Bog'liq 12jun13 aromi advances behavioral economics
82 T H A L E R measures the perceived value of the “deal.” It is defined as the difference between
the amount paid and the ‘reference price’ for the good, that is, the regular price
that the consumer expects to pay for this product. The following example (from
Thaler, 1985) illustrates the role of transaction utility.
You are lying on the beach on a hot day. All you have to drink is ice water. For the last
hour you have been thinking about how much you would enjoy a nice cold bottle of
your favorite brand of beer. A companion gets up to go make a phone call and offers to
bring back a beer from the only nearby place where beer is sold (a fancy resort hotel) [a
small, run-down grocery store]. He says that the beer might be expensive and so asks
how much you are willing to pay for the beer. He says that he will buy the beer if it costs
as much or less than the price you state. But if it costs more than the price you state he
will not buy it. You trust your friend, and there is no possibility of bargaining with the
(bartender) [store owner]. What price do you tell him?
Two versions of the question were administered, one using the phrases in
parentheses, the other the phrases in brackets. The median responses for the two
versions were $2.65 (resort) and $1.50 [store] in 1984 dollars. People are willing
to pay more for the beer from the resort because the reference price in that context
is higher. Note that this effect cannot be accommodated in a standard economic
model because the consumption experience is the same in either case; the place of
purchase should be irrelevant.
The addition of transaction utility to the purchase calculus leads to two kinds of
effects in the marketplace. First, some goods are purchased primarily because
they are especially good deals. Most of us have some rarely worn items in our
closets that are testimony to this phenomenon. Sellers make use of this penchant
by emphasizing the savings relative to the regular retail price (which serves as the
suggested reference price). In contrast, some purchases that would seemingly
make the consumer better off may be avoided because of substantial negative
transaction utility. The thirsty beer-drinker who would pay $4 for a beer from a
resort but only $2 from a grocery store will miss out on some pleasant drinking
when faced with a grocery store charging $2.50.
Opening and Closing Accounts One of the discretionary components of an accounting system is the decision of
when to leave accounts ‘open’ and when to ‘close’ them. Consider the example of
someone who buys 100 shares of stock at $10 a share. This investment is initially
worth $1000, but the value will go up or down with the price of the stock. If the
price changes, the investor has a “paper” gain or loss until the stock is sold, at
which point the paper gain or loss becomes a ‘realized’ gain or loss. The mental
accounting of paper gains and losses is tricky (and depends on timing—see be-
low), but one clear intuition is that a realized loss is more painful than a paper
loss. When a stock is sold, the gain or loss has to be “declared” both to the tax au-
thorities and to the investor (and spouse). Because closing an account at a loss is
painful, a prediction of mental accounting is that people will be reluctant to sell