Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
In This Section

The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics

Editor-in-Chief: Schipper, Burkhard

Ed. by Fong, Yuk-fai / Peeters, Ronald / Puzzello , Daniela / Rivas, Javier / Wenzelburger, Jan

2 Issues per year

IMPACT FACTOR 2016: 0.229
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.271

CiteScore 2016: 0.30

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.458
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.553

Mathematical Citation Quotient (MCQ) 2015: 0.16

See all formats and pricing
In This Section

On the Rejectability of the Subjective Expected Utility Theory

Konrad Grabiszewski
  • Corresponding author
  • Department of Economics, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33124, USA
  • Email:
Published Online: 2016-06-02 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/bejte-2015-0074


State space, a key element of the Subjective Expected Utility (SEU) theory, is not observable. This implies that, in order to test the SEU theory, it is necessary to assume some state space. Consequently, if the SEU theory is rejected, then it is appropriate to conduct a robustness check; that is, to search for a different state space and a probability over that state space which together do not lead to the rejection of the SEU theory. To find such state space and probability means to SEU-rationalize the agent’s behavior. I show how to conduct the process of SEU-rationalization and determine when an SEU-rationalization is possible.

Keywords: SEU theory; state space; SEU-rationalization

JEL: D01; D03; D81


  • Amarante, M. 2014. “What is Ambiguity?” CIREQ Cahier 04–2014.

  • Arrow, K. J., and L. Hurwicz. 1972. “An Optimality Criterion for Decision-Making under Ignorance.” In Uncertainty and Expectations in Economics: Essays in Honour of G.L.S. Shackle, edited by C. Carter and J. Ford, 1–11. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

  • Barberà, S. 1977. “The Manipulation of Social Choice Mechanisms That Do Not Leave “Too Much” to Chance.” Econometrica 45:1573–88. [Crossref]

  • Barberà, S., C. R. Barrett, and P. K. Pattanaik. 1984. “On Some Axioms for Ranking Sets of Alternatives.” Journal of Economic Theory 33:301–8. [Crossref]

  • Barberà, S., W. Bossert, and P. K. Pattanaik. 2004. “Ranking Sets of Objects.” In Handbook of Utility Theory, edited by P. Hammond and C. Seidl, vol. 2, Extensions, chap. 17, 893–978. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  • Barberà, S., and P. K. Pattanaik. 1984. “Extending an Order on a Set to the Power Set: Some Remarks on Kannai and Peleg’s Approach.” Journal of Economic Theory 32:185–91. [Crossref]

  • Ben Larbi, R., S. Konieczny, and P. Marquis. 2010. “A Characterization of Optimality Criteria for Decision Making Under Complete Ignorance.” Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Toronto 172–81.

  • Billot, A., and V. Vergopoulos. 2014. “Dynamic Consistency and Expected Utility with State Ambiguity.” PSE Working Papers 2014–19.

  • Blume, L., D. A. Easley, and J. Y. Halpern. 2009. “Constructive Decision Theory.” Economics Series, Institute for Advanced Studies, Vienna, No. 246.

  • Blume, L. E., D. A. Easley, and J. Y. Halpern. 2006. “Redoing the Foundations of Decision Theory.” Tenth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 10–24.

  • Bossert, W. 1989. “On the Extension of Preferences Over a Set to the Power: An Axiomatic Characterization of a Quasi-Ordering.” Journal of Economic Theory 49:84–92. [Crossref]

  • Bossert, W., P. K. Pattanaik, and Y. Xu. 1994. “Ranking Opportunity Sets: An Axiomatic Approach.” Journal of Economic Theory 63:326–45. [Crossref]

  • Bossert, W., P. K. Pattanaik, and Y. Xu. 2000. “Choice under Complete Uncertainty: Axiomatic Characterizations of Some Decision Rules.” Economic Theory 16:295–312. [Crossref]

  • Debreu, G. 1954. “Representation of a Preference Ordering by a Numerical Function.” In Decision Processes, edited by R. Thrall, C. Coombs, and R. Davis, 159–65. New York, NY: Wiley.

  • Debreu, G. 1964. “Continuity Properties of Paretian Utility.” International Economic Review 5:285–93. [Crossref]

  • Dudley, R. M. 2002. Real Analysis and Probability. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Dutta, B., and A. Sen. 1996. “Ranking Opportunity Sets and Arrow Impossibility Theorems: Correspondence Results.” Journal of Economic Theory 71:90–101. [Crossref]

  • Eichberger, J., and D. Kelsey. 2009. “Ambiguity.” In The Oxford Handbook of Rational and Social Choice, edited by P. Anand, P. Pattanaik, and C. Puppe, 113–39. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Epstein, L. G. 2010. “A Paradox for the “Smooth Ambiguity” Model of Preference.” Theoretical Economics 78:2085–99.

  • Ghirardato, P. 2001. “Coping with Ignorance: Unforeseen Contingencies and Non-additive Uncertainty.” Economic Theory 17:247–76. [Crossref]

  • Ghirardato, P. 2010. “Ambiguity.” In Encyclopaedia of Quantitative Finance, edited by R. Cont, 39–44. Chichester: J. Wiley and Sons.

