This article aims to provide an introduction to empirical revealed preference (RP) and an overview of the current state of the field. We hope to give a sense of how RP methods work and the types of questions they can address and to assess the strengths and drawbacks of the approach. After briefly recapping the basics of RP theory, we review and critically assess the literature in two main areas representing the principal fields in which recent research has made significant advances: broadening the scope of RP methods and dealing with empirical issues related to bringing RP to the data. We conclude with a discussion of some future directions.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. Adams A, Cherchye L, De Rock B, Verriest E. 2012. Commitment in intertemporal household consumption: a revealed preference analysis. Cent. Econ. Stud. Discuss. Pap. 12.12, KU Leuven
  2. Afriat SN. 1967. The construction of utility functions from expenditure data. Int. Econ. Rev. 8:67–77 [Google Scholar]
  3. Afriat SN. 1969. The construction of separable utility functions from expenditure data Tech. Rep., Univ. North Carolina
  4. Afriat SN. 1972. Efficiency estimation of production functions. Int. Econ. Rev. 13:568–98 [Google Scholar]
  5. Afriat SN. 1973. On a system of inequalities in demand analysis: an extension of the classical method. Int. Econ. Rev. 14:460–72 [Google Scholar]
  6. Andreoni J, Gillen BJ, Harbaugh WT. 2013. The power of revealed preference tests: ex-post evaluation of experimental design. Tech. Rep., Univ. Calif., San Diego
  7. Andrews DWK, Guggenberger P. 2009. Validity of subsampling and “plug-in asymptotic” inference for parameters defined by moment inequalities. Econ. Theory 25:669–709 [Google Scholar]
  8. Barnett WA, Choi S. 1989. A Monte Carlo study of tests of blockwise weak separability. J. Bus. Econ. Stat. 7:363–77 [Google Scholar]
  9. Beatty TKM, Crawford I. 2011. How demanding is the revealed preference approach to demand?. Am. Econ. Rev. 101:2782–95 [Google Scholar]
  10. Becker GS. 1962. Irrational behavior and economic theory. J. Polit. Econ. 70:1–13 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bergstrom T. 1989. A fresh look at the rotten-kid theorem and other household mysteries. J. Polit. Econ. 97:1138–59 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bergstrom TC, Cornes RC. 1981. Gorman and Musgrave are dual: an antipodean theorem on public goods. Econ. Lett. 7:371–78 [Google Scholar]
  13. Bergstrom TC, Cornes RC. 1983. Independence of allocative efficiency from distribution in the theory of public goods. Econometrica 51:1753–65 [Google Scholar]
  14. Blow L, Browning M, Crawford I. 2008. Revealed preference analysis of characteristics models. Rev. Econ. Stud. 75:371–89 [Google Scholar]
  15. Blundell R, Browning M, Crawford I. 2003. Nonparametric Engel curves and revealed preference. Econometrica 71:205–40 [Google Scholar]
  16. Blundell R, Browning M, Crawford I. 2008. Best nonparametric bounds on demand responses. Econometrica 76:1227–62 [Google Scholar]
  17. Bronars SG. 1987. The power of nonparametric tests of preference maximization. Econometrica 55:693–98 [Google Scholar]
  18. Brown B, Walker MB. 1989. The random utility hypothesis and inference in demand systems. Econometrica 57:815–29 [Google Scholar]
  19. Brown DJ, Calsamiglia C. 2007. The nonparametric approach to applied welfare analysis. Econ. Theory 31:183–88 [Google Scholar]
  20. Brown DJ, Matzkin RL. 1996. Testable restrictions on the equilibrium manifold. Econometrica 64:1249–62 [Google Scholar]
  21. Browning M. 1989. A nonparametric test of the life-cycle rational expectations hypothesis. Int. Econ. Rev. 30:979–92 [Google Scholar]
  22. Carvajal A, González N. 2014. On refutability of the Nash bargaining solution. J. Math. Econ. 50:177–86 [Google Scholar]
  23. Carvajal A, Ray I, Snyder S. 2004. Equilibrium behavior in markets and games: testable restrictions and identification. J. Math. Econ. 40:1–40 [Google Scholar]
