A theory of reference-dependent behavior

被引:0
作者
Jose Apesteguia
Miguel A. Ballester
机构
[1] Universitat Pompeu Fabra,
[2] Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona,undefined
来源
Economic Theory | 2009年 / 40卷
关键词
Individual rationality; Reference-dependence; Rationalization; Path independence; Status-quo bias; Addiction; Habit formation; A12; B41; D11;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Extensive field and experimental evidence in a variety of environments show that behavior depends on a reference point. This paper provides an axiomatic characterization of this dependence. We proceed by imposing gradually more structure on both choice correspondences and preference relations, requiring increasingly higher levels of rationality, and freeing the decision-maker from certain types of inconsistencies. The appropriate degree of behavioral structure will depend on the phenomenon that is to be modeled. Last, we provide two applications of our work: one to model the status-quo bias, and another to model addictive behavior.
引用
收藏
页码:427 / 455
页数:28
相关论文
共 54 条
  • [1] Arrow K.(1959)Rational choice functions and orderings Economica 26 121-127
  • [2] Bateman I.(1997)A test of the theory of reference-dependent preferences Q J Econ 112 479-505
  • [3] Munro A.(1988)A theory of rational addiction J Polit Econ 96 675700-276
  • [4] Rhodes B.(2007)Reference-dependent utility with shifting reference points and incomplete preferences J Math Psychol 51 266-1254
  • [5] Starmer C.(2003)Regulation for conservatives: behavioral economics and the case for asymmetric paternalism U Penn Law Rev 151 1211-174
  • [6] Sugden R.(1950)Revealed preference and the utility function Economica 17 159-702
  • [7] Becker G.(2005)Learning to like what you have: explaining the endowment effect Econ J 115 689-291
  • [8] Murphy K.(1979)Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk Econometrica 47 263-1348
  • [9] Bleichrodt H.(1990)Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem J Polit Econ 98 1325-206
  • [10] Camerer C.(1991)Anomalies: the endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias J Econ Perspect 5 193-1165