De Finetti's concept of exchangeability provides a way to formalize the intuitive idea of similarity and its role as guide in decision making. His classic representation theorem states that exchangeable expected utility preferences can be expressed in terms of a subjective beliefs on parameters. De Finetti's representation is inextricably linked to expected utility as it simultaneously identifies the parameters and Bayesian beliefs about them. This paper studies the implications of exchangeability assuming that preferences are monotone, transitive and continuous, but otherwise incomplete and/or fail probabilistic sophistication. The central tool in our analysis is a new subjective ergodic theorem which takes as primitive preferences, rather than probabilities (as in standard ergodic theory). Using this theorem, we identify the i.i.d. parametrization as sufficient for all preferences in our class. A special case of the result is de Finetti's classic representation. We also prove: (1) a novel derivation of subjective probabilities based on frequencies; (2) a subjective sufficient statistic theorem; and that (3) differences between various decision making paradigms reduce to how they deal with uncertainty about a common set of parameters.

A group of experts with different prior beliefs must choose a treatment. A dataset is made public and leads to revisions of beliefs. We propose a model where the experts' disagreements are resolved through bargaining, using the Nash bargaining solution. Experts bargain after disclosure of the dataset. Bargaining may lead to an inefficient use of information in a strong sense: experts receive a lower payoff in every state, and for any prior belief (i.e., inadmissibility). Bargaining exhibits under-reaction to information as compared to the normative solution in which experts bargain ex ante on the procedure used to exploit the data.

We consider the efficiency properties of exchange economies where privately informed traders behave strategically. Specifically, a competitive mechanism is any mapping of traders' reports about their types to an equilibrium price vector and allocation of the reported economy. In our model, some traders may have non-vanishing impact on prices and allocations regardless of the size of the economy. Although truthful reporting by all traders cannot be achieved, we show that, given any desired level of approximation, there is ̄N such that any Bayesian - Nash equilibrium of any competitive mechanism of any private information economy with ̄N or more traders leads, with high probability, to prices and allocations that are close to a competitive equilibrium of the true economy. In particular, allocations are approximately efficient. A key assumption is that there is small probability that traders behave non-strategically.