Are physicians rational under ambiguity?

被引:2
作者
Gao, Yu [1 ]
Huang, Zhenxing [2 ]
Liu, Ning [3 ,4 ]
Yang, Jia [2 ]
机构
[1] Peking Univ, Guanghua Sch Management, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] Shanghai Univ Finance & Econ, Sch Econ, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[3] Beihang Univ, Sch Econ & Management, New Main Bldg A1005,37 Xueyuan Rd,Haidian Dist, Beijing 100191, Peoples R China
[4] Beihang Univ, Lab Low Carbon Intelligent Governance, Beijing, Peoples R China
基金
美国国家科学基金会; 中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Ambiguity attitudes; Expert decision-making; Rationality; D81; D91; I12; EXPECTED UTILITY; TREATMENT DECISIONS; SAVAGE AXIOMS; UNCERTAINTY; RISK; PROBABILITY; PREFERENCES; CHOICE; HETEROGENEITY; VACCINATION;
D O I
10.1007/s11166-023-09425-z
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
Do physicians behave rationally when facing a new disease? This study assesses physicians' ambiguity attitudes towards the future severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in its early stages and the financial market in the US using an incentive-compatible online experiment. Our findings indicate that physicians demonstrate significant deviations from expected utility, characterized by a modest degree of ambiguity aversion and pronounced levels of likelihood insensitivity. While physicians generally show less insensitivity to uncertainty compared to the general public, both groups exhibited similar levels of irrationality when dealing with the ambiguity surrounding the COVID-19 severity. These results underscore the necessity for debiasing strategies among medical professionals, especially in managing real-world uncertainties, with a specific focus on mitigating likelihood insensitivity.
引用
收藏
页码:183 / 203
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
[31]   Ambiguity aversion in schizophrenia: An fMRI study of decision-making under risk and ambiguity [J].
Fujino, Junya ;
Hirose, Kimito ;
Tei, Shisei ;
Kawada, Ryosaku ;
Tsurumi, Kosuke ;
Matsukawa, Noriko ;
Miyata, Jun ;
Sugihara, Genichi ;
Yoshihara, Yujiro ;
Ideno, Takashi ;
Aso, Toshihiko ;
Takemura, Kazuhisa ;
Fukuyama, Hidenao ;
Murai, Toshiya ;
Takahashi, Hidehiko .
SCHIZOPHRENIA RESEARCH, 2016, 178 (1-3) :94-101
[32]   The value of a statistical life under ambiguity aversion [J].
Treich, Nicolas .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2010, 59 (01) :15-26
[33]   A dynamic mechanism and surplus extraction under ambiguity [J].
Bose, Subir ;
Daripa, Arup .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC THEORY, 2009, 144 (05) :2084-2114
[34]   Rationality under uncertainty: classic and current criticisms of the Bayesian viewpoint [J].
Zappia, Carlo .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT, 2018, 25 (06) :1387-1419
[35]   Separate aggregation of beliefs and values under ambiguity [J].
Qu, Xiangyu .
ECONOMIC THEORY, 2017, 63 (02) :503-519
[36]   Social and strategic ambiguity versus betrayal aversion [J].
Li, Chen ;
Turmunkh, Uyanga ;
Wakker, Peter P. .
GAMES AND ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR, 2020, 123 :272-287
[37]   Source Theory: A Tractable and Positive Ambiguity Theory [J].
Baillon, Aurelien ;
Bleichrodt, Han ;
Li, Chen ;
Wakker, Peter P. .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2025,
[38]   An Ambiguity Aversion Model for Decision Making under Ambiguity [J].
Ma, Wenjun ;
Luo, Xudong ;
Jiang, Yuncheng .
THIRTY-FIRST AAAI CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2017, :614-621
[39]   OPTIMAL PORTFOLIO CHOICE BASED ON α-MEU UNDER AMBIGUITY [J].
Fei, Weiyin .
STOCHASTIC MODELS, 2009, 25 (03) :455-482
[40]   Fast and slow dynamic decision making under ambiguity [J].
Caferra, Rocco ;
Hey, John ;
Morone, Andrea .
JOURNAL OF RISK AND UNCERTAINTY, 2025, 70 (02) :89-104