Showing 1 - 10 of 11
The Hicksian definition of complementarity and substitutability may not apply in contexts in which agents are not utility maximisers or where price or income variations, whether implicit or explicit, are not available. We look for tools to identify complementarity and substitutability satisfying...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011816568
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010241583
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010348309
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011901919
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011631275
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10012034520
The Hicksian definition of complementarity and substitutability may not apply in contexts in which agents are not utility maximisers or where price or income variations, whether implicit or explicit, are not available. We look for tools to identify complementarity and substitutability satisfying...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011795820
We model the choice behaviour of an agent who is vNM rational but imperfectly attentive. We define inattention axiomatically through preference over menus and endowed alternatives: an agent is inattentive if it is better to be endowed with an alternative a than to be allowed to pick a from a...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010904126
There are many situations in which alternatives ranked by quality wish to be chosen and compete for the imperfect attention of a chooser by selecting their own salience. The chooser may be “tricked" into choosing more salient but inferior alter- natives. We investigate when competitive forces...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011265503
We model the choice behaviour of an agent who suffers from imperfect attention. We define inattention axiomatically through preference over menus and endowed alternatives: an agent is inattentive if it is better to be endowed with an alternative a than to be allowed to pick a from a menu in...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011075620