2018
DOI: 10.1177/0033294118802555
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Endowment Effect: Trading for Oneself Versus Trading for Others

Abstract: Prior research on the endowment effect has tended to focus on decisions made by individuals acting on their own account rather than on others’ behalf. This article reports on three experiments that modeled this “for-self” versus “for-others” distinction and measured its effects on prices. Specifically, our participants who were asked to make trading decisions for other people subsequently reported decreases in the endowment effect. We concluded that, in the context of the trading of goods, perceived ownership … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
(76 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Past research suggests tourists may avoid visitation merely to refrain from financial support of a destination (Webster and Timothy, 2006). This finding is corroborated by more recent research suggesting a relationship between emotion and willing to pay (WTP) a premium (Wang et al, 2019). Consumers are WTP a price premium merely to avoid the purchase of products originating in a country toward which they harbor animosity (Cui et al, 2012).…”
Section: Conceptual Model and Research Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Past research suggests tourists may avoid visitation merely to refrain from financial support of a destination (Webster and Timothy, 2006). This finding is corroborated by more recent research suggesting a relationship between emotion and willing to pay (WTP) a premium (Wang et al, 2019). Consumers are WTP a price premium merely to avoid the purchase of products originating in a country toward which they harbor animosity (Cui et al, 2012).…”
Section: Conceptual Model and Research Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…We do not know why an individual might prioritize one close other over another. Recent research suggests that value-based psychological systems are involved in tracking important social information (e.g., social status) and close-other status strongly modulates the subjective value of rewards (Feng, Zhao, & Donnay, 2013;Hackel, Doll, & Amodio, 2015;Morelli, Chang, Carlson, Kullar, & Zaki, 2018;Parkinson, Kleinbaum, & Wheatley, 2017;Wang, Cheng, Lee, & Chuang, 2019;Zerubavel, Bearman, Weber, & Ochsner, 2015;Zhao, Feng, & Kazinka, 2014) Coupled with the fact that prior studies on social decision-making with close others have found evidence of consistent preferences with monetary outcomes (Guassi Moreira et al, 2019), it is likely that a value-based psychological architecture may be driving these preferences while also leaving open the possibility that non-value-based architectures may drive preferences involving other outcomes (e.g., social motivations).…”
Section: Close Othersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Secondly, studies on non-literal languages claim that metaphorical context primes the expression’s metaphorical meaning, and literal context promotes the item’s literal meaning (e.g. Katz and Ferretti 2001 ; Wang et al 2018 ). But the GSH argues that if a meaning is salient enough, its activation is hardly influenced by the context.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%