{"id":{"repo_id":"east-anglia","oai_identifier":"oai:ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk:57215"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/east-anglia/oai:ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk:57215","repository":{"repo_id":"east-anglia","name":"University of East Anglia","base_url":"https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/cgi/oai2"},"display":{"title":"Validating the predictions of case-based decision theory","abstract":"Real-life decision-makers typically do not know all possible outcomes arising from alternative courses of action. Instead, when people face a problem, they may rely on the recollection of their past personal experience: the situation, the action taken, and the accompanying consequence. In addition, the applicability of a past experience in decision-making may depend on how similar the current problem is to situations encountered previously. Case-based decision theory (CBDT), proposed by Itzhak Gilboa and David Schmeidler (1995), formalises this type of analogical reasoning. While CBDT is intuitively appealing, only a few experimental and empirical studies have attempted to validate its predictions. This thesis reports two laboratory experiments and an empirical study that attempt to confirm the predictive power of CBDT vis-à-vis Bayesian reasoning.","abstract_html":"Real-life decision-makers typically do not know all possible outcomes arising from alternative courses of action. Instead, when people face a problem, they may rely on the recollection of their past personal experience: the situation, the action taken, and the accompanying consequence. In addition, the applicability of a past experience in decision-making may depend on how similar the current problem is to situations encountered previously. Case-based decision theory (CBDT), proposed by Itzhak Gilboa and David Schmeidler (1995), formalises this type of analogical reasoning. While CBDT is intuitively appealing, only a few experimental and empirical studies have attempted to validate its predictions. This thesis reports two laboratory experiments and an empirical study that attempt to confirm the predictive power of CBDT vis-à-vis Bayesian reasoning.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Radoc, Benjamin"],"institution":"University of East Anglia","degree_name":"phd","degree_level":"doctoral","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2015,"date_issued":"2015-10","date_published":"2015-10","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:12:13Z","subjects":[],"languages":["en"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":null,"outbound_label":null,"outbound_source":null},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Radoc, Benjamin"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2015-10"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2015-10"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.department","label":"Dc Publisher Department","values":["School of Economics"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.institution","label":"Dc Publisher Institution","values":["University of East Anglia"]},{"key":"dc:relation.isreferencedby","label":"Dc Relation Isreferencedby","values":["https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/57215/"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationlevel","label":"Dc Type Qualificationlevel","values":["doctoral"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationname","label":"Dc Type Qualificationname","values":["phd"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["en"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/57215/1/BJE_Radoc_thesis.pdf"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Real-life decision-makers typically do not know all possible outcomes arising from alternative courses of action. Instead, when people face a problem, they may rely on the recollection of their past personal experience: the situation, the action taken, and the accompanying consequence. In addition, the applicability of a past experience in decision-making may depend on how similar the current problem is to situations encountered previously. Case-based decision theory (CBDT), proposed by Itzhak Gilboa and David Schmeidler (1995), formalises this type of analogical reasoning. While CBDT is intuitively appealing, only a few experimental and empirical studies have attempted to validate its predictions. This thesis reports two laboratory experiments and an empirical study that attempt to confirm the predictive power of CBDT vis-à-vis Bayesian reasoning."]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Validating the predictions of case-based decision theory"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Radoc, Benjamin"],"dc:date":["2015-10"],"dc:date.issued":["2015-10"],"dc:description.abstract":["Real-life decision-makers typically do not know all possible outcomes arising from alternative courses of action. Instead, when people face a problem, they may rely on the recollection of their past personal experience: the situation, the action taken, and the accompanying consequence. In addition, the applicability of a past experience in decision-making may depend on how similar the current problem is to situations encountered previously. Case-based decision theory (CBDT), proposed by Itzhak Gilboa and David Schmeidler (1995), formalises this type of analogical reasoning. While CBDT is intuitively appealing, only a few experimental and empirical studies have attempted to validate its predictions. This thesis reports two laboratory experiments and an empirical study that attempt to confirm the predictive power of CBDT vis-à-vis Bayesian reasoning."],"dc:format":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/57215/1/BJE_Radoc_thesis.pdf"],"dc:language":["en"],"dc:publisher.department":["School of Economics"],"dc:publisher.institution":["University of East Anglia"],"dc:relation.isreferencedby":["https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/57215/"],"dc:title":["Validating the predictions of case-based decision theory"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"dc:type.qualificationlevel":["doctoral"],"dc:type.qualificationname":["phd"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:12:13Z"}