Abstract
We provide a simplified test to determine if choice data from a two-commodity consumption set satisfies the Generalized Axiom of Revealed Preference (GARP), and thus the preference or utility maximization hypothesis. We construct an algorithm for this test and illustrate its application on experimental choice data.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andreoni, J., & Miller, J. (2002). Giving according to GARP: An experimental test of the consistency of preferences for altruism. Econometrica, 70, 737–753.
Battalio, R. C., Kagel, J. H., Winkler, R. C., Fisher, E. B. Jr., Basmann, R. L., & Krasner, L. (1973). A Test of consumer demand theory using observations of individual consumer purchases. Western Economic Journal, 11, 411–428.
Cox, J. C. (1997). On testing the utility hypothesis. The Economic Journal, 107, 1054–1078.
Harbaugh, W. T., Krause, K., & Berry, T. R. (2001). GARP for kids: On the development of rational choice behavior. American Economic Review, 91, 1539–1545.
Matzkin, R., & Richter, M. (1991). Testing strictly concave rationality. Journal of Economic Theory, 53, 287–303.
Rose, H. (1958). Consistency of preference: The two-commodity case. Review of Economic Studies, 25, 124–125.
Sippel, R. (1997). An experiment on the pure theory of consumer’s behaviour. The Economic Journal, 107, 1431–1444.
Varian, H. R. (1982). The nonparametric approach to demand analysis. Econometrica, 50, 945–973.
Varian, H. R. (1988). Revealed preference with a subset of goods. Journal of Economic Theory, 46, 179–185.
Warshall, S. (1962). A theorem on Boolean matrices. Journal of the American Association of Computing Machinery, 9, 11–12.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
JEL Classification C91, D11, D12
An erratum to this article is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10683-008-9205-5.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Banerjee, S., Murphy, J.H. A simplified test for preference rationality of two-commodity choice. Exp Econ 9, 67–75 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-006-4313-6
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-006-4313-6