IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v60y2014i3p628-637.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Giving It All Up on Valuation: A New Look at the Endowment Effect

Author

Listed:
  • Amos Schurr

    (Department of Management, Guilford Glazer Faculty of Business and Management, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva 84105, Israel)

  • Ilana Ritov

    (School of Education and Center for the Study of Rationality, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91904, Israel)

Abstract

In three experiments we show that the endowment effect---the tendency to demand more money for relinquishing owned goods than one is willing to pay for the same goods---fails to emerge when sellers are not fully depleted of their endowment. This finding is incompatible with prospect theory's account of the effect as stemming primarily from aversion to loss relative to the individual's current state. We suggest a new account of the endowment effect as reflecting the human aversion to “giving it all up” rather than simply an aversion to incurring any loss relative to the status quo. Experiments 1 and 2 show the effect employing a pricing paradigm. Experiment 3 examines what constitutes “all” in the giving-it-all-up effect. This paper was accepted by Uri Gneezy, behavioral economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Amos Schurr & Ilana Ritov, 2014. "The Effect of Giving It All Up on Valuation: A New Look at the Endowment Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(3), pages 628-637, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:60:y:2014:i:3:p:628-637
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2013.1783
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1783
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1783?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. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    2. John A. List, 2003. "Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(1), pages 41-71.
    3. 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..
    4. John A. List, 2004. "Neoclassical Theory Versus Prospect Theory: Evidence from the Marketplace," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 615-625, March.
    5. Carmon, Ziv & Wertenbroch, Klaus & Zeelenberg, Marcel, 2003. "Option Attachment: When Deliberating Makes Choosing Feel Like Losing," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(1), pages 15-29, June.
    6. Carmon, Ziv & Ariely, Dan, 2000. "Focusing on the Forgone: How Value Can Appear So Different to Buyers and Sellers," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(3), pages 360-370, December.
    7. Ert, Eyal & Erev, Ido, 2008. "The rejection of attractive gambles, loss aversion, and the lemon avoidance heuristic," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 715-723, November.
    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. van Dijk, Eric & van Knippenberg, Daan, 1998. "Trading wine: On the endowment effect, loss aversion, and the comparability of consumer goods," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 485-495, August.
    10. Strahilevitz, Michal A & Loewenstein, George, 1998. "The Effect of Ownership History on the Valuation of Objects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(3), pages 276-289, December.
    11. Horowitz, John K & McConnell, K E & Quiggin, John, 1999. "A Test of Competing Explanations of Compensation Demanded," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 37(4), pages 637-646, October.
    12. Rosenboim, Mosi & Shavit, Tal & Cohen, Chen, 2013. "Do bidders require a monetary premium for cognitive effort in an auction?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 99-105.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas, Veronica L. & Yeh, Marie & Jewell, Robert D., 2015. "Enhancing valuation: the impact of self-congruence with a brand on the endowment effect," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 178-185.
    2. Xie, Guangming & Lü, Kevin & Gupta, Suraksha & Jiang, Yushi & Shi, Li, 2021. "How Dispersive Opinions Affect Consumer Decisions: Endowment Effect Guides Attributional Inferences," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 97(4), pages 621-638.
    3. Eldad Yechiam & Amitay Kauffmann & Nathaniel J S Ashby & Gal Zahavi, 2017. "On the relation between economic bubbles and effort gaps between sellers and buyers: An experimental study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Hongli Xu & Hai Yang & Jing Zhou & Yafeng Yin, 2017. "A Route Choice Model with Context-Dependent Value of Time," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(2), pages 536-548, May.

    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. (Xiao-Tian) Wang, X.T. & Ong, Lay See & Tan, Jolene H., 2015. "Sense and sensibility of ownership: Type of ownership experience and valuation of goods," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 171-177.
    2. 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.
    3. Smith, Alec, 2019. "Lagged beliefs and reference-dependent utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 331-340.
    4. Xu, Xiaobing & Chen, Rong & Zhang, Jin, 2019. "Effectiveness of trade-ins and price discounts: A moderating role of substitutability," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 80-89.
    5. Walasek, Lukasz & Mullett, Timothy L. & Stewart, Neil, 2024. "A meta-analysis of loss aversion in risky contexts," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    6. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Nash, Jane Gradwohl & Rosenthal, Robert A., 2014. "An investigation of the endowment effect in the context of a college housing lottery," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 74-82.
    10. Martinez, Luis F. & Zeelenberg, Marcel & Rijsman, John B., 2011. "Regret, disappointment and the endowment effect," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 962-968.
    11. John A. List, 2006. "Using Hicksian Surplus Measures to Examine Consistency of Individual Preferences: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 108(1), pages 115-134, March.
    12. 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.
    13. Yuanji Wen & Stijn Masschelein & Anmol Ratan, 2022. "Loss aversion in asymmetric anti‐coordination games," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 88(4), pages 1549-1573, April.
    14. Jiwoong Shin & Dan Ariely, 2004. "Keeping Doors Open: The Effect of Unavailability on Incentives to Keep Options Viable," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(5), pages 575-586, May.
    15. Dietz, Simon & Venmans, Frank, 2019. "The endowment effect, discounting and the environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 67-91.
    16. I. Lens & M. Pandelaere & L. Warlop, 2009. "The Role of Materialism in the Endowment Effect," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 09/578, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    17. Ravaja, Niklas & Korhonen, Pekka & Köksalan, Murat & Lipsanen, Jari & Salminen, Mikko & Somervuori, Outi & Wallenius, Jyrki, 2016. "Emotional–motivational responses predicting choices: The role of asymmetrical frontal cortical activity," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 56-70.
    18. Gächter, Simon & Johnson, Eric J. & Herrmann, Andreas, 2007. "Individual-Level Loss Aversion in Riskless and Risky Choices," IZA Discussion Papers 2961, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Aravena, Claudia & Martinsson, Peter & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2014. "Does money talk? — The effect of a monetary attribute on the marginal values in a choice experiment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 483-491.
    20. Marianne Bertrand & Dean S. Karlan & Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir & Jonathan Zinman, 2005. "What's Psychology Worth? A Field Experiment in the Consumer Credit Market," Working Papers 918, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:60:y:2014:i:3:p:628-637. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.