IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/kyklos/v77y2024i1p22-39.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The cost of love: Solving the gift anomaly

Author

Listed:
  • Elias L. Khalil

Abstract

Friendship‐and‐love affords bonding that satisfies what can be called “transcendental preferences”—in contradistinction of “substantive preferences” afforded by, for example, food, clothes, and shelter. Substantive preferences involve ordinary “substantive cost,” whereas transcendental preferences involve “bonding cost” that includes heartaches, obsession, and emotional turmoil. What about the cost of gifts such as flowers, time, and other carriers of friendship‐and‐love? The greater is the expenditure on gifts, the greater the bonding cost. This paper investigates the following question: How should we model bonding cost, which includes the cost of gift, in relation to substantive cost? Given bonding cost and substantive cost share the same budget, neoclassical economists treat them as commensurable and, hence, transcendental and substantive preferences make up a unidimensional objective function. This treatment, however, originates the “gift anomaly”: If people easily substitute between the two genera of preferences, why do they consider the demand of payments for visiting their grandmothers—or payments for voting and sexual intercourse—as repugnant (taboo)? To solve the gift anomaly, this paper is critical of the standard economist's entry point. This paper proposes bonding and substantive costs as incommensurable and, corollary, transcendental and substantive preferences as incommensurable as well. This paper further shows how, without undermining the incommensurability thesis, the incommensurability is up to a limit: the two genera of costs and, corollary, the two genera of preferences are still linked via the income effect—as opposed to the substitution effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Elias L. Khalil, 2024. "The cost of love: Solving the gift anomaly," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 77(1), pages 22-39, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:kyklos:v:77:y:2024:i:1:p:22-39
    DOI: 10.1111/kykl.12355
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/kykl.12355
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/kykl.12355?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Khalil, Elias L., 2011. "The mirror neuron paradox: How far is understanding from mimicking?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 86-96, January.
    2. Elias Khalil, 2004. "The Gift Paradox: Complex Selves and Symbolic Good," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(3), pages 379-392.
    3. Alvin E. Roth, 2007. "Repugnance as a Constraint on Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(3), pages 37-58, Summer.
    4. Elias Khalil, 2013. "Practical beliefs vs. scientific beliefs: two kinds of maximization," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 107-126, January.
    5. Khalil, Elias L., 2023. "Does Friendship Stem From Altruism? Adam Smith And The Distinction Between Love-Based And Interest-Based Preferences," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(2), pages 249-277, June.
    6. Gary S. Becker, 1992. "Habits, Addictions, and Traditions," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 327-345, August.
    7. Charles R. Plott & Kathryn Zeiler, 2007. "Exchange Asymmetries Incorrectly Interpreted as Evidence of Endowment Effect Theory and Prospect Theory?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(4), pages 1449-1466, September.
    8. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1325-1348, December.
    9. Knetsch, Jack L, 1989. "The Endowment Effect and Evidence of Nonreversible Indifference Curves," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1277-1284, December.
    10. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    11. Elias L. Khalil & Alain Marciano, 2018. "A Theory of Tasteful and Distasteful Transactions," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 110-131, February.
    12. Khalil, Elias L. & Wu, Kevin, 2017. "Explicit vs implicit proprietorship: Can endowment effect theory explain exchange asymmetry?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 117-119.
    13. Khalil, Elias L, 1997. "Is the Firm an Individual?," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 21(4), pages 519-544, July.
    14. Elias L. Khalil, 2022. "Solving the income-happiness paradox," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 69(3), pages 433-463, September.
    15. Michael Bacharach, 2006. "The Hi-Lo Paradox, from Beyond Individual Choice: Teams and Frames in Game Theory," Introductory Chapters, in: Natalie Gold & Robert Sugden (ed.),Beyond Individual Choice: Teams and Frames in Game Theory, Princeton University Press.
    16. Daniel Kahneman & Richard H. Thaler, 2006. "Anomalies: Utility Maximization and Experienced Utility," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 221-234, Winter.
    17. Becker, Gary S & Murphy, Kevin M, 1988. "A Theory of Rational Addiction," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(4), pages 675-700, August.
