very nice analysis. But you may miss the point Fang raised



所有跟贴·加跟贴·新语丝读书论坛http://www.xys.org/cgi-bin/mainpage.pl

送交者: xj 于 2006-4-27, 23:38:21:

回答: 人也不是理性动物一文中例2也有问题。 由 fujita 于 2006-4-27, 22:45:59:

or in fact Kahneman and Tvesky raised in 1981. I believe this is an example in their 1981 science paper, framing and choice (go to jstor and search it).

The key point here is the amount of money is only $10 which hardly affect the total consumption curve. In fact, from my point of view (I never learned economics officially, so my knowledge is quite at undergraduate level), this little amount of money eliminates the confounding effect from the monetary consideration.

The point they are making is that even though $10 and $10 ticket are essentially the same, but given one has already purchased the ticket, the future decision making is affected by the prior conditions, which they termed "framing".

But I totally agree with you that the modern econ models should (and some have) consider these psychological uncertainty in addition to the background information.




所有跟贴:


加跟贴

笔名: 密码(可选项): 注册笔名请按这里

标题:

内容(可选项):

URL(可选项):
URL标题(可选项):
图像(可选项):


所有跟贴·加跟贴·新语丝读书论坛http://www.xys.org/cgi-bin/mainpage.pl