Standard economic models have long been applied to choices over private consumption goods, but have recently been extended to incorporate social situations as well. We challenge the applicability of standard decision theoretic models to social settings. We argue that, in economically relevant social settings, agents may choose to randomize over any of the deterministic outcomes in a way that clashes with standard decision theory axioms that require lotteries not to be valued strictly above the best deterministic outcome. Thus, mainstream economic analysis is unable to fully accommodate such choices. We find little evidence of such deviations in non-social settings.
On the Difference Between Social and Private Goods
We document a revealed preference for randomization for “social goods”, while such non-standard behavior is not present for private consumption goods.
Economic Journal, 2021 131: 713-744. With Ericson, Spinnewijn &, Starc Demand for insurance can be driven by high risk aversion or high risk, and we show how to separate the two using observed market shares. Go to paper
Review of Economic Studies, 2019 86(4): 1411-1447. With Michèle Belot and Paul Muller. We develop and evaluate experimentally a novel tool that redesigns the job search process by providing tailored online advice about related occupations. Go to paper
Econometrica, 2015, Vol 83 (5), 1849-1875. With K. Kim. [online appendix] We introduce cheap-talk into a market game and study if the equilibrium can replicate the constraint efficient allocation under (reserve) price posting. Go to paper
American Economic Review P&P, 2017, 107(5): 158–162 With J. Greenwood, C. Santos & M. Tertilt. In a quantitative equilibrium model of sexual behavior and HIV/AIDS transmission we study policies that encourage long-term partnerships. Go to paper