On the aversion to incomplete preferences

We propose an axiomatization of aversion to incomplete preferences. Some prevailing models of incomplete preferences rely on the hypothesis that incompleteness is temporary and that by keeping their opportunity set open individuals reveal a preference for flexibility. We consider that the maintenanc...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: Arlegi Pérez, Ricardo, Bourgeois-Gironde, Sacha, Hualde Vidaurre, Mikel
Formato: artículo
Estado:Versión aceptada para publicación
Fecha de publicación:2021
País:España
Recursos:Universidad Pública de Navarra
Repositorio:Academica-e. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad Pública de Navarra
OAI Identifier:oai:academica-e.unavarra.es:2454/40408
Acesso em linha:https://hdl.handle.net/2454/40408
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:Aversion to incomplete preferences
Preference for flexibility
Ranking sets
Descrição
Resumo:We propose an axiomatization of aversion to incomplete preferences. Some prevailing models of incomplete preferences rely on the hypothesis that incompleteness is temporary and that by keeping their opportunity set open individuals reveal a preference for flexibility. We consider that the maintenance of incomplete preference is also aversive. Our model allows us to show how incompleteness induces an aversive attitude in two different ways: intrinsic and instrumental. Intrinsic aversion holds when one instance of incomplete preference in the set suffices to decrease its utility. Instrumental aversion holds only insofar dominating options are affected by incompleteness. Given two partially overlapping sets of axioms on the binary relation over sets we formalize their consistency with the two types of aversion to incompleteness. Finally, we relate our model to the classical Sen's distinction between tentative and assertive incompleteness. The spelling out of this distinction in the terms of our approach uncovers to what extent aversion to incompleteness may be compatible with a preference for flexibility.