IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hop/hopeec/v46y2014i1p85-116.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Paul Samuelson and Revealed Preference Theory

Author

Listed:
  • D. Wade Hands

Abstract

Revealed preference theory is not a specific theory; it is a broad programmatic framework for analyzing choice behavior. Within this broad framework there are a number of different revealed preference theories (different versions of the program)—they all share common features, but there are also sharp differences. The diversity of revealed preference theory is not well understood, and one purpose of this article is to improve our historical understanding of the field by examining this historical diversity. This history is valuable for its own sake, but also because it is relevant to recent debates about the methodological foundations of rational choice theory among experimental psychologists, behavioral economists, neuroeconomists, and others. The second purpose of this article is to use material from the Paul Samuelson archives to help us understand how Samuelson, the originator of revealed preference theory, viewed his contribution to the program and how he evaluated the different versions of revealed preference theory. The article will examine Das Paul Samuelson Problem: the question of whether Paul Samuelson changed his mind about the foundations (the nature, significance, and purpose) of revealed preference theory over time.

Suggested Citation

  • D. Wade Hands, 2014. "Paul Samuelson and Revealed Preference Theory," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 85-116, Spring.
    • Handle: RePEc:hop:hopeec:v:46:y:2014:i:1:p:85-116
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hope.dukejournals.org/content/46/1/85.full.pdf+html
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. A. Fostel & H. Scarf & M. Todd, 2004. "Two new proofs of Afriat’s theorem," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 24(1), pages 211-219, July.
    2. B. Douglas Bernheim, 2009. "Behavioral Welfare Economics," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 7(2-3), pages 267-319, 04-05.
    3. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2005. "The Case for Mindless Economics," Levine's Working Paper Archive 784828000000000581, David K. Levine.
    4. Caplin, Andrew & Schotter, Andrew, 2008. "The Foundations of Positive and Normative Economics: A Handbook," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195328318, Decembrie.
    5. Ivan Moscati & Paola Tubaro, 2011. "Becker random behavior and the as-if defense of rational choice theory in demand analysis," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 107-128.
    6. Gross, John, 1995. "Testing Data for Consistency with Revealed Preference," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(4), pages 701-710, November.
    7. Rosenberg, Alexander, 1992. "Economics--Mathematical Politics or Science of Diminishing Returns?," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226727233, September.
    8. Hurwicz, Leonid & Richter, Marcel K., 1979. "An integrability condition with applications to utility theory and thermodynamics," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 7-14, March.
    9. D. Wade Hands, 2011. "Back To The Ordinalist Revolution: Behavioral Economic Concerns In Early Modern Consumer Choice Theory," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(2), pages 386-410, May.
    10. D. Wade Hands, 2006. "Integrability, Rationalizability, and Path-Dependency in the History of Demand Theory," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 38(5), pages 153-185, Supplemen.
    11. Paul A. Samuelson, 1998. "How Foundations Came to Be," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(3), pages 1375-1386, September.
    12. Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, 1954. "Choice, Expectations and Measurability," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 68(4), pages 503-534.
    13. Paul A. Samuelson, 1938. "The Numerical Representation of Ordered Classifications and the Concept of Utility," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 6(1), pages 65-70.
    14. Ivan Moscati, 2007. "Early Experiments in Consumer Demand Theory: 1930-1970," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 39(3), pages 359-401, Fall.
    15. Samuelson, Paul A, 1972. "Maximum Principles in Analytical Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(3), pages 249-262, June.
    16. Taradas Bandyopadhyay & Indraneel Dasgupta & Prasanta Pattanaik, 2004. "A general revealed preference theorem for stochastic demand behavior," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 23(3), pages 589-599, March.
    17. W. E. Diewert, 1973. "Afriat and Revealed Preference Theory," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 40(3), pages 419-425.
    18. D. Wade Hands, 2009. "Effective Tension in Robbins' Economic Methodology," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 76(s1), pages 831-844, October.