  24. Chambers CP, Echenique F. 2014. On the consistency of data with bargaining theories. Theor. Econ. 9:137–62 [Google Scholar]
  25. Chambers CP, Echenique F, Shamaya S. 2014. The axiomatic structure of empirical content. Am. Econ. Rev. In press [Google Scholar]
  26. Cherchye L, Crawford I, De Rock B, Vermeulen F. 2013a. Gorman revisited: nonparametric conditions for exact linear aggregation. Cent. Econ. Stud. Discuss. Pap. 13.05, KU Leuven
  27. Cherchye L, De Rock B, Sabbe J, Vermeulen F. 2008. Nonparametric tests of collective rational consumption behavior: an integer programming procedure. J. Econom. 147:258–65 [Google Scholar]
  28. Cherchye L, De Rock B, Vermeulen F. 2007. The collective model of household consumption: a nonparametric characterization. Econometrica 75:553–74 [Google Scholar]
  29. Cherchye L, De Rock B, Vermeulen F. 2009. Opening the black box of intra-household decision-making. J. Polit. Econ. 117:1074–104 [Google Scholar]
  30. Cherchye L, De Rock B, Vermeulen F. 2010. An Afriat theorem for the collective model of household consumption. J. Econ. Theory 145:1142–63 [Google Scholar]
  31. Cherchye L, De Rock B, Vermeulen F. 2011a. The revealed preference approach to collective consumption behavior: testing and sharing rule recovery. Rev. Econ. Stud. 78:176–98 [Google Scholar]
  32. Cherchye L, Demuynck T, De Rock B. 2014. Is utility transferable? A revealed preference analysis. Theor. Econ. In press [Google Scholar]
  33. Cherchye L, Demuynck T, De Rock B. 2011b. Revealed preference analysis of noncooperative household consumption. Econ. J. 121:1073–96 [Google Scholar]
  34. Cherchye L, Demuynck T, De Rock B. 2011c. Testable implications of general equilibrium models: an integer programming approach. J. Math. Econ. 47:564–75 [Google Scholar]
  35. Cherchye L, Demuynck T, De Rock B. 2013b. Nash bargained consumption decisions: a revealed preference analysis. Econ. J. 123:195–235 [Google Scholar]
  36. Cherchye L, Demuynck T, De Rock B. 2013c. Revealed preference analysis for convex rationalizations on nonlinear budget sets. Work. Pap., KU Leuven
  37. Cherchye L, Demuynck T, De Rock B, Hjertstrand P. 2012. Revealed preference tests for weak separability: an integer programming approach. Cent. Econ. Stud. Discuss. Pap. 12.15, KU Leuven
  38. Cherchye L, Vermeulen F. 2008. Nonparametric analysis of household labor supply: goodness-of-fit and power of the unitary and the collective model. Rev. Econ. Stat. 90:267–74 [Google Scholar]
  39. Chernozhukov V, Hong H, Tamer E. 2007. Estimation and confidence regions for parameter sets in econometric models. Econometrica 75:1243–83 [Google Scholar]
  40. Chiappori P. 1988. Rational household labor supply. Econometrica 56:63–89 [Google Scholar]
  41. Chiappori P, Rochet J. 1987. Revealed preferences and differentiable demand. Econometrica 55:687–91 [Google Scholar]
  42. Crawford I. 2004. Necessary and sufficient conditions for latent separability. Tech. Rep. 02/04, Cent. Microdata Methods Practice, London
  43. Crawford I. 2010. Habits revealed. Rev. Econ. Stud. 77:1382–402 [Google Scholar]
  44. Crawford I, Pendakur K. 2013. How many types are there?. Econ. J. 123:77–95 [Google Scholar]
  45. de Finetti B. 1992 (1937). Foresight: its logical laws, its subjective sources. In Breakthroughs in Statistics, ed. S Kotz, NL Johnson, pp. 134–74. New York: Wiley
  46. Dean M, Martin D. 2010. How rational are your choice data? Tech. Rep., Brown Univ., Providence, RI
  47. Demuynck T, Verriest E. 2013. I’ll never forget my first cigarette: a revealed preference analysis of the habits as durables model. Int. Econ. Rev. 54:717–38 [Google Scholar]
  48. Diewert WE. 1973. Afriat and revealed preference theory. Rev. Econ. Stud. 40:419–25 [Google Scholar]
  49. Diewert WE, Parkan C. 1985. Tests for the consistency of consumer data. J. Econom. 30:127–47 [Google Scholar]
  50. Echenique F, Lee S, Shum M. 2011. The money pump as a measure of revealed preference violations. J. Polit. Econ. 119:1201–23 [Google Scholar]
