 |
Neoclassical economics uses the maximization of a stable and exogenous preference relation as the benchmark for positive and normative economics. Following the evidence that behavior depends on context and experience, several authors have designed models that treat behavior inconsistent with the maximization of a stable preference as mistaken. In this paper, I argue that it is important to distinguish mistakes from inconsistent behavior that results from preferences (or preference change) that individuals identify with (reflexive preferences). I sketch two hierarchical preferences models that represent some of these ideas, and discuss how they could relate with the conflicted agent and evolving agent models in order to represent reflexive and non-reflexive preference change. Finally, I argue that collecting information on if individuals identify or not with their preferences (or preference change) may be useful for normative analysis, in particular as a refinement to welfare rankings currently used in behavioral welfare economics.
