IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/ecstat/estat_0336-1454_2004_num_374_1_7246.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

De la théorie à une enquête méthodologique originale

Author

Listed:
  • Luc Arrondel
  • André Masson
  • Daniel Verger

Abstract

[eng] From Theory to an Original Methodological Survey . Standard saving theory -which assumes the "exponential” discounting of future utilities through to the end of the life cycle and refers, under an uncertain future, to the criterion of expected utility -uses only two preference parameters to explain asset behaviour: relative risk aversion and the discount rate. The clear mismatch between this theory’s predictions and actual observation has given rise to the development of more realistic non-standard models -unexpected utility, hyperbolic discounting, etc. However, these models have to use more independent preference parameters to be able to agree with the laboratory and survey data: empirically, this proliferation runs into a dead end. We have therefore adopted a middle line using two "pivotal” preference parameters - one for risk and the other for time - whose definitions differ from the standard framework. The risk parameter characterises the general attitude to risk rather than actual aversion. Likewise, the long-run time preference is flanked by two other types of parameters measuring short-run impatience and altruism with regard to descendants. Correlatively, the empirical approach adopted proves to be both qualitative and eclectic. Aware of the disappointments of experiences to date in the Englishspeaking world, we propose purely ordinal preference measures, called "scores”, which summarise the interviewee’s responses to a multitude of all kinds of generally concrete questions - behaviour, opinions, intentions, etc. - covering a wide range of areas - consumption, health, work, financial management, family, retirement, etc. [fre] De la théorie à une enquête méthodologique originale . La théorie standard de l’épargnant - qui suppose une actualisation «exponentielle» des utilités futures jusqu’au terme de l’existence et qui se réfère, en avenir risqué, au critère de l’espérance de l’utilité - ne retient que deux paramètres de préférence pour expliquer les comportements patrimoniaux: l’aversion - relative - à l’égard du risque et le taux de dépréciation du futur. L’inadéquation manifeste des prédictions de cette théorie avec l’observation a conduit à l’élaboration de modèles non standard plus réalistes - utilité non espérée, actualisation «hyperbolique», etc. Cependant, ces modèles doivent multiplier les paramètres de préférence indépendants pour pouvoir s’accorder aux données de laboratoire ou d’enquêtes: cette prolifération aboutit, au plan empirique, à une impasse. C’est pourquoi on adopte une voie moyenne qui privilégie encore deux paramètres de préférence «pivots», l’un par rapport au risque, l’autre par rapport au temps, mais dont les définitions s’éloignent du cadre standard. Le paramètre pour le risque caractérisera l’attitude . générale à l’égard du risque plutôt que l’aversion proprement dite; de même, la préférence de long terme pour le présent se verra bordée de deux autres types de paramètres, mesurant l’un l’impatience sur le court terme, l’autre l’altruisme pour sa descendance. Corrélativement, l’approche empirique adoptée s’avère à la fois qualitative et éclectique. Avertis des déboires qu’ont connus les expériences anglo-saxonnes existantes, on propose des mesures purement ordinales . des préférences, baptisées «scores», qui synthétisent les réponses de l’enquêté à une multitude de questions le plus souvent concrètes et de toute nature - comportements, opinions, projets, etc. - et couvrant un large éventail de domaines - consommation, santé, travail, gestion financière, famille, retraite, etc. [ger] Von der Theorie zu einer originellen methodologischen