Aydogan, Ilke, Aurélien Baillon, Emmanuel Kemel, & Chen Li (2025) "How much do we learn? Measuring symmetric and asymmetric deviations from Bayesian updating through choices," Quantitative Economics, vol. 16:1, 329-365.
Baillon, Aurélien, Han Bleichrodt, Chen Li & Peter P. Wakker, (forthcoming) "Source Theory: a tractable and positive ambiguity theory," Management Science, forthcoming.
Li, Chen & Peter P. Wakker (2024) “ A Simple and General Axiomatization of Average Utility Maximization for Infinite Streams,” Journal of Economic Theory 216, 105795.
Baillon, Aurélien, Yoram Halevy, & Chen Li (2022). “Randomize at your own Risk: on the Observability of Ambiguity Aversion,” Econometrica, vol 90:3, pp.1085-1107.
Baillon, Aurélien, Yoram Halevy, & Chen Li (2022). “Experimental Evidence on the Measurement of Ambiguity Attitude,” Experimental Economics, Experimental Economics, vol 25, pp. 1002-1023.
Baillon, Aurélien, Han Bleichrodt, Chen Li, & Peter P. Wakker (2021). “Belief Hedges: Applying Ambiguity Measurements to All Events and All Ambiguity,” Journal of Economic Theory 198, 105353.
Bleichrodt, H., Eichberger, J., Grant, S., Kelsey, D., & Li, C. (2021). Testing dynamic consistency and consequentialism under ambiguity. European Economic Review, 134, [103687].
Li, Chen & Ning Liu (2020) "What to tell? Wise Communication and Wise Crowd," Theory and Decision, 90, 279-299.
Li, Chen, Uyanga Turmunkh, & Peter P. Wakker (2020) “Social and Strategic Ambiguity versus Betrayal Aversion,” Games and Economic Behavior 123, 272-287. Abstracts & Online appendix.
Bleichrodt, Han, Jason Doctor, Yu Gao, Chen Li, Daniella Meeker, and Peter P. Wakker (2019). "Resolving Rabin's Paradox," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 59, 239-260.
Li, Chen, Uyanga Turmunkh & Peter P. Wakker (2019). "Trust as a decision under ambiguity," Experimental Economics 22, 51-75.
Baillon, Aurélien, Han Bleichrodt, Umut Keskin, Olivier l’Haridon, & Chen Li (2018). "The Effect of Learning on Ambiguity Attitudes," Management Science, vol. 64:5, pp.2181-2198.
Li, Chen (2017). "Are the Poor worse at dealing with Ambiguity." Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 54(3), 239-268.
Chai, Junyi, Chen Li, Peter P. Wakker, Tong V. Wang, & Jingni Yang (2016). "Reconciling Savage’s and Luce’s Modeling of Uncertainty: The Best of Both Worlds," Journal of Mathematical Psychology 75, 10-18.
Bleichrodt, Han, Chen Li, Ivan Moscati & Peter P. Wakker (2016). "Nash Was a First to Axiomatize Expected Utility," Theory and Decision, 81, 309-312.
Li, Chen, Zhihua Li & Peter P. Wakker (2014). "If Nudge Cannot Be Applied: A Litmus Test of the Readers’ Stance on Paternalism," Theory and Decision 76, 297-315.
Gutierrez, Cédric, Chen Li & Isabella Solal (2024). “Does ambiguity reinforce gender inequality?”
Abstract. This paper investigates how ambiguity attitudes affect people's willingness to enter a gender incongruent field dominated by the opposite gender. In an online experiment, subjects performed both a male-typical task and a female-typical task. They had to choose one of the two tasks to compete with other subjects and win a prize if they were among the top 50% performers. We elicited subjects' ambiguity attitudes concerning their ranking in the two tasks. We found that 49% of men, as compared with 33% of women, chose to compete in the gender incongruent task. Both women and men were more ambiguity averse towards their ranking on the gender incongruent task. Controlling for actual performance, this extra ambiguity aversion made people less willing to compete in gender incongruent tasks. This suggests that ambiguity is an important factor contributing to the underrepresentation of one gender in professions populated by the opposite gender (e.g., women in STEM fields). Our findings opened up an additional channel, ambiguity attitudes, where policymakers may tap in to reduce the ongoing gender inequality.
Li, Chen, Kirsten Rohde & Peter Wakker (2024). "Row-First or Column-First? A Bifurcation Question in Behavioral Aggregations of Multiple Components"
Abstract. This paper proposes a unified framework for optimization over two or more components, e.g., time and risk. Using a century-old theorem on macro-micro aggregation we show that many existing debates in the literature, including incentive compatibility of the random incentive system, hedging in the Anscombe-Aumann framework for ambiguity, equity in Harsanyi’s veil of ignorance, and multiattribute risk aversion, all concern the same bifurcation question “row-first or column-first aggregation?”. For decisions with a single component, behavioral models typically relax (strong) separability assumptions while preserving monotonicity. This paper shows that when two or more components are involved, relaxing separability while maintaining monotonicity is no longer possible. Relaxing separability then comes at the cost of giving up monotonicity for at least one of the components. The question of which monotonocity to give up, is equivalent to the (“bifurcation”) question of which component to aggregate over first. Our analysis identifies the common piece underlying many existing puzzles, and sheds new lights on many ongoing debates. We further provide diagnoses and techniques for overcoming undesirable restrictions. A mathematical online appendix shows how our framework can be used theoretically to generalize many preference axiomatizations.
Bleichrodt, Han, Peiran Jiao &Chen Li (2021). Losing faith or losing appetite? The Impact of Past Earnings on Ambiguity Attitudes, Beliefs, and Investment Decisions.
Gutierrez, Cédric, David Gonzalez Jimenez, Marine Hainguerlot, & Chen Li (2024). Unable to learn? the impact of profile congruence.