IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/mateco/v95y2021ics0304406820301476.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new preference model that allows for narrow framing

Author

Listed:
  • Guo, Jing
  • He, Xue Dong

Abstract

Narrow framing is the idea that, when considering a monetary risk, the individual evaluates it to some extent in isolation and separately from her other risks. Originally documented in experimental settings, narrow framing has been widely applied to explain real-world investor behavior. We show that a prominent mathematical model of narrow framing presented in Barberis and Huang (2009) has some drawbacks that limit its applicability. We then propose a new model of narrow framing that overcomes these limitations and show its tractability in applications to choice over monetary gambles.

Suggested Citation

  • Guo, Jing & He, Xue Dong, 2021. "A new preference model that allows for narrow framing," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:mateco:v:95:y:2021:i:c:s0304406820301476
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jmateco.2020.102470
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304406820301476
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jmateco.2020.102470?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. Barberis, Nicholas & Huang, Ming, 2009. "Preferences with frames: A new utility specification that allows for the framing of risks," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1555-1576, August.
    2. Jeffrey R. Brown & Jeffrey R. Kling & Sendhil Mullainathan & Marian V. Wrobel, 2008. "Why Don’t People Insure Late-Life Consumption? A Framing Explanation of the Under-Annuitization Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(2), pages 304-309, May.
    3. Jeffrey R. Brown & Arie Kapteyn & Erzo F. P. Luttmer & Olivia S. Mitchell & Anya Samek, 2021. "Behavioral Impediments to Valuing Annuities: Complexity and Choice Bracketing," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 103(3), pages 533-546, July.
    4. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    5. Mankiw, N. Gregory & Zeldes, Stephen P., 1991. "The consumption of stockholders and nonstockholders," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 97-112, March.
    6. Easley, David & Yang, Liyan, 2015. "Loss aversion, survival and asset prices," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 494-516.
    7. 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..
    8. Guo, Jing & He, Xue Dong, 2017. "Equilibrium asset pricing with Epstein-Zin and loss-averse investors," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 86-108.
    9. Matthew Rabin & Georg Weizsacker, 2009. "Narrow Bracketing and Dominated Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1508-1543, September.
    10. James J. Choi & David Laibson & Brigitte C. Madrian, 2009. "Mental Accounting in Portfolio Choice: Evidence from a Flypaper Effect," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2085-2095, December.
    11. Baltussen, Guido & Post, Gerrit T., 2011. "Irrational Diversification: An Examination of Individual Portfolio Choice," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(5), pages 1463-1491, October.
    12. Nicholas C. Barberis & Lawrence J. Jin & Baolian Wang, 2020. "Prospect Theory and Stock Market Anomalies," NBER Working Papers 27155, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Barberis, Nicholas & Xiong, Wei, 2012. "Realization utility," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 251-271.
    14. Emily Haisley & Romel Mostafa & George Loewenstein, 2008. "Myopic risk-seeking: The impact of narrow decision bracketing on lottery play," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 57-75, August.
    15. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    16. Marinacci, Massimo & Montrucchio, Luigi, 2010. "Unique solutions for stochastic recursive utilities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(5), pages 1776-1804, September.
    17. Jonathan E. Ingersoll & Lawrence J. Jin, 2013. "Realization Utility with Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 26(3), pages 723-767.
    18. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2001. "Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Individual Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(4), pages 1247-1292, August.
    19. John Y. Campbell & João Cocco & Francisco Gomes & Pascal J. Maenhout & Luis M. Viceira, 2001. "Stock Market Mean Reversion and the Optimal Equity Allocation of a Long-Lived Investor," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 5(3), pages 269-292.
    20. Yan Li & Liyan Yang, 2013. "Asset-Pricing Implications of Dividend Volatility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(9), pages 2036-2055, September.
    21. Matthew Rabin, 2000. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1281-1292, September.
    22. Angie Andrikogiannopoulou & Filippos Papakonstantinou & Francesca Cornelli, 2020. "History-Dependent Risk Preferences: Evidence from Individual Choices and Implications for the Disposition Effect," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 33(8), pages 3674-3718.
    23. Xue Dong He & Xun Yu Zhou, 2014. "Myopic loss aversion, reference point, and money illusion," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(9), pages 1541-1554, September.
    24. Shlomo Benartzi & Richard H. Thaler, 1995. "Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(1), pages 73-92.
