Skip to main content Accessibility help

Login Alert

Cancel
Log in
×
×
Register
Log In
(0) Cart
Logo for Cambridge Core from Cambridge University Press. Click to return to homepage.
Logo for Cambridge Core from Cambridge University Press. Click to return to homepage.
Cited by
  • Crossref logo 27
  • Google Scholar logo
Crossref Citations
Crossref logo
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.
Cettolin, Elena and Riedl, Arno 2013. Justice under Uncertainty. SSRN Electronic Journal,
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Cettolin, Elena and Tran, Giang 2016. Giving in the Face of Risk. SSRN Electronic Journal,
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Peeters, Ronald Wolk, Leonard and Ponti, Giovanni 2017. Eliciting interval beliefs: An experimental study. PLOS ONE, Vol. 12, Issue. 4, p. e0175163.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Cettolin, Elena and Riedl, Arno 2017. Justice Under Uncertainty. Management Science, Vol. 63, Issue. 11, p. 3739.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Cettolin, Elena Riedl, Arno and Tran, Giang 2017. Giving in the face of risk. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol. 55, Issue. 2-3, p. 95.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Askanazi, Ross Diebold, Francis X. Schorfheide, Frank and Shin, Minchul 2018. On the Comparison of Interval Forecasts. Journal of Time Series Analysis, Vol. 39, Issue. 6, p. 953.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Kölle, Felix and Lauer, Thomas 2018. Cooperation, Discounting, and the Effects of Delayed Costs and Benefits. SSRN Electronic Journal,
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Askanazi, Ross Diebold, Francis X. Schorfheide, Frank and Shin, Minchul 2018. On the Comparison of Interval Forecasts. SSRN Electronic Journal,
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Columbus, Simon Münich, Jiří and Gerpott, Fabiola H. 2020. Playing a different game: Situation perception mediates framing effects on cooperative behaviour. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 90, Issue. , p. 104006.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Crosetto, Paolo Filippin, Antonio Katuščák, Peter and Smith, John 2020. Central tendency bias in belief elicitation. Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 78, Issue. , p. 102273.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Santos-Pinto, Luis and de la Rosa, Leonidas Enrique 2020. Handbook of Labor, Human Resources and Population Economics. p. 1.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Engl, Florian Riedl, Arno M. and Weber, Roberto A. 2020. Spillover Effects of Institutions on Cooperative Behavior, Preferences, and Beliefs. SSRN Electronic Journal,
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Zylbersztejn, Adam Babutsidze, Zakaria and Hanaki, Nobuyuki 2020. Preferences for observable information in a strategic setting: An experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Vol. 170, Issue. , p. 268.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Columbus, Simon and Böhm, Robert 2021. Norm shifts under the strategy method. Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 16, Issue. 5, p. 1267.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Albertazzi, Andrea Lown, Patrick and Mengel, Friederike 2021. The Causal Effect of Income Inequality on Attribution and Social Trust. SSRN Electronic Journal ,
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Fissler, Tobias Frongillo, Rafael Hlavinová, Jana and Rudloff, Birgit 2021. Forecast evaluation of quantiles, prediction intervals, and other set-valued functionals. Electronic Journal of Statistics, Vol. 15, Issue. 1,
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Kölle, Felix and Quercia, Simone 2021. The influence of empirical and normative expectations on cooperation. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Vol. 190, Issue. , p. 691.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Shead, Steven Durand, Robert B. Thomas, Stephanie and Kiss, Hubert János 2021. Predicting price intervals under exogenously induced stress. PLOS ONE, Vol. 16, Issue. 9, p. e0255038.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Engl, Florian Riedl, Arno and Weber, Roberto 2021. Spillover Effects of Institutions on Cooperative Behavior, Preferences, and Beliefs. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, Vol. 13, Issue. 4, p. 261.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Zhu, Qiansheng and Lang, Joseph B. 2022. Test-inversion confidence intervals for estimands in contingency tables subject to equality constraints. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Vol. 169, Issue. , p. 107413.
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
Download full list
Google Scholar Citations

View all Google Scholar citations for this article.

×
Cambridge University Press

Our Site

  • Accessibility
  • Contact & Help
  • Legal Notices

Quick Links

  • Cambridge Core
  • Cambridge Open Engage
  • Cambridge Aspire website

Our Products

  • Journals
  • Books
  • Elements
  • Textbooks
  • Courseware

Join us online

Please choose a valid location.

  • Rights & Permissions
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Notice
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies Policy
Cambridge University Press 2025

Cancel
Confirm
×

Save article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

A method to elicit beliefs as most likely intervals
  • Volume 10, Issue 5
  • Karl H. Schlag (a1) and Joël J. van der Weele
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500005593
Please provide your Kindle email.
Available formats Please select a format to save.
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

A method to elicit beliefs as most likely intervals
  • Volume 10, Issue 5
  • Karl H. Schlag (a1) and Joël J. van der Weele
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500005593
Available formats Please select a format to save.
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

A method to elicit beliefs as most likely intervals
  • Volume 10, Issue 5
  • Karl H. Schlag (a1) and Joël J. van der Weele
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500005593
Available formats Please select a format to save.
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Contents help
Close Contents help

- No HTML tags allowed
- Web page URLs will display as text only
- Lines and paragraphs break automatically
- Attachments, images or tables are not permitted

Please enter your response.

Your details

Email help
Close Email help

Your email address will be used in order to notify you when your comment has been reviewed by the moderator and in case the author(s) of the article or the moderator need to contact you directly.

Please enter a valid email address.
You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? * Conflicting interests help

Close Conflicting interests help

Please list any fees and grants from, employment by, consultancy for, shared ownership in or any close relationship with, at any time over the preceding 36 months, any organisation whose interests may be affected by the publication of the response. Please also list any non-financial associations or interests (personal, professional, political, institutional, religious or other) that a reasonable reader would want to know about in relation to the submitted work. This pertains to all the authors of the piece, their spouses or partners.