Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T03:40:37.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE HISTORY OF ATTITUDES TOWARDS INTERDEPENDENT PREFERENCES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 November 2012

STAVROS A. DRAKOPOULOS
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The notion of interdependent preferences has a long history in economic thought. In its general form, it can be found in the works of authors such as Hume, Rae, Genovesi, Smith, Marx, and Mill, among others. In the twentieth century, the idea became more widespread mainly through the works of Veblen and Duesenberry. Recently, an increasing number of theorists are interested in issues such as reference income, relative consumption, and positional goods, which are all based on the concept of interdependent preferences. However, such preferences were never part of the corpus of orthodox theory. For instance, although Pareto and Marshall were aware of their existence, they did not advocate their incorporation into orthodox economic theory. This paper argues that the structure of mainstream economic methodology and the challenging theoretical implications of adopting interdependent preferences were two possible reasons for the mainstream rejection. The discussion includes the more recent orthodox attitudes towards such preferences.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 34 , Issue 4 , December 2012 , pp. 541 - 557
Copyright
Copyright © The History of Economics Society 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ackerman, F. 1997. “Consumed in Theory: Alternative Perspectives on the Economics of Consumption.” Journal of Economic Issues 31: 651–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akerlof, George A. 1997. “Social Distance and Social Decisions.” Econometrica 65: 1005–1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akerlof, George A., and Yellen, J.. 1990. “The Fair Wage-Effort Hypothesis and Unemployment.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 105: 255–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J. 1995. “Cooperation in Public-Goods Experiments: Kindness or Confusion?” American Economic Review 85 (4): 891–904.Google Scholar
Arrow, K. 1950. “Book Review of Income, Saving and the Theory of Consumer Behaviour (J. Duesenberry).” American Economic Review 40: 906–911.Google Scholar
Aslanbeigui, N. 1992. “More on the Demise of Pigovian Economics.” Southern Economic Journal 59: 98–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, M. 2010. “Interdependent Preferences: Early and Late Debates on Emulation, Distinction, and Fashion.” University of Casino Economics Working Paper, No 4/2010, pp.1–16.Google Scholar
Blanchflower, D., and Oswald, A.. 2004. “Well-being over Time in Britain and the USA.” Journal of Public Economics 88: 1359–1386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boskin, M., and Sheshinski, E.. 1978. “Optimal Redistributive Taxation When Individual Welfare Depends upon Relative Income.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 92: 589–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowles, S., and Gintis, H.. 2000. “Walrasian Economics in Retrospect.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 115: 1411–1439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruni, L. 2004. “The ‘Happiness Transformation Problem’ in the Cambridge Tradition.” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 11: 431–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruni, L. 2007. “The ‘Technology of Happiness’ and the Tradition of Economic Science>” In Bruni, L. and Porta, P. L., eds., Handbook of the Economics of Happiness. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 24–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruni, L., and Guala, F.. 2001. “Vilfredo Pareto and the Epistemological Foundations of Choice Theory.” History of Political Economy 33: 21–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charness, G., and Grosskopf, B.. 2001. “Relative Payoffs and Happiness: An Experimental Study.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 45: 301–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, A., and Oswald, A.. 1996. “Satisfaction and Comparison Income.” Journal of Public Economics 61: 359–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, A., Frijters, P., and Shields, M.. 2008. “Relative Income, Happiness and Utility: An Explanation for the Easterlin Paradox and Other Puzzles.” Journal of Economic Literature 46: 95–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clower, R. 1951. “Professor Duesenberry and Traditional Theory.” Review of Economic Studies 19: 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowling, K. 2006. “Prosperity, Depression and Modern Capitalism.” Kyklos 59: 369–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunynghame, H. 1892. “Some Improvements in Simple Geometrical Methods of Treating Exchange Value, Monopoly, and Rent.” Economic Journal II: 35–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drakopoulos, S. A. 1997. “Origins and Development of the Trend Towards Value-free Economics.