Can free evidence be Bad? Value of information for the imprecise probabilist

This article considers a puzzling conflict between two positions that are each compelling: ðaÞ it is irrational for an agent to pay to avoid ‘free’ evidence, and ðbÞ rational agents may have imprecise beliefs. An important aspect of responding to this conflict is resolving the question of how rational ðimpreciseÞ agents ought to make sequences of decisions-we make explicit what the key alternatives are and defend our own approach. We endorse a resolution of the aforementioned puzzle-we privilege decision theories that merely per-mit avoiding free evidence over decision theories that make avoiding free information obligatory.