This paper provides an axiomatic foundation for catastrophic thinking, a form of pessimism in which an agent evaluates uncertain alternatives by attending only to a subset of adverse outcomes. We introduce Catastrophic Attention Preferences (CAP), under which an act is evaluated by its subjective expected utility conditional on the worst outcomes, up to a subjectively determined probability threshold $q$. The resulting functional is a subjective counterpart of Expected Shortfall: both the agent's belief $\mu$ and her threshold $q$ are derived from preferences rather than assumed, without a probability distribution given as a primitive. Our main result is a complete behavioral characterization: six axioms, one of which, Catastrophic Complementarity, carries the behavioral content of catastrophic thinking, together with two standard richness conditions, are equivalent to the existence of a CAP representation, and the parameters $(\mu, q)$ are unique. The parameters are fully identified from probability equivalents of events, simple binary bets that can be elicited experimentally. We characterize comparative ambiguity aversion within the class: with common beliefs, ambiguity aversion is completely ordered by $q$; with different beliefs, we provide a necessary and sufficient condition on the two belief-threshold pairs. The model admits an equivalent multiple priors representation with a closed-form set of priors, nests subjective expected utility at $q = 1$, and converges to maxmin expected utility as $q \rightarrow 0$.
Experimental evidence suggests that ambiguity-sensitive choice can vary systematically with the circumstances of a decision. This paper isolates one channel within a stable preference relation: ambiguity weighting may depend on the act's certainty-equivalent level. After the standard Anscombe-Aumann calibration of cons...
Although probabilistic statements are ubiquitous, foundational disagreements persist about their understanding, as exemplified by debates between Bayesians and frequentists; moreover, it is unclear when and why acting on them actually leads to desirable outcomes. Here, we argue that every probability is the output of a...
In final offer arbitration, a single submission is final, irreversible, and binding: the arbitrator selects one party's number without compromise, and millions of dollars can hinge on whether that number was set well. The decision rests entirely on beliefs about a quantity the decision maker cannot observe, namely the...
Economists often estimate preferences by looking at how demand for an option changes as its attributes change or as beliefs about them change in response to information. I show in a multi-attribute induced-preference experiment that this method can be substantially biased due to differential inattention. Attention is...
J. Conlon· Journal of the European Econ...· 0 citations
Abstract It is natural to express some beliefs in binary terms (P is either believed or not, e.g., “bribery is immoral”), and others in terms of a subjective probability (P has some probability of being true, e.g., “there's an 80% chance a Democrat will win the next election”). Construing a belief in probabilistic term...