Proper scoring rules provide convenient and highly efficient tools for incentive-compatible elicitations of subjective beliefs. As traditionally used, however, they are valid only under expected value maximization. This paper shows how they can be generalized to modern ("non-expected utility") theories of risk and ambiguity, yielding mutual benefits: users of scoring rules can benefit from the empirical realism of non-expected utility, and analysts of ambiguity attitudes can benefit from efficient measurements using proper scoring rules. An experiment demonstrates the feasibility of our generalization.

, , ,
doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-937X.2009.00557.x, hdl.handle.net/1765/17483
The Review of Economic Studies
Erasmus Research Institute of Management

Offerman, T., Sonnemans, J., van de Kuilen, G., & Wakker, P. (2009). A truth serum for non-bayesians: Correcting proper scoring rules for risk attitudes. The Review of Economic Studies, 76(4), 1461–1489. doi:10.1111/j.1467-937X.2009.00557.x