IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/mateco/v92y2021icp81-94.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Randomly evolving tastes and delayed commitment

Author

Listed:
  • Krishna, R. Vijay
  • Sadowski, Philipp

Abstract

We consider a decision maker with randomly evolving tastes who faces dynamic decision situations that involve intertemporal tradeoffs, such as those in consumption savings problems. We axiomatize a recursive representation of choice that features uncertain consumption utilities, which evolve according to a subjective Markov process. The parameters of the representation, which are the subjective Markov process governing the evolution of utilities, and the discount factor, are uniquely identified from behavior. We relate the correlation of tastes over time and the desire to delay commitment to future consumption.

Suggested Citation

  • Krishna, R. Vijay & Sadowski, Philipp, 2021. "Randomly evolving tastes and delayed commitment," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 81-94.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:mateco:v:92:y:2021:i:c:p:81-94
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jmateco.2020.09.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030440682030104X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jmateco.2020.09.007?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eddie Dekel & Barton L. Lipman & Aldo Rustichini, 2009. "Temptation-Driven Preferences," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(3), pages 937-971.
    2. David Dillenberger & R. Vijay Krishna & Philipp Sadowski, 2020. "Subjective Information Choice Processes," PIER Working Paper Archive 20-021, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    3. Roee Teper, 2016. "Learning the Krepsian State: Exploration Through Consumption," Working Paper 5860, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    4. R. H. Strotz, 1955. "Myopia and Inconsistency in Dynamic Utility Maximization," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 23(3), pages 165-180.
    5. Riella, Gil, 2013. "Preference for Flexibility and Dynamic Consistency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(6), pages 2467-2482.
    6. Thierry Magnac & David Thesmar, 2002. "Identifying Dynamic Discrete Decision Processes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 801-816, March.
    7. Bekaert, Geert & Engstrom, Eric & Grenadier, Steven R., 2010. "Stock and bond returns with Moody Investors," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 867-894, December.
    8. Larry G. Epstein & Stanley E. Zin, 2013. "Substitution, risk aversion and the temporal behavior of consumption and asset returns: A theoretical framework," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 12, pages 207-239, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Piermont, Evan & Takeoka, Norio & Teper, Roee, 2016. "Learning the Krepsian state: Exploration through consumption," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 69-94.
    10. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2005. "The Revealed Preference Theory of Changing Tastes," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(2), pages 429-448.
    11. Dekel, Eddie & Lipman, Barton L & Rustichini, Aldo, 2001. "Representing Preferences with a Unique Subjective State Space," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(4), pages 891-934, July.
    12. R. Vijay Krishna & Philipp Sadowski, 2014. "Dynamic Preference for Flexibility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(2), pages 655-703, March.
    13. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2004. "Self-Control and the Theory of Consumption," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(1), pages 119-158, January.
    14. Kreps, David M & Porteus, Evan L, 1978. "Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty and Dynamic Choice Theory," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 185-200, January.
    15. Haluk Ergin & Todd Sarver, 2010. "A Unique Costly Contemplation Representation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1285-1339, July.
    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. Mira Frick & Ryota Iijima & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2019. "Dynamic Random Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(6), pages 1941-2002, November.
    2. Mihm, Maximilian & Ozbek, Kemal, 2019. "On the identification of changing tastes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 203-216.
    3. André Lapied & Thomas Rongiconi, 2013. "Ambiguity as a Source of Temptation: Modeling Unstable Beliefs," Working Papers halshs-00797631, HAL.
    4. Eisenbach, Thomas M. & Schmalz, Martin C., 2016. "Anxiety in the face of risk," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 414-426.
    5. Honda, Edward, 2021. "Sophistication and preference inconsistency in a menu utility representation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 116-121.
    6. Noor, Jawwad & Takeoka, Norio, 2015. "Menu-dependent self-control," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-20.
    7. Roee Teper, 2016. "Learning the Krepsian State: Exploration Through Consumption," Working Paper 5860, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    8. Piermont, Evan & Takeoka, Norio & Teper, Roee, 2016. "Learning the Krepsian state: Exploration through consumption," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 69-94.
    9. Jawwad Noor, 2005. "Temptation, Welfare and Revealed Preference," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2005-15, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    10. Larry G. Epstein, 2006. "An Axiomatic Model of Non-Bayesian Updating," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 73(2), pages 413-436.
    11. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 2012. "Timing and Self‐Control," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(1), pages 1-42, January.
    12. Gorno, Leandro, 2016. "Additive representation for preferences over menus in finite choice settings," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 41-47.
    13. Nobuo Koida, 2018. "Anticipated stochastic choice," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 65(3), pages 545-574, May.
    14. Leandro Gorno, 2010. "Additive representation for preferences over menus in finite choice settings," Working Papers 1292, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Econometric Research Program..
    15. Tang, Rui & Zhang, Mu, 2023. "Motivated naivete," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    16. Eddie Dekel & Barton L. Lipman, 2010. "How (Not) to Do Decision Theory," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 257-282, September.
    17. Larry Epstein & Igor Kopylov, 2006. "Cognitive Dissonance and Choice," RCER Working Papers 525, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    18. Piermont, Evan, 2017. "Introspective unawareness and observable choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 134-152.
    19. Cooke, Kevin, 2017. "Preference discovery and experimentation," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(3), September.
    20. Houser, Daniel & Schunk, Daniel & Winter, Joachim & Xiao, Erte, 2018. "Temptation and commitment in the laboratory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 329-344.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Preference for flexibility; Random tastes;

    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:eee:mateco:v:92:y:2021:i:c:p:81-94. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jmateco .

    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.