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 19: 286–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drakopoulos, S. A. 2008. “The Paradox of Happiness: Towards an Alternative Explanation.” Journal of Happiness Studies 9: 302–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drakopoulos, S. A. 2011. “The Concept of Comparison Income: An Historical Perspective.” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 18: 441–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duesenberry, J. S. 1949. Income, Saving and the Theory of Consumer Behaviour. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dugger, W. 1985. “The Analytics of Consumption Externalities.” Review of Social Economy 43 (2): 212–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edgell, S., and Tilman, R.. 1991. “John Rae and Thorstein Veblen on Conspicuous Consumption: A Neglected Intellectual Relationship.” History of Political Economy 23: 731–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foley, C. 1893. “Fashion.” The Economic Journal 3: 458–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, R. 1984. “Interdependent Preferences and the Competitive Wage Structure.” Rand Journal of Economics 15: 510–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, R. 1985a. “The Demand for Unobservable and other Nonpositional Goods.” American Economic Review 75: 101–116.Google Scholar
Frank, R. 1985b. Choosing the Right Pond. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Frey, B., and Stutzer, A.. 2002. “What Can Economists Learn from Happiness Research?” Journal of Economic Literature 40: 402–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M. 1953. “The Methodology of Positive Economics.” In Essays in Positive Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Frank, R. 1957. A Theory of Consumption Function. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Galbraith, J. K. 1969. The Affluent Society. Second edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
Harbaugh, R. 1996. “Falling Beyond the Joneses: Relative Consumption and the Growth-Savings Paradox.” Economics Letters 53: 297–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hicks, J., and Allen, R.G.D.. 1934. “A Reconsideration of the Theory of Value.” Economica 1: 52–76, 196–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsch, F. 1976. Social Limits to Growth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holländer, H. 2001. “On the Validity of Utility Statements: Standard Theory Versus Duesenberry’s.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 45: 227–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollander, S. 1984. “Marx and Malthusianism: Marx’s Secular Path of Wages.” American Economic Review 74: 139–151.Google Scholar
Hume, D. [1736] 1897. Treatise of Human Nature. Reprinted in L.A. Selby-Bigge, British Moralists. Volume one. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kapteyn, A., and Van Herwaarden, F.G.. 1980. “Interdependent Welfare Functions and Optimal Income Distribution.” Journal of Public Economics 14: 375–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Layard, R. 1980. “Human Satisfactions and Public Policy.” Economic Journal 90: 737–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibenstein, H. 1950. “Bandwagon, Snob, and Veblen Effects in the Theory of Consumers’ Demand.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 64: 183–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewin, S. 1996. “Economics and Psychology: Lessons for Our Own Day From the Early Twentieth Century.” Journal of Economic Literature XXXIV: 1293–1323.Google Scholar
Longfield, M. [1834] 1971. “ Lectures on Political Economy.” In., The Economic Writings of Mountifort Longfield. Edited and with an Introduction by R.D. Collison Black, New York: A.M.Kelley.Google Scholar
McCormick, K. 1983. “Duesenberry and Veblen: The Demonstration Effect Revisited.” Journal of Economic Issues 17: 1125–1129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLure, M. 2010. “Pareto, Pigou and Third-party Consumption: Divergent Approaches to Welfare Theory with Implications for the Study of Public Finance.” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 17: 635–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, A. [1890] 1920. Principles of Economics. Eighth edition. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Marx, K. [1849] 1977. “Wage Labour and Capital.” In Collected Works of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Volume nine. London: Lawrence & Wishart, pp. 197–228.Google Scholar
