IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pdn/ciepap/149.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Decision-making under Imperfect Information with Bayesian Learning or Heuristic Rules

Author

Listed:
  • Carina Burs

    (Paderborn University)

  • Thomas Gries

    (Paderborn University)

Abstract

Information is one of the most important ingredients for decision-making. While the neoclassical assumption of perfect information is surely an important conceptual benchmark for discussing efficient allocations, it is obviously far from describing a rational choice under real conditions. In reality, optimal choices should be considered choices under imperfect information. Thus, decision-makers' information problem can be solved by two strategies. Either they collect an optimal set of information to make an optimal allocation choice under this imperfect information set or they can apply heuristic reasoning. In this paper, we suggest a formal model framework for the example of a simple consumer decision for the allocation of differentiated goods to explore information acquisition strategies in such a simple standard choice situation. Using the model variation under perfect information as a benchmark, we answer the following questions. First and most importantly, under imperfect information, can a heuristic rule substitute information acquisition as an optimal choice? Second, what is the role of risk aversion in the information acquisition process? Finally, we explore the differences to the benchmark, both ex ante the first purchase decision and ex post when repeated purchases and consumption allows for experiences with the choices made.

Suggested Citation

  • Carina Burs & Thomas Gries, 2022. "Decision-making under Imperfect Information with Bayesian Learning or Heuristic Rules," Working Papers CIE 149, Paderborn University, CIE Center for International Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:pdn:ciepap:149
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://groups.uni-paderborn.de/wp-wiwi/RePEc/pdf/ciepap/WP149.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stigler, George J., 2011. "Economics of Information," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 5, pages 35-49.
    2. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    3. Kevin F. McCardle, 1985. "Information Acquisition and the Adoption of New Technology," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(11), pages 1372-1389, November.
    4. Kihlstrom, Richard E, 1974. "A Bayesian Model of Demand for Information About Product Quality," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 15(1), pages 99-118, February.
    5. Xavier Gabaix & David Laibson & Guillermo Moloche & Stephen Weinberg, 2006. "Costly Information Acquisition: Experimental Analysis of a Boundedly Rational Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1043-1068, September.
    6. Nelson, Phillip, 1970. "Information and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(2), pages 311-329, March-Apr.
    7. Klein, Lisa R., 1998. "Evaluating the Potential of Interactive Media through a New Lens: Search versus Experience Goods," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 195-203, March.
    8. Elena Reutskaja & Rosemarie Nagel & Colin F. Camerer & Antonio Rangel, 2011. "Search Dynamics in Consumer Choice under Time Pressure: An Eye-Tracking Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 900-926, April.
    9. Steven A. Lippman & Kevin F. McCardle, 1987. "Does Cheaper, Faster, or Better Imply Sooner in the Timing of Innovation Decisions?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(8), pages 1058-1064, August.
    10. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean, 2015. "Revealed Preference, Rational Inattention, and Costly Information Acquisition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(7), pages 2183-2203, July.
    11. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean & Daniel Martin, 2011. "Search and Satisficing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(7), pages 2899-2922, December.
    12. Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 1996. "Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Capturing Dynamic Brand Choice Processes in Turbulent Consumer Goods Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20.
    13. , & ,, 2006. "A model of choice from lists," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 1(1), pages 3-17, March.
    14. Canan Ulu & James E. Smith, 2009. "Uncertainty, Information Acquisition, and Technology Adoption," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(3), pages 740-752, June.
    15. Kihlstrom, Richard, 1974. "A general theory of demand for information about product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 413-439, August.
    16. J. Neil Bearden & Terry Connolly, 2008. "On Optimal Satisficing: How Simple Policies Can Achieve Excellent Results," Springer Optimization and Its Applications, in: Tamar Kugler & J. Cole Smith & Terry Connolly & Young-Jun Son (ed.), Decision Modeling and Behavior in Complex and Uncertain Environments, pages 79-97, Springer.
    17. Jensen, Richard, 1982. "Adoption and diffusion of an innovation of uncertain profitability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 182-193, June.
    18. Tülin Erdem & Michael Keane & T. Öncü & Judi Strebel, 2005. "Learning About Computers: An Analysis of Information Search and Technology Choice," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 207-247, September.
    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. Jan Hausfeld & Sven Resnjanskij, 2017. "Risky Decisions and the Opportunity Costs of Time," TWI Research Paper Series 108, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    2. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Duffy, Sean & Gussman, Steven & Smith, John, 2021. "Visual judgments of length in the economics laboratory: Are there brains in stochastic choice?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    4. John D. Hey & Yudistira Permana & Nuttaporn Rochanahastin, 2018. "When and how to satisfice: an experimental investigation," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 5, pages 121-137, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Duffy, Sean & Gussman, Steven & Smith, John, 2019. "Judgments of length in the economics laboratory: Are there brains in choice?," MPRA Paper 93126, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Duffy, Sean & Smith, John, 2020. "An economist and a psychologist form a line: What can imperfect perception of length tell us about stochastic choice?," MPRA Paper 99417, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean & Daniel Martin, 2011. "Search and Satisficing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(7), pages 2899-2922, December.
    8. Pantelis P. Analytis & Amit Kothiyal & Konstantinos Katsikopoulos, 2014. "Multi-attribute utility models as cognitive search engines," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(5), pages 403-419, September.
    9. DeSarbo, Wayne S. & Choi, Jungwhan, 1998. "A latent structure double hurdle regression model for exploring heterogeneity in consumer search patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 423-455, November.
    10. Bronnenberg, Bart & Dube, Jean-Pierre, 2016. "The Formation of Consumer Brand Preferences," CEPR Discussion Papers 11648, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:5:p:403-419 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Daisuke Nakajima & Erkut Y. Ozbay, 2012. "Revealed Attention," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2183-2205, August.
    13. Pantelis P. Analytis & Francesco Cerigioni & Alexandros Gelastopoulos & Hrvoje Stojic, 2022. "Sequential Choice and Self-Reinforcing Rankings," Working Papers 1318, Barcelona School of Economics.
    14. Garcia, René, 1986. "La théorie économique de l’information : exposé synthétique de la littérature," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 62(1), pages 88-109, mars.
    15. Bleile, Jörg, 2016. "Limited Attention in Case-Based Belief Formation," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 518, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    16. Adam Sanjurjo, 2015. "Search, Memory, and Choice Error: An Experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, June.
    17. Bart J. Bronnenberg & Jean-Pierre H. Dubé, 2016. "The Formation of Consumer Brand Preferences," NBER Working Papers 22691, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Chadd, Ian, 2023. "Random network consideration: Theory and experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 251-269.
    19. James E. Smith & Canan Ulu, 2012. "Technology Adoption with Uncertain Future Costs and Quality," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(2), pages 262-274, April.
    20. Luigi Mittone & Mauro Papi, 2017. "Does inducing choice procedures make individuals better off? An experimental study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(1), pages 37-59, June.
    21. James E. Smith & Canan Ulu, 2017. "Risk Aversion, Information Acquisition, and Technology Adoption," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1011-1028, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    information economics; imperfect information; Bayesian learning; risk; heuristics; differentiated products;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • D90 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - General
    • D18 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Protection

    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:pdn:ciepap:149. 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: WP-WiWi-Info or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cipadde.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.