On the Optimality of Mental Accounting
Jarrod Burgh, Emerson Melo, Matthew Shum
Abstract
Mental accounting is usually explained by self-control, and two-stage budgeting by separable preferences. We propose a third explanation based on sellers' market power. A consumer who commits to spend a fixed number of dollars in a category has unit-elastic demand, so a seller in that category gains nothing by restricting quantity. A consumer who instead targets a fixed physical quantity has perfectly inelastic demand, a case that a monopolist can exploit. We characterize the commitments that remove a seller's incentive to mark up prices, and show that the fixed dollar budget is the least restrictive. We then show that what matters is budget rigidity rather than separability of preferences. A consumer who re-optimizes her category budget when prices change is insulated from market power only if categories are substitutes; a rigid budget insulates her in every case. Mental accounting can therefore be read as a commitment device against markups, a rationale that is separate from the self-control motive in the existing literature.
Create a lesson
Related papers
Linear Demand Systems are Consistent with Discrete Choice
Afonso Rodrigues
Microfinance Competition in the Presence of Moneylenders: Theory and Evidence
Shyamal Chowdhury, Prabal Roy Chowdhury, Joeri Smits
The Myth of Restrictive Working-Time Agreements: Firms' Working-Time Adjustment after Exit from Collective Bargaining
Vinzenz Pyka, André Rieder
Who Leads and Who Collects:Algorithmic Collusion in Markets of Heterogeneous Language Models
Jun Yeong Lee
Risk Ceilings and Development Deadlines: Pacing AI under Uncertain Safety Productivity
Li Gan
The Gendered Impacts of Perceived Skin Tone: Evidence from African American Siblings in 1870-1940
Ran Abramitzky, Jacob Conway, Roy Mill et al.