Asymmetric Valuation of Gains and Losses and Preference Order Assumptions
AbstractRecent findings of large differences between people's valuations of gains and losses imply that the common preference order axioms of completeness, transitivity, and dominance on which economic analyses and predictions of consumer behavior are largely based, may not be consistent with actual choices. This paper reports the results of an experimental test of the preference order assumptions using real exchanges of two goods and money. The findings show consistent differences in the valuation placed on goods and money, depending on whether the entitlements are being acquired or given up, and provide direct evidence of preference assumption violations. Copyright 1995 by Oxford University Press.
Download InfoTo our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Western Economic Association International in its journal Economic Inquiry.
Volume (Year): 33 (1995)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://ei.oupjournals.org/
More information through EDIRC
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- de Groot, I. Manon & Antonides, Gerrit & Read, Daniel & Raaij, W. Fred van, 2009. "The effects of direct experience on consumer product evaluation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 509-518, June.
- Bruno S. Frey & Simon Luechinger, . "Measuring Terrorism," IEW - Working Papers 171, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
- Brown, Thomas C. & Gregory, Robin, 1999. "Why the WTA-WTP disparity matters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 323-335, March.
- Ahlheim, Michael & Frör, Oliver & Heinke, Antonia & Duc, Nguyen Minh & Dinh, Pham Van, 2010. "Labour as a utility measure in contingent valuation studies: how good is it really?," FZID Discussion Papers 13-2010, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
- Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, 07.
- Philip R. P. Coelho & James E. McClure, 1996.
"Social context and the utility of wealth: Addressing the Markowitz challenge,"
199602, Ball State University, Department of Economics, revised Jan 1998.
- Coelho, Philip R. P. & McClure, James E., 1998. "Social context and the utility of wealth: Addressing the Markowitz challenge," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 305-314, November.
- Peter R. Mueser & Jay K. Dow, 1998. "Experimental Evidence on the Divergence Between Measures of Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept--The Role of Value Uncertainty," Experimental 9803001, EconWPA.
- Sun, Lili & van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Voss, Graham M., 2006. "Quality of Life as an Explanation of the Divergence between Ranchers' WTA and WTP for Public Forage," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21162, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- Borges, Bernhard F. J. & Knetsch, Jack L., 1998. "Tests of market outcomes with asymmetric valuations of gains and losses: Smaller gains, fewer trades, and less value," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 185-193, January.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum).
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.