IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v13y2022i6p71-d956443.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Misperception and Cognition in Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Young

    (Economics Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney 2007, Australia)

Abstract

We consider a market setting where a consumer holds either a naive or sophisticated perception of their preference over products. We introduce the concept of a cognitive equilibrium, in which the consumer can transition between the cognitive states of naiveté and sophistication depending on the degree of exploitation in the market. We compare market outcomes under monopoly and competition. While competition unambiguously improves market outcomes when the consumer’s cognitive state is exogenous, it can strictly lower gains from trade when cognitive states are endogenously determined.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Young, 2022. "Misperception and Cognition in Markets," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:13:y:2022:i:6:p:71-:d:956443
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/13/6/71/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/13/6/71/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean Tirole, 2009. "Cognition and Incomplete Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 265-294, March.
    2. Matthew Rabin & Ted O'Donoghue, 1999. "Doing It Now or Later," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 103-124, March.
    3. Fabian Herweg & Antonio Rosato, 2020. "Bait and ditch: Consumer naïveté and salesforce incentives," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 97-121, January.
    4. Kfir Eliaz & Ran Spiegler, 2006. "Contracting with Diversely Naive Agents," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 73(3), pages 689-714.
    5. Xavier Gabaix & David Laibson, 2018. "Shrouded attributes, consumer myopia and information suppression in competitive markets," Chapters, in: Victor J. Tremblay & Elizabeth Schroeder & Carol Horton Tremblay (ed.), Handbook of Behavioral Industrial Organization, chapter 3, pages 40-74, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2016. "Mindful Economics: The Production, Consumption, and Value of Beliefs," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(3), pages 141-164, Summer.
    7. Sims, Christopher A., 2003. "Implications of rational inattention," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 665-690, April.
    8. Stefano DellaVigna & Ulrike Malmendier, 2006. "Paying Not to Go to the Gym," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 694-719, June.
    9. Stefano DellaVigna & Ulrike Malmendier, 2004. "Contract Design and Self-Control: Theory and Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(2), pages 353-402.
    10. Paul Heidhues & Botond Koszegi, 2010. "Exploiting Naivete about Self-Control in the Credit Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2279-2303, December.
    11. Martin, Daniel, 2017. "Strategic pricing with rational inattention to quality," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 131-145.
    12. Sanjay Jain, 2009. "Self-Control and Optimal Goals: A Theoretical Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(6), pages 1027-1045, 11-12.
    13. Marco Ottaviani & Francesco Squintani, 2006. "Naive audience and communication bias," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 35(1), pages 129-150, December.
    14. Chen, Ying, 2011. "Perturbed communication games with honest senders and naive receivers," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 401-424, March.
    15. George A. Akerlof & Robert J. Shiller, 2015. "Phishing for Phools: The Economics of Manipulation and Deception," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10534.
    16. David Eil & Justin M. Rao, 2011. "The Good News-Bad News Effect: Asymmetric Processing of Objective Information about Yourself," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 114-138, May.
    17. Yuval Salant & Ron Siegel, 2018. "Contracts with Framing," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 315-346, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhongwen Chen & Xiaojian Zhao, 2023. "Strategic Information Suppression in Borrowing and Pre-Lending Cognition: Theory and Evidence," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-24, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arno Apffelstaedt & Lydia Mechtenberg, 2021. "Competition for Context-Sensitive Consumers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2828-2844, May.
    2. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    3. Rodrigue Mendez, 2012. "Predatory Lending," Working Papers hal-00991948, HAL.
    4. Ran Spiegler, 2019. "Behavioral Economics and the Atheoretical Style," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 173-194, May.
    5. Laureti, Carolina & Szafarz, Ariane, 2023. "Banking regulation and costless commitment contracts for time-inconsistent agents," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    6. Marieke Bos & Chloé Le Coq & Peter van Santen, 2022. "Scarcity and consumers’ credit choices," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(1), pages 105-139, February.
    7. Anett John, 2020. "When Commitment Fails: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(2), pages 503-529, February.
    8. Jing Ai & Lin Zhao & Wei Zhu, 2016. "Contracting with Present-Biased Consumers in Insurance Markets," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 41(2), pages 107-148, September.
    9. Liang Guo, 2023. "The Mnemonomics of Contractual Screening," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1739-1757, March.
    10. Akin, Zafer, 2009. "Imperfect information processing in sequential bargaining games with present biased preferences," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 642-650, August.
    11. Michael D. Grubb, 2015. "Overconfident Consumers in the Marketplace," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(4), pages 9-36, Fall.
    12. Jonathan DE QUIDT & Maitreesh GHATAK, 2018. "Is The Credit Worth It? For-Profit Lenders In Microfinance With Rational And Behavioral Borrowers," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 89(1), pages 175-199, March.
    13. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Yu, Pei Cheng, 2020. "Seemingly exploitative contracts," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 299-320.
    15. Murooka, Takeshi & Schwarz, Marco A., 2018. "The timing of choice-enhancing policies," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 27-40.
    16. Rao, Raghunath Singh & Irwin, Julie & Liu, Zhuping, 2020. "Flying with a net, and without: Preventative devices and self-control," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 521-543.
    17. Wenner, Lukas M., 2018. "Do sellers exploit biased beliefs of buyers? An experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 194-215.
    18. Schumacher, Heiner, 2016. "Insurance, self-control, and contract flexibility," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 220-232.
    19. Paul Heidhues & Botond Kőszegi, 2015. "On the Welfare Costs of Naiveté in the US Credit-Card Market," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 47(3), pages 341-354, November.
    20. Weinschenk, Philipp, 2021. "On the benefits of time-inconsistent preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 185-195.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:13:y:2022:i:6:p:71-:d:956443. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.