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
[41]   Modelling under ambiguity with dynamically consistent Choquet random walks and Choquet-Brownian motions [J].
Kast, Robert ;
Lapied, Andre ;
Roubaud, David .
ECONOMIC MODELLING, 2014, 38 :495-503
[42]   Betting on Machina's reflection example: an experiment on ambiguity [J].
L'Haridon, Olivier ;
Placido, Laetitia .
THEORY AND DECISION, 2010, 69 (03) :375-393
[43]   Foundations of ambiguity models under symmetry: α-MEU and smooth ambiguity [J].
Klibanoff, Peter ;
Mukerji, Sujoy ;
Seo, Kyoungwon ;
Stanca, Lorenzo .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC THEORY, 2022, 199
[44]   Efficient allocations under ambiguity [J].
Strzalecki, Tomasz ;
Werner, Jan .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC THEORY, 2011, 146 (03) :1173-1194
[45]   Redistributive politics under ambiguity [J].
Donna, Javier D. .
SOCIAL CHOICE AND WELFARE, 2024, 62 (03) :583-607
[46]   Innovation Under Ambiguity and Risk [J].
Coiculescu, Gabriela ;
Izhakian, Yehuda ;
Ravid, S. Abraham .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL AND QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS, 2024, 59 (07) :3190-3229
[47]   Insurance bargaining under ambiguity [J].
Huang, Rachel J. ;
Huang, Yi-Chieh ;
Tzeng, Larry Y. .
INSURANCE MATHEMATICS & ECONOMICS, 2013, 53 (03) :812-820
[48]   Emergence of populism under ambiguity [J].
Kishishita, Daiki .
INTERNATIONAL TAX AND PUBLIC FINANCE, 2018, 25 (06) :1559-1562
[49]   Bias and Sensitivity under Ambiguity [J].
Huo, Zhen ;
Pedroni, Marcelo ;
Pei, Guangyu .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2024, 114 (12) :4091-4133
[50]   Belief hedges: Measuring ambiguity for all events and all models [J].
Baillon, Aurelien ;
Bleichrodt, Han ;
Li, Chen ;
Wakker, Peter P. .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC THEORY, 2021, 198