Abstract
This paper considers a generalization of the Savage framework in which there are two state spaces as follows: one to model events and one to define acts. The distinction between these two spaces typically induces non-consequentialist motives. The dynamic derivation of the Sure Thing Principle is studied in this framework. When these two spaces are substantially different, there exists a class of preferences that satisfy dynamic consistency and, at the same time, rationalize violations of the Sure Thing Principle. Consequently, it is possible to use non-expected utility preferences to study problems with dynamic consistency, as long as preferences belong to the previous class and as long as problems refer to information structures, defined as partitions over the set that serves to model events.
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.