    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. Francesco GUALA, 2017. "Preferences: Neither Behavioural nor Mental," Departmental Working Papers 2017-05, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    2. Wang, Jian & Iversen, Tor & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Godager, Geir, 2020. "Are patient-regarding preferences stable? Evidence from a laboratory experiment with physicians and medical students from different countries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    3. Zouboulakis, Michel S., 2023. "A.G. Papandreou’S Academic Economic Thought 1943-1963," SocArXiv 3nqfb, Center for Open Science.
    4. H. Spencer Banzhaf & Yaqin Liu & Martin Smith & Frank Asche, 2019. "Non-Parametric Tests of the Tragedy of the Commons," NBER Working Papers 26398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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. Yoram Halevy & Dotan Persitz & Lanny Zrill, 2018. "Parametric Recoverability of Preferences," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1558-1593.
    2. Jean-Sébastien Lenfant, 2018. "Probabilising the consumer: Georgescu-Roegen, Marschak and Quandt on the modelling of the consumer in the 1950s," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 36-72, January.
    3. B. Douglas Bernheim, 2009. "On the Potential of Neuroeconomics: A Critical (but Hopeful) Appraisal," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 1-41, August.
    4. Akhabbar, Amanar, 2013. "Samuelson and the Non-Substitution Theorem: Some Methodological Remarks," MPRA Paper 61760, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Per Hjertstrand & James Swofford, 2012. "Revealed preference tests for consistency with weakly separable indirect utility," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(2), pages 245-256, February.
    6. Alan Beggs, 2021. "Afriat and arbitrage," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 9(2), pages 167-176, October.
    7. Andrew Caplin & Daniel Martin, 2015. "A Testable Theory of Imperfect Perception," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(582), pages 184-202, February.
    8. Giandomenica Becchio, 2020. "The Two Blades of Occam's Razor in Economics: Logical and Heuristic," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, July.
    9. Halevy, Yoram & Persitz, Dotan & Zrill, Lanny, 2017. "Non-parametric bounds for non-convex preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 105-112.
    10. Aluma Dembo & Shachar Kariv & Matthew Polisson & John Quah, 2021. "Ever since Allais," IFS Working Papers W21/15, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    11. Glenn W. Harrison, 2019. "The behavioral welfare economics of insurance," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 44(2), pages 137-175, September.
    12. Nicolas Brisset & Dorian Jullien, 2019. "Models as Speech Acts: A Restatement and a new Case Study," GREDEG Working Papers 2019-09, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    13. Thomas Demuynck & John Rehbeck, 2023. "Computing revealed preference goodness-of-fit measures with integer programming," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(4), pages 1175-1195, November.
    14. Laurens Cherchye & Bram De Rock & Vincenzo Platino, 2013. "Private versus public consumption within groups: testing the nature of goods from aggregate data," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 54(3), pages 485-500, November.
    15. John Geanakoplos, 2013. "Afriat from MaxMin," Levine's Working Paper Archive 786969000000000746, David K. Levine.
    16. József Sákovics, 2013. "Revealed cardinal preference," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 1(1), pages 39-45, May.
    17. Polisson, Matthew & Renou, Ludovic, 2016. "Afriat’s Theorem and Samuelson’s ‘Eternal Darkness’," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 36-40.
    18. Gross, John, 1995. "Heterogeneity of preferences for local public goods: The case of private expenditure on public education," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 103-127, May.
    19. Laura Blow & Richard Blundell, 2018. "A Nonparametric Revealed Preference Approach to Measuring the Value of Environmental Quality," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(3), pages 503-527, March.
    20. David Lipka, 2014. "Do economists need virtues?," ICER Working Papers 06-2014, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Paul Samuelson; revealed preference theory;

    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:hop:hopeec:v:46:y:2014:i:1:p:85-116. 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: Center for the History of Political Economy Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.dukeupress.edu/Catalog/ViewProduct.php?viewby=journal&productid=45614 .

    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.