IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeborg/v128y2016icp1-13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experience based dynamic choice: A revealed preference approach

Author

Listed:
  • Maltz, Amnon

Abstract

We use the revealed preference method to derive a model of dynamic choice where the agent's past experience may influence her current decisions. Our model generalizes the classical individual choice model which is rationalized by utility maximization, and reduces to that model in the absence of experience. As the agent gains experience her utility changes but only in a very restricted fashion. Every period, after an alternative is chosen, the utility of that, and only that alternative, may change while the utility of all other alternatives remains fixed. The model provides a platform on which many behavioral dynamic phenomena may be examined. We utilize it and look into the behavioral implications of bounded memory, status quo bias and variety seeking.

Suggested Citation

  • Maltz, Amnon, 2016. "Experience based dynamic choice: A revealed preference approach," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 1-13.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:128:y:2016:i:c:p:1-13
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2016.05.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268116300786
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jebo.2016.05.001?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bloemer, JoseM. M. & Kasper, Hans D. P., 1995. "The complex relationship between consumer satisfaction and brand loyalty," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 311-329, July.
    2. 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.
    3. James J. Choi & David Laibson & Brigitte C. Madrian & Andrew Metrick, 2004. "For Better or for Worse: Default Effects and 401(k) Savings Behavior," NBER Chapters, in: Perspectives on the Economics of Aging, pages 81-126, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Knetsch, Jack L, 1989. "The Endowment Effect and Evidence of Nonreversible Indifference Curves," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1277-1284, December.
    5. Itzhak Gilboa & Amit Pazgal, 2001. "Cumulative Discrete Choice," Post-Print hal-00752291, HAL.
    6. Riella, Gil & Teper, Roee, 2014. "Probabilistic dominance and status quo bias," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 288-304.
    7. Kareen Rozen, 2010. "Foundations of Intrinsic Habit Formation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1341-1373, July.
    8. Masatlioglu, Yusufcan & Ok, Efe A., 2005. "Rational choice with status quo bias," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 1-29, March.
    9. Boldrin, Michele & Christiano, Lawrence J. & Fisher, Jonas D.M., 1997. "Habit Persistence And Asset Returns In An Exchange Economy," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 312-332, June.
    10. Brigitte C. Madrian & Dennis F. Shea, 2001. "The Power of Suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) Participation and Savings Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(4), pages 1149-1187.
    11. Knetsch, Jack L. & Wong, Wei-Kang, 2009. "The endowment effect and the reference state: Evidence and manipulations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 407-413, August.
    12. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    13. Robert J. Meyer & Arvind Sathi, 1985. "A Multiattribute Model of Consumer Choice During Product Learning," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(1), pages 41-61.
    14. Thaler, Richard, 1980. "Toward a positive theory of consumer choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 39-60, March.
    15. Klemperer, Paul D, 1987. "Entry Deterrence in Markets with Consumer Switching Costs," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(388a), pages 99-117, Supplemen.
    16. Yuval Salant & Ariel Rubinstein, 2008. "(A, f): Choice with Frames -super-1," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(4), pages 1287-1296.
    17. Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Efe A. Ok, 2014. "A Canonical Model of Choice with Initial Endowments," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(2), pages 851-883.
    18. Ortoleva, Pietro, 2010. "Status quo bias, multiple priors and uncertainty aversion," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 411-424, July.
    19. Paul Klemperer, 1987. "Markets with Consumer Switching Costs," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(2), pages 375-394.
    20. Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 1996. "Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Capturing Dynamic Brand Choice Processes in Turbulent Consumer Goods Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20.
    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.
    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. Ding, Zhao & Jiang, Yuansheng, 2020. "Experience, learning behavior, and rural households’ preferences for microfinance," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304308, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Guy Barokas, 2021. "Dynamic choice under familiarity-based attention," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(4), pages 703-720, November.
    3. Barokas, Guy, 2019. "Choice theoretic foundation for libertarian paternalism: Reconciling the behavioral and libertarian approaches to welfare," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 62-73.
    4. Maniquet, François & Nosratabadi, Hassan, 2022. "Welfare analysis when choice is status-quo biased," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).

    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. Guney, Begum & Richter, Michael, 2018. "Costly switching from a status quo," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 55-70.
    2. Riella, Gil & Teper, Roee, 2014. "Probabilistic dominance and status quo bias," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 288-304.
    3. Roee Teper, 2010. "Probabilistic Dominance and Status Quo Bias," Working Paper 5864, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    4. Maniquet, François & Nosratabadi, Hassan, 2022. "Welfare analysis when choice is status-quo biased," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    5. Kovach, Matthew, 2020. "Twisting the truth: foundations of wishful thinking," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(3), July.
    6. Maltz, Amnon & Romagnoli, Giorgia, 2015. "The Effect of Ambiguity on Status Quo Bias: An Experimental Study," Working Papers WP2015/5, University of Haifa, Department of Economics.
    7. Dean, Mark & Kıbrıs, Özgür & Masatlioglu, Yusufcan, 2017. "Limited attention and status quo bias," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 93-127.
    8. Mark Dean & Ozgur Kibris & Yusufcan Masatlioglu, 2014. "Limited Attention and Status Quo Bias," Working Papers 2014-11, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    9. Qin, Dan, 2021. "Exclusive shortlisting choice with reference," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    10. Wisnicki, Bartlomiej, 2022. "Consumer inertia fosters product quality," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    11. Maltz, Amnon, "undated". "Rational Choice with Category Bias," Working Papers WP2015/4, University of Haifa, Department of Economics, revised 18 Nov 2015.
    12. Georgios, Gerasimou, 2013. "A Behavioural Model of Choice in the Presence of Decision Conflict," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-25, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    13. 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.
    14. Daniele Pennesi, 2013. "Endogenous Status Quo," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 314, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    15. Buturak, Gökhan & Evren, Özgür, 2017. "Choice overload and asymmetric regret," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(3), September.
    16. Masatlioglu, Yusufcan & Uler, Neslihan, 2013. "Understanding the reference effect," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 403-423.
    17. 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.
    18. Peter D. Lunn, 2013. "Telecommunications Consumers: A Behavioral Economic Analysis," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 167-189, April.
    19. Roth, Gerrit, 2006. "Predicting the Gap between Willingness to Accept and Willingness to Pay," Munich Dissertations in Economics 4901, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    20. Dai Zusai, 2018. "Tempered best response dynamics," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 1-34, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Experience; Dynamic choice; Memory; Status quo bias; Revealed preference;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    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:eee:jeborg:v:128:y:2016:i:c:p:1-13. 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/jebo .

    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.