IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bge/wpaper/573.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Measure of Rationality and Welfare

Author

Listed:
  • Jose Apesteguia
  • Miguel Ángel Ballester

Abstract

Evidence showing that individual behavior often deviates from the classical principle of preference maximization has raised at least two important questions: (i) How serious are the deviations? and (ii) What is the best way to analyse choice behavior in order to extract information for the purpose of welfare analysis? This paper addresses these questions by proposing a new way to identify the preference relation which is closest, in terms of welfare loss, to the revealed choice.

Suggested Citation

  • Jose Apesteguia & Miguel Ángel Ballester, 2014. "A Measure of Rationality and Welfare," Working Papers 573, Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:bge:wpaper:573
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.barcelonagse.eu/sites/default/files/working_paper_pdfs/573.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2007. "Sequentially Rationalizable Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1824-1839, December.
    2. Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Daisuke Nakajima & Erkut Y. Ozbay, 2012. "Revealed Attention," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2183-2205, August.
    3. Walter Bossert & Yves Sprumont, 2009. "Non-Deteriorating Choice," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 76(302), pages 337-363, April.
    4. Chambers, Christopher P. & Hayashi, Takashi, 2012. "Choice and individual welfare," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(5), pages 1818-1849.
    5. Michael Brusco & Hans-Friedrich Köhn & Stephanie Stahl, 2008. "Heuristic Implementation of Dynamic Programming for Matrix Permutation Problems in Combinatorial Data Analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 73(3), pages 503-522, September.
    6. Halevy, Yoram & Persitz, Dotan & Zrill, Lanny, 2012. "Parametric Recoverability of Preferences," Microeconomics.ca working papers yoram_halevy-2012-20, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 28 Aug 2015.
    7. Douglas Bernheim & Antonio Rangel, 2007. "Beyond Revealed Preference Choice Theoretic Foundations for Behavioral Welfare Economics," Discussion Papers 07-031, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    8. Federico Echenique & Sangmok Lee & Matthew Shum, 2011. "The Money Pump as a Measure of Revealed Preference Violations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(6), pages 1201-1223.
    9. Timothy K. M. Beatty & Ian A. Crawford, 2011. "How Demanding Is the Revealed Preference Approach to Demand?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2782-2795, October.
    10. Varian, Hal R., 1990. "Goodness-of-fit in optimizing models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1-2), pages 125-140.
    11. Green, Jerry & Hojman, Daniel, 2007. "Choice, Rationality and Welfare Measurement," Working Paper Series rwp07-054, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    12. Efe A. Ok & Pietro Ortoleva & Gil Riella, 2015. "Revealed (P)Reference Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 299-321, January.
    13. B. Douglas Bernheim & Antonio Rangel, 2009. "Beyond Revealed Preference: Choice-Theoretic Foundations for Behavioral Welfare Economics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 124(1), pages 51-104.
    14. Masatlioglu, Yusufcan & Ok, Efe A., 2005. "Rational choice with status quo bias," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 1-29, March.
    15. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel A. Ballester & Rosa Ferrer, 2011. "On the Justice of Decision Rules," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 78(1), pages 1-16.
    16. Faruk Gul & Paulo Natenzon & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2014. "Random Choice as Behavioral Optimization," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82, pages 1873-1912, September.
    17. Martin Grötschel & Michael Jünger & Gerhard Reinelt, 1984. "A Cutting Plane Algorithm for the Linear Ordering Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 1195-1220, December.
    18. Famulari, Melissa, 1995. "A Household-Based, Nonparametric Test of Demand Theory," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(2), pages 372-382, May.
    19. Howe, Eric C, 1991. "A More Powerful Method for Triangularizing Input-Output Matrices: A Comment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 521-523, 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. Katherine Baldiga & Jerry Green, 2013. "Assent-maximizing social choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(2), pages 439-460, February.
    2. Ghosal, Sayantan & Dalton, Patricio, 2013. "Characterizing Behavioral Decisions with Choice Data," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 107, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    3. Apesteguia, Jose & Ballester, Miguel A., 2013. "Choice by sequential procedures," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 90-99.
    4. Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Daisuke Nakajima & Erkut Y. Ozbay, 2012. "Revealed Attention," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2183-2205, August.
    5. Abi Adams, 2015. "Mutually consistent revealed preference bounds," IFS Working Papers W15/20, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    6. Miguel Costa-Gomes & Carlos Cueva & Georgios Gerasimou & Matus Tejiscak, 2014. "Choice, Deferral and Consistency," Discussion Paper Series, Department of Economics 201416, Department of Economics, University of St. Andrews, revised 26 Dec 2016.
    7. Tugce Cuhadaroglu, 2015. "Choosing on Influence," Discussion Paper Series, Department of Economics 201504, Department of Economics, University of St. Andrews.
    8. Pawel Dziewulski, 2018. "Just-noticeable difference as a behavioural foundation of the critical cost-efficiency," Economics Series Working Papers 848, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    9. Garth Heutel, 2017. "Prospect Theory and Energy Efficiency," NBER Working Papers 23692, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. repec:eee:jetheo:v:172:y:2017:i:c:p:163-201 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. repec:kap:theord:v:83:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11238-017-9590-3 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Daisuke Nakajima, 2015. "Completing Incomplete Revealed Preference Under Limited Attention," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 66(3), pages 285-299, September.
    13. Kohei Shiozawa, 2015. "Note on goodness-of-fit measures for the revealed preference test: The computational complexity of the minimum cost index," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(4), pages 2455-2461.
    14. Halevy, Yoram & Persitz, Dotan & Zrill, Lanny, 2012. "Parametric Recoverability of Preferences," Microeconomics.ca working papers yoram_halevy-2012-20, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 28 Aug 2015.
    15. Mark Dean & Daniel Martin, 2011. "Testing for Rationality with Consumption Data: Demographics and Heterogeneity," Working Papers 2011-11, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    16. Laurens Cherchye & Thomas Demuynck & Bram De Rock & Khushboo Surana, 2018. "Revealed Preference Analysis with Normal Goods: Application to Cost of Living Indices," Working Papers ECARES 2018-08, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    17. Sophie Bade, 2016. "Pareto-optimal matching allocation mechanisms for boundedly rational agents," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(3), pages 501-510, October.
    18. Chambers, Christopher P. & Hayashi, Takashi, 2012. "Choice and individual welfare," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(5), pages 1818-1849.
    19. Horan, Sean & Sprumont, Yves, 2016. "Welfare criteria from choice: An axiomatic analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 56-70.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Revealed Preference;

    JEL classification:

    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • D60 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - General

    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:bge:wpaper:573. 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: (Bruno Guallar). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/bargses.html .

    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 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.

    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.