Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Citations for "Testing strictly concave rationality"

by Matzkin, Rosa L. & Richter, Marcel K.

For a complete description of this item, click here. For a RSS feed for citations of this item, click here.
as in new window
  1. Snyder, Susan K., 1999. "Testable restrictions of Pareto optimal public good provision," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 97-119, January.
  2. Ait-Sahalia, Yacine & Duarte, Jefferson, 2003. "Nonparametric option pricing under shape restrictions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 116(1-2), pages 9-47.
  3. Kalandrakis, Tasos, 2010. "Rationalizable voting," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 5(1), January.
  4. Jan Heufer, 2013. "Testing revealed preferences for homotheticity with two-good experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 114-124, March.
  5. Blundell, Richard & Kristensen, Dennis & Matzkin, Rosa, 2014. "Bounding quantile demand functions using revealed preference inequalities," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 179(2), pages 112-127.
  6. Andrés Carvajal, 2003. "Testable Restrictions On The Equilibrium Manifold Under Random Preferences," BORRADORES DE ECONOMIA 001899, BANCO DE LA REPÚBLICA.
  7. Heufer, Jan, 2013. "Quasiconcave preferences on the probability simplex: A nonparametric analysis," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 21-30.
  8. Andrés Carvajal, . "Testable Restrictions of General Equilibrium Theory in Exchange Economies with Externalities," Borradores de Economia 231, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
  9. Carvajal, Andres & Polemarchakis, H.M., 2008. "Identification of Pareto-improving policies: Information as the real invisible hand," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 167-179, January.
  10. Jan Heufer, 2014. "A geometric approach to revealed preference via Hamiltonian cycles," Theory and Decision, Springer, Springer, vol. 76(3), pages 329-341, March.
  11. Richter, Marcel K. & Wong, K.-C.Kam-Chau, 2004. "Concave utility on finite sets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 341-357, April.
  12. Jens Hougaard & Tue Tjur & Lars Østerdal, 2012. "On the meaningfulness of testing preference axioms in stated preference discrete choice experiments," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 409-417, August.
  13. Carvajal, Andres & Ray, Indrajit & Snyder, Susan, 2004. "Equilibrium behavior in markets and games: testable restrictions and identification," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-2), pages 1-40, February.
  14. Christopher Connell & Eric Rasmusen, 2012. "Concavifying the Quasiconcave," Working Papers, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy 2012-10, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
  15. Andrés Carvajal, 2004. "Individually-Rational Collective Choice under Random Preferences," Royal Holloway, University of London: Discussion Papers in Economics, Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London 04/29, Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London, revised Nov 2004.
  16. Andrés Carvajal, 2010. "The testable implications of competitive equilibrium in economies with externalities," Economic Theory, Springer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 349-378, October.
  17. Apartsin, Yevgenia & Kannai, Yakar, 2006. "Demand properties of concavifiable preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 36-55, December.
  18. Andrés Carvajal, 2007. "Individually Rational Collective Choice," Theory and Decision, Springer, Springer, vol. 62(4), pages 355-374, May.
  19. Donald J. Brown & Rosa L. Matzkin, 1995. "Testable Restrictions on the Equilibrium Manifold," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University 1109, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  20. Shomu Banerjee & James H. Murphy, 2004. "A Simplified Test for Preference Rationality of Two-commodity Choice," Emory Economics, Department of Economics, Emory University (Atlanta) 0421, Department of Economics, Emory University (Atlanta).
  21. Reinhard Sippel, 1995. "An Experiment on the Pure Theory of Consumer's Behaviour," Discussion Paper Serie B 274, University of Bonn, Germany.
  22. Shomu Banerjee & James H. Murphy, 2007. "Do Rational Demand Estimates Differ from Irrational Ones? Evidence from an Induced Budget Experiment," Emory Economics, Department of Economics, Emory University (Atlanta) 0714, Department of Economics, Emory University (Atlanta).
  23. Samiran Banerjee & James Murphy, 2006. "A simplified test for preference rationality of two-commodity choice," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 67-75, April.
  24. Carvajal, Andrés & González, Natalia, 2014. "On refutability of the Nash bargaining solution," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 177-186.
  25. Liu, Pak-Wai & Wong, Kam-Chau, 2000. "Revealed homothetic preference and technology," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 287-314, November.