IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2601.01421.html

A multi-self model of self-punishment

Author

Listed:
  • Angelo Enrico Petralia

Abstract

We investigate the choice of a decision maker (DM) who harms herself, by maximizing in each menu some distortion of her true preference, in which the first i alternatives are moved, in reverse order, to the bottom. This pattern has no empirical power, but it allows to define a degree of self-punishment, which measures the extent of the denial of pleasure adopted by the DM. We characterize irrational choices displaying the lowest degree of self-punishment, and we fully identify the preferences that explain the DM's picks by a minimal denial of pleasure. These datasets account for some well known selection biases, such as second-best procedures, and the handicapped avoidance. Necessary and sufficient conditions for the estimation of the degree of self-punishment of a choice are singled out. Moreover the linear orders whose harmful distortions justify choice data are partially elicited. Finally, we offer a simple characterization of the choice behavior that exhibits the highest degree of self-punishment, and we show that this subclass comprises almost all choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Angelo Enrico Petralia, 2026. "A multi-self model of self-punishment," Papers 2601.01421, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2601.01421
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2601.01421
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huber, Joel & Payne, John W & Puto, Christopher, 1982. "Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 9(1), pages 90-98, June.
    2. Uri Gneezy & Alex Imas & Kristóf Madarász, 2014. "Conscience Accounting: Emotion Dynamics and Social Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(11), pages 2645-2658, November.
    3. Bellemare, Charles & Sebald, Alexander & Suetens, Sigrid, 2017. "A note on testing guilt aversion," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 233-239.
    4. Baigent, Nick & Gaertner, Wulf, 1996. "Never Choose the Uniquely Largest: A Characterization," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 239-249, August.
    5. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2015. "State dependent choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(2), pages 239-268, September.
    6. Mara Thiene & Marco Boeri & Caspar Chorus, 2012. "Random Regret Minimization: Exploration of a New Choice Model for Environmental and Resource Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(3), pages 413-429, March.
    7. Cassie Mogilner & Tamar Rudnick & Sheena Iyengar, 2008. "The Mere Categorization Effect: How the Presence of Categories Increases Choosers' Perceptions of Assortment Variety," Economics Working Papers 0070, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science.
    8. Giarlotta, Alfio & Petralia, Angelo & Watson, Stephen, 2023. "Context-sensitive rationality: Choice by salience," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    9. Cassie Mogilner & Tamar Rudnick & Sheena S. Iyengar, 2008. "The Mere Categorization Effect: How the Presence of Categories Increases Choosers' Perceptions of Assortment Variety and Outcome Satisfaction," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 35(2), pages 202-215, June.
    10. John Buckell & Vrinda Vasavada & Sarah Wordsworth & Dean A. Regier & Matthew Quaife, 2022. "Utility maximization versus regret minimization in health choice behavior: Evidence from four datasets," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 363-381, February.
    11. Angelo Enrico Petralia, 2024. "Harmful Random Utility Models," Papers 2408.01317, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.
    12. Gil Kalai & Ariel Rubinstein & Ran Spiegler, 2002. "Rationalizing Choice Functions By Multiple Rationales," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(6), pages 2481-2488, November.
    13. Chernev, Alexander, 2003. "When More Is Less and Less Is More: The Role of Ideal Point Availability and Assortment in Consumer Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 170-183, September.
    14. Francesco Cerigioni, 2021. "Dual Decision Processes: Retrieving Preferences When Some Choices Are Automatic," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(6), pages 1667-1704.
    15. Attila Ambrus & Kareen Rozen, 2015. "Rationalising Choice with Multi‐self Models," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(585), pages 1136-1156, June.
    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. Angelo Enrico Petralia, 2024. "Harmful Random Utility Models," Papers 2408.01317, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.
    2. Giarlotta, Alfio & Petralia, Angelo & Watson, Stephen, 2023. "Context-sensitive rationality: Choice by salience," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    3. Griffith, Rachel & O'Connell, Martin & Smith, Kate & Cherchye, Laurens & De Rock, Bram & Vermeulen, Frederic, 2017. "A new year, a new you? Heterogeneity and self-control in food purchases," CEPR Discussion Papers 12499, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco & Tyson, Christopher J., 2016. "Partial knowledge restrictions on the two-stage threshold model of choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 41-47.
    5. Qin, Dan, 2024. "A simple model of two-stage choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    6. Yang Wang & Xueming Luo & Zhijie Lin, 2023. "Estimating assortment size effects on platforms: Leveraging imperfect geographic targeting for causal inference," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(11), pages 3394-3412, November.
    7. Thai, Nguyen T. & Yuksel, Ulku, 2017. "Too many destinations to visit: Tourists’ dilemma?," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 38-53.
    8. Yan, Huan & Chang, En-Chung & Chou, Ting-Jui & Tang, Xiaofei, 2015. "The over-categorization effect: How the number of categorizations influences shoppers' perceptions of variety and satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 631-638.
    9. , & ,, 2012. "Reason-based choice: a bargaining rationale for the attraction and compromise effects," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(1), January.
    10. Beneke, Justin & Cumming, Alice & Jolly, Lindsey, 2013. "The effect of item reduction on assortment satisfaction—A consideration of the category of red wine in a controlled retail setting," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 282-291.
    11. Spassova, Gerri & Isen, Alice M., 2013. "Positive affect moderates the impact of assortment size on choice satisfaction," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 89(4), pages 397-408.
    12. Lee, Ha Kyung & Choo, Ho Jung, 2019. "Birds of a feather flocked together look abundant: The visual gestalt effect of an assortment presentation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 170-182.
    13. Chang, Chingching, 2011. "The Effect of the Number of Product Subcategories on Perceived Variety and Shopping Experience in an Online Store," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 159-168.
    14. Frank Goedertier & Kristof Geskens & Maggie Geuens & Bert Weijters, 2012. "Increasing choice satisfaction through goal-based labeling," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 119-136, March.
    15. Liu, Pengcheng & Xie, Qing & You, Yi & Dong, Qingqing, 2024. "A Study of Choice Overload Measurement in Food Consumption," IAAE 2024 Conference, August 2-7, 2024, New Delhi, India 344272, International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE).
    16. repec:ags:cfcp15:344272 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Barbara Kahn & Alexander Chernev & Ulf Böckenholt & Kate Bundorf & Michaela Draganska & Ryan Hamilton & Robert Meyer & Klaus Wertenbroch, 2014. "Consumer and managerial goals in assortment choice and design," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 293-303, September.
    18. 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.
    19. Victor D. Mejía, 2025. "Assortment management strategies that people see: Insights from a meta-analysis of experimental research on perceived assortment variety," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 1230-1259, July.
    20. Kahn, Barbara E., 2017. "Using Visual Design to Improve Customer Perceptions of Online Assortments," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 29-42.
    21. Lauren S. Carroll & Mathew P. White & Sabine Pahl, 2011. "The impact of excess choice on deferment of decisions to volunteer," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(7), pages 629-637, 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:2601.01421. 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.