Abstract
The common consequence paradox of Allais can be decomposed into three simpler principles: transitivity, coalescing, and restricted branch independence. Different theories attribute such paradoxes to violations of restricted branch independence only, to coalescing only, or to both. This study separates tests of these two properties in order to compare these theories. Although rank-dependent utility (RDU) theories, including cumulative prospect theory (CPT), violate branch independence, the empirical pattern of violations is opposite that required by RDU theories to account for Allais paradoxes. Data also show systematic violations of coalescing, which refute RDU theories. The findings contradict both original and CPTs with or without their editing principles of combination and cancellation. Modal choices were well predicted by Birnbaum's RAM and TAX models with parameters estimated from previous data. The effects of event framing on these tests were also assessed and found to be negligible.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