Erhebung . Die Standardtheorie über den Sparer, die eine «exponentielle» Abzinsung des künftigen Nutzens bis zum Existenzende annimmt und die bei einer ungewissen Zukunft auf das Kriterium der Erwartung von Nutzen verweist, verwendet nur zwei Präferenzparameter, um die Verhaltensweisen bei der Vermögensbildung zu erklären: relative Risikoaversion und Grad des Wertverlusts der Zukunft. Da sich die Prognosen dieser Theorie mit den gemachten Beobachtungen offensichtlich nicht decken, wurden Nichtstandard-Modelle erarbeitet, die realistischer sind: nicht erhoffter Nutzen, «hyperbolische» Abzinsung usw. Allerdings sind bei diesen Modellen mehr unabhängige Präferenzparameter erforderlich, um sich den Labor-oder Erhebungsdaten anpassen zu können: die Zunahme der Parameter führt aber empirisch gesehen in eine Sackgasse. Aus diesem Grunde wird ein mittlerer Weg gewählt, der ebenfalls zwei zentrale Präferenzparameter privilegiert; der eine für das Risiko und der andere für die Zeit, deren Parameter für das Risiko kennzeichnet eher die allgemeine . Einstellung zum Risiko als die Aversion im eigentlichen Sinne. Des Gleichen wird die langfristige Präferenz für die Gegenwert von zwei anderen Arten von Parametern bestimmt, von denen der eine die . Ungeduld in kurzfristiger Hinsicht und der andere den . Altruismus zugunsten der Nachkommen misst. Es zeigt sich, dass der gewählte empirische Ansatz qualitativer und eklektischer Art ist. Im Bewusstsein der Misserfolge, zu denen die bestehenden angelsächsischen Erfahrungen führten, werden rein ordinale Messungen der Präferenzen vorgeschlagen, die als «Scores» bezeichnet werden; diese fassen die Antworten des Befragten auf eine Vielzahl von in den meisten Fällen konkreten und unterschiedlichen Fragen -Verhaltensweisen, Meinungen, Projekte usw - zusammen und decken ein breites Spektrum von Bereichen - Konsum, Gesundheit, Arbeit, Finanzmanagement, Familie, Ruhestand usw. -ab. [spa] De la teoría a una encuesta metodológica original . La teoría estándar del ahorrador - la cual supone una actualización «exponencial» de las utilidades futuras hasta el fin de vida y se refiere, en un futuro arriesgado, al criterio de la esperanza de la utilidad - tan sólo retiene dos parámetros de preferencia para explicar los comportamientos patrimoniales: la aversión - relativa - respecto al riesgo y la tasa de depreciación del futuro. La patente inadecuación de las predicciones de esta teoría con lo observado induce la elaboración de unos modelos no estandares más realistas - utilidad no esperada, actualización «hiperbólica», etc. Sin embargo, esos modelos deben multiplicar los parámetros de preferencia independientes para poder concordar con datos de laboratorio o encuestas: esa proliferación da, a nivel empírico, a un callejón sin salida. Por todo eso se adopta aquí una vía media que sigue privilegiando dos parámetros de preferencia «ejes», uno relacionado con el riesgo, otro relacionado con el tiempo, pero sus definiciones se alejan del marco estándar. El parámetro relacionado con el riesgo va a caracterizar la actitud general respecto al riesgo antes que la aversión propiamente dicha; del mismo modo, la preferencia de largo plazo por el presente irá a la par con otros dos tipos de parámetros, uno que mide la . impaciencia a corto plazo, otro el altruismo con la descendencia. Correlativamente el enfoque empírico adoptado resulta ser a la vez cualitativo y ecléctico. Sabidas las decepciones que se llevaron las experiencias anglosajonas existentes, se proponen aquí unas mediciones meramente . ordinales de las preferencias, llamadas «tanteos», las cuales sintetizan las respuestas del encuestado a una multitud de preguntas la mayoría de las veces concretas y de todo tipo - comportamientos, opiniones, proyectos, etc. - y que abarcan un amplio abanico de ámbitos - consumo, sanidad, trabajo, gestión financiera, familia, jubilación, etc.

