@article{Fountain:263711,
      recid = {263711},
      author = {Fountain, John},
      title = {Assessing Starmer's Evidence for New Theories of Choice: A  Subjectivist's Comment},
      address = {1993-01-01},
      number = {2008-2017-4831},
      series = {9301},
      pages = {14},
      year = {1993},
      abstract = {Inferences derived from Starmer's (1992) experimental  evidence concerning Expected Utility (EUT), Fanning Out  (FO), and Fanning In (Fl) theories are both incomplete and  incorrect A subjectivist Bayesian approach based on  calculating posterior probability distributions for  experimental outcomes is used to quantify the degree of  support for each theory and to make coherent inferences  about the relative performance of FO and H theories in  explaining violations of EUT.},
      url = {http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/263711},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.263711},
}