Abstract
This paper provides a model of beliefs representation in which ambiguity and unambiguity are endogenously distinguished in the maxmin expected utility model of Gilboa and Schmeidler (1989). Specifically, I first extend it by getting a representation of beliefs such that the probabilistic beliefs over each ambiguous event are represented by a nondegenerate interval, while the ones over each unambiguous event are represented by a number. I then suggest a behavioral definition of ambiguity. It provides a choice theoretical foundation for the Knightian distinction between ambiguity and unambiguity.
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.