    25. Daniel Gottlieb & Olivia S. Mitchell, 2020. "Narrow Framing and Long‐Term Care Insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 87(4), pages 861-893, December.
    26. Heaton, John & Lucas, Deborah, 2000. "Portfolio Choice in the Presence of Background Risk," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(460), pages 1-26, January.
    27. Mehra, Rajnish & Prescott, Edward C., 1985. "The equity premium: A puzzle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 145-161, March.
    28. De Giorgi, Enrico G. & Legg, Shane, 2012. "Dynamic portfolio choice and asset pricing with narrow framing and probability weighting," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 951-972.
    29. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang & Richard H. Thaler, 2006. "Individual Preferences, Monetary Gambles, and Stock Market Participation: A Case for Narrow Framing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1069-1090, September.
    30. Daniel Gottlieb & Kent Smetters, 2012. "Narrow Framing and Life Insurance," NBER Working Papers 18601, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    31. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2001. "Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Individual Stock Returns," NBER Working Papers 8190, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    32. Lars Peter Hansen & Jose A. Scheinkman, 2012. "Recursive utility in a Markov environment with stochastic growth," Working Papers 1380, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Econometric Research Program..
    33. Grinblatt, Mark & Han, Bing, 2005. "Prospect theory, mental accounting, and momentum," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 311-339, November.
    34. Li, Yan & Yang, Liyan, 2013. "Prospect theory, the disposition effect, and asset prices," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 715-739.
    35. Alok Kumar & Sonya Seongyeon Lim, 2008. "How Do Decision Frames Influence the Stock Investment Choices of Individual Investors?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(6), pages 1052-1064, June.
    36. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang & Tano Santos, 2001. "Prospect Theory and Asset Prices," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(1), pages 1-53.
    37. 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.
    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. Guo, Jing & He, Xue Dong, 2017. "Equilibrium asset pricing with Epstein-Zin and loss-averse investors," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 86-108.
    2. Jing Guo & Xue Dong He, 2021. "Recursive Utility with Investment Gains and Losses: Existence, Uniqueness, and Convergence," Papers 2107.05163, arXiv.org.
    3. David Hirshleife, 2015. "Behavioral Finance," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 133-159, December.
    4. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2006. "The Loss Aversion / Narrow Framing Approach to the Equity Premium Puzzle," NBER Working Papers 12378, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    6. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    7. Neszveda, G., 2019. "Essays on behavioral finance," Other publications TiSEM 05059039-5236-42a3-be1b-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Luigi Guiso, 2015. "A Test of Narrow Framing and its Origin," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 1(1), pages 61-100, March.
    9. Hsiaw, Alice, 2018. "Goal bracketing and self-control," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 100-121.
    10. Daniel Gottlieb & Olivia S. Mitchell, 2020. "Narrow Framing and Long‐Term Care Insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 87(4), pages 861-893, December.
    11. Magi, Alessandro, 2009. "Portfolio choice, behavioral preferences and equity home bias," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 501-520, May.
    12. Pauline Vorjohann, 2023. "Reference-dependent choice bracketing," Discussion Papers 2309, University of Exeter, Department of Economics.
    13. Luca De Gennaro Aquino & Xuedong He & Moris Simon Strub & Yuting Yang, 2024. "Reference-dependent asset pricing with a stochastic consumption-dividend ratio," Papers 2401.12856, arXiv.org.
    14. Lucks, Konstantin, 2016. "The Impact of Self-Control on Investment Decisions," MPRA Paper 73099, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Pasquariello, Paolo, 2014. "Prospect Theory and market quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 276-310.
    16. Fortin, Ines & Hlouskova, Jaroslava, 2024. "Prospect theory and asset allocation," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 214-240.
    17. Hwang, In Do, 2021. "Prospect theory and insurance demand: Empirical evidence on the role of loss aversion," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    18. Liyan Yang, 2019. "Loss Aversion in Financial Markets," The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design, Society for the Promotion of Mechanism and Institution Design, University of York, vol. 4(1), pages 119-137, November.
    19. Juanjuan Meng & Xi Weng, 2018. "Can Prospect Theory Explain the Disposition Effect? A New Perspective on Reference Points," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(7), pages 3331-3351, July.
    20. Easley, David & Yang, Liyan, 2015. "Loss aversion, survival and asset prices," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 494-516.

    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:95:y:2021:i:c:s0304406820301476. 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.