Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:46:25.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Are objectivism and subjectivism compatible concepts?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2012

P. G. Moore
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1.l. The aim of this paper is to examine a number of issues that arise in decision-making. In particular it seeks to explore the relevance to decision-making of the commonly made polarization as between the so-called objective and subjective approaches to probability. The paper is in three parts. The first concerns utility, and the second various aspects of probability. The third and final part looks at the interplay between these two concepts. Whilst a number of the comments and illustrations refer specifically to the insurance industry, the concepts discussed are broadly set in the wider context of business and commerce as a whole. It is hoped that the paper will thereby provide a basis for discussion on a topic that has acquired increasing importance in recent years.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Institute of Actuaries , Volume 107 , Issue 1 , January 1980 , pp. 11 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © Institute and Faculty of Actuaries 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Balthasar, H. W., Boschi, R. A. A. and Menke, M. M. (1978). Calling the Long Shots in R. & D. Harvard Business Review, 56, 151–160.Google Scholar
Beard, R. E., Pentikainen, T. and Pesonen, E. (1969). Risk Theory. (Methuen: London.)Google Scholar
Beard, R. E. (1968). Some Actuarial Aspects of Non-life Insurance Company Management. Het Verzekerings Archief, 42, 296–324.Google Scholar
Brier, G. W. (1950). Verification of Forecasts Expressed in Terms of Probabilities. Monthly Weather Review, 78, 1–3.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Committee on Policy Optimisation (1978). Report. (HMSO London: Cmnd 7148.)Google Scholar
Doherty, N. A. (1975). Some Fundamental Theorems of Risk Management. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 5, 447–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrenberg, A. S. C. (1975). Data Reduction. (Wiley: London & New York.)Google Scholar
Einham, H. J. and Hogarth, R. M. (1978). Confidence in Judgment; Persistence in the Illusion of Validity. Psychol. Rev., 85(5), 395–416.Google Scholar
The Financing of Small Firms (1979). Committee to Review the Functioning of Financial Institutions. (HMSO London: Cmnd 7503.)Google Scholar
Fisher, R. A. (1925–70). Statistical Methods for Research Workers. (Oliver & Boyd: Edinburgh.)Google Scholar
Harrison, F. L. (1977). Decision Making in Conditions of Extreme Uncertainty. Journal of Management Studies, 14, 169–78.Google Scholar
Healey, M. J. R. (1978). Is Statistics a Science? J.R. Statist. Soc., A, 141, 385–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoerl, A. E. and Fallin, J. K. (1974). Reliability of Subjective Evaluations in a High Incentive Situation. J.R. Statist Soc., A, 137, 227–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kabus, I. (1976). You can Bank on Uncertainty. Harvard Business Review, May-June, 95–105.Google Scholar
Kepner, C. H. and Tregoe, B. B. (1965). The Rational Manager. (McGraw-Hill: London.)Google Scholar
Lindley, D. V. (1971). Making Decisions. (Wiley: London & New York.)Google Scholar
Moore, P. G. (1977). The Manager's Struggles with Uncertainty. J.R. Statist. Soc., A, 140, 129–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, P. G. (1978). The Mythical Threat of Bayesianism. International Statistical Review, 46, 67–73.Google Scholar
Murphy, A. H. and Winkler, R. L. (1977). Reliability of Subjective Probability Forecasts of Precipitation and Temperature. J.R. Statist. Soc., C (Applied Statistics), 26, 41–47.Google Scholar
Pearson, Karl (1931). Tables for Statisticians and Biometricians, Part 2. (Galton Laboratory: London.)Google Scholar
Popper, Sir Karl (1963). Conjectures and Refutations. (Routledge: London.)Google Scholar
Popper, Sir Karl (1972). Objective Knowledge. (University Press: Oxford.)Google Scholar
Ryder, J. M. (1976). Subjectivism—a Reply in Defence of Classical Actuarial Methods. J.I.A., 103, 59–91.Google Scholar
Savage, L. J. et al. (1962). The Foundations of Statistical Inference. (Methuen: London.)Google Scholar
Smedslund, J. (1966). Note on Learning, Contingency, and Clinical Experience. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 7, 265–266.Google Scholar
Souder, W. I. (1969). The Validity of Subjective Probability of Success Forecasts by R. & D. Project Managers. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-16, No. 1, February.Google Scholar
Taylor, H. C. and Russell, J. T. (1939). The Relationship of Validity Coefficients to the Practical Effectiveness of Tests in Selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 23, 565–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A. (1974). Assessing Uncertainty. J.R. Statist. Soc., B, 36, 148–159.Google Scholar
Von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour. (University Press: Princeton.)Google Scholar