Valuing Others’ Information under Imperfect Expectations

Sometimes we believe that others receive harmful information. However, Marschak’s value of information framework always assigns non-negative value under expected utility: it starts from the decision maker’s beliefs – and one can never anticipate information’s harmfulness for oneself. The impact of decision makers’ capabilities to process information and of their expectations remains hidden behind the individual and subjective perspective Marschak’s framework assumes. By introducing a second decision maker as a point of reference, this paper introduces a way for evaluating others’ information from a cross-individual, imperfect expectations perspective for agents maximising expected utility. We define the cross-value of information that can become negative – then the information is “harmful” from a cross-individual perspective – and we define (mutual) cost of limited information processing capabilities and imperfect expectations as an opportunity cost from this same point of reference. The simple relationship between these two expected utility-based concepts and Marschak’s framework is shown, and we discuss evaluating short-term reactions of stock market prices to new information as an important domain of valuing others’ information.      

The role of multi-objective optimization in negotiation and mediation support

The paper reviews the methodology of multi-objective modeling and optimization used in decision support based on computerized analytical models (as opposed to logical models used in expert systems) that represent expert knowledge in a given field. The essential aspects of this methodology relate to its flexibility: modeling and optimization methods are treated not as goals in themselves but as tools that help a sovereign user (an analyst or a decision maker) to interact with the model, to generate and analyze various decision options, to learn about possible outcomes of these decisions. Although the applications of such methods in negotiation and mediation support is scarce yet, their flexibility increases essentially the chances of such applications. Various aspects of negotiation and mediation methods related to multi-objective optimization and game theory are also reviewed. A possible application of the MCBARG system for supporting negotiation related to the acid rain problem is briefly summarized.     

Is specialization desirable in committee decision making?

Committee decision making is examined in this study focusing on the role assigned to the committee members. In particular, we are concerned about the comparison between committee performance under specialization and non-specialization of the decision makers. Specialization (in the context of project or public policy selection) means that the decision of each committee member is based on a narrow area, which typically results in the acquirement and use of relatively high expertise in that area. When the committee members’ expertise is already determined, specialization only means that the decision of each committee member is based solely on his/her relatively high expertise area. This form of specialization is potentially inferior relative to non-specialization under which the decision of each committee member is based on different areas, not just his/her relatively high expertise area. Given that the expertise of the committee members is already determined but unknown, our analysis focuses on non-specializing individuals whose decision is based on a decision rule that does not require information on the decision-making skills. Under these realistic assumptions, non-specialization is shown to be preferable over specialization, depending on the aggregation rule applied by the committee. The significance of our approach is not limited to the specific results that we obtain. Rather, it should be viewed as a first step toward a deeper examination of the role of individual decision makers in enhancing the performance of collective decision making.     

Recent developments in modeling preferences: Uncertainty and ambiguity

In subjective expected utility (SEU), the decision weights people attach to events are their beliefs about the likelihood of events. Much empirical evidence, inspired by Ellsberg (1961) and others, shows that people prefer to bet on events they know more about, even when their beliefs are held constant. (They are averse to ambiguity, or uncertainty about probability.) We review evidence, recent theoretical explanations, and applications of research on ambiguity and SEU.Thanks to Jonathan Baron, James Dow, Peter Fishburn, Itzhak Gilboa, Gordon Hazen, Howard Kunreuther, Tomas Phillipson, David Schmeidler, Amos Tversky, the editor, and several anonymous referees for corrections and helpful comments. Camerer's contribution to this work was supported by the National Science Foundation, grant no. SES 88-09299. Weber's contribution was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsge-meinschaft, grant no. WE 993/5-1.     

Go to the Hospital or Stay at Home? A Qualitative Study of Expected Hospital Decision Making Among Older African Americans With Advanced Heart Failure

To address the need for more information concerning hospital decision making, we conducted in-depth interviews among African Americans with heart failure and their family caregivers (n?=?11 dyads). Using a case scenario, we asked participants about their anticipated hospitalization decisions. Most patients indicated that they would seek care to avoid further deterioration or death from their worsening condition. Many family caregivers anticipated having an active influence on hospitalization decisions. Findings suggest that social workers should encourage the development of adequate home-based services, recognize diverse communication styles, and use this information to facilitate medical decision making by these patients and their caregivers.     

Indecisiveness aversion and preference for commitment

We present an axiomatic model of preferences over menus that is motivated by three assumptions. First, the decision maker is uncertain ex ante (i.e., at the time of choosing a menu) about her ex post (i.e., at the time of choosing an option within her chosen menu) preferences over options, and she anticipates that this subjective uncertainty will not resolve before the ex post stage. Second, she is averse to ex post indecisiveness (i.e., to having to choose between options that she cannot rank with certainty). Third, when evaluating a menu she discards options that are dominated (i.e., inferior to another option whatever her ex post preferences may be) and restricts attention to the undominated ones. Under these assumptions, the decision maker has a preference for commitment in the sense of preferring menus with fewer undominated alternatives. We derive a representation in which the decision maker’s uncertainty about her ex post preferences is captured by means of a subjective state space, which in turn determines which options are undominated in a given menu, and in which the decision maker fears, whenever indecisive, to choose an option that will turn out to be the worst (undominated) one according to the realization of her ex post preferences.     

