IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oxf/wpaper/531.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Goods Versus Characteristics: Revealed Preference Procedures for Nested Models

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew Polisson

Abstract

This paper compares the goods and characteristics models of the consumer within a traditional demand framework. We examine the nonparametric revealed preference conditions for the goods and characteristics models, and we develop a methodology for testing nested models of this class using nonparametric revealed preference techniques. Of primary interest is to make a comparison on the basis of predictive success, which requires that we develop a method to relate set predictions across models. This allows us to nonparametrically identify the model which best fits the data, and in doing so, to identify the value added by the characteristics structure in explaining consumer behavior. We then explore the effects of hypothetical price variation as implied by our findings in order to nonparametrically bound any comparative statics of interest. We implement these procedures on household panel data from the UK milk market. The primary result is that the better fit of the characteristics model is entirely attributable to dimension reduction.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew Polisson, 2011. "Goods Versus Characteristics: Revealed Preference Procedures for Nested Models," Economics Series Working Papers 531, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:oxf:wpaper:531
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:7ee434f5-cadd-4d88-af06-148af4bd3740
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. A. Fostel & H. Scarf & M. Todd, 2004. "Two new proofs of Afriat’s theorem," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 24(1), pages 211-219, July.
    2. Rachel Griffith & Lars Nesheim, 2010. "Estimating households' willingness to pay," CeMMAP working papers CWP24/10, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    3. Laura Blow & Martin Browning & Ian Crawford, 2008. "Revealed Preference Analysis of Characteristics Models," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(2), pages 371-389.
    4. Andreoni,J. & Harbaugh,W.T., 2005. "Power indices for revealed preference tests," Working papers 10, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    5. Matthew Polisson & John K.-H. Quah, 2013. "Revealed Preference in a Discrete Consumption Space," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 28-34, February.
    6. Timothy K. M. Beatty & Ian A. Crawford, 2011. "How Demanding Is the Revealed Preference Approach to Demand?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2782-2795, October.
    7. W. E. Diewert, 1973. "Afriat and Revealed Preference Theory," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 40(3), pages 419-425.
    8. James Banks & Richard Blundell & Arthur Lewbel, 1997. "Quadratic Engel Curves And Consumer Demand," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(4), pages 527-539, November.
    9. Andrew Leicester & Zoë Oldfield, 2009. "Using Scanner Technology to Collect Expenditure Data," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 30(Special I), pages 309-337, December.
    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. Matthew Polisson, 2011. "Goods Versus Characteristics: Dimension Reduction and Revealed Preference," Discussion Papers in Economics 11/44, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester, revised Dec 2011.
    2. Ian Crawford & Bram De Rock, 2014. "Empirical Revealed Preference," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 503-524, August.
    3. Sam Cosaert & Thomas Demuynck, 2015. "Revealed preference theory for finite choice sets," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 59(1), pages 169-200, May.
    4. Cherchye, Laurens & Demuynck, Thomas & De Rock, Bram & Hjertstrand, Per, 2015. "Revealed preference tests for weak separability: An integer programming approach," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 129-141.
    5. Thomas Demuynck & Christian Seel, 2018. "Revealed Preference with Limited Consideration," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 102-131, February.
    6. Sabrina Bruyneel & Laurens Cherchye & Sam Cosaert & Bram De Rock & Siegfried Dewitte, 2012. "Are the Smart Kids More Rational ?," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2012-050, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    7. Laurens CHERCHYE & Thomas DEMUYNCK & Bram DE ROCK, 2010. "Noncooperative household consumption with caring," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven ces10.34, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.
    8. Sam Cosaert & Veerle Hennebel, 2023. "Parental Childcare with Process Benefits," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 90(357), pages 339-371, January.
    9. Cherchye, Laurens & De Rock, Bram & Sabbe, Jeroen & Vermeulen, Frederic, 2008. "Nonparametric tests of collectively rational consumption behavior: An integer programming procedure," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 258-265, December.
    10. Laurens Cherchye & Thomas Demuynck & Bram De Rock, 2011. "Revealed Preference Analysis of Non‐Cooperative Household Consumption," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(555), pages 1073-1096, September.
    11. Matthew Polisson, 2018. "A lattice test for additive separability," IFS Working Papers W18/08, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    12. Dieter Saelens, 2022. "Unitary or collective households? A nonparametric rationality and separability test using detailed data on consumption expenditures and time use," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 62(2), pages 637-677, February.
    13. repec:hal:wpaper:halshs-00870052 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Laurens Cherchye & Thomas Demuynck & Bram De Rock, 2013. "Nash‐Bargained Consumption Decisions: A Revealed Preference Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 123, pages 195-235, March.
    15. Forges, Françoise & Iehlé, Vincent, 2014. "Afriat’s theorem for indivisible goods," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-6.
    16. Polisson, Matthew & Renou, Ludovic, 2016. "Afriat’s Theorem and Samuelson’s ‘Eternal Darkness’," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 36-40.
    17. Laurens Cherchye & Thomas Demuynck & Bram De Rock & Khushboo Surana, 2020. "Revealed Preference Analysis with Normal Goods: Application to Cost-of-Living Indices," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 165-188, August.
    18. Kohei Shiozawa, 2015. "Revealed Preference Test and Shortest Path Problem; Graph Theoretic Structure of the Rationalizability Test," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 15-17-Rev., Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics, revised Jul 2015.
    19. John Quah & Hiroki Nishimura & Efe A. Ok, 2013. "A Unified Approach to Revealed Preference Theory: The Case of Rational Choice," Economics Series Working Papers 686, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    20. Smeulders, Bart & Crama, Yves & Spieksma, Frits C.R., 2019. "Revealed preference theory: An algorithmic outlook," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(3), pages 803-815.
    21. Yoram Halevy & Dotan Persitz & Lanny Zrill, 2018. "Parametric Recoverability of Preferences," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1558-1593.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Characteristics; demand; dimension reduction; nested models; revealed preference;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:oxf:wpaper:531. 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: Anne Pouliquen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfeixuk.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.