Due to factors such as temptation, choices may not respect normative prefer- ence (the agent.s own, subjective view of what constitutes his welfare). Neverthe- less, the evidence on preference reversals suggests a means of recovering normative preference from choice. A de.nition of normative...

Choice may be determined both by a consideration of one?s welfare (normative preference) and by desires (temptation preference). To provide foundations for such a theory, Gul and Pesendorfer [7, 8] adopt a preference over choice problems as a primitive and hypothesize that temptation creates a...

Choice may be determined both by a consideration of one’s welfare (normative preference) and by desires (temptation preference). To provide foundations for such a theory, Gul and Pesendorfer [10, 11] adopt a preference over choice problems as a primitive and hypothesize that temptation creates...

Temptation is the conflict between one’s desires (temptation preference) and one’s view of what choices he should make (normative preference). In seminal work, Gul and Pesendorfer [7, 8] provide foundations for a model of temptation on the basis of the idea that temptation creates a...

The literature on self-control problems has typically put forth models that imply behavior that is consistent with the Weak Axiom of Revealed Prefer- ence. Thus, while choice is hypothesized to be the outcome of some under- lying internal con.ict, the resulting choices are perfectly consistent...

The literature on self-control problems has typically concentrated on immediate temptations. This paper studies a Gul and Pesendorfer [13, 14] style model in which decision-makers are affected by temptations that lie in the future. While temptation is commonly understood to give rise to a demand...