Call number: LD2668 .T4 1951 B89 / Master of Science

No description available.

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität Bern, 1921. / Includes bibliographical references ([vii]).

Thesis--Katholieke Economische Hoogeschool te Tilburg. / "Stellingen" and summary in Dutch. Includes bibliography and indexes.

Overall this thesis explores the age pattern of consumption of the Canadian elderly. Theoretical applications of the Life Cycle Hypothesis suggest that these consumption patterns should be constant in real terms as individuals age. However, most empirical work observes a declining pattern of consumption with age and health status. This thesis attempts to resolve this difference. The first chapter uses data from the Canadian National Population Health Survey. Using a comprehensive measure of health status, it finds that poor health explains the reduction in consumption (and its marginal utility), with most of the effect occurring among individuals whose income is above the median. The second chapter uses data from the Canadian Survey of Household Spending to explore the effect on non-healthcare consumption of falling into ill health. It finds that the effect on non-healthcare consumption varies by the level of a household's saving or dissaving. Non-healthcare consumption decreases by roughly 2.25% of after-tax income for those households that dissave 10% of their current year after-tax income or less. As households dissave larger and larger amount, however, the effect first becomes less negative, and then more positive. The third chapter develops a theoretical approach to calculating a life annuity value that produces optimal levels of annual consumption that reflect changes in utility based on health status and age. Relative to an annuity that produces a constant real stream of income for a healthy 65 year old male, the optimal stream of income starts roughly 2% higher and drops by 2% to 3% by age 80 and by a further 2% or so by age 95. This pattern of consumption is roughly equivalent to ignoring 15 to 20 basis points of annual inflation relative to an annuity that is fully indexed to inflation. / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Economic explanations tend to view individuals as acting to satisfy their preferences, so that when given a choice between goods, individuals choose those goods which have greater utility for them – they choose those goods which they believe can best satisfy their preferences in the circumstances at hand. In this thesis, I investigate how utility theory works when it is used to explain behaviour. In theory, utility is a positive concept. It is intended to describe and explain an individual’s behaviour without judging or justifying it. It also seems to be regarded as non-hypothetical, for it explains an individual’s behaviour in terms of preferences which need not be shared by others, but may be wholly particular to her. This implies a distinctive way of approaching people’s behaviour as isolated from and immune to the judgements of a community, for utility cannot be used as a common standard by which we judge an individual’s behaviour as better or worse, appropriate or inappropriate. I argue that this theoretical treatment of utility is substantially different from the practice of using utility to explain behaviour. In the first place, when utility is used to explain behaviour as preference-guided, it treats this behaviour as rational action. An explanation of rational action is, however, necessarily governed by the instrumental principle. This principle is normative – it stipulates the correct relation between a person’s means and her ends, rather than simply describing an existing relation. The principle is also non-hypothetical – our commitment to the principle does not rely on the possession of particular ends, but on having ends in general. The instrumental principle therefore acts as a common standard for reasoning about how to act, so that when we explain an agent’s behaviour as rational action, we expect that her action will conform to standards that we all share in virtue of having ends. Thus, I contend, in order to explain the rational actions of an individual, marginal utility necessarily appeals to the judgements of a community.

The main thesis of these essays is that social phenomena are different from psychological phenomena and thus social sciences do not belong to behavioural sciences. Chapter 1 introduces the fundamental problem of the rational choice theory ("Macaulay's problem"): either the theory is empirical and false or it is without empirical content and true. Various suggested solutions to this problem are reviewed and criticized. It is argued that the problem is evaded once it is admitted that rational choice theory does not attempt to explain behaviour. It was developed to explain decreasing individual demand and its extension to behavioural sciences is illegitimate. In Chapter 2 the difference between the interpretation of rationality in choice theory and demand theory is shown. It is argued that choice theory must adopt the agent's point of view, while demand theory proceeds from the point of view of an observer. Chapter 3 applies the argument to the problem of indifference ("Nozick's problem"): it claims that choice theory must adopt strict ordering of alternatives because indifference is already accounted for in the description of the choice alternatives. The difference between the consumer perception and the objective price-quantity relation embodied in the demand function is further explored in Chapter 4 on the example of the Rothbardian demand theory. It is argued that the law of marginal utility defined in terms of subjective units (i.e. units relevant to the consumer) does not imply nonincreasing demand. Chapter 5 is complementary to the previous and attempts to answer the question, whether the concept of marginal utility is compatible with ordinalism. Finally, Chapter 6 discusses on the methodological level the difference between behavioural sciences and economics. It argues that the difference can be conveniently described with the help of Popper's concepts of 'World 2'and 'World 3'.

Acquisition is a crucial element of consumer behavior. By gaining a deeper understanding of the factors that influence consumers' acquisition of products, marketers and managers can develop more effective marketing strategies, and design products that better align with the needs and desires of their target customers. This dissertation develops two essays that examine key components of consumers' interest to acquisition: (1) the impact of ownership language on product evaluation, and (2) the influence of dispositional greed on the experience of diminishing marginal utility. Essay 1 investigates the impact of ownership language (e.g., this is my car) on prospective buyers' item evaluation. Results show that using ownership language has a negative effect on both tangible and intangible item evaluation. Specifically, using more ownership language raises contamination concerns and leads to decreased item evaluation. Essay 2 focuses on the individual differences in the experience of diminishing marginal utility (DMU), which is an essential component of consumers' interest in acquisition. By examining the relationship between dispositional greed and the experience of DMU, this research provides valuable insights into the motivations and desires that drive consumer behavior. The findings from six studies demonstrate that individuals with higher levels of dispositional greed are less likely to experience DMU and that such a heterogeneous experience of DMU depends on consumption scenarios (i.e., quantity-based vs. non-quantity-based). / Doctor of Philosophy / Understanding what motivates people to buy things is a key focus for consumer research. By studying consumers' interest in acquisition, businesses can gain valuable insights into the factors that drive consumer behavior, which can help them design better marketing strategies and create products better suited for the needs of their target customers. This dissertation features two essays that focus on the concept of "consumers' interest in acquisition." Essay 1 studies how using phrases like "this is my car" (i.e., ownership language) affects consumers' evaluation of second-hand products. The results find that using ownership language makes consumers evaluate both tangible and intangible items less favorably. To be specific, using ownership language raises contamination concerns (e.g., the feeling of having been "polluted"), which leads to lowered item evaluation. Essay 2 investigates an aspect of consumer behavior that has received little attention in previous research: the individual differences in the experience of diminishing marginal utility (DMU). I argue that individuals' dispositional level of greed (e.g., dissatisfaction of not having enough, combined with the desire to acquire more) is related to the experience of DMU, such that individuals with higher levels of greed tend to experience less DMU compared to less greedy consumers. In other words, as greedy consumers acquire more of a good or service, the additional satisfaction they gain from each additional unit does not decrease as rapidly as it does for less greedy people. Moreover, I discovered that this heterogeneous experience of DMU was more evident when consumption experiences involved changes in quantity vs. attributes or features of a product/service.

No description available.

Rev. version of the author's thesis (doctoral). / Includes bibliographical references and index.