This paper extends the analysis of the data from the experiment of Hey et al. (Theory and Decision 83(3): 337–353, 2017), which was designed to test Proposition 2 of the theory of Manski (Theory and Decision 83(2): 155–173, 2017). I focus on how the subjects select the aspiration levels when they choose to satisfice, and try to find a better explanation for that story than that of Manski. I assume that the subjects are expected utility (EU) (rather than MiniMax regret) agents and that they think of the payoffs as having a uniform risky (rather than an ambiguous) distribution. I consider two special cases of the EU preferences: CRRA and CARA; and I combine these with two different stories for the stochastic specification of errors: beta and normal. To give a fair comparison in finding a better explanation of the individual behaviour, I also fit the data using Manski’s optimal strategy under both stochastic specifications. I estimate using maximum log likelihood. The estimation is done subject by subject. The results tell us that assuming that the subjects are EU agents and that they see the payoffs as uniformly distributed produces a better statistical explanation than that of Manski. That is the actual aspiration levels are statistically closer to the optimal aspiration levels assuming CRRA and CARA than those of Manski’s prediction. Interestingly, the subjects in the Hey et al. (2017) experiment appear to be risk loving when selecting their aspiration levels.

中文翻译：

---

通过风险规避解释满意度

本文扩展了Hey等人实验数据的分析。（Theory and Decision 83（3）：337–353，2017），旨在测试曼斯基理论的命题2（Theory and Decision 83（2）：155–173，2017）。我着重研究对象在选择满足条件时如何选择期望水平，并尝试为该故事找到比曼斯基更好的解释。我假设这些受试者是预期的效用（EU）代理商（而不是MiniMax遗憾），并且他们认为收益具有统一的风险（而不是模棱两可）的分布。我考虑了欧盟优惠的两种特殊情况：CRRA和CARA。我将这些与两个不同的故事结合起来，用于随机指定错误：beta和normal。为了公平地进行比较，以更好地解释每个人的行为，在两个随机指标下，我还使用Manski的最佳策略拟合数据。我估计使用最大对数可能性。估计是逐个主题进行的。结果告诉我们，假设受试者是欧盟代理人，并且他们认为收益均匀分布，那么产生的统计解释要比曼斯基更好。也就是说，假设CRRA和CARA比Manski的预测值高，实际的抽吸水平在统计上更接近最佳抽吸水平。有趣的是，Hey等人的主题。（2017）实验似乎在选择他们的期望水平时喜欢冒险。结果告诉我们，假设受试者是欧盟代理人，并且他们认为收益均匀分布，那么产生的统计解释要比曼斯基更好。也就是说，假设CRRA和CARA比Manski的预测值高，实际的抽吸水平在统计上更接近最佳抽吸水平。有趣的是，Hey等人的主题。（2017）实验似乎在选择他们的期望水平时喜欢冒险。结果告诉我们，假设受试者是欧盟代理人，并且他们认为收益均匀分布，那么产生的统计解释要比曼斯基更好。也就是说，假设CRRA和CARA比Manski的预测值高，实际的抽吸水平在统计上更接近最佳抽吸水平。有趣的是，Hey等人的主题。（2017）实验似乎在选择他们的期望水平时喜欢冒险。