IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Similarity Judgments and Anomalies in Intertemporal Choice


  • Jonathan W. Leland


This article demonstrates that choices based on similarity judgments will exhibit not only common ratio and reflection effects under uncertainty but also common difference and reflection effects in intertemporal contexts. Copyright 2002, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonathan W. Leland, 2002. "Similarity Judgments and Anomalies in Intertemporal Choice," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 40(4), pages 574-581, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:40:y:2002:i:4:p:574-581

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Sharon M. Oster & Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1998. "Aging And Productivity Among Economists," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 154-156, February.
    2. Nathalie Greenana & Jacques Mairesse, 2000. "Computers And Productivity In France: Some Evidence," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 275-315.
    3. Catherine J. Morrison, 2000. "Assessing The Productivity Of Information Technology Equipment In U.S. Manufacturing Industries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(3), pages 471-481, August.
    4. Mark Doms & Timothy Dunne & Kenneth R. Troske, 1997. "Workers, Wages, and Technology," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 112(1), pages 253-290.
    5. Zvi Griliches, 1958. "Research Costs and Social Returns: Hybrid Corn and Related Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 66, pages 419-419.
    6. John E. DiNardo & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 1997. "The Returns to Computer Use Revisited: Have Pencils Changed the Wage Structure Too?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 112(1), pages 291-303.
    7. McDowell, John M & Smith, Janet Kiholm, 1992. "The Effect of Gender-Sorting on Propensity to Coauthor: Implications for Academic Promotion," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(1), pages 68-82, January.
    8. Sauer, Raymond D, 1988. "Estimates of the Returns to Quality and Coauthorship in Economic Academia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(4), pages 855-866, August.
    9. Lazear, Edward P, 1999. "Globalisation and the Market for Team-Mates," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(454), pages 15-40, March.
    10. Trajtenberg, Manuel, 1989. "The Welfare Analysis of Product Innovations, with an Application to Computed Tomography Scanners," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(2), pages 444-479, April.
    11. Dasgupta, Partha, 1988. "Patents, Priority and Imitation or, the Economics of Races and Waiting Games," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(389), pages 66-80, March.
    12. Quandt, Richard E, 1976. "Some Quantitative Aspects of the Economics Journal Literature," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 84(4), pages 741-755, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Edward John Dorrell Webb, 2014. "Do we see monopoly or duopoly? The influence of perception on entry deterrence," Discussion Papers 14-20, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    2. Edward J. D. Webb, 2017. "If It’s All the Same to You: Blurred Consumer Perception and Market Structure," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 50(1), pages 1-25, February.
    3. Marco Casari, 2009. "Pre-commitment and flexibility in a time decision experiment," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 117-141, April.
    4. Jonathan W. Leland, 2006. "Equilibrium Selection, Similarity Judgments and the "Nothing to Gain/Nothing to Lose" Effect," CEEL Working Papers 0604, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    5. Edward J. Webb, 2014. "Perception and quality choice in vertically differentiated markets," Discussion Papers 14-07, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    6. Lu, Yang & Wu, Dongmei & Zhuang, Xintian, 2016. "Part-whole bias in intertemporal choice: An empirical study of additive assumption," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 463(C), pages 231-235.
    7. Jonathan W. Leland & Mark Schneider, 2015. "Salience and Strategy Choice in 2 × 2 Games," Games, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 6(4), pages 1-39, October.
    8. Mareile Drechsler & Konstantinos Katsikopoulos & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2014. "Axiomatizing bounded rationality: the priority heuristic," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(2), pages 183-196, August.
    9. Jonathan W. Leland & Mark Schneider & Jonathan Leland, 2016. "Axioms for Salience Perception," Working Papers 16-15, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    10. Scholten, Marc & Read, Daniel, 2006. "Beyond discounting: the tradeoff model of intertemporal choice," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 22710, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Konstantinos Katsikopoulos & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2008. "One-reason decision-making: Modeling violations of expected utility theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 35-56, August.
    12. A. Y. Klimenko, 2015. "Intransitivity in Theory and in the Real World," Papers 1507.03169,
    13. Mark Schneider, 2016. "Dual Process Utility Theory: A Model of Decisions Under Risk and Over Time," Working Papers 16-23, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    14. Jeffrey Carpenter & Justin Garcia & J. Lum, 2011. "Dopamine receptor genes predict risk preferences, time preferences, and related economic choices," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 233-261, June.
    15. Daniel Read & Shane Frederick & Burcu Orsel & Juwaria Rahman, 2005. "Four Score and Seven Years from Now: The Date/Delay Effect in Temporal Discounting," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(9), pages 1326-1335, September.
    16. Fabrizio Adriani & Silvia Sonderegger, 2014. "Evolution of similarity judgements in intertemporal choice," Discussion Papers 2014-06, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    17. Feigenbaum, James, 2016. "Equivalent representations of non-exponential discounting models," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 58-71.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:oup:ecinqu:v:40:y:2002:i:4:p:574-581. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.