited 2×
“, Keren and Gerritsen [30], Kühberger and Perner [31]) suggests that in this case the agent may behave as if he were playing against an informed opponent who might take advantage of this uncertainty and turn it against him.”
Background
Cited by
Mastrobuoni, G. (2009) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2009.07.009 · Cited by 448
PORTFOLIO SELECTION WITH MONOTONE MEAN‐VARIANCE PREFERENCES
Maccheroni, F., Marinacci, M., Rustichini, A., & Taboga, M. (2009) · Mathematical Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9965.2009.00376.x · Cited by 426
Self-citationAmbiguity, Learning, and Asset Returns
(2012) · Econometrica · doi:10.3982/ecta7618 · Cited by 404
Theory and applications of robust optimization
Bertsimas, D., Brown, D. B., & Caramanis, C. (2011) · SIAM Review · doi:10.1137/080734510 · Cited by 134
The Incapacitation Effect of Incarceration: Evidence from Several Italian Collective Pardons
Barbarino, A., & Mastrobuoni, G. (2014) · American Economic Journal: Economic Policy · doi:10.1257/pol.6.1.1 · Cited by 108
Metadata
- Authors
- Maccheroni, F., Marinacci, M., & Rustichini, A.
- Venue
- Econometrica
- Publisher
- The Econometric Society
- Published
- 2006-11
- Volume
- 74
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1447-1498
- ISSN
- 0012-9682 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-0262
- OpenAlex
- W1550380623
- Cited by
- 1,124
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 28.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ambiguity Aversion, Robustness, and the Variational Representation of Preferences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00716.x
- The paper
- Maccheroni, F., Marinacci, M., & Rustichini, A. (2006). Ambiguity Aversion, Robustness, and the Variational Representation of Preferences. Econometrica. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00716.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
