[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i6p1470-d1100286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Random “Decision and Experienced Utility”, Adaptive “Consumer Memory and Choice”: The Impact of Mind Fluctuations and Cognitive Biases on Consumption and Classification

Author

Listed:
  • Runze Yuan

    (China Agricultural University, Beijing 100084, China)

  • Xi Xi

    (China Agricultural University, Beijing 100084, China)

  • Zhentao Liu

    (Ferguson College of Agricultural, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74075, USA)

Abstract
In the study of consumer behavior, we believe that a distinction should be made between the subjective mental activity of consumption and the objective process of consumption experience, and that the deviation and fluctuation of “decision utility” and the randomness of “experience utility” have essential effects on consumer behavior. For one thing, purchase often precedes experience, and consumers cannot precisely predict utility and its distribution but can only make decisions based on adaptive expectations. Secondly, there is often uncertainty in the experience of goods, making predictions more difficult. Thirdly, the revision of consumer decision utility is carried out through memory in an adaptive process. We introduce two stochastic forms of decision and experience utility functions and build a two-period model. In the model, consumers make decisions based on a pre-determined decision utility function in the first period and a randomly realized experience utility function in the second period. The analysis shows that the volatility of “decision utility” and “experience utility” affects consumers in opposite directions; the former may trigger expansionary consumption, while the latter makes consumers more cautious. Finally, the consumption behaviors in the model can be divided into 24 categories based on the dimensions of chance, systematicity, luck, and deviance, corresponding to various scenarios. The total number of consumer behavior categories is a full ranking of the size relationship of the four factors mentioned above, thus 24 categories. For example, when good luck is accompanied by chance underestimation versus systematic underestimation, it leads to a better process experience for the consumer.

Suggested Citation

  • Runze Yuan & Xi Xi & Zhentao Liu, 2023. "Random “Decision and Experienced Utility”, Adaptive “Consumer Memory and Choice”: The Impact of Mind Fluctuations and Cognitive Biases on Consumption and Classification," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-26, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:6:p:1470-:d:1100286
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/6/1470/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/6/1470/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Peter P. Wakker & Rakesh Sarin, 1997. "Back to Bentham? Explorations of Experienced Utility," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 375-406.
    2. van de Stadt, Huib & Kapteyn, Arie & van de Geer, Sara, 1985. "The Relativity of Utility: Evidence from Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(2), pages 179-187, May.
    3. Hans Brems, 1948. "The Interdependence of Quality Variations, Selling Effort and Price," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 62(3), pages 418-440.
    4. Akay, Alpaslan & Bargain, Olivier B. & Jara, H. Xavier, 2017. "Back to Bentham, Should We? Large-Scale Comparison of Experienced versus Decision Utility," GLO Discussion Paper Series 52, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    5. Leonardo Nicolao & Julie R. Irwin & Joseph K. Goodman, 2009. "Happiness for Sale: Do Experiential Purchases Make Consumers Happier than Material Purchases?," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(2), pages 188-198.
    6. Sohn, Yong Seok & Ko, Man Ting, 2021. "The impact of planned vs. unplanned purchases on subsequent purchase decision making in sequential buying situations," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    7. Rong Hai & Dirk Krueger & Andrew Postlewaite, 2020. "On the welfare cost of consumption fluctuations in the presence of memorable goods," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(4), pages 1177-1214, November.
    8. Chen, Ching-Fu & Chen, Fu-Shian, 2010. "Experience quality, perceived value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions for heritage tourists," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 29-35.
    9. Daniel Kahneman & Richard H. Thaler, 2006. "Anomalies: Utility Maximization and Experienced Utility," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 221-234, Winter.
    10. Jeffrey C. Fuhrer, 2000. "Habit Formation in Consumption and Its Implications for Monetary-Policy Models," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(3), pages 367-390, June.
    11. Selin Atalay & Margaret G. Meloy, 2011. "Retail therapy: A strategic effort to improve mood," Post-Print hal-00596836, HAL.
    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. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    2. Carter, Steven & McBride, Michael, 2013. "Experienced utility versus decision utility: Putting the ‘S’ in satisfaction," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 13-23.
    3. Gabriel Leite Mota, 2022. "Unsatisfying ordinalism: The breach through which happiness (re)entered economics," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(3), pages 513-528, June.
    4. Hajdu, Tamás & Hajdu, Gábor, 2011. "A hasznosság és a relatív jövedelem kapcsolatának vizsgálata magyar adatok segítségével [Examining the relation of utility and relative income using Hungarian data]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 56-73.
    5. Caporale, Guglielmo Maria & Georgellis, Yannis & Tsitsianis, Nicholas & Yin, Ya Ping, 2009. "Income and happiness across Europe: Do reference values matter?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 42-51, February.
    6. Been-lon Chen & Yu-shan Hsu, 2009. "Is admiration a source of indeterminacy when the speed of habit formation is finite?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(4), pages 3041-3049.
    7. Stutzer, Alois, 2004. "The role of income aspirations in individual happiness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 89-109, May.
    8. Koen Decancq & Marc Fleurbaey & Erik Schokkaert, 2015. "Happiness, Equivalent Incomes and Respect for Individual Preferences," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 82, pages 1082-1106, December.
    9. Jan-Emmanuel De Neve & George Ward & Femke De Keulenaer & Bert Van Landeghem & Georgios Kavetsos & Michael I. Norton, 2018. "The Asymmetric Experience of Positive and Negative Economic Growth: Global Evidence Using Subjective Well-Being Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(2), pages 362-375, May.
    10. Bruno Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2014. "Economic Consequences of Mispredicting Utility," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 937-956, August.
    11. Francesco Ferrante, 2009. "Education, Aspirations and Life Satisfaction," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(4), pages 542-562, November.
    12. van Hoorn, Andre, 2016. "Reliability and Validity of the Happiness Approach to Measuring Preferences," MPRA Paper 79977, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Claudia Senik, 2006. "Ambition et jalousie. La perception du revenu d'autrui dans la « vieille Europe », la « nouvelle Europe » et les États-Unis," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 57(3), pages 645-653.
    14. Ruut Veenhoven & Felicia Chiperi & Xin Kang & Martijn Burger, 2021. "Happiness and Consumption: A Research Synthesis Using an Online Finding Archive* â€," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440209, March.
    15. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    16. repec:jhu:papers:357 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Barrafrem, Kinga & Västfjäll, Daniel & Tinghög, Gustav, 2021. "The arithmetic of outcome editing in financial and social domains," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    18. Bazyli Czyżewski & Anna Hnatyszyn-Dzikowska & Jan Polcyn, 2016. "Problems of Quantifying Public Goods in the Healthcare Sector," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 105-125.
    19. Marco Persichina, 2024. "Present Bias in Renewable Resource Management and Agent’s Welfare," Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, , vol. 36(1), pages 79-97, January.
    20. Johannes Müller-Trede & Shoham Choshen-Hillel & Meir Barneron & Ilan Yaniv, 2018. "The Wisdom of Crowds in Matters of Taste," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1779-1803, April.
    21. Emmerling, Johannes & Qari, Salmai, 2017. "Car ownership and hedonic adaptation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 29-38.

    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:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:6:p:1470-:d:1100286. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.