Suggested Citation

  • Luc Arrondel & André Masson & Daniel Verger, 2004. "De la théorie à une enquête méthodologique originale," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 374(1), pages 21-51.
  • Handle: RePEc:prs:ecstat:estat_0336-1454_2004_num_374_1_7246
    DOI: 10.3406/estat.2004.7246
    Note: DOI:10.3406/estat.2004.7246
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/estat.2004.7246
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/estat_0336-1454_2004_num_374_1_7246
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3406/estat.2004.7246?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abel, Andrew B, 1990. "Asset Prices under Habit Formation and Catching Up with the Joneses," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 38-42, May.
    2. Gary S. Becker & Casey B. Mulligan, 1997. "The Endogenous Determination of Time Preference," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(3), pages 729-758.
    3. Modigliani, Franco, 1986. "Life Cycle, Individual Thrift, and the Wealth of Nations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(3), pages 297-313, June.
    4. Andrew Caplin & John Leahy, 2004. "The Social Discount Rate," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(6), pages 1257-1268, December.
    5. Attanasio, Orazio P & Browning, Martin, 1995. "Consumption over the Life Cycle and over the Business Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1118-1137, December.
    6. repec:adr:anecst:y:2004:i:73:p:07 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Kimball, Miles S, 1990. "Precautionary Saving in the Small and in the Large," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(1), pages 53-73, January.
    8. Kimball, Miles S, 1993. "Standard Risk Aversion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 589-611, May.
    9. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    10. Gilbert Ghez & Gary S. Becker, 1975. "The Allocation of Time Over the Life Cycle," NBER Chapters, in: The Allocation of Time and Goods over the Life Cycle, pages 83-132, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    12. Milton Friedman, 1957. "Introduction to "A Theory of the Consumption Function"," NBER Chapters, in: A Theory of the Consumption Function, pages 1-6, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Arrondel, Luc & Masson, Andre, 2006. "Altruism, exchange or indirect reciprocity: what do the data on family transfers show?," Handbook on the Economics of Giving, Reciprocity and Altruism, in: S. Kolm & Jean Mercier Ythier (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 14, pages 971-1053, Elsevier.
    14. Akerlof, George A, 1991. "Procrastination and Obedience," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(2), pages 1-19, May.
    15. Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
    16. Robert B. Barsky & F. Thomas Juster & Miles S. Kimball & Matthew D. Shapiro, 1997. "Preference Parameters and Behavioral Heterogeneity: An Experimental Approach in the Health and Retirement Study," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 537-579.
    17. Friend, Irwin & Blume, Marshall E, 1975. "The Demand for Risky Assets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(5), pages 900-922, December.
    18. Gilbert Ghez & Gary S. Becker, 1975. "The Allocation of Goods Over the Life Cycle," NBER Chapters, in: The Allocation of Time and Goods over the Life Cycle, pages 46-82, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Kreps, David M & Porteus, Evan L, 1978. "Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty and Dynamic Choice Theory," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 185-200, January.
    20. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    21. Becker, Gary S & Murphy, Kevin M, 1988. "A Theory of Rational Addiction," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(4), pages 675-700, August.
    22. Viscusi, W. Kip & Moore, Michael J., 1989. "Rates of time preference and valuations of the duration of life," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 297-317, April.
    23. Jean-Pascal Gayant, 2004. "Rôle de la transformation des probabilités dans la combinaison d'actifs risqués," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 73, pages 141-155.
    24. Kreps, David M & Porteus, Evan L, 1979. "Dynamic Choice Theory and Dynamic Programming," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(1), pages 91-100, January.
    25. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    26. Gilbert Ghez & Gary S. Becker, 1975. "A Theory of the Allocation of Time and Goods Over the Life Cycle," NBER Chapters, in: The Allocation of Time and Goods over the Life Cycle, pages 1-45, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    27. John Ameriks & Andrew Caplin & John Leahy, 2003. "Wealth Accumulation and the Propensity to Plan," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(3), pages 1007-1047.
    28. Deaton,Angus & Muellbauer,John, 1980. "Economics and Consumer Behavior," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521296762.
    29. Milton Friedman, 1957. "A Theory of the Consumption Function," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number frie57-1, March.
    30. Tobin, James, 1985. "Neoclassical Theory in America: J. B. Clark and Fisher," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(6), pages 28-38, December.
    31. Luc Arrondel & André Masson, 1996. "Gestion du risque et comportements patrimoniaux," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 296(1), pages 63-89.
    32. Gilbert Ghez & Gary S. Becker, 1975. "The Allocation of Time and Goods over the Life Cycle," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number ghez75-1, March.
    33. Machina, Mark J, 1989. "Dynamic Consistency and Non-expected Utility Models of Choice under Uncertainty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 27(4), pages 1622-1668, December.
    34. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
    35. Paul A. Samuelson, 1937. "A Note on Measurement of Utility," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 4(2), pages 155-161.
    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. Roméo Fontaine & Manuel Plisson & Jérôme Wittwer & Nina Zerrar, 2012. "Perception du risque dépendance et demande d'assurance : une analyse à partir de l'enquête PATER," Post-Print hal-01686603, HAL.
    2. repec:dau:papers:123456789/10722 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Pascal Godefroy & Stéfan Lollivier, 2014. "Satisfaction et qualité de vie," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 469(1), pages 199-232.
    4. repec:dau:papers:123456789/11723 is not listed on IDEAS