  51. Fleissig A, Whitney GA. 2003. A new PC-based test for Varian’s weak separability condition. J. Bus. Econ. Stat. 21:133–45 [Google Scholar]
  52. Fleissig A, Whitney GA. 2007. Testing additive separability. Econ. Lett. 96:215–20 [Google Scholar]
  53. Fleissig A, Whitney GA. 2008. A nonparametric test of weak separability and consumer preferences. J. Econom. 147:275–81 [Google Scholar]
  54. Forges F, Minelli E. 2009. Afriat’s theorem for general budget sets. J. Econ. Theory 144:135–45 [Google Scholar]
  55. Green EJ, Osband K. 1991. A revealed preference theory for expected utility. Rev. Econ. Stud. 58:677–95 [Google Scholar]
  56. Gross J. 1995. Testing data for consistency with revealed preference. Rev. Econ. Stat. 77:701–10 [Google Scholar]
  57. Halevy Y, Persitz D, Zrill L. 2013. Parametric recoverability of preferences. Tech. Rep., Univ. Toronto
  58. Hoderlein S, Stoye J. 2014. Revealed preference in a heterogeneous population. Rev. Econ. Stat. In press [Google Scholar]
  59. Houthakker HS. 1950. Revealed preference and the utility function. Economica 17:159–74 [Google Scholar]
  60. Lewbel A. 2001. Demand systems with and without errors. Am. Econ. Rev. 91:611–18 [Google Scholar]
  61. Manski C. 2003. Partial Identification of Probability Distributions New York: Springer-Verlag
  62. Matzkin RL. 1991. Axioms of revealed preference for nonlinear choice sets. Econometrica 59:1779–86 [Google Scholar]
  63. Polisson M, Quah J. 2013. Revealed preference in a discrete consumption space. Am. Econ. J. Microecon. 5:28–34 [Google Scholar]
  64. Samuelson PA. 1938. A note on the pure theory of consumer’s behavior. Economica 5:61–71 [Google Scholar]
  65. Samuelson PA. 1948. Consumption theory in terms of revealed preference. Economica 15:243–53 [Google Scholar]
  66. Selten R. 1991. Properties of a measure of predictive success. Math. Soc. Sci. 21:153–67 [Google Scholar]
  67. Selten R, Krischker S. 1982. Comparison of two theories for characteristic function experiments. In Aspiration Levels in Bargaining and Economic Decision Making, ed. R Tietz, pp. 259–64. New York: Springer
  68. Swofford JL, Whitney GA. 1987. Nonparametric tests of utility maximization and weak separability for consumption, leisure and money. Rev. Econ. Stat. 69:458–64 [Google Scholar]
  69. Swofford JL, Whitney GA. 1988. A comparison of nonparametric tests of weak separability for annual and quarterly data on consumption, leisure, and money. J. Bus. Econ. Stat. 6:241–46 [Google Scholar]
  70. Swofford JL, Whitney GA. 1994. A revealed preference test for weakly separable utility maximization with incomplete adjustment. J. Econom. 60:235–49 [Google Scholar]
  71. Thaler R, Shefrin HM. 1981. An economic theory of self-control. J. Polit. Econ. 89:392–406 [Google Scholar]
  72. Tversky A, Kahneman D. 1991. Loss aversion in riskless choice: a reference-dependent model. Q. J. Econ. 106:1039–61 [Google Scholar]
  73. Varian HR. 1982. The nonparametric approach to demand analysis. Econometrica 50:945–74 [Google Scholar]
  74. Varian HR. 1983. Non-parametric tests of consumer behavior. Rev. Econ. Stud. 50:99–110 [Google Scholar]
  75. Varian HR. 1984. The nonparametric approach to production analysis. Econometrica 52:579–97 [Google Scholar]
  76. Varian HR. 1985. Non-parametric analysis of optimizing behavior with measurement error. J. Econom. 30:445–58 [Google Scholar]
  77. Varian HR. 1988. Estimating risk aversion from Arrow-Debreu portfolio choice. Econometrica 56:973–79 [Google Scholar]
  78. Varian HR. 2006. Revealed preference. In Samuelson Economics and the Twenty-First Century, ed. M Szenberg, L Ramrattan, AA Gottesman, pp. 99–115. New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  79. Vermeulen F. 2005. And the winner is … an empirical evaluation of unitary and collective labour supply models. Empir. Econ. 30:711–34 [Google Scholar]
  80. Warshall S. 1962. A theorem of Boolean matrices. J. Am. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 9:11–12 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error