IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i21p7134-d669732.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prospect Theory with Bounded Temporal Horizon for Modeling Prosumer Behavior in the Smart Grid

Author

Listed:
  • Mohsen Rajabpour

    (Wireless Information Network Lab (WINLAB), Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08902, USA)

  • Mohammad Yousefvand

    (Wireless Information Network Lab (WINLAB), Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08902, USA)

  • Robert Mulligan

    (The Kohl Group, Inc., Parsippany, NJ 07054, USA)

  • Narayan B. Mandayam

    (Wireless Information Network Lab (WINLAB), Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ 08902, USA)

Abstract

We study prosumer decision-making in the smart grid in which a prosumer must decide whether to make a sale of solar energy units generated at her home every day or hold (store) the energy units in anticipation of a future sale at a better price. Specifically, we enhance a Prospect Theory (PT)-based behavioral model by taking into account bounded temporal horizons (a time window specified in terms of the number of days) that prosumers implicitly impose on their decision-making in arriving at “hold” or “sell” decisions of energy units. The new behavioral model for prosumers assumes that in addition to the framing and probability weighting effects imposed by classical PT, humans make decisions that will affect their lives within a bounded temporal horizon regardless of how far into the future their units may be sold. Modeling the utility of the prosumer with parameters such as the offered price on a day, the available energy units on a day, and the probabilities of the forecast prices, we fit the PT-based proposed behavioral model with bounded temporal horizons to prosumer data collected over 10 weeks from 57 homeowners who generated surplus units of solar power and had the opportunity to sell those units to the local utility at the price set that day by the utility or hold the units for sale in the future. For most participants, a model with a bounded temporal horizon in the range of 1–6 days provided a much better fit to their responses than was found for the traditional EUT-based model, thus validating the need to model PT effects (framing and probability weighting) and bounded temporal horizons imposed in prosumer decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohsen Rajabpour & Mohammad Yousefvand & Robert Mulligan & Narayan B. Mandayam, 2021. "Prospect Theory with Bounded Temporal Horizon for Modeling Prosumer Behavior in the Smart Grid," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-16, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:21:p:7134-:d:669732
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/21/7134/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/21/7134/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. David Genesove & Christopher Mayer, 2001. "Loss Aversion and Seller Behavior: Evidence from the Housing Market," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(4), pages 1233-1260.
    4. repec:bla:jfinan:v:53:y:1998:i:5:p:1775-1798 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. 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..
    6. Drazen Prelec, 1998. "The Probability Weighting Function," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 497-528, May.
    7. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
    8. Shefrin, Hersh & Statman, Meir, 1985. "The Disposition to Sell Winners Too Early and Ride Losers Too Long: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 40(3), pages 777-790, July.
    9. Nicholas C. Barberis, 2013. "Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 173-196, Winter.
    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. Alex Markle & George Wu & Rebecca White & Aaron Sackett, 2018. "Goals as reference points in marathon running: A novel test of reference dependence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 19-50, February.
    2. 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.
    3. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    4. Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Vitalie Spinu, 2020. "Searching for the Reference Point," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 93-112, January.
    5. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    6. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    7. Thomas Epper & Helga Fehr-Duda, 2012. "The missing link: unifying risk taking and time discounting," ECON - Working Papers 096, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Oct 2018.
    8. Henderson, Vicky & Hobson, David & Tse, Alex S.L., 2018. "Probability weighting, stop-loss and the disposition effect," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 360-397.
    9. Arjun Chatrath & Rohan A. Christie‐David & Hong Miao & Sanjay Ramchander, 2019. "Losers and prospectors in the short‐term options market," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(6), pages 721-743, June.
    10. Stracca, Livio, 2004. "Behavioral finance and asset prices: Where do we stand?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 373-405, June.
    11. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    12. Häckel, Björn & Pfosser, Stefan & Tränkler, Timm, 2017. "Explaining the energy efficiency gap - Expected Utility Theory versus Cumulative Prospect Theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 414-426.
    13. Doron Sonsino & Mosi Rosenboim & Tal Shavit, 2017. "The valuation “by-tranche” of composite investment instruments," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(3), pages 353-393, March.
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:2:p:118-127 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Simon Gächter & Eric J. Johnson & Andreas Herrmann, 2022. "Individual-level loss aversion in riskless and risky choices," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(3), pages 599-624, April.
    16. EOM, Cheoljun & EOM, Yunsung & PARK, Jong Won, 2024. "Intermediate cross-sectional prospect theory value in stock markets: A novel method," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    17. Giannikos, Christos I. & Kakolyris, Andreas & Suen, Tin Shan, 2023. "Prospect theory and a manager's decision to trade a blind principal bid basket," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    18. Teck H. Ho & Noah Lim & Colin Camerer, 2005. "Modeling the Psychology of Consumer and Firm Behavior with Behavioral Economics," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000476, UCLA Department of Economics.
    19. Matteo Ploner, 2017. "Hold on to it? An experimental analysis of the disposition effect," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(2), pages 118-127, March.
    20. Lucy F. Ackert & Richard Deaves & Jennifer Miele & Quang Nguyen, 2020. "Are Time Preference and Risk Preference Associated with Cognitive Intelligence and Emotional Intelligence?," Journal of Behavioral Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 136-156, April.
    21. Moshe Levy, 2022. "An evolutionary explanation of the Allais paradox," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 1545-1574, November.

    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:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:21:p:7134-:d:669732. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.