Private information is at the heart of many economic activities. For decades, economists have assumed that individuals are willing to misreport private information if this maximizes their material payoff. We combine data from 90 experimental studies in economics, psychology, and sociology, and show that, in fact, people lie surprisingly little. We then formalize a wide range of potential explanations for the observed behavior, identify testable predictions that can distinguish between the models, and conduct new experiments to do so. Our empirical evidence suggests that a preference for being seen as honest and a preference for being honest are the main motivations for truth‐telling.
Econometrica · 2018, 86(5) · Aloisio Pessoa de Araujo、Alain Chateauneuf、Juan Pablo Gama、Rodrigo Novinski · ↗ 分享
未归类D 微观经济学
越来越多的经济学家正在发现远远超出古典经济学范畴的经济行为的经验证据与实验证据。特别是,经验证据(Jullien and Salanié (2000))与实验证据(Kahneman and Tversky (1979))支持了风险爱好、模糊爱好及相关行为在经济学中的重要性。然而,由于偏好的非凸性给证明均衡的存在性带来了困难,有限个体的一般均衡文献尚未对这类偏好进行分析。本文的主要结果给出了一组条件,在这些条件下此类经济中均衡存在。我们表明,总财富的不确定性,以及经济中风险厌恶者禀赋的某种占优,对 Arrow–Debreu 均衡的存在性发挥着作用。该结果可以扩展到 CEU(Choquet 期望效用)、平滑模糊(Smooth Ambiguity)与变分偏好(Variational Preference)意义下的模糊性。
英文原文
More and more economists are finding both empirical and experimental evidence of economic behavior that is well beyond classical economics. In particular, empirical evidence ( Jullien and Salanié (2000)) and experimental evidence ( Kahneman and Tversky (1979)) supported the importance of risk loving, ambiguity loving, and related behavior in economics. However, these types of preferences have not been analyzed in the general equilibrium literature with a finite number of agents because non-convexity of preferences creates difficulty in proving existence of equilibrium. The main result in this paper provides a set of conditions under which equilibrium exists in such economies. We show that uncertainty of aggregate wealth, as well as some dominance of the endowment of the risk averters in the economy, play a role in the existence of Arrow–Debreu equilibria. This result can be extended to ambiguity in the sense of CEU, Smooth Ambiguity, and Variational Preference.
We develop an aggregative games approach to study oligopolistic price competition with multiproduct firms. We introduce a new class of IIA demand systems, derived from discrete/continuous choice, and nesting CES and logit demands. The associated pricing game with multiproduct firms is aggregative and a firm's optimal price vector can be summarized by a uni-dimensional sufficient statistic, the ι-markup. We prove existence of equilibrium using a nested fixed-point argument, and provide conditions for equilibrium uniqueness. In equilibrium, firms may choose not to offer some products. We analyze the pricing distortions and provide monotone comparative statics. Under (nested) CES and logit demands, another aggregation property obtains: All relevant information for determining a firm's performance and competitive impact is contained in that firm's uni-dimensional type. We extend the model to nonlinear pricing, quantity competition, general equilibrium, and demand systems with a nest structure. Finally, we discuss applications to merger analysis and international trade.
We provide the first analysis of altruism in networks. Agents are embedded in a fixed network and care about the well‐being of their network neighbors. Depending on incomes, they may provide financial support to their poorer friends. We study the Nash equilibria of the resulting game of transfers. We show that equilibria maximize a concave potential function. We establish existence, uniqueness of equilibrium consumption, and generic uniqueness of equilibrium transfers. We characterize the geometry of the network of transfers and highlight the key role played by transfer intermediaries. We then study comparative statics. A positive income shock to an individual benefits all. For small changes in incomes, agents in a component of the network of transfers act as if they were organized in an income‐pooling community. A decrease in income inequality or expansion of the altruism network may increase consumption inequality.
We analyze the long-term workforce composition when the quality of mentoring available to majority and minority juniors depends on their representation in the workforce. A workforce with ≥50% majority workers invariably converges to one where the majority is overrepresented relative to the population. To maximize welfare, persistent interventions, such as group-specific fellowships, are often needed, and the optimal workforce may include minority workers of lower innate talent than the marginal majority worker. We discuss the role of mentorship determinants, talent dispersion, the scope of short-term interventions, various policy instruments and contrast our results to the classic fairness narrative.
We develop a theory that rationalizes the use of a dominant unit of account in an economy.Agents enter into non-contingent contracts with a variety of business partners.Trade unfolds sequentially in credit chains and is subject to random matching.By using a dominant unit of account, agents can lower their exposure to relative price risk, avoid costly default, and create more total surplus.We discuss conditions under which it is optimal to adopt circulating government paper as the dominant unit of account, and the optimal choice of "currency areas" when there is variation in the intensity of trade within and across regions.
We provide general conditions under which principal-agent problems with either one or multiple agents admit mechanisms that are optimal for the principal. Our results cover as special cases pure moral hazard and pure adverse selection. We allow multidimensional types, actions, and signals, as well as both financial and non-financial rewards. Our results extend to situations in which there are ex ante or interim restrictions on the mechanism, and allow the principal to have decisions in addition to choosing the agent's contract. Beyond measurability, we require no a priori restrictions on the space of mechanisms. It is not unusual for randomization to be necessary for optimality and so it (should be and) is permitted. Randomization also plays an essential role in our proof. We also provide conditions under which some forms of randomization are unnecessary.