  • Gilboa, I. 2009. Theory of Decision under Uncertainty. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Gilboa, I., and M. Marinacci. 2011. “Ambiguity and the Bayesian Paradigm.” In Advances in Economics and Econometrics: Theory and Applications, Tenth World Congress of the Econometric Society, edited by D. Acemoglu, M. Arellano, and E. Dekel. New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Gilboa, I., and L. Samuelson. 2012. “Subjectivity in Inductive Inference.” Theoretical Economics 7:183–215. [Crossref] [Web of Science]

  • Gilboa, I., and D. Schmeidler. 1994. “Additive Representations of Non-Additive Measures and the Choquet Integral.” Annals of Operations Research 52:43–65. [Crossref]

  • Gilboa, I., and D. Schmeidler. 2004. “Subjective Distributions.” Theory and Decision 56:345–57. [Crossref]

  • Grant, S., J. Kline, I. Meneghel, J. Quiggin, and R. Tourky. 2015. “A Theory of Robust Experiments for Choice under Uncertainty,” working paper.

  • Hurwicz, L. 1951. “Optimality Criteria for Decision Making Under Ignorance.” Cowles Commission Discussion Paper: Statistics, No. 370.

  • Kadane, J. B. 1992. “Healthy Scepticism as an Expected-Utility Explanation of the Phenomena of Allais and Ellsberg.” Theory and Decision 32:57–64. [Crossref]

  • Kannai, Y., and B. Peleg. 1984. “A Note on the Extension of an Order on a Set to the Power Set.” Journal of Economic Theory 32:172–5. [Crossref]

  • Karni, E. 2008. “Unknowable States and Choice-Based Denitions of Subjective Probabilities.” Economics Letters 99:534–6. [Crossref]

  • Karni, E., and D. Schmeidler. 1991. “Utility Theory with Uncertainty.” In Handbook of Mathematical Economics, edited by W. Hildenbrand and H. Sonnenschein, 4:1763–831. Elsevier.

  • Karni, E., and M. -L. VierØ. 2013. “Reverse Bayesianism: A Choice-Based Theory of Growing Awareness.” American Economic Review 103:2790–810. [Web of Science] [Crossref]

  • Kreps, D. M. 1979. “A Representation Theorem for “Preference for Flexibility”.” Econometrica 47:565–77. [Crossref]

  • Kreps, D. M. 1992. “Static Choice and Unforeseen Contingencies.” In Economics Analysis of Markets and Games: Essays in Honor of Frank Hahn, edited by P. Dasgupta, D. Gale, O. Hart, and E. Maskin, 258–81. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

  • LeFevre, J. -A., M. Penner-Wilger, A. A. Pyke, T. Shanahan, and W. A. Deslauriers. 2014. “Putting Two and Two Together: Declines in Arithmetic Fluency among Young Canadian Adults, 1993 to 2005.” Carleton University Cognitive Science Technical Report 2014–01.

  • Lipman, B. L. 1999. “Decision Theory without Logical Omniscience: Toward an Axiomatic Framework for Bounded Rationality.” Review of Economic Studies 66:339–61. [Crossref]

  • Machina, M. J. 2003. “States of the World and the State of Decision Theory.” In The Economics of Risk, edited by D. Meyer, 17–49. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.

  • Nehring, K., and C. Puppe. 1996. “Continuous Extension of an Order on a Set to the Power Set.” Journal of Economic Theory 68:456–79. [Crossref]

  • Neveu, J. 1965. Mathematical Foundations of the Calculus of Probability. San Francisco, CA: Holden-Day.

  • Olszewski, W. 2007. “Preferences over Sets of Lotteries.” Review of Economic Studies 74:567–95. [Crossref]

  • Pattanaik, P. K., and Y. Xu. 1998. “On Preference and Freedom.” Theory and Decision 44:173–98. [Crossref]

  • Pattanaik, P. K., and Y. Xu. 2000. “On Ranking Opportunity Sets in Economic Environments.” Journal of Economic Theory 93:48–71. [Crossref]

  • Savage, L. J. 1972. The Foundations of Statistics. New York, NY: Dover Publications (revised and expanded version of a work originally published by John Wiley & Sons in 1954).

  • Schipper, B. C. 2013. “Awareness-Dependent Subjective Expected Utility.” International Journal of Game Theory 42:725–53. [Crossref] [Web of Science]

  • Schmeidler, D. 1989. “Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity.” Econometrica 57:571–87. [Crossref]

  • Schmeidler, D., and P. Wakker. 1987. “Expected Utility and Mathematical Expectation.” In The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 1st ed., edited by J. Eatwell, M. Milgate, and P. Newman. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Siniscalchi, M. 2008. “Ambiguity and Ambiguity Aversion.” In The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd ed., edited by S. N. Durlauf and L. E. Blume. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Standing, L. G. 2006. “Why Johnny Still Can’t Add: Predictors of University Students’ Performance on an Elementary Arithmetic Test.” Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal 34:151–60.

  • Standing, L. G., R. A. Sproule, and A. Leung. 2006. “Can Business and Economics Students Perform Elementary Arithmetic?” Psychoogical Reports 98:549–55. [Crossref]

About the article

Published Online: 2016-06-02

Published in Print: 2016-06-01

Citation Information: The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, ISSN (Online) 1935-1704, ISSN (Print) 2194-6124, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/bejte-2015-0074. Export Citation

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in