Rights statement: This is a pre-copy-editing, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in British Journal for the Philosophy of Science following peer review. The definitive publisher-authenticated version Elias Bouacida, Daniel Martin, Predictive Power in Behavioral Welfare Economics, Journal of the European Economic Association, Volume 19, Issue 3, June 2021, Pages 1556–1591, https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvaa037 is available online at: https://academic.oup.com/jeea/article-abstract/19/3/1556/5893294
Accepted author manuscript, 423 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Predictive Power In Behavioral Welfare Economics
AU - Bouacida, Elias
AU - Martin, Daniel
N1 - This is a pre-copy-editing, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in British Journal for the Philosophy of Science following peer review. The definitive publisher-authenticated version Elias Bouacida, Daniel Martin, Predictive Power in Behavioral Welfare Economics, Journal of the European Economic Association, Volume 19, Issue 3, June 2021, Pages 1556–1591, https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvaa037 is available online at: https://academic.oup.com/jeea/article-abstract/19/3/1556/5893294
PY - 2021/6/30
Y1 - 2021/6/30
N2 - When choices are inconsistent due to behavioral biases, there is a theoretical debate about whether the structure of a model is necessary for providing precise welfare guidance based on those choices. To address this question empirically, we use standard data sets from the lab and field to evaluate the predictive power of two “model-free” approaches to behavioral welfare analysis. We find they typically have high predictive power, which means there is little ambiguity about what should be selected from each choice set. We also identify properties of revealed preferences that help to explain the predictive power of these approaches.
AB - When choices are inconsistent due to behavioral biases, there is a theoretical debate about whether the structure of a model is necessary for providing precise welfare guidance based on those choices. To address this question empirically, we use standard data sets from the lab and field to evaluate the predictive power of two “model-free” approaches to behavioral welfare analysis. We find they typically have high predictive power, which means there is little ambiguity about what should be selected from each choice set. We also identify properties of revealed preferences that help to explain the predictive power of these approaches.
KW - Welfare economics
KW - behavioral economics
KW - predictive power
KW - revealed preferences
U2 - 10.1093/jeea/jvaa037
DO - 10.1093/jeea/jvaa037
M3 - Journal article
VL - 19
SP - 1556
EP - 1591
JO - Journal of the European Economic Association
JF - Journal of the European Economic Association
SN - 1542-4766
IS - 3
ER -