Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
7368390 | Journal of Monetary Economics | 2017 | 16 Pages |
Abstract
A laboratory experiment illustrates cognitive limitations in decision-making that may be relevant for modeling price-setting. Our subjects systematically depart from the optimal Bayesian response in several respects. Their responses are random, even conditioning on available information. Subjects adjust in discrete jumps rather than after each new piece of information, and by both large and small amounts, contrary to the predictions of an “Ss” model of optimal adjustment subject to a fixed cost. And they prefer to report “round numbers,” even when that requires additional effort. A model of inattentive adjustment is found to quantitatively outperform popular alternatives.
Related Topics
Social Sciences and Humanities
Economics, Econometrics and Finance
Economics and Econometrics
Authors
Mel Win Khaw, Luminita Stevens, Michael Woodford,