Use of data on planned contributions and stated beliefs in the measurement of social preferences

In a series of one-shot linear public goods game, we ask subjects to report their contributions, their contribution plans for the next period, and their first-order beliefs about their present and future partner. We estimate subjects’ preferences from plan data by a finite mixture approach and compare the results with those obtained from contribution data. Controlling for beliefs, which incorporate the information about the others’ decisions, we are able to show that plans convey accurate information about subjects’ preferences and, consequently, are good predictors of their future behavior.     

Dynamic consistency in extensive form decision problems

In a stimulating paper, Piccione and Rubinstein (1997) argued how a decision maker could undertake dynamically inconsistent choices when, in an extensive form decision problem, she has a particular type of imperfect recall named absentmindedness. Such memory limitation obtains whenever information sets include decision histories along the same decision path. Starting from work focusing on the absentminded driver example, and independently developed by Segal (2000) and Dimitri (1999), the main theorem of this article provides a general result of dynamically consistent choices, valid for a large class of finite extensive form decision problems without nature.      

Group decision and negotiation support in evolving,nonshared information contexts

Based on evolutionary systems design (ESD), group decision and negotiation support in evolving, nonshared information contexts is discussed. A non-shared information context — one without full information sharing — is associated with what has been loosely called a noncooperative context in the group decision and negotiation support systems (GDNSS) literature. Without full information sharing, we have a game with incomplete information that, in general, is evolving. The paper discusses how the GDNSS, MEDIATOR, supports evolution of the group problem representation — a process of consensus seeking (through information sharing, here partial) subject to problem adaptation and restructuring within which compromise is possible.     

Are beliefs a matter of taste? A case for objective imprecise information

We argue, in the spirit of some of Jean-Yves Jaffray’s work, that explicitly incorporating the information, however imprecise, available to the decision maker is relevant, feasible, and fruitful. In particular, we show that it can lead us to know whether the decision maker has wrong beliefs and whether it matters or not, that it makes it possible to better model and analyze how the decision maker takes into account new information, even when this information is not an event and finally that it is crucial when attempting to identify and measure the decision maker’s attitude toward imprecise information.     

Pretrial Bargaining in the Face of a Random Court Decision: Evidence from Laboratory Games

If negotiation over ownership of an asset is unsuccessful, agents go to court to determine possession. Experiments examine how the presence of a stochastic court decision affects pretrial bargaining behavior. Two players have private information over the value of an asset, owned by one player. If there is no acceptable trade price, a random court decision assigns ownership. The impact of a second stage court decision on bargaining outcomes and the efficiency of trades is measured. Courts reduce the total earnings of players and the frequency of efficient trades. Relative earnings and bargaining behavior depend on which agent proposes the trade price.     

Great Expectations. Part I: On the Customizability of Generalized Expected Utility

We propose a generalization of expected utility that we call generalized EU (GEU), where a decision maker’s beliefs are represented by plausibility measures and the decision maker’s tastes are represented by general (i.e., not necessarily real-valued) utility functions. We show that every agent, “rational” or not, can be modeled as a GEU maximizer. We then show that we can customize GEU by selectively imposing just the constraints we want. In particular, we show how each of Savage’s postulates corresponds to constraints on GEU.     

The relationship between individual expectations and behaviors: Mortality expectations and smoking decisions

Using data from the Health and Retirement Study, we assess the accuracy of subjective beliefs about mortality and objectively estimated probabilities for individuals in the same sample. Overall, subjective beliefs and objective probabilities are very close. However, there are differences conditional on behaviors, with current smokers being relatively optimistic and never smokers relatively pessimistic in their assessments. In the aggregate, individuals accurately predict longevity, but at the individual level, subjective beliefs provide information in addition to the estimated objective probabilities in predicting actual events, which may arise from the effect of past or anticipated decisions on these beliefs.

Information management support for international negotiations

This paper examines the information processing requirements that surround the international negotiations process. General problem-solving models and generic task taxonomies are explored to provide insight into this process, a process that can be characterized as iterative options analysis. The paper also identifies a set of existing and emerging information technologies that can support the negotiation process, technologies that range from electronic mail to group decision support systems. The premise of the paper is that cost-effective information technology can support many important negotiation tasks and that existing technology has been vastly under-exploited by negotiators and their staffs. A program for introducing and evaluating information technology is also proposed.     

Overconfidence in tournaments: evidence from the field

This paper uses a field survey to investigate the quality of individuals’ beliefs of relative performance in tournaments. We consider two field settings, poker and chess, which differ in the degree to which luck is a factor and also in the information that players have about the ability of the competition. We find that poker players’ forecasts of relative performance are random guesses with an overestimation bias. Chess players also overestimate their relative performance but make informed guesses. We find support for the “unskilled and unaware hypothesis” in chess: high-skilled chess players make better forecasts than low-skilled chess players. Finally, we find that chess players’ forecasts of relative performance are not efficient.     

No-betting Pareto under ambiguity

It has been argued that Pareto-improving trade is not as compelling under uncertainty as it is under certainty. The former may involve agents with different beliefs, who might wish to execute trades that are no more than betting. In response, the concept of no-betting Pareto dominance was introduced, requiring that putative Pareto improvements must be rationalizable by some common probabilities, even though the participants’ beliefs may differ. In this paper, we argue that this definition might be too narrow for use when agents are not Bayesian. Agents who face ambiguity might wish to trade in ways that can be justified by common ambiguity, though not necessarily by common probabilities. We accordingly extend the notion of no-betting Pareto dominance to characterize trades than are “no-betting Pareto” ranked according to the maxmin expected utility model.