IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/mateco/v97y2021ics0304406821001166.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Frame-based stochastic choice rule

Author

Listed:
  • Bhattacharya, Mihir
  • Mukherjee, Saptarshi
  • Sonal, Ruhi

Abstract

We consider an individual decision-making problem where the decision maker is subject to inattention. The source of this inattention is the frames with which the alternatives appear; leading to randomness in choice. We characterize a rule called frame-based stochastic choice rule, according to which the choice probability of an alternative (say, x) is the probability with which attention is drawn by its frame and not by the frames which are associated with the alternatives that beat x according to a complete and antisymmetric binary relation. The choice probability is zero if a better alternative appears with the same frame. The rule and the treatment are largely influenced by Manzini and Mariotti (2014). Our framework is applicable to settings where frames are advertisements or types of packaging.

Suggested Citation

  • Bhattacharya, Mihir & Mukherjee, Saptarshi & Sonal, Ruhi, 2021. "Frame-based stochastic choice rule," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:mateco:v:97:y:2021:i:c:s0304406821001166
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jmateco.2021.102553
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304406821001166
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jmateco.2021.102553?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. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2014. "Stochastic Choice and Consideration Sets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(3), pages 1153-1176, May.
    2. Ioana Chioveanu & Jidong Zhou, 2013. "Price Competition with Consumer Confusion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(11), pages 2450-2469, November.
    3. Saptarshi Mukherjee, 2014. "Choice in ordered-tree-based decision problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(2), pages 471-496, August.
    4. Matias D. Cattaneo & Xinwei Ma & Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Elchin Suleymanov, 2020. "A Random Attention Model," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(7), pages 2796-2836.
    5. Jura Liaukonyte & Thales Teixeira & Kenneth C. Wilbur, 2015. "Television Advertising and Online Shopping," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 311-330, May.
    6. Li, Jiangtao & Tang, Rui, 2017. "Every random choice rule is backwards-induction rationalizable," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 563-567.
    7. Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Daisuke Nakajima & Erkut Y. Ozbay, 2012. "Revealed Attention," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2183-2205, August.
    8. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2015. "Modelling Imperfect Attention," Working Papers 744, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    9. John T. Gourville & Dilip Soman, 2005. "Overchoice and Assortment Type: When and Why Variety Backfires," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 382-395, July.
    10. Drew Fudenberg & Ryota Iijima & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2015. "Stochastic Choice and Revealed Perturbed Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 2371-2409, November.
    11. Plott, Charles R, 1973. "Path Independence, Rationality, and Social Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(6), pages 1075-1091, November.
    12. Rook, Dennis W & Fisher, Robert J, 1995. "Normative Influences on Impulsive Buying Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 22(3), pages 305-313, December.
    13. Aguiar, Victor H., 2017. "Random categorization and bounded rationality," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 46-52.
    14. 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.
    15. Rik Pieters & Michel Wedel, 2007. "Goal Control of Attention to Advertising: The Yarbus Implication," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(2), pages 224-233, June.
    16. Bhattacharya, Mihir & Mukherjee, Saptarshi & Sonal, Ruhi, 2020. "Consumer equilibrium, random choice and hemi-Bayesian revision rule," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    17. Kahle, Lynn R & Homer, Pamela M, 1985. "Physical Attractiveness of the Celebrity Endorser: A Social Adaptation Perspective," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 11(4), pages 954-961, March.
    18. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i::p:396-403 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. , & ,, 2006. "A model of choice from lists," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 1(1), pages 3-17, March.
    20. Bloch, Peter H & Brunel, Frederic F & Arnold, Todd J, 2003. "Individual Differences in the Centrality of Visual Product Aesthetics: Concept and Measurement," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(4), pages 551-565, March.
    21. ,, 2016. "List-rationalizable choice," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(2), May.
    22. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2015. "Modelling Imperfect Attention," Working Papers 744, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    23. H.D. Block & Jacob Marschak, 1959. "Random Orderings and Stochastic Theories of Response," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 66, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    24. Echenique, Federico & Saito, Kota & Tserenjigmid, Gerelt, 2018. "The perception-adjusted Luce model," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 67-76.
    25. Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco, 2018. "Dual random utility maximisation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 162-182.
    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. Gerelt Tserenjigmid, 2021. "The Order-Dependent Luce Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6915-6933, November.
    2. Mihir Bhattacharya & Saptarshi Mukherjee & Ruhi Sonal, 2019. "Attention and Framing," Working Papers 18, Ashoka University, Department of Economics.
    3. Mihir Bhattacharya & Saptarshi Mukherjee & Ruhi Sonal, 2019. "Attention and Framing," Working Papers 1027, Ashoka University, Department of Economics.
    4. Yegane, Ece, 2022. "Stochastic choice with limited memory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    5. Duffy, Sean & Smith, John, 2020. "An economist and a psychologist form a line: What can imperfect perception of length tell us about stochastic choice?," MPRA Paper 99417, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Duffy, Sean & Gussman, Steven & Smith, John, 2021. "Visual judgments of length in the economics laboratory: Are there brains in stochastic choice?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    7. Breitmoser, Yves, 2017. "Discrete Choice with Presentation Effects," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 35, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    8. Efe A. Ok & Gerelt Tserenjigmid, 2023. "Measuring Stochastic Rationality," Papers 2303.08202, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    9. Demirkan, Yusufcan & Kimya, Mert, 2020. "Hazard rate, stochastic choice and consideration sets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 142-150.
    10. Edward Honda, 2021. "Categorical consideration and perception complementarity," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(2), pages 693-716, March.
    11. Caliari, Daniele, 2023. "Behavioural welfare analysis and revealed preference: Theory and experimental evidence," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2023-303, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    12. Gibbard, Peter, 2021. "Disentangling preferences and limited attention: Random-utility models with consideration sets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    13. Victor H. Aguiar & Maria Jose Boccardi & Nail Kashaev & Jeongbin Kim, 2023. "Random utility and limited consideration," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(1), pages 71-116, January.
    14. Valentino Dardanoni & Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti & Christopher J. Tyson, 2020. "Inferring Cognitive Heterogeneity From Aggregate Choices," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(3), pages 1269-1296, May.
    15. Gent Bajraj & Levent Ülkü, 2015. "Choosing two finalists and the winner," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(4), pages 729-744, December.
    16. Matias D. Cattaneo & Xinwei Ma & Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Elchin Suleymanov, 2020. "A Random Attention Model," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(7), pages 2796-2836.
    17. Caplin, Andrew, 2014. "Rational inattention and revealed preference: The data-theoretic approach to economic modeling," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 295-305.
    18. Aguiar, Victor H., 2017. "Random categorization and bounded rationality," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 46-52.
    19. Aguiar, Victor H. & Kimya, Mert, 2019. "Adaptive stochastic search," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 74-83.
    20. Hassan Nosratabadi, 2017. "Referential Revealed Preference Theory," Departmental Working Papers 201705, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.

    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:mateco:v:97:y:2021:i:c:s0304406821001166. 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/jmateco .

    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.