IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2504.03056.html

Separable joint choices

Author

Listed:
  • Davide Carpentiere
  • Alfio Giarlotta
  • Angelo Petralia
  • Ester Sudano

Abstract

We introduce a novel choice dataset, called joint choice, in which options and menus are multidimensional. In this general setting, we define a notion of choice separability, which requires that selections from some dimensions are never affected by those performed on the remaining dimensions. This generalizes the classical definition of separability for discrete preference relations and utility functions, to encompass a class of choice behaviors that may lack a preference or utility representation. We thoroughly investigate the stability of separability across dimensions, and then suggest effective tests to check whether a joint choice is separable. Upon defining rationalizable joint choices as those explained by the maximization of a relation of revealed preference, we examine the interplay between the notions of rationalizability and separability. Finally, we show that the rationalizability of a separable joint choice can be tested by verifying the rationalizability of some derived joint choices over fewer dimensions.

Suggested Citation

  • Davide Carpentiere & Alfio Giarlotta & Angelo Petralia & Ester Sudano, 2025. "Separable joint choices," Papers 2504.03056, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2025.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2504.03056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2504.03056
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blavatskyy, Pavlo R., 2017. "Probabilistic intertemporal choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 142-148.
    2. Barbera, Salvador & Masso, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 1997. "Voting under Constraints," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 298-321, October.
    3. Steffen Anderson & Glenn Harrison & Morten Lau & Rutstrom Elisabet, 2007. "Valuation using multiple price list formats," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(6), pages 675-682.
    4. Pennesi, Daniele, 2021. "Intertemporal discrete choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 690-706.
    5. Bradley, W. James & Hodge, Jonathan K. & Kilgour, D. Marc, 2005. "Separable discrete preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 335-353, May.
    6. Steffen Andersen & Glenn Harrison & Morten Lau & E. Rutström, 2009. "Elicitation using multiple price list formats," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(3), pages 365-366, September.
    7. Nail Kashaev & Martin Pl'avala & Victor H. Aguiar, 2024. "Entangled vs. Separable Choice," Papers 2403.09045, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2024.
    8. de Haan, Jan & van der Grient, Heymerik A., 2011. "Eliminating chain drift in price indexes based on scanner data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 161(1), pages 36-46, March.
    9. Barbera, Salvador & Sonnenschein, Hugo & Zhou, Lin, 1991. "Voting by Committees," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 595-609, May.
    10. Nail Kashaev, Martin Plavala and Victor H. Aguiar, 2024. "Entangled vs. Separable Choice," Discussion Papers dp24-03, Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University.
    11. Aliprantis, Charalambos D., 1997. "Separable utility functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 415-444, November.
    12. Amartya K. Sen, 1971. "Choice Functions and Revealed Preference," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 38(3), pages 307-317.
    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. , & ,, 2012. "Strategy-proof voting for multiple public goods," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(3), September.
    2. repec:rza:wpaper:227 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Sarah Jacobson & Ragan Petrie, 2009. "Learning from mistakes: What do inconsistent choices over risk tell us?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 143-158, April.
    4. Nehring, Klaus & Puppe, Clemens, 2007. "The structure of strategy-proof social choice -- Part I: General characterization and possibility results on median spaces," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 135(1), pages 269-305, July.
    5. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/4ccevsvsdm96qpv5fgamlf1p1p is not listed on IDEAS
    6. John A. Weymark, 2008. "Strategy‐Proofness and the Tops‐Only Property," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 10(1), pages 7-26, February.
    7. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Panagiotis Lazaridis & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2009. "Would consumers value food-away-from-home products with nutritional labels?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(4), pages 550-575.
    8. Chatterji, Shurojit & Zeng, Huaxia, 2018. "On random social choice functions with the tops-only property," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 413-435.
    9. Chatterji, Shurojit & Zeng, Huaxia, 2023. "A taxonomy of non-dictatorial unidimensional domains," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 228-269.
    10. Sidartha Gordon, 2015. "Unanimity in attribute-based preference domains," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 13-29, January.
    11. Duquette, Eric & Higgins, Nathaniel & Horowitz, John, 2013. "Time Preference and Technology Adoption: A Single-Choice Experiment with U.S. Farmers," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150719, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Daniele Asioli & Adriana Mignani & Frode Alfnes, 2021. "Quick and easy? Respondent evaluations of the Becker–DeGroot–Marschak and multiple price list valuation mechanisms," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(2), pages 215-234, April.
    13. Tobias Rachidi, 2021. "Optimal Voting Mechanisms on Generalized Single-Peaked Domains," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2020_214v2, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    14. d'Amato, Alessio & Goeschl, Timo & Lorè, Luisa & Zoli, Mariangela, 2020. "Date Marks, Valuation, and Food Waste: Three In-Store ‘Eggsperiments’," Working Papers 0693, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    15. Elena Castellari & Elena Claire Ricci & Stefanella Stranieri & Stephan S. Marette & Martina Sarnataro & Claudio Soregaroli, 2019. "Relationships Between Health and Environmental Information on the Willingness to Pay for Functional Foods: The Case of a New Aloe Vera Based Product [Impact de l’information sur la santé et l'environnement sur la volonté de payer pour les aliments," Post-Print hal-02627431, HAL.
    16. Stergios Athanasoglou & Somouaoga Bonkoungou & Lars Ehlers, 2023. "Strategy-proof preference aggregation and the anonymity-neutrality tradeoff," Working Papers 519, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Apr 2025.
    17. Barbera, Salvador & Masso, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 2005. "Voting by committees under constraints," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 185-205, June.
    18. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/4ccevsvsdm96qpv5fgamlf1p1p is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Lagarde, Mylene & Papanicolas, Irene & Stacey, Nicholas, 2024. "The demand for private telehealth services in low- and middle-income countries: Evidence from South Africa," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 354(C).
    20. David Bruner, 2009. "Changing the probability versus changing the reward," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(4), pages 367-385, December.
    21. Roy, Souvik & Sadhukhan, Soumyarup, 2023. "Committee formation under constraints through randomized voting rules on separable domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    22. Marco Lerro & Riccardo Vecchio & Francesco Caracciolo & Stefano Pascucci & Luigi Cembalo, 2018. "Consumers' heterogeneous preferences for corporate social responsibility in the food industry," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1050-1061, November.
    23. Antoni Bosch-Domènech & Joaquim Silvestre, 2013. "Measuring risk aversion with lists: a new bias," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(4), pages 465-496, October.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2504.03056. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.