IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ksa/szemle/29.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hasznosság és tipikusság. Valóban különböznek egymástól?
[Utility and typicality. Do they really differ from each other?]

Author

Listed:
  • Sárváry, Miklós
  • Szekeres, Éva

Abstract

A számos axiómát összefoglaló preferenciarelációból modellalkotók hasznosságfüggvényeket hoznak létre a reprezentációs tétel segítségével. Mind a hasznosság, mind a preferencia modellalkotási segédeszközök, elvont fogalmak, melyek a lehető legtömörebben foglalják össze a fogyasztói döntés mechanizmusát. A fogyasztói magatartás kutatóit azonban éppen e folyamat mélyén meghúzódó preferenciák magyarázata érdekli. A mindössze néhány évtizedes - a nyelvészet, az antropológia és a pszichológia eredményeire építő - kategorizációkutatás eredményei szerint az emberek fejében a "dolgok" mentális reprezentációi hierarchikusan tagolt kategóriarendszereket alkotnak. Sőt, ezen kategóriák is rendelkeznek egy belső struktúrával, mely jól leírható a (proto)tipikusság fogalmával. Jelen tanulmány két célt tűz ki maga elé. Először is szeretné felhívni a figyelmet a tipikusság és a hasznosság fogalmak között fennálló analógiákra, ezzel ún. külső érvényességet nyújtva a hasznosságelméletnek. Másodszor pedig útmutatást kíván nyújtani modellalkotók számára abban a kérdésben,hogy a hasznosságelmélet mely változatát érdemes választani a különböző modellezési helyzetekben.

Suggested Citation

  • Sárváry, Miklós & Szekeres, Éva, 1995. "Hasznosság és tipikusság. Valóban különböznek egymástól? [Utility and typicality. Do they really differ from each other?]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(6), pages 571-581.
    • Handle: RePEc:ksa:szemle:29
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.kszemle.hu/tartalom/letoltes.php?id=29
    Download Restriction: Registration and subscription. 3-month embargo period to non-subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Loken, Barbara & Ward, James C, 1990. "Alternative Approaches to Understanding the Determinants of Typicality," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 17(2), pages 111-126, September.
    2. Nedungadi, Prakash, 1990. "Recall and Consumer Consideration Sets: Influencing Choice without Altering Brand Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 17(3), pages 263-276, December.
    3. Schoemaker, Paul J H, 1982. "The Expected Utility Model: Its Variants, Purposes, Evidence and Limitations," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 529-563, June.
    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. Punj, Girish & Moon, Junyean, 2002. "Positioning options for achieving brand association: a psychological categorization framework," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 275-283, April.
    2. Schoormans, Jan P. L. & Robben, Henry S. J., 1997. "The effect of new package design on product attention, categorization and evaluation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 18(2-3), pages 271-287, April.
    3. Sanktjohanser, Anna & Hörner, Johannes, 2022. "Too Much of A Good Thing?," TSE Working Papers 22-1327, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    4. Gatti, Nicolas & Cecil, Michael & Baylis, Kathy & Estes, Lyndon & Blekking, Jordan & Heckelei, Thomas & Vergopolan, Noemi & Evans, Tom, 2023. "Is closing the agricultural yield gap a “risky” endeavor?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    5. Chadwick J. Miller & Daniel C. Brannon & Jim Salas & Martha Troncoza, 2021. "Advertising, incentives, and the upsell: how advertising differentially moderates customer- vs. retailer-directed price incentives’ impact on consumers’ preferences for premium products," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1043-1064, November.
    6. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2006. "Environmental Morale and Motivation," CREMA Working Paper Series 2006-17, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    7. Ole Røgeberg & Morten Nordberg, 2005. "A defence of absurd theories in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 543-562.
    8. Randall Lewis & Dan Nguyen, 2015. "Display advertising’s competitive spillovers to consumer search," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 93-115, June.
    9. Luís Santos-Pinto & Adrian Bruhin & José Mata & Thomas Åstebro, 2015. "Detecting heterogeneous risk attitudes with mixed gambles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 573-600, December.
    10. Michaël Lainé, 2014. "Vers une alternative au paradigme de la rationalité ? Victoires et déboires du programme spinoziste en économie," Post-Print hal-01335618, HAL.
    11. Christopher Prendergast, 1993. "Rationality, Optimality, and Choice," Rationality and Society, , vol. 5(1), pages 47-57, January.
    12. Rasmussen, Svend, 2003. "Criteria for optimal production under uncertainty. The state-contingent approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 1-30.
    13. Finkelshtain, Israel & Feinerman, Eli, 1997. "Framing the Allais paradox as a daily farm decision problem: tests and explanations," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 155-167, January.
    14. Segal, Uzi, 1987. "The Ellsberg Paradox and Risk Aversion: An Anticipated Utility Approach," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 28(1), pages 175-202, February.
    15. Inger ROOS & Anders GUSTAFSSON & Bo EDVARDSSON & Peter LANDMARK, 2010. "Should We Differentiate Between Business And Private Customers?," Management Research and Practice, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2(3), pages 249-263, September.
    16. Jacqueline de Bony, 2005. "Dutch decision as rooted in Dutch culture: An ethnologic study of the Dutch decision process," Post-Print halshs-00113147, HAL.
    17. Sheng, Shibin & Pan, Yue, 2009. "Bundling as a new product introduction strategy: The role of brand image and bundle features," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 367-376.
    18. Nicolau, Juan L., 2012. "The effect of winning the 2010 FIFA World Cup on the tourism market value: The Spanish case," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 503-510.
    19. Dimitriu, Radu & Warlop, Luk, 2022. "Is similarity a constraint for service-to-service brand extensions?," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 1019-1041.
    20. Erfgen, Carsten & Zenker, Sebastian & Sattler, Henrik, 2015. "The vampire effect: When do celebrity endorsers harm brand recall?," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 155-163.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • A12 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Other Disciplines

    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:ksa:szemle:29. 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: Odon Sok (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.kszemle.hu .

    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.