Volume 27, Issue 4 (Winter 2023)
JPBUD 2023, 27(4): 3-22 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Pahlevan Yazdanabad H, Hoseini M, Fadaee M. (2023). Combinatorial choice and limited attention. JPBUD. 27(4), 3-22. doi:10.52547/jpbud.27.4.3
URL: http://jpbud.ir/article-1-2154-en.html
URL: http://jpbud.ir/article-1-2154-en.html
1- Institute for Management and Planning Studies, Tehran, Iran. , h.pahlevan@imps.ac.ir
2- Department of Economics, Institute for Management and Planning Studies, Tehran, Iran.
2- Department of Economics, Institute for Management and Planning Studies, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract: (1074 Views)
Combinatorial choice models are based on the implicit assumption that decision-makers consider all possible combinations that can be made by the options in a given set. Therefore, these models assumed that the chosen combination is the most preferable combination.
However, decision-makers may not consider all possible combinations due to the limited attention. Thus, the chosen combination is not necessarily the best. This paper presents a model that can explain such choice behaviors. After presenting the model, we investigate its revealed preference implications and explain how one can make inferences about individuals’ preferences considering their choices in the new context. Finally, for the model to be testable, we present its characterizing axiom and show that it is equivalent to the model.
Keywords: Combinatorial Choice, Limited Attention, Revealed Preferences, Choice Theory, Axiom of Choice.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Microeconomics
Received: Oct 12 2022 | Accepted: Feb 01 2023 | ePublished: Mar 15 2023
Received: Oct 12 2022 | Accepted: Feb 01 2023 | ePublished: Mar 15 2023
References
1. Alva, S. (2018). WARP and Combinatorial Choice. Journal of Economic Theory, 173(1), 320-333. [DOI:10.1016/j.jet.2017.11.007]
2. Brandt, F., & Harrenstein, P. (2011). Set-Rationalizable Choice and Self-Stability. Journal of Economic Theory, 146(4), 1721-1731. [DOI:10.1016/j.jet.2011.03.006]
3. Caplin, A., Dean, M., & Leahy, J. (2019). Rational Inattention, Optimal Consideration Sets, and Stochastic Choice. The Review of Economic Studies, 86(3), 1061-1094. [DOI:10.1093/restud/rdy037]
4. Cattaneo, M. D., Ma, X., Masatlioglu, Y., & Suleymanov, E. (2020). A Random Attention Model. Journal of Political Economy, 128(7), 2796-2836. [DOI:10.1086/706861]
5. Chambers, C. P., & Echenique, F. (2018). A Characterization of Combinatorial Demand. Mathematics of Operations Research, 43(1), 222-227. [DOI:10.1287/moor.2017.0859]
6. De Clippel, G., & Rozen, K. (2021). Bounded Rationality and Limited Data Sets. Theoretical Economics, 16(2), 359-380. [DOI:10.3982/TE4070]
7. Dean, M., Kıbrıs, Ö., & Masatlioglu, Y. (2017). Limited Attention and Status Quo Bias. Journal of Economic Theory, 169(1), 93-127. [DOI:10.1016/j.jet.2017.01.009]
8. Geng, S., & Özbay, E. Y. (2021). Shortlisting Procedure with a Limited Capacity. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 94(1), 102447. [DOI:10.1016/j.jmateco.2020.11.003]
9. Horan, S. (2016). A Simple Model of Two-Stage Choice. Journal of Economic Theory, 162(1), 372-406. [DOI:10.1016/j.jet.2016.01.002]
10. Kelso Jr, A. S., & Crawford, V. P. (1982). Job Matching, Coalition Formation, and Gross Substitutes. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 50(6), 1483-1504. [DOI:10.2307/1913392]
11. Lleras, J. S., Masatlioglu, Y., Nakajima, D., & Ozbay, E. Y. (2017). When More is Less: Limited Consideration. Journal of Economic Theory, 170(1), 70-85. [DOI:10.1016/j.jet.2017.04.004]
12. Manzini, P., & Mariotti, M. (2007). Sequentially Rationalizable Choice. American Economic Review, 97(5), 1824-1839. [DOI:10.1257/aer.97.5.1824]
13. Manzini, P., & Mariotti, M. (2012). Categorize then Choose: Boundedly Rational Choice and Welfare. Journal of the European Economic Association, 10(5), 1141-1165. [DOI:10.1111/j.1542-4774.2012.01078.x]
14. Masatlioglu, Y., Nakajima, D., & Ozbay, E. Y. (2012). Revealed Attention. American Economic Review, 102(5), 2183-2205. [DOI:10.1257/aer.102.5.2183]
15. Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M. D., & Green, J. R. (1995). Microeconomic Theory: Oxford University Press.
16. Roth, A. E. (1984). Stability and Polarization of Interests in Job Matching. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 52(1), 47-57. [DOI:10.2307/1911460]
17. Rubinstein, A., & Salant, Y. (2006). A Model of Choice from Lists. Theoretical Economics, 1(1), 3-17.
18. Salant, Y., & Rubinstein, A. (2008). Choice with Frames. The Review of Economic Studies, 75(4), 1287-1296. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-937X.2008.00510.x]
19. Sen, A. K. (1971). Choice Functions and Revealed Preference. The Review of Economic Studies, 38(3), 307-317. [DOI:10.2307/2296384]
20. Sher, I., & il Kim, K. (2014). Identifying Combinatorial Valuations from Aggregate Demand. Journal of Economic Theory, 153(1), 428-458. [DOI:10.1016/j.jet.2014.07.009]
21. Szpilrajn, E. (1930). Sur l'extension de l'ordre partiel. Fundamenta mathematicae, 1(16), 386-389. [DOI:10.4064/fm-16-1-386-389]
22. Tyson, C. J. (2008). Cognitive Constraints, Contraction Consistency, and the Satisficing Criterion. Journal of Economic Theory, 138(1), 51-70. [DOI:10.1016/j.jet.2007.01.019]
23. Tyson, C. J. (2015). Satisficing Behavior with a Secondary Criterion. Social Choice and Welfare, 44(3), 639-661. [DOI:10.1007/s00355-014-0850-7]
24. Yang, Y.-Y. (2020). Rationalizable Choice Functions. Games and Economic Behavior, 123(1), 120-126. [DOI:10.1016/j.geb.2020.07.003]
25. Yildiz, K. (2016). List‐Rationalizable Choice. Theoretical Economics, 11(2), 587-599. [DOI:10.3982/TE1298]
| Rights and permissions | |
.jpg) |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
