Naivete-Based歧视

IF 11.1 1区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Quarterly Journal of Economics Pub Date : 2017-05-01 DOI:10.1093/QJE/QJW042
Paul Heidhues, B. Kőszegi
{"title":"Naivete-Based歧视","authors":"Paul Heidhues, B. Kőszegi","doi":"10.1093/QJE/QJW042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We initiate the study of naivete-based discrimination, the practice of conditioning offers on external information about consumers’ naivete. Knowing that a consumer is naive increases a monopolistic or competitive firm's willingness to generate inefficiency to exploit the consumer's mistakes, so naivete-based discrimination is not Pareto-improving, can be Pareto-damaging, and often lowers total welfare when classical preference-based discrimination does not. Moreover, the effect on total welfare depends on a hitherto unemphasized market feature: the extent to which the exploitation of naive consumers distorts trade with different types of consumers. If the distortion is homogeneous across naive and sophisticated consumers, then under an arguably weak and empirically testable condition, naivete-based discrimination lowers total welfare. In contrast, if the distortion arises only for trades with sophisticated consumers, then perfect naivete-based discrimination maximizes social welfare, although imperfect discrimination often lowers welfare. If the distortion arises only for trades with naive consumers, then naivete-based discrimination has no effect on welfare. We identify applications for each of these cases. In our primary example, a credit market with present-biased borrowers, firms lend more than is socially optimal to increase the amount of interest naive borrowers unexpectedly pay, creating a homogeneous distortion. The condition for naivete-based discrimination to lower welfare is then weaker than prudence.","PeriodicalId":48470,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Economics","volume":"132 1","pages":"1019-1054"},"PeriodicalIF":11.1000,"publicationDate":"2017-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/QJE/QJW042","citationCount":"71","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Naivete-Based Discrimination\",\"authors\":\"Paul Heidhues, B. Kőszegi\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/QJE/QJW042\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We initiate the study of naivete-based discrimination, the practice of conditioning offers on external information about consumers’ naivete. Knowing that a consumer is naive increases a monopolistic or competitive firm's willingness to generate inefficiency to exploit the consumer's mistakes, so naivete-based discrimination is not Pareto-improving, can be Pareto-damaging, and often lowers total welfare when classical preference-based discrimination does not. Moreover, the effect on total welfare depends on a hitherto unemphasized market feature: the extent to which the exploitation of naive consumers distorts trade with different types of consumers. If the distortion is homogeneous across naive and sophisticated consumers, then under an arguably weak and empirically testable condition, naivete-based discrimination lowers total welfare. In contrast, if the distortion arises only for trades with sophisticated consumers, then perfect naivete-based discrimination maximizes social welfare, although imperfect discrimination often lowers welfare. If the distortion arises only for trades with naive consumers, then naivete-based discrimination has no effect on welfare. We identify applications for each of these cases. In our primary example, a credit market with present-biased borrowers, firms lend more than is socially optimal to increase the amount of interest naive borrowers unexpectedly pay, creating a homogeneous distortion. The condition for naivete-based discrimination to lower welfare is then weaker than prudence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48470,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Journal of Economics\",\"volume\":\"132 1\",\"pages\":\"1019-1054\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/QJE/QJW042\",\"citationCount\":\"71\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Journal of Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/QJE/QJW042\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/QJE/QJW042","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 71

摘要

我们开始研究基于天真的歧视,即以消费者天真的外部信息为条件提供服务的做法。知道消费者是天真的,会增加垄断或竞争性公司利用消费者错误产生低效率的意愿,因此基于天真的歧视并不能改善帕累托,可能会对帕累托造成损害,并且当基于传统偏好的歧视没有改善时,往往会降低总福利。此外,对整体福利的影响取决于一个迄今为止未被强调的市场特征:对天真消费者的剥削在多大程度上扭曲了与不同类型消费者的贸易。如果这种扭曲在天真和老练的消费者中是同质的,那么在一个可以说是软弱和经验可检验的条件下,基于天真的歧视会降低总体福利。相比之下,如果扭曲只发生在与老练消费者的交易中,那么基于完美天真的歧视会使社会福利最大化,尽管不完美的歧视往往会降低福利。如果这种扭曲只发生在与天真消费者的交易中,那么基于天真的歧视对福利没有影响。我们确定了每种情况的应用程序。在我们的主要例子中,在一个目前有偏见的借款人的信贷市场中,公司的贷款超过了社会最佳水平,从而增加了天真的借款人意外支付的利息,造成了同质扭曲。基于天真的歧视降低福利的条件比谨慎更弱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Naivete-Based Discrimination
We initiate the study of naivete-based discrimination, the practice of conditioning offers on external information about consumers’ naivete. Knowing that a consumer is naive increases a monopolistic or competitive firm's willingness to generate inefficiency to exploit the consumer's mistakes, so naivete-based discrimination is not Pareto-improving, can be Pareto-damaging, and often lowers total welfare when classical preference-based discrimination does not. Moreover, the effect on total welfare depends on a hitherto unemphasized market feature: the extent to which the exploitation of naive consumers distorts trade with different types of consumers. If the distortion is homogeneous across naive and sophisticated consumers, then under an arguably weak and empirically testable condition, naivete-based discrimination lowers total welfare. In contrast, if the distortion arises only for trades with sophisticated consumers, then perfect naivete-based discrimination maximizes social welfare, although imperfect discrimination often lowers welfare. If the distortion arises only for trades with naive consumers, then naivete-based discrimination has no effect on welfare. We identify applications for each of these cases. In our primary example, a credit market with present-biased borrowers, firms lend more than is socially optimal to increase the amount of interest naive borrowers unexpectedly pay, creating a homogeneous distortion. The condition for naivete-based discrimination to lower welfare is then weaker than prudence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
24.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: The Quarterly Journal of Economics stands as the oldest professional journal of economics in the English language. Published under the editorial guidance of Harvard University's Department of Economics, it comprehensively covers all aspects of the field. Esteemed by professional and academic economists as well as students worldwide, QJE holds unparalleled value in the economic discourse.
期刊最新文献
Predicting and Preventing Gun Violence: An Experimental Evaluation of READI Chicago. The Impact of Public School Choice: Evidence from Los Angeles’ Zones of Choice THe Economic Impacts of COVID-19: Evidence from a New Public Database Built Using Private Sector Data A Retrieved-Context Theory of Financial Decisions Organizational Structure and Pricing: Evidence from a Large U.S. Airline
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1