IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/27007.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Becker's thesis and three models of preference change

Author

Listed:
  • Bradley, Richard

Abstract

This paper examines Becker's thesis that the hypothesis that choices maximise expected utility relative to fixed and universal tastes provides a general framework for the explanation of behaviour. Three different models of preference revision are presented and their scope evaluated. The first, the classical conditioning model, explain all changes in preferences in terms of changes in the information held by the agent, holding fundamental beliefs and desires fixed. The second, the Jeffrey conditioning model, explains them in terms of changes in both the information held by the agent and changes in her prior beliefs, holding her fundamental desires fixed. The final model, that of generalised conditioning, allows for explanations in terms of changes in the values of all three variables.

Suggested Citation

  • Bradley, Richard, 2008. "Becker's thesis and three models of preference change," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 27007, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:27007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/27007/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stigler, George J & Becker, Gary S, 1977. "De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(2), pages 76-90, March.
    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. Alessio Emanuele Biondo & Roberto Cellini & Tiziana Cuccia, 2020. "Choices on museum attendance: An agent‐based approach," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(4), pages 882-897, November.
    2. Trung X. Hoang & Nga V. T. Le, 2021. "Natural disasters and risk aversion: Evidence from Vietnam," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 45(3), pages 211-229, August.
    3. Thunström, Linda & Nordström, Jonas & Shogren, Jason F., 2015. "Certainty and overconfidence in future preferences for food," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 101-113.
    4. Robert Kaestner, 1995. "The Effects of Cocaine and Marijuana Use on Marriage and Marital Stability," NBER Working Papers 5038, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Carl Christian von Weizsäcker, 2011. "Homo Oeconomicus Adaptivus – Die Logik des Handelns bei veränderlichen Präferenzen," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2011_10, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    6. Kanazawa, Satoshi, 2005. "Is "discrimination" necessary to explain the sex gap in earnings?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 269-287, April.
    7. Dhaval M. Dave, 2013. "Effects of Pharmaceutical Promotion: A Review and Assessment," NBER Working Papers 18830, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Sascha O. Becker & Irena Grosfeld & Pauline Grosjean & Nico Voigtländer & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2020. "Forced Migration and Human Capital: Evidence from Post-WWII Population Transfers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(5), pages 1430-1463, May.
    9. Steven N. Durlauf, 1996. "Statistical Mechanics Approaches to Socioeconomic Behavior," NBER Technical Working Papers 0203, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Manolis Galenianos & Rosalie Liccardo Pacula & Nicola Persico, 2012. "A Search-Theoretic Model of the Retail Market for Illicit Drugs," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(3), pages 1239-1269.
    11. Jonathan Guryan & Melissa S. Kearney, 2010. "Is Lottery Gambling Addictive?," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 90-110, August.
    12. Borowiecki, Karol J. & Bakhshi, Hasan, 2018. "Did you really take a hit? Understanding how video games playing affects individuals," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 313-326.
    13. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/vbu6kd1s68o6r34k5bcm3iopv is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Collado, M. Dolores & Ortuño Ortin, Ignacio & Romeu, Andrés, 2008. "Vertical Transmission of Consumption Behavior and the Distribution of Surnames," UMUFAE Economics Working Papers 2651, DIGITUM. Universidad de Murcia.
    15. Peter Murrell, 1982. "Comparative growth and comparative advantage: Tests of the effects of interest group behavior on foreign trade patterns," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 35-53, March.
    16. Nela Filimon & Jordi López-Sintas & Carlos Padrós-Reig, 2011. "A test of Rosen’s and Adler’s theories of superstars," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 35(2), pages 137-161, May.
    17. Charles B. Blankart, 2013. "Oil and Vinegar: A Positive Fiscal Theory of the Euro Crisis," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(4), pages 497-528, November.
    18. Bester, Helmut & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 1995. "Price competition and advertising in oligopoly," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 1075-1088, June.
    19. Gordon Burt, 1997. "Cultural Convergence in Historical Cultural Space-Time," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 21(4), pages 291-305, December.
    20. 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.
    21. Eric S. SCHWARTZ, 2011. "Relevance Of Utility Maximization In Student University Choice – A Consumption-Based Model For Higher Education," Review of Economic and Business Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, issue 7, pages 157-177, May.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics

    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:ehl:lserod:27007. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.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.