Levels and subject
When does reference values or targeted subject influence positional preferences?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7557/22.5867Keywords:
Behavioral economics, Positional concerns, Economic methods, decision making, Hypothetical choiceAbstract
In this study, we use an experimental survey approach to if the degree of positionality is sensitive to variations in reference levels and targeted subject. Based on previous research in economics and psychology, our hypotheses are that 1) people are more positional when they choose between alternatives with relatively high consumption levels, and 2) people are more positional when they choose for a hypothetical grandchild, than for themselves. We measure positional preferences in five domains – Income, housing, vacation and SAT-score, and test our hypotheses on a large representative sample from the US (N=1300). As social demographic indicators, we include information about gender, birth year, children or grandchildren, individual income, vacation days, size of home and reported SAT-score. Our results suggest that the instruments commonly used to elicit positional preferences are relatively insensitive to variations in consumption levels and targeted subject, with a few important exceptions. First, we find that positional preferences for income and SAT scores depend on the reference level used in the hypothetical choice scenarios. Second, our results suggest that people are significantly more likely to choose the positional option for housing when they choose for a hypothetical grandchild than when they choose for themselves.
References
Akay, A., & Martinsson, P. (2019). Positional concerns through the life-cycle. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 78, 98-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2018.12.005
Alpizar, F., Carlsson, F., & Johansson-Stenman, O. (2005). How much do we care about absolute versus relative income and consumption? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 56(3), 405-421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2002.10.007
Bogaerts, T., & Pandelaere, M. (2013). Less is more: Why some domains are more positional than others. Journal of Economic Psychology, 39, 225-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2013.08.005
Carlsson, F., Gupta, G., & Johansson-Stenman, O. (2008). Keeping up with the Vaishyas? Caste and relative standing in India. Oxford Economic Papers, 61(1), 52-73. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpn015
Carlsson, F., Johansson‐Stenman, O., & Martinsson, P. (2007). Do you enjoy having more than others? Survey evidence of positional goods. Economica, 74(296), 586-598. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0335.2006.00571.x
Celse, J. (2012). Is the positional bias an artefact? Distinguishing positional concerns from egalitarian concerns. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 41(3), 277-283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2012.01.002
Clark, A. E., & Oswald, A. J. (1996). Satisfaction and comparison income. Journal of public economics, 61(3), 359-381. https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2727(95)01564-7
Duesenberry, J. S. (1949). Income, saving, and the theory of consumer behavior. 33(3). https://doi.org/10.2307/1926590
Easterlin, R. A. (1995). Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 27(1), 35-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(95)00003-B
Elster, J. (1998). Emotions and economic theory. Journal of economic literature, 36(1), 47-74. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2564951
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human relations, 7(2), 117-140. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202
Grolleau, G., Mzoughi, N., & Saïd, S. (2012). Do you believe that others are more positional than you? Results from an empirical survey on positional concerns in France. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 41(1), 48-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2011.10.001
Hillesheim, I., & Mechtel, M. (2012). Relative consumption concerns or non-monotonic preferences? Available at SSRN 2041113. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2041113
Hillesheim, I., & Mechtel, M. (2013). How much do others matter? Explaining positional concerns for different goods and personal characteristics. Journal of Economic Psychology, 34, 61-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2012.11.006
Hirsch, F. (1977). Social limits to growth, 1976. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press), pgs, 87, 105. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674497900
Johansson‐Stenman, O., Carlsson, F., & Daruvala, D. (2002). Measuring future grandparents' preferences for equality and relative standing. The economic journal, 112(479), 362-383. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00040
Luttmer, E. F. J. T. Q. j. o. e. (2005). Neighbors as negatives: Relative earnings and well-being. 120(3), 963-1002. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355305774268255
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological review, 50(4), 370. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346
Solnick, S. J., & Hemenway, D. (1998). Is more always better?: A survey on positional concerns. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 37(3), 373-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2681(98)00089-4
Solnick, S. J., & Hemenway, D. (2005). Are positional concerns stronger in some domains than in others? American Economic Review, 95(2), 147-151. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282805774669925
Veblen, T. (1899). The theory of the leisure class
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Ingvild Mageli

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.