    18. Elias Khalil, 1987. "Kuhn, Lakatos, and the History of Economic Thought," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 14(3/4/5), pages 118-131, March.
    19. Angel S. Fernandez-Castro & Peter C. Smith, 2002. "Lancaster's characteristics approach revisited: product selection using non-parametric methods," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 83-91.
    20. Knetsch, Jack L. & Wong, Wei-Kang, 2009. "The endowment effect and the reference state: Evidence and manipulations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 407-413, August.
    21. Satz, Debra, 2010. "Why Some Things Should Not Be for Sale: The Moral Limits of Markets," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195311594.
    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. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    2. Khalil, Elias L. & Wu, Kevin, 2017. "Explicit vs implicit proprietorship: Can endowment effect theory explain exchange asymmetry?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 117-119.
    3. Andrea Isoni & Graham Loomes & Robert Sugden, 2011. "The Willingness to Pay—Willingness to Accept Gap, the "Endowment Effect," Subject Misconceptions, and Experimental Procedures for Eliciting Valuations: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 991-1011, April.
    4. Brown, Thomas C. & Morrison, Mark D. & Benfield, Jacob A. & Rainbolt, Gretchen Nurse & Bell, Paul A., 2015. "Exchange asymmetry in experimental settings," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 104-116.
    5. Crockett, Erin & Crockett, Sean, 2019. "Endowments and risky choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 344-354.
    6. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel Ballester, 2009. "A theory of reference-dependent behavior," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(3), pages 427-455, September.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:988-1014 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Holden, Stein & Bezu, Sosina, 2014. "Tools, Fertilizer or Cash? Exchange Asymmetries in Productive Assets," CLTS Working Papers 13/14, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 11 Oct 2019.
    9. Domenico Colucci & Chiara Franco & Vincenzo Valori, 2021. "Endowment effects at different time scenarios: the role of ownership and possession," Discussion Papers 2021/279, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    10. Sousa, Yannick Ferreira De & Munro, Alistair, 2012. "Truck, barter and exchange versus the endowment effect: Virtual field experiments in an online game environment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 482-493.
    11. Dirk Engelmann & Guillaume Hollard, 2010. "Reconsidering the Effect of Market Experience on the “Endowment Effect”," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(6), pages 2005-2019, November.
    12. Zuzana Gocmanová & Jaromír Skorkovský & Štěpán Veselý & Jan Böhm, 2019. "Where Do You Want to Go Skiing? The Effect of the Reference Point and Loss Aversion," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 67(1), pages 243-252.
    13. Dirk Engelmann & Guillaume Hollard, 2009. "A Shock Therapy Against the “Endowment Effect”," Discussion Papers 09-04, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    14. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:988-1014 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Peter D. Lunn, 2013. "Telecommunications Consumers: A Behavioral Economic Analysis," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 167-189, April.
    16. Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2016. "Constructing markets: environmental economics and the contingent valuation controversy," MPRA Paper 78814, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Daniel McFadden, 2014. "The new science of pleasure: consumer choice behavior and the measurement of well-being," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 2, pages 7-48, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Keith M. Marzilli Ericson & Andreas Fuster, 2009. "Expectations as Endowments: Reference-Dependent Preferences and Exchange Behavior," Levine's Working Paper Archive 814577000000000415, David K. Levine.
    19. Wu, Stephen, 2001. "Adapting to heart conditions: a test of the hedonic treadmill," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 495-507, July.
    20. Holden, Stein T. & Bezu, Sosina, 2019. "Exchange asymmetries in productive assets: Tools, fertilizer or cash?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 269-278.
    21. Isabel Marcin & Andreas Nicklisch, 2014. "Testing the Endowment Effect for Default Rules," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2014_01, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    22. Daniel Villanova, 2019. "The extended self, product valuation, and the endowment effect," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 9(3), pages 357-371, December.

    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:bla:kyklos:v:77:y:2024:i:1:p:22-39. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0023-5962 .

    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.