This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Peters, O. The ergodicity problem in economics. Nat. Phys. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-019-0732-0 (2019).
Keeney, R. L. & Raiffa, H. Decisions with Multiple Objectives 2nd edn, Ch. 9 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1993).
Meder, D. et al. Ergodicity-breaking reveals time optimal economic behavior in humans. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.04652 (2019).
Hershey, J. C. & Schoemaker, P. J. H. Probability versus certainty equivalence methods in utility measurement: are they equivalent? Manage. Sci. 31, 1213–1231 (1985).
Starmer, C. J. Developments in non-expected utility theory: the hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. Econ. Lit. 38, 332–382 (2000).
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47, 263–291 (1979).
Press Release: The Prize in Economic Sciences 2017 (Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, 2017); https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2017/press-release
L’Haridon, O. & Vieider, F. All over the map: a worldwide comparison of risk preferences. Quant. Econ. 10, 185–215 (2019).
Grossman, M. J. On the concept of health capital and the demand for health. Polit. Econ. 80, 223–255 (1972).
Acknowledgements
We thank A. Baillon and O. Hulme for useful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed equally. The ordering of authors is alphabetical.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
Supplementary Information.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Doctor, J.N., Wakker, P.P. & Wang, T.V. Economists’ views on the ergodicity problem. Nat. Phys. 16, 1168 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-020-01106-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-020-01106-x
This article is cited by
-
The influence of ergodicity on risk affinity of timed and non-timed respondents
Scientific Reports (2022)
-
Introduction to the Special Issue in Honor of Peter Wakker
Theory and Decision (2022)
-
Reply to: Economists’ views on the ergodicity problem
Nature Physics (2020)