IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v193y2022ics092180092100361x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Prospect Theory-based experimental vignette methodology for exploring rebound effects and rebound-damping interventions

Author

Listed:
  • Schmidt, Karolin
  • Kösling, Philipp
  • Bamberg, Sebastian
  • Blöbaum, Anke

Abstract

Reducing energy use through increased energy efficiency in production and consumption represents a crucial strategy by national governments for reaching their climate protection goals. Unfortunately, increasing the technological energy efficiency may raise the demand for these services (i.e., rebound effect). To provide appropriate proposals on how this undesired effect could be stopped or at least damped, the Experimental Vignette Methodology (EVM) represents a research methodology allowing the controlled experimental analysis of causal mechanisms underlying a rebound effect and the empirical evaluation of rebound-damping interventions without the high costs associated with (quasi-) experimental field studies. Based on the results of 12 studies, we are evaluating two types of vignette designs: (1) a single-vignette design theoretically based on an economic perspective on the rebound and (2) a double-vignette design theoretically based on Prospect Theory. Finally, we document how to imbed an experimental test of a psychological intervention's effectiveness. The findings underline the value of the EVM as a viable methodological strategy for analyzing and understanding rebound affine situations and appropriate intervention strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmidt, Karolin & Kösling, Philipp & Bamberg, Sebastian & Blöbaum, Anke, 2022. "A Prospect Theory-based experimental vignette methodology for exploring rebound effects and rebound-damping interventions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:193:y:2022:i:c:s092180092100361x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180092100361X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107302?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert C. Blattberg & Richard Briesch & Edward J. Fox, 1995. "How Promotions Work," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3_supplem), pages 122-132.
    2. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    3. Brannlund, Runar & Ghalwash, Tarek & Nordstrom, Jonas, 2007. "Increased energy efficiency and the rebound effect: Effects on consumption and emissions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-17, January.
    4. Hunt, Lester C. & Ryan, David L., 2015. "Economic modelling of energy services: Rectifying misspecified energy demand functions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 273-285.
    5. A. Greening, Lorna & Greene, David L. & Difiglio, Carmen, 2000. "Energy efficiency and consumption -- the rebound effect -- a survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6-7), pages 389-401, June.
    6. 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..
    7. Urbany, Joel E. & Dickson, Peter R., 1990. "Prospect theory and pricing decisions," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 69-80.
    8. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1325-1348, December.
    9. Gurumurthy Kalyanaram & Russell S. Winer, 1995. "Empirical Generalizations from Reference Price Research," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3_supplem), pages 161-169.
    10. Santarius, Tilman & Soland, Martin, 2018. "How Technological Efficiency Improvements Change Consumer Preferences: Towards a Psychological Theory of Rebound Effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 414-424.
    11. Sorrell, Steve & Dimitropoulos, John & Sommerville, Matt, 2009. "Empirical estimates of the direct rebound effect: A review," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1356-1371, April.
    12. Giuseppe Salvia & Eugenio Morello & Federica Rotondo & Andrea Sangalli & Francesco Causone & Silvia Erba & Lorenzo Pagliano, 2020. "Performance Gap and Occupant Behavior in Building Retrofit: Focus on Dynamics of Change and Continuity in the Practice of Indoor Heating," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-25, July.
    13. Lillian L. Cheng & Kent B. Monroe, 2013. "An appraisal of behavioral price research (part 1): price as a physical stimulus," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(3), pages 103-129, September.
    14. Lillian L. Cheng & Kent B. Monroe, 2013. "Some reflections on an appraisal of behavioral price research (part 1)," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(3), pages 155-159, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items 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. Sheehan, Daniel & Hardesty, David M. & Ziegler, Alexander H. & Chen, Haipeng (Allan), 2019. "Consumer reactions to price discounts across online shopping experiences," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 129-138.
    2. Mao, Zhixin & Duan, Yongrui & Liu, Wenxia, 2023. "Consumers’ choice of private label considering reference price and moderating effect," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    3. Teck H. Ho & Noah Lim & Colin Camerer, 2005. "Modeling the Psychology of Consumer and Firm Behavior with Behavioral Economics," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000476, UCLA Department of Economics.
    4. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel Ballester, 2009. "A theory of reference-dependent behavior," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(3), pages 427-455, September.
    5. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1486-1525, December.
    6. Shunda, Nicholas, 2009. "Auctions with a buy price: The case of reference-dependent preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 645-664, November.
    7. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    8. Erica Mina Okada, 2010. "Uncertainty, Risk Aversion, and WTA vs. WTP," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(1), pages 75-84, 01-02.
    9. Rabindra Nepal, Muhammad Indra al Irsyad, and Tooraj Jamasb, 2021. "Sectoral Electricity Demand and Direct Rebound Effects in New Zealand," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4).
    10. Teck-Hua Ho & Juanjuan Zhang, 2008. "Designing Pricing Contracts for Boundedly Rational Customers: Does the Framing of the Fixed Fee Matter?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 686-700, April.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:988-1014 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Young, Diana L. & Goodie, Adam S. & Hall, Daniel B. & Wu, Eric, 2012. "Decision making under time pressure, modeled in a prospect theory framework," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 179-188.
    13. Toshiaki Iizuka & Hitoshi Shigeoka, 2020. "Asymmetric Demand Response when Prices Increase and Decrease: The Case of Child Healthcare," NBER Working Papers 28057, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Chip Heath & Marc Knez & Colin Camerer, 1993. "The strategic management of the entitlement process in the employment relationship," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 75-93, December.
    15. Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2012. "A genuine foundation for prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 97-113, October.
    16. De Borger, Bruno & Fosgerau, Mogens, 2007. "Discrete choices and the trade-off between money and time: A test of the theory of reference-dependent preferences," MPRA Paper 3904, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Domenico Colucci & Chiara Franco & Vincenzo Valori, 2021. "Endowment effects at different time scenarios: the role of ownership and possession," Discussion Papers 2021/279, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    18. Han Bleichrodt, 2002. "A new explanation for the difference between time trade‐off utilities and standard gamble utilities," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(5), pages 447-456, July.
    19. Freire-González, Jaume, 2017. "Evidence of direct and indirect rebound effect in households in EU-27 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 270-276.
    20. Joost M. E. Pennings & Ale Smidts, 2003. "The Shape of Utility Functions and Organizational Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(9), pages 1251-1263, September.
    21. repec:ken:wpaper:0601 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Andrea Isoni & Graham Loomes & Robert Sugden, 2011. "The Willingness to Pay—Willingness to Accept Gap, the "Endowment Effect," Subject Misconceptions, and Experimental Procedures for Eliciting Valuations: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 991-1011, April.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:193:y:2022:i:c:s092180092100361x. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.