Mason, R. 1995. “Interpersonal Effects on Consumer Demand in Economic Theory and Marketing Thought, 1890–1950.” Journal of Economic Issues 29: 871–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, R. 2000. “The Social Significance of Consumption: James Duesenberry’s Contribution to Consumer Theory.” Journal of Economic Issues 34: 553–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, A. 2002. “All Consumption Is Conspicuous.” In Fullbrook, R., ed., Intersubjectivity in Economics. London: Routledge, pp. 43–55.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. [1874] 1969. “Three Essays on Religion.” In Robson, J.M., ed., Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Volume X. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, pp. 369–489.Google Scholar
Modigliani, F., and Brumberg, R.. 1954. “Utility Analysis and the Consumption Function: An Interpretation of Cross Section Data.” In Kurihara, K., ed., Post Keynesian Economics, New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, pp. 388–436.Google Scholar
Nicolaides, P. 1988. “Limits to the Expansion of Neoclassical Economics.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 12: 313–328.Google Scholar
Pareto, V. [1896–97] 1971. Corso di Economia Politica [Cours d’Économie Politique]. Torino: Unione Tipographico-Editrice Torinese.Google Scholar
Pareto, V. [1916] 1935. Mind and Society [Tratatto di Sociologia Generale]. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.Google Scholar
Pareto, V. 1918. “Economia sperimentale.” Giornale degli Economisti e Rivista di Statistica 28 (57): 1–18. Reprinted in G. Busino, ed., Oeuvres Complètes 22: Écrits Sociologiques Mineurs. Genève: Librairie Droz, 1980, pp. 719–743.Google Scholar
Perrotta, C. 2004. Consumption as an Investment: The Fear of Goods from Hesiod to Adam Smith. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pigou, A. C. 1903. “Some Remarks on Utility.” Economic Journal 13: 58–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pigou, A.C. 1910. “Producers’ and Consumers’ Surplus.” Economic Journal 20: 358–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollak, R.A. 1976. “Interdependent Preferences.” American Economic Review 66 (3): 745–763.Google Scholar
Postlewaite, A. 1998. “The Social Basis of Interdependent Preferences.” European Economic Review 42: 779–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rabbin, M. 2002. “A Perspective on Psychology and Economics.” European Economic Review 46 (4): 657–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rae, J. [1834] 1964. Statement of Some New Principles on the Subject of Political Economy. New York: A.M. Kelley.Google Scholar
Ranchetti, F. 1998. “Choice without Utility?” In Bianchi, M., ed., The Active Consumer. London: Routledge, pp. 21–45.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. 1947. Foundations of Economic Analysis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schneider, M. 2007. “The Nature, History and Significance of the Concept of Positional Goods.” History of Economics Review 45: 60–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scitovsky, T. 1962. “On the Principle of Consumers’ Sovereignty.” The American Economic Review 52 (2): 262–268.Google Scholar
Selby-Bigge, L.A. 1897. British Moralists. Two volumes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Seligman, B. 1969. “The Impact of Positivism on Economic Thought.” History of Political Economy 1: 256–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Senior, N. [1836] 1965. An Outline of the Science of Political Economy. New York: A.M. Kelley.Google Scholar
Sent, E-M. 2004. “Behavioral Economics: How Psychology Made its (Limited) Way Back into Economics.” History of Political Economy 36: 735–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A. [1759] 1976. The Theory of Moral Sentiments, edited by Raphael, D.D. and Macfie, A.L.. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Smith, A. [1776] 1976. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, vol. 1, edited by Campbell, R.H., Skinner, A.S., and Todd, W.B.. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Sobel, J. 2005. “Interdependent Preferences and Reciprocity.” Journal of Economic Literature XLIII: 392–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steuart, J. Sir. [1767] 1966. An Inquiry into the Principles of Political Oeconomy, edited by Skinner, A.. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.Google Scholar
Stigler, J., and Becker, G.. 1977. “De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum.” American Economic Review 67: 76–90.Google Scholar
Sugden, R. 2002. “Beyond Sympathy and Empathy: Adam Smith’s Concept of Fellow-Feeling.” Economics and Philosophy 18: 63–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Truyts, T. 2010. “Social Status in Economic Theory.” Journal of Economic Surveys 24: 137–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veblen, T. [1899] 1934. The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Whately, R. [1832] 1968. Introductory Lectures on Political Economy. New York: A.M. Kelley.Google Scholar