IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nwu/cmsems/1002.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On Determining the Importance of Attributes with a Stopping Problem

Author

Listed:
  • Zvika Neeman

Abstract

One of the approaches in consumer theory considers each product as a collection of attributes. As opposed to the traditional approach, according to which consumer preferences for products are the underlying features of economic modeling, they are now derived from the composition and strength of products' attributes. In this paper I try to answer the question of how one can determine the relative importance of the different attributes of a product. In order to answer this question a stopping problem model is constructed. An agent faces a sequence of i.i.d. multi-dimensional products of which he can observe only one attribute. At each stage the agent has to decide whether he wants to stop, taking the best product so far, or whether he prefers to continue by observing a specific attribute of the next product. The model is solved for an optimal observing policy. In the finite case, second order stochastic dominance characterizes the optimal strategy in the sense that if it holds between the two random variable induced by the expected utility given an attribute, it is never optimal to observe the "dominating" one. In the infinite horizon case, observing one attribute only is always optimal. However, the infinite horizon optimal strategy may not be myopically optimal. The seeming discrepancy between finite and infinite horizon models vanishes for a sufficiently large horizon, thus making the infinite case optimal attribute the one chosen for a long period in finite horizon cases also. Identifying the infinite case optimal attribute allows us to determine the performance of the model in the in the long run even when second order stochastic dominance does not hold.

Suggested Citation

  • Zvika Neeman, 1992. "On Determining the Importance of Attributes with a Stopping Problem," Discussion Papers 1002, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:nwu:cmsems:1002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/research/math/papers/1002.pdf
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), 2002. "Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 3, number 3.
    2. Peter C. Fishburn, 1968. "Utility Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(5), pages 335-378, January.
    3. K. K. Lancaster, 2010. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Levine's Working Paper Archive 1385, David K. Levine.
    4. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    5. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
    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. Sanjurjo, Adam, 2017. "Search with multiple attributes: Theory and empirics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 535-562.
    2. Klabjan, Diego & Olszewski, Wojciech & Wolinsky, Asher, 2014. "Attributes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 190-206.
    3. Olszewski, Wojciech & Wolinsky, Asher, 2016. "Search for an object with two attributes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 145-160.

    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. Anderson, Simon P. & Foros, Øystein & Kind, Hans Jarle, 2012. "Product quality, competition, and multi-purchasing," Discussion Papers 2012/9, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    2. Veneziani, Mario & Sckokai, Paolo & Moro, Daniele, 2012. "Consumers’ willingness to pay for a functional food," 2012 First Congress, June 4-5, 2012, Trento, Italy 124101, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    3. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Olynk, Nicole J., 2011. "Modeling heterogeneity in consumer preferences for select food safety attributes in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 318-324, April.
    4. Katrak, Homi, 1998. "Economic analyses of Industrial Research Institutes in developing countries: the Indian experience," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 337-347, August.
    5. Ondřej Vojáček, 2011. "K pojetí preferencí v ekonomickém myšlení [Preference Dilemma in Economics]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2011(3), pages 345-358.
    6. Amir, Shmuel, 1995. "Welfare maximization in economic theory: Another viewpoint," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 359-376, August.
    7. Timothy K.M. Beatty, 2007. "Recovering the Shadow Value of Nutrients," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(1), pages 52-62.
    8. Knittel Christopher R. & Stango Victor, 2008. "Incompatibility, Product Attributes and Consumer Welfare: Evidence from ATMs," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-42, January.
    9. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    10. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    11. Tisdell, Clement A., 2012. "Ecotourism Experiences Promoting Conservation and Changing Economic Values: The Case of Mon Repos Turtles," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 125209, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    12. Zhang, Xiaohui & Zhao, Xueyan & Harris, Anthony, 2009. "Chronic diseases and labour force participation in Australia," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 91-108, January.
    13. Guggenberger, Patrik & Kaul, Ashok & Kolmar, Martin, 2002. "Efficiency properties of labor taxation in a spatial model of restricted labor mobility," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 447-473, July.
    14. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    15. Aguilar, Francisco X., 2009. "Spatial econometric analysis of location drivers in a renewable resource-based industry: The U.S. South Lumber Industry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 184-193, May.
    16. Marva Stithou & Yiannis Kountouris & Phoebe Koundouri, 2011. "A Choice Experiments Application in Transport Infrastructure: A case study on travel time savings, accidents and pollution reduction," DEOS Working Papers 1116, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    17. Akpalu, Wisdom & Dasmani, Isaac & Aglobitse, Peter B., 2011. "Demand for cooking fuels in a developing country: To what extent do taste and preferences matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 6525-6531, October.
    18. Witte, Kristof De & Geys, Benny, 2011. "Evaluating efficient public good provision: Theory and evidence from a generalised conditional efficiency model for public libraries," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 319-327, May.
    19. Frenken, Koen & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2000. "Scaling trajectories in civil aircraft (1913-1997)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 331-348, March.
    20. Anastassiadis, Friederike & Liebe, Ulf & Musshoff, Oliver, 2012. "Finanzielle Flexibilität In Landwirtschaftlichen Investitionsentscheidungen: Ein Discrete Choice Experiment," 52nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 26-28, 2012 137142, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).

    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:nwu:cmsems:1002. 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: Fran Walker (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cmnwuus.html .

    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.