IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Revealed preference theory for finite choice sets

  • Sam COSAERT
  • Thomas DEMUYNCK

The theory of revealed preferences offers an elegant way to test the neoclassical model of utility maximization subject to a linear budget constraint. In many settings, however, the set of available consumption bundles does not take the form of a linear budget set. In this paper, we adjust the theory of revealed preferences to handle situations where the set of feasible bundles is finite. Such situations occur frequently in many real life and experimental settings. We derive the revealed preference conditions for consistency with utility maximization in this finite choice-set setting. Interestingly, we find that it is necessary to make a distinction between the cases where the underlying utility function is weakly monotone, strongly monotone and/or concave. Next, we provide conditions on the structure of the finite choice sets for which the usual revealed preference condition (i.e. GARP) is still valid. We illustrate the relevance of our results by means of an application based on two experimental data sets that contain choice behavior from children.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.econ.kuleuven.be/drc/CES/research/dps-papers/dps-13/dps1308.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën in its series Center for Economic Studies - Discussion papers with number ces13.08.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Apr 2013
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ete:ceswps:ces13.08
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Naamsestraat 69, 3000 Leuven

Phone: +32-(0)16-32 67 25
Fax: +32-(0)16-32 67 96
Web page: http://www.econ.kuleuven.be/ew
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Hoderlein, Stefan, 2011. "How many consumers are rational?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 164(2), pages 294-309, October.
  2. Philippe Février & Michael Visser, 2000. "AStudyof Consumer Behavior Using Laboratory Data," Working Papers 2000-12, Centre de Recherche en Economie et Statistique.
  3. Sabrina Bruyneel & Laurens Cherchye & Sam Cosaert & Bram De Rock & Siegfried Dewitte, 2012. "Are the Smart Kids More Rational ?," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2012-050, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  4. Matzkin, Rosa L, 1991. "Axioms of Revealed Preference for Nonlinear Choice Sets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(6), pages 1779-86, November.
  5. Laurens Cherchye & Thomas Demuynck & Bram De Rock, 2013. "Nash-Bargained Consumption Decisions: A Revealed Preference Analysis," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/131704, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  6. Hal R. Varian, 1983. "Non-parametric Tests of Consumer Behaviour," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(1), pages 99-110.
  7. Sam COSAERT & Thomas DEMUYNCK, 2013. "Revealed preference theory for finite choice sets," Center for Economic Studies - Discussion papers ces13.08, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën.
  8. Matthew Polisson & John K.-H. Quah, 2013. "Revealed Preference in a Discrete Consumption Space," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 28-34, February.
  9. Raymond Fisman & Shachar Kariv & Daniel Markovits, 2005. "Individual Preferences for Giving," Game Theory and Information 0504007, EconWPA.
  10. Stefan Hoderlein & Jörg Stoye, 2009. "Revealed Preferences in a Heterogeneous Population," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 745, Boston College Department of Economics.
  11. Richard Blundell & Martin Browning & Ian Crawford, 2005. "Best Nonparametric Bounds on Demand Responses," CAM Working Papers 2005-16, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Applied Microeconometrics.
  12. Kenneth Train, 2003. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Online economics textbooks, SUNY-Oswego, Department of Economics, number emetr2.
  13. Cherchye, Laurens & Demuynck, Thomas & De Rock, Bram, 2011. "Testable implications of general equilibrium models: An integer programming approach," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 564-575.
  14. Laurens Cherchye & Thomas Demuynck & Bram De Rock, 2012. "Revealed Preference Analysis for Convex Rationalizations on Nonlinear Budget Sets," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2012-044, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  15. Richard Blundell & Martin Browning & Ian Crawford, 1998. "Nonparametric Engel Curves and Revealed Preference," Discussion Papers 99-07, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
  16. James Andreoni & John Miller, 2002. "Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 737-753, March.
  17. A. Fostel & H. Scarf & M. Todd, 2004. "Two new proofs of Afriat’s theorem," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 211-219, 07.
  18. Forges, Françoise & Minelli, Enrico, 2009. "Afriat's theorem for general budget sets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 135-145, January.
  19. Echenique, Federico & Ivanov, Lozan, . "Implications of Pareto Efficiency for two-agent (household) choice," Working Papers 1308, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  20. Laurens Cherchye & Bram De Rock & Vincenzo Platino, 2010. "Private versus public consumption within groups: testing the nature of goods from aggregate data," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 10090, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
  21. Syngjoo Choi & Shachar Kariv & Wieland Mueller & Dan Silverman, 2011. "Who Is (More) Rational?," Vienna Economics Papers 1105, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
  22. Mattei, Aurelio, 2000. "Full-scale real tests of consumer behavior using experimental data," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 487-497, December.
  23. Sabrina Bruyneel & Laurens Cherchye & Bram De Rock, 2012. "Collective consumption models with restricted bargaining weights: an empirical assessment based on experimental data," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 395-421, September.
  24. Francoise Forges & Enrico Minelli, 2009. "Afriat's theorem for generalized budget sets," Post-Print hal-00360726, HAL.
  25. Selten, Reinhard, 1991. "Properties of a measure of predictive success," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 153-167, April.
  26. Laura Blow & Martin Browning & Ian Crawford, 2005. "Revealed preference analysis of characteristics models," CAM Working Papers 2005-04, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Applied Microeconometrics.
  27. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-90, July.
  28. Cox, James C, 1997. "On Testing the Utility Hypothesis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(443), pages 1054-78, July.
  29. Varian, Hal R., 1990. "Goodness-of-fit in optimizing models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1-2), pages 125-140.
  30. Varian, Hal R, 1982. "The Nonparametric Approach to Demand Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 945-73, July.
  31. Daniel Burghart & Paul Glimcher & Stephanie Lazzaro, 2013. "An expected utility maximizer walks into a bar..," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 215-246, June.
  32. Yatchew, Adonis John, 1985. "A note on non-parametric tests of consumer behaviour," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 45-48.
  33. Richard Blundell & Dennis Kristensen & Rosa Matzkin, 2011. "Bounding quantile demand functions using revealed preference inequalities," CeMMAP working papers CWP21/11, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  34. Richard Blundell & Joel Horowitz & Matthias Parey, 2013. "Nonparametric estimation of a heterogeneous demand function under the Slutsky inequality restriction," CeMMAP working papers CWP54/13, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  35. Douglas M. Gale & Shachar Kariv & Syngjoo Choi & Raymond Fisman, 2007. "Revealing Preferences Graphically: An Old Method Gets a New Tool Kit," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 153-158, May.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ete:ceswps:ces13.08. 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: (Karla Vander Weyden)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.