IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecm/wc2000/1095.html

A Study of Consumer Behavior Using Laboratory Data

Author

Listed:
  • Philippe Fevrier

    (CREST - LEI)

  • Michael Visser

    (CREST-LEI)

Abstract

This paper reports the results of an experiment on individual consumer behavior. The experiment was designed to address the following questions. Do participants behave as utility-maximizing agents? Are there variables (socio-economic characteristics, experimental conditions) that have an effect on the probability of being non-rational? And finally, to what extent does the presence of non-rational individuals affect the estimation results of demand equations? Revealed preference tests indicate that 29% of the individuals do not behave as utility-maximizing agents. Gender and the times spent on performing experimental tasks have a significant effect on the likelihood of being non-rational, but the level of remuneration does not. The estimation results of some commonly used demand systems and tests of the Slutsky restrictions are affected by the presence of non-rational individuals in the experimental sample.

Suggested Citation

  • Philippe Fevrier & Michael Visser, 2000. "A Study of Consumer Behavior Using Laboratory Data," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1095, Econometric Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecm:wc2000:1095
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://fmwww.bc.edu/RePEc/es2000/1095.pdf
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Cox, James C., 2010. "Some issues of methods, theories, and experimental designs," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 24-28, January.
    2. Marc-Arthur Diaye & François Gardes & Christophe Starzec, 2010. "GARP violation, Economic Environment Distortions and Shadow Prices: Evidence from Household Expenditure Panel Data," Post-Print halshs-00449463, HAL.
    3. Wang, Jian & Iversen, Tor & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Godager, Geir, 2020. "Are patient-regarding preferences stable? Evidence from a laboratory experiment with physicians and medical students from different countries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    4. Philippe Février & Michael Visser, 2004. "A Study of Consumer Behavior Using Laboratory Data," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(1), pages 93-114, February.
    5. Douglas D. Davis & Edward L. Millner, 2005. "Rebates, Matches, and Consumer Behavior," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(2), pages 410-421, October.
    6. Forges, Françoise & Iehlé, Vincent, 2014. "Afriat’s theorem for indivisible goods," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-6.
    7. Daniel John Zizzo & Melanie Parravano & Ryota Nakamura & Suzanna Forwood & Marc Suhrcke, 2021. "The impact of taxation and signposting on diet: an online field study with breakfast cereals and soft drinks," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1294-1324, December.
    8. van Bruggen, Paul & Heufer, Jan, 2017. "Afriat in the lab," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 546-550.
    9. Andreoni,J. & Harbaugh,W.T., 2005. "Power indices for revealed preference tests," Working papers 10, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    10. Heufer, Jan, 2014. "Nonparametric comparative revealed risk aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 569-616.
    11. Pires Gonçalves, Ricardo, 2008. "Consumer Behavior: Product Characteristics and Quality Perception," MPRA Paper 11142, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Matej Opatrny, 2018. "Extent of Irrationality of the Consumer: Combining the Critical Cost Eciency and Houtman Maks Indices," Working Papers IES 2018/11, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, revised Apr 2018.
    13. Eileen Tipoe & Abi Adams & Ian Crawford, 2022. "Revealed preference analysis and bounded rationality [Consume now or later? Time inconsistency, collective choice and revealed preference]," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(2), pages 313-332.
    14. Marc-Arthur Diaye & Michal Wong-Urdanivia, 2005. "A simple test of Richter-rationality," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00084390, HAL.
    15. Marc-Arthur Diaye & François Gardes & Christophe Starzec, 2009. "GARP violation, Economic Environment Distortions and Shadow Prices : Evidence from Household Expenditure Panel Data," Post-Print halshs-00376747, HAL.
    16. Pavel TOMSIK & Hana STOJANOVA & Jiri SEDLO & Ida VAJCNEROVA, 2016. "Factors of profitability of the grapes production," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(6), pages 292-297.
    17. Carrillo, Juan & Brocas, Isabelle & Combs, T. Dalton, 2015. "Consistency in Simple vs. Complex Choices over the Life Cycle," CEPR Discussion Papers 10457, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Sam Cosaert & Thomas Demuynck, 2015. "Revealed preference theory for finite choice sets," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 59(1), pages 169-200, May.
    19. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2006. "Two-stage Boundedly Rational Choice Procedures: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 561, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    20. Marc-Arthur Diaye & François Gardes & Christophe Starzec, 2009. "GARP violation, economic environment distortions and shadow prices: Evidence from household expenditure panel data," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 09020, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    21. W D A Bryant, 2009. "General Equilibrium:Theory and Evidence," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 6875, March.
    22. Brocas, Isabelle & Carrillo, Juan D. & Combs, T. Dalton & Kodaverdian, Niree, 2019. "Consistency in simple vs. complex choices by younger and older adults," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 580-601.
    23. Moscati, Ivan & Tubaro, Paola, 2009. "Random behavior and the as-if defense of rational choice theory in demand experiments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 27001, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    24. J. C. Poindexter & Julia B. Earp & David L. Baumer, 2006. "An experimental economics approach toward quantifying online privacy choices," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 8(5), pages 363-374, December.
    25. Paul Oslington, 2012. "General Equilibrium: Theory and Evidence," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 88(282), pages 446-448, September.

    More about this item

    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:ecm:wc2000:1095. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/essssea.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.