In this paper, we econometrically examine the performance of salience theory (ST) for explaining observed behavior outside of a fully defined state contingent setting. Using a well-known dataset, we find that only a minority of people act consistently in the way proposed by ST when confronted with lottery choices for which only marginal probabilities are presented. By estimating the implied dependence structure of payoffs consistent with ST, only a minority of people infer independent payoffs when attaching probabilities to states, a finding at odds with ST. Instead, a majority treat lotteries as having positively correlated payoffs which raise questions about the independence assumption in ST. Finally, we also find that ST explains choice behavior less consistently than expected utility. Thus, ST should not be assumed to be superior to the most prominent models within the literature when employed outside of particular contexts.

中文翻译：

---

显着性理论的计量经济学分析

在本文中，我们通过计量经济学检验了显着性理论 (ST) 在解释完全定义的状态条件设置之外观察到的行为的性能。使用一个众所周知的数据集，我们发现只有少数人在面对只提供边际概率的彩票选择时，会按照 ST 提出的方式一贯地行事。通过估计与 ST 一致的收益的隐含依赖结构，只有少数人在将概率附加到状态时推断出独立的收益，这一发现与 ST 不一致。相反，大多数人认为彩票具有正相关的收益，这引发了对 ST 中独立性假设的质疑。最后，我们还发现 ST 对选择行为的解释不如预期效用那么一致。因此，