Abstract
This paper argues that exchange and valuation asymmetries observed in experiments can be explained by the hypothesis that revision of consumption plans is costly. This hypothesis is compatible with the standard consumer theory in the sense that it does not rest on the assumption of reference-dependent preferences. It is shown that the revision cost hypothesis is in line with available empirical evidence. Notably, it is capable of explaining some of the findings which cannot be accounted for by the dominant models of reference-dependent preferences.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