    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. Orazio P. Attanasio & Guglielmo Weber, 2010. "Consumption and Saving: Models of Intertemporal Allocation and Their Implications for Public Policy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(3), pages 693-751, September.
    2. Orazio P. Attanasio, 1998. "Consumption Demand," NBER Working Papers 6466, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. repec:dau:papers:123456789/6826 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1324-1369 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Sudeep Bhatia & Graham Loomes & Daniel Read, 2021. "Establishing the laws of preferential choice behavior," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(6), pages 1324-1369, November.
    6. Luc Arrondel & André Masson & Daniel Verger, 2004. "Mesurer les préférences individuelles à l'égard du risque," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 374(1), pages 53-85.
    7. Hubbard, R. Glenn & Skinner, Jonathan & Zeldes, Stephen P., 1994. "The importance of precautionary motives in explaining individual and aggregate saving," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 59-125, June.
    8. Dorian Jullien, 2016. "Under Uncertainty, Over Time and Regarding Other People: Rationality in 3D," GREDEG Working Papers 2016-20, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    9. de La Bruslerie, Hubert & Pratlong, Florent, 2012. "La valeur psychologique du temps : une synthèse de la littérature," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 88(3), pages 361-400, Septembre.
    10. Dorian Jullien, 2018. "Under Risk, Over Time, Regarding Other People: Language and Rationality within Three Dimensions," Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, in: Including a Symposium on Latin American Monetary Thought: Two Centuries in Search of Originality, volume 36, pages 119-155, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    11. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    12. Aylit Tina Romm, 2017. "Retirement date effects on saving behavior: Endogenous labor supply and non-separable preferences," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 13(3), pages 327-346, September.
    13. Donatella Baiardi & Marco Magnani & Mario Menegatti, 2020. "The theory of precautionary saving: an overview of recent developments," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 513-542, June.
    14. Chavas, Jean-Paul, 2013. "On the microeconomics of food and malnutrition under endogenous discounting," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 80-96.
    15. Andrea Butelmann P & Francisco Gallego, 2000. "Household Saving in Chile: Microeconomic Evidence," Journal Economía Chilena (The Chilean Economy), Central Bank of Chile, vol. 3(1), pages 5-24, April.
    16. Antony Millner & Geoffrey Heal, 2015. "Collective intertemporal choice: time consistency vs. time invariance," GRI Working Papers 220, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    17. Jinrui Pan & Craig S. Webb & Horst Zank, 2019. "Delayed probabilistic risk attitude: a parametric approach," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 87(2), pages 201-232, September.
    18. Thomas Epper & Helga Fehr-Duda, 2012. "The missing link: unifying risk taking and time discounting," ECON - Working Papers 096, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Oct 2018.
    19. Andrea Butelmann P & Francisco Gallego, 2000. "Household Saving in Chile: Microeconomic Evidence," Journal Economía Chilena (The Chilean Economy), Central Bank of Chile, vol. 3(1), pages 5-24, April.
    20. Stracca, Livio, 2004. "Behavioral finance and asset prices: Where do we stand?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 373-405, June.
    21. Marieka M. Klawitter & C. Leigh Anderson & Mary Kay Gugerty, 2013. "Savings And Personal Discount Rates In A Matched Savings Program For Low-Income Families," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(3), pages 468-485, July.
    22. Hammond, Peter J & Zank, Horst, 2013. "Rationality and Dynamic Consistency under Risk and Uncertainty," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1033, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:prs:ecstat:estat_0336-1454_2004_num_374_1_7246. 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: Equipe PERSEE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/estat .

    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.