arXiv subjects

Mikhail Freer

Publications and source records attributed to Mikhail Freer.

10 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2026

Experimental School Choice with Parents

We conduct the first laboratory school choice experiment in which parents-the relevant decision makers in the field-are the experimental subjects. We compare Deferred Acceptance (DA) with two manipulable but potentially more efficient alternatives: Efficiency-Adjusted Deferred Acceptance (EADA) and the Rank-Minimizing mechanism (RM). We find that all mechanisms are frequently manipulated, with no significant differences in truth-telling rates. Parents and students manipulate at similar rates, supporting the external validity of student-based experiments, though students make significantly more obvious errors, suggesting parents' deviations are more deliberate. Despite widespread manipulation, the predicted welfare-stability tradeoff largely survives: DA never produces Pareto-efficient allocations yet generates little justified envy; whereas RM delivers substantial efficiency gains at a meaningful stability cost. EADA occupies a middle ground: its efficiency gains over DA are modest and imprecisely estimated yet double justified envy. Higher cognitive ability is associated with more deviations, and under EADA with worse outcomes. While DA does not induce truth-telling, it is the only mechanism in which manipulation never pays off and rarely changes outcomes.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2024

On the Welfare (Ir)Relevance of Two-Stage Models

In a two-stage model of choice a decision maker first shortlists a given menu and then applies her preferences. We show that a sizeable class of these models run into significant issues in terms of identification of preferences (welfare-relevance) and thus cannot be used for welfare analysis. We classify these models by their revealed preference principles and expose the principle that we deem to be the root of their identification issue. Taking our analysis to an experimental data, we observe that half of the alternatives that are revealed preferred to another under rational choice are left revealed preferred to nothing for any member of this class of models. Furthermore, the welfare-relevance of the specific models established in the literature are much worse. The model with the highest welfare-relevance produces a revealed preference relation with the average density of 2% (1 out of 45 possible comparisons revealed), while rational choice does 63% (28 out of 45 possible comparisons). We argue that the issue is not an inherent feature of two-stage models, and rather lies in the approach with which the first stage is modelled in the literature.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2023

Motives for Delegating Financial Decisions

Why do some investors delegate financial decisions to supposed experts? We report a laboratory experiment designed to disentangle four possible motives. Almost 600 investors drawn from the Prolific subject pool choose whether or not to delegate a real-stakes choice among lotteries to a previous investor (an ``expert'') after seeing information on the performance of several available experts. We find that a surprisingly large fraction of investors delegate even trivial choice tasks, suggesting a major role for the blame shifting motive. A larger fraction of investors delegate our more complex tasks, suggesting that decision costs play a role for some investors. Some investors who delegate choose a low quality expert with high earnings, suggesting a role for chasing past performance. We find no evidence for a fourth possible motive, that delegation makes risk more acceptable.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2023

Stable Marriage, Children, and Intrahousehold Allocations

We present a revealed preference framework to study sharing of resources in households with children. We explicitly model the impact of the presence of children in the context of stable marriage markets under both potential types of custody arrangement - joint custody and sole custody. Our models deliver testable revealed preference conditions and allow for the identification of intrahousehold allocation of resources. Empirical applications to household data from the Netherlands (joint custody) and Russia (sole custody) show the methods' potential to identify intrahousehold allocation.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2022

Revealed Preference Analysis Under Limited Attention

An observer wants to understand a decision-maker's welfare from her choice. She believes that decisions are made under limited attention. We argue that the standard model of limited attention cannot help the observer greatly. To address this issue, we study a family of models of choice under limited attention by imposing an attention floor in the decision process. We construct an algorithm that recovers the revealed preference relation given an incomplete data set in these models. Next, we take these models to the experimental data. We first show that assuming that subjects make at least one comparison before finalizing decisions (that is, an attention floor of 2) is almost costless in terms of describing the behavior when compared to the standard model of limited attention. In terms of revealed preferences, on the other hand, the amended model does significantly better. We can not recover any preferences for 63% of the subjects in the standard model, while the amended model reveals some preferences for all subjects. In total, the amended model allows us to recover one-third of the preferences that would be recovered under full attention.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2021

A General Revealed Preference Test for Quasilinear Preferences: Theory and Experiments

We provide a generalized revealed preference test for quasilinear preferences. The test applies to nonlinear budget sets and non-convex preferences as those found in taxation and nonlinear pricing contexts. We study the prevalence of quasilinear preferences in a laboratory real-effort task experiment with nonlinear wages. The experiment demonstrates the empirical relevance of our test. We find support for either convex (non-separable) preferences or quasilinear preferences but weak support for the hypothesis of both quasilinear and convex preferences.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2021

Marital Stability With Committed Couples: A Revealed Preference Analysis

We present a revealed preference characterization of marital stability where some couples are committed. A couple is committed if they can divorce only with mutual consent. We provide theoretical insights into the potential of the characterization for identifying intrahousehold consumption patterns. We demonstrate that without price variation for private goods among potential couples, intrahousehold resource allocations can only be identified for non-committed couples. We conduct simulations using Dutch household data to support our theoretical findings. Our results show that with price variation, the empirical implications of marital stability allow for the identification of household consumption allocations for both committed and non-committed couples.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2021

An algebraic approach to revealed preferences

We propose and develop an algebraic approach to revealed preference. Our approach dispenses with non algebraic structure, such as topological assumptions. We provide algebraic axioms of revealed preference that subsume previous, classical revealed preference axioms, as well as generate new axioms for behavioral theories, and show that a data set is rationalizable if and only if it is consistent with an algebraic axiom.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2021

Credibility in Second-Price Auctions: An Experimental Test

We provide the first direct test of how the credibility of an auction format affects bidding behavior and final outcomes. To do so, we conduct a series of laboratory experiments where the role of the seller is played by a human subject who receives the revenue from the auction and who (depending on the treatment) has agency to determine the outcome of the auction. Contrary to theoretical predictions, we find that the non-credible second-price auction fails to converge to the first-price auction. We provide a behavioral explanation for our results based on sellers' aversion to rule-breaking, which is confirmed by an additional experiment.

econ.GN↗