Experimental economics demonstrates systematic violations of the expected utility model through paradoxes like Allais and Ellsberg
the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
confidence 85/100
Experimental economics and decision research consistently demonstrate that human choices systematically violate expected utility theory, robustly highlighted by classic anomalies like the Allais and Ellsberg paradoxes.
Evidence for · 4
Size Doesn't Really Matter
2008 · cited by 35
Paper 1 demonstrates that ambiguity aversion in urn tasks violates expected utility theory.
See more details
More for · 3
Ambiguity aversion in a delay analogue of the Ellsberg Paradox
2012 · cited by 7
Paper 3 shows that ambiguity aversion, structurally identical to the Ellsberg paradox, extends beyond risk into intertemporal choice.
Development of ambiguity aversion from early adolescence to adulthood: New insights from the Ellsberg paradox
2022 · cited by 5
Paper 5 confirms the robustness of ambiguity aversion across various developmental stages using adaptations of the Ellsberg paradox.
Toward an attentional turn in research on risky choice.
2022 · cited by 3
Paper 6 acknowledges that the Allais paradox and other phenomena represent seminal empirical deviations from neo-Bernoullian expected utility theory.