IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/econjl/v129y2019i619p1343-1363..html

Stochastic Complementarity

Author

Listed:
  • Paola Manzini
  • Marco Mariotti
  • Levent Ülkü

Abstract

The Hicksian definition of complementarity and substitutability may not apply in contexts in which agents are not utility maximisers or where price or income variations, whether implicit or explicit, are not available. We look for tools to identify complementarity and substitutability satisfying the following criteria: they are behavioural (based only on observable choice data); model-free (valid whether the agent is rational or not) and they do not rely on price or income variation. We uncover a conflict between properties that it is arguably reasonable for a complementarity notion to possess. We discuss three different possible resolutions of the conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti & Levent Ülkü, 2019. "Stochastic Complementarity," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(619), pages 1343-1363.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:econjl:v:129:y:2019:i:619:p:1343-1363.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/ecoj.12601
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. B. Douglas Bernheim & Antonio Rangel, 2009. "Beyond Revealed Preference: Choice-Theoretic Foundations for Behavioral Welfare Economics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(1), pages 51-104.
    2. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    3. Chambers, Christopher P. & Echenique, Federico & Shmaya, Eran, 2010. "On behavioral complementarity and its implications," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(6), pages 2332-2355, November.
    4. B. Douglas Bernheim, 2009. "Behavioral Welfare Economics," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 7(2-3), pages 267-319, 04-05.
    5. Faruk Gul & Paulo Natenzon & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2014. "Random Choice as Behavioral Optimization," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82, pages 1873-1912, September.
    6. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Mamer, John W., 1997. "Competitive Equilibrium in an Exchange Economy with Indivisibilities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 385-413, June.
    7. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean, 2015. "Revealed Preference, Rational Inattention, and Costly Information Acquisition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(7), pages 2183-2203, July.
    8. Aguiar, Victor H. & Boccardi, Maria Jose & Dean, Mark, 2016. "Satisficing and stochastic choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 445-482.
    9. Christopher P. Chambers & Federico Echenique & Eran Shmaya, 2011. "Testable Implications of Gross Substitutes in Demand for Two Goods," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 129-136, February.
    10. Blavatskyy, Pavlo R., 2011. "Probabilistic risk aversion with an arbitrary outcome set," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 34-37, July.
    11. Elizabeth Baldwin & Paul Klemperer, 2019. "Understanding Preferences: “Demand Types”, and the Existence of Equilibrium With Indivisibilities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(3), pages 867-932, May.
    12. Matthew Gentzkow, 2007. "Valuing New Goods in a Model with Complementarity: Online Newspapers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 713-744, June.
    13. Samuelson, Paul A, 1974. "Complementarity-An Essay on the 40th Anniversary of the Hicks-Allen Revolution in Demand Theory," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 1255-1289, December.
    14. Chipman, John S., 1977. "An empirical implication of Auspitz-Lieben-Edgeworth-Pareto complementarity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 228-231, February.
    15. John K.-H Quah, 2007. "The Comparative Statics of Constrained Optimization Problems," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(2), pages 401-431, March.
    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. Iaria, Alessandro & Wang, Ao, 2021. "A note on stochastic complementarity for the applied researcher," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    2. Iaria, Alessandro & ,, 2020. "Identification and Estimation of Demand for Bundles," CEPR Discussion Papers 14363, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Iaria, Alessandro & ,, 2020. "Inferring Complementarity from Correlations rather than Structural Estimation," CEPR Discussion Papers 14273, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Roy Allen & John Rehbeck, 2020. "Hicksian complementarity and perturbed utility models," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 245-261, October.
    5. Liao, Fanchao & Dissanayake, Dilum & Homem de Almeida Correia, Gonçalo, 2024. "Modelling the complementarity and flexibility between different shared modes available in smart electric mobility hubs (eHUBS)," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    6. Roy Allen & John Rehbeck, 2023. "Revealed stochastic choice with attributes," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(1), pages 91-112, January.

    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. Edward E. Schlee & M. Ali Khan, 2022. "Money Metrics In Applied Welfare Analysis: A Saddlepoint Rehabilitation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(1), pages 189-210, February.
    2. Guy Barokas & Burak Ünveren, 2022. "Impressionable Rational Choice: Revealed-Preference Theory with Framing Effects," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(23), pages 1-19, November.
    3. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. 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).
    5. Christopher Tyson, 2015. "Satisficing behavior with a secondary criterion," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(3), pages 639-661, March.
    6. DECANCQ Koen & OLIVERA Javier & SCHOKKAERT Erik, 2018. "Program evaluation and ethnic differences: the Pension 65 program in Peru," LISER Working Paper Series 2018-21, Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER).
    7. T. Hayashi & R. Jain & V. Korpela & M. Lombardi, 2023. "Behavioral strong implementation," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(4), pages 1257-1287, November.
    8. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel A. Ballester, 2015. "A Measure of Rationality and Welfare," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 123(6), pages 1278-1310.
    9. 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.
    10. Jean-Pierre H. Dubé, 2018. "Microeconometric Models of Consumer Demand," NBER Working Papers 25215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Masatlioglu, Yusufcan & Vu, Tri Phu, 2024. "Growing attention," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    12. Francesco Cerigioni & Simone Galperti, 2021. "Listing specs: The effect of framing attributes on choice," Economics Working Papers 1775, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    13. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Ernst Fehr & Nick Netzer, 2021. "Time Will Tell: Recovering Preferences When Choices Are Noisy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(6), pages 1828-1877.
    14. FLEURBAEY, Marc & SCHOKKAERT, Erik, 2011. "Behavioral fair social choice," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2011043, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    15. Sean Duffy & John Smith, 2025. "An economist and a psychologist form a line: What can imperfect perception of length tell us about stochastic choice?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 99(3), pages 701-734, November.
    16. Adriani, Fabrizio & Sonderegger, Silvia, 2020. "Optimal similarity judgments in intertemporal choice (and beyond)," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    17. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2020. "Welfare Economics in Large Worlds: Welfare and Public Policies in an Uncertain Environment," GREDEG Working Papers 2020-08, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    18. Emmanuel Farhi & Xavier Gabaix, 2020. "Optimal Taxation with Behavioral Agents," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(1), pages 298-336, January.
    19. Mogens Fosgerau & Emerson Melo & André de Palma & Matthew Shum, 2020. "Discrete Choice And Rational Inattention: A General Equivalence Result," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(4), pages 1569-1589, November.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D0 - Microeconomics - - General

    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:oup:econjl:v:129:y:2019:i:619:p:1343-1363.. 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: Oxford University Press or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    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.