IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/restat/v78y1996i3p441-50.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Loss Aversion and Adaptation in the Labor Market: Empirical Indifference Functions and Labor Supply

Author

Listed:
  • Dunn, L F

Abstract

This paper presents empirically determined indifference functions for income and leisure which exhibit the phenomena of loss aversion and a utility reference point determined by adaptation, as expounded by Kahneman and Tversky and others. Data for this study were gathered in original surveys of seven diverse labor markets. The indifference functions of all show common features consistent with loss aversion/adaptation. These features help explain stability in labor markets in the face of an overtime premium which prevents the many workers in the United States from being at an optimal equilibrium and causes discontinuities in labor supply curves. Labor supply curves derived from indifference curves with the loss aversion adaptation features have much smaller discontinuities than those based on simulated curves without these features. Copyright 1996 by MIT Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Dunn, L F, 1996. "Loss Aversion and Adaptation in the Labor Market: Empirical Indifference Functions and Labor Supply," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(3), pages 441-450, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:tpr:restat:v:78:y:1996:i:3:p:441-50
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0034-6535%28199608%2978%3A3%3C441%3ALAAAIT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-N&origin=bc
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jonathan Chapman & Erik Snowberg & Stephanie W. Wang & Colin Camerer, 2022. "Looming Large or Seeming Small? Attitudes Towards Losses in a Representative Sample," NBER Working Papers 30243, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Mohammed SHARIF, 2000. "Inverted “S”—The complete neoclassical labour-supply function," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 139(4), pages 409-435, December.
    3. Doerrenberg, Philipp & Duncan, Denvil & Löffler, Max, 2023. "Asymmetric labor-supply responses to wage changes: Experimental evidence from an online labor market," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    4. Jia, Zhiyang & Vattø, Trine Engh, 2021. "Predicting the path of labor supply responses when state dependence matters," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    5. Bahamonde-Birke, Francisco J., 2018. "Estimating the reference frame: A smooth twice-differentiable utility function for non-compensatory loss-averse decision-making," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 71-81.
    6. Patricia Tovar, 2004. "The Effects of Loss Aversion on Trade Policy and the Anti-Trade Bias Puzzle," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 499, Econometric Society.
    7. Ran, Tao & Keithly, Walter R., Jr. & Yue, Chengyan, 2014. "Reference-Dependent Preferences in Gulf of Mexico Shrimpers' Fishing Effort Decision," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 39(1), pages 1-15, April.
    8. Ahrens, Steffen & Pirschel, Inske & Snower, Dennis J., 2014. "A theory of wage adjustment under loss aversion," Kiel Working Papers 1977, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    9. Matthew Gould & Matthew D. Rablen, 2019. "Are World Leaders Loss Averse?," CESifo Working Paper Series 7763, CESifo.
    10. Berg, Nathan, 2006. "Behavioral Labor Economics," MPRA Paper 26366, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Jonathan Chapman & Erik Snowberg & Stephanie Wang & Colin Camerer, 2018. "Loss Attitudes in the U.S. Population: Evidence from Dynamically Optimized Sequential Experimentation (DOSE)," NBER Working Papers 25072, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Han Bleichrodt & Corina Paraschiv, 2007. "Loss Aversion Under Prospect Theory: A Parameter-Free Measurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1659-1674, October.
    13. Dohmen, Thomas, 2014. "Behavioral labor economics: Advances and future directions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 71-85.
    14. Eil, David & Lien, Jaimie W., 2014. "Staying ahead and getting even: Risk attitudes of experienced poker players," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 50-69.
    15. Ian M. McDonald, 2017. "‘We Will End Up Being a Third Rate Economy … A Banana Republic’: How Behavioural Economics Can Improve Macroeconomic Outcomes," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 50(2), pages 137-151, June.
    16. Georgellis, Yannis & Gregoriou, Andros & Tsitsianis, Nikolaos, 2008. "Adaptation towards reference values: A non-linear perspective," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(3-4), pages 768-781, September.
    17. Anthony Yates, 1998. "Downward nominal rigidity and monetary policy," Bank of England working papers 82, Bank of England.
    18. Rizzo, John A. & Zeckhauser, Richard J., 2007. "Pushing incomes to reference points: Why do male doctors earn more?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 514-536, July.
    19. Peters, Hans, 2012. "A preference foundation for constant loss aversion," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 21-25.
    20. W. Wong & R. Chan, 2008. "Prospect and Markowitz stochastic dominance," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 105-129, January.

    More about this item

    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:tpr:restat:v:78:y:1996:i:3:p:441-50. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: The MIT Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    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.