The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Temptation and Self-Control
Abstract
We study a two-period model where ex ante inferior choice may tempt the decision-maker in the second period. Individuals have preferences over sets of alternatives that represent second period choices. Our axioms yield a representation that identifies the individual's commitment ranking, temptation ranking, and cost of self-control. An agent has a preference for commitment if she strictly prefers a subset of alternatives to the set itself. An agent has self-control if she resists temptation and chooses an option with higher ex ante utility. We introduce comparative measures of preference for commitment and self-control and relate them to our representations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Journal of Economic Literature
(2019) · AEA Papers and Proceedings · doi:10.1257/pandp.109.633 · Cited by 7,468
Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting
Laibson, D. (1997) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355397555253 · Cited by 6,122
Myopia and Inconsistency in Dynamic Utility Maximization
Strotz, R. H. (1955) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.2307/2295722 · Cited by 2,834 · cited 1×
“…by the representation theorems: individuals with self-control preferences maximize u + v and individuals with overwhelming temptation preferences lexicographically maximize first v and then u. Starting with Strotz (1955), the possibility of a preference for commitment has received some attention.”
BackgroundMyopia and Inconsistency in Dynamic Utility Maximization
Strotz, R. H. (1973) · Readings in Welfare Economics · doi:10.1007/978-1-349-15492-0_10 · Cited by 2,743
Out of Control: Visceral Influences on Behavior
Loewenstein, G. (1996) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0028 · Cited by 2,610
Rabin, M. (1997) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 2,459
Anomalies in Intertemporal Choice: Evidence and an Interpretation
Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (1992) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2118482 · Cited by 2,305
Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty and Dynamic Choice Theory
Kreps, D. M., & Porteus, E. L. (1978) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1913656 · Cited by 1,821
The Economic Consequences of Cognitive Dissonance
Akerlof, G. A., & Dickens, W. T. (2005) · Explorations in Pragmatic Economics · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199253906.003.0009 · Cited by 1,133
Postdecision changes in the desirability of alternatives.
Brehm, J. W. (1956) · The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0041006 · Cited by 1,088
Cited by
A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences
Koszegi, B., & Rabin, M. (2006) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1093/qje/121.4.1133 · Cited by 2,728
Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field
DellaVigna, S. (2009) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.47.2.315 · Cited by 2,365
Tying Odysseus to the Mast: Evidence From a Commitment Savings Product in the Philippines
Ashraf, N., Karlan, D., & Yin, W. (2006) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/qjec.2006.121.2.635 · Cited by 1,542
Savings Constraints and Microenterprise Development: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Kenya
Dupas, P., & Robinson, J. (2013) · American Economic Journal: Applied Economics · doi:10.1257/app.5.1.163 · Cited by 959
Addiction and Cue-Triggered Decision Processes
Bernheim, B. D., & Rangel, A. (2004) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/0002828043052222 · Cited by 732
Metadata
- Authors
- Gul, F., & Pesendorfer, W.
- Venue
- Econometrica
- Publisher
- The Econometric Society
- Published
- 2001-11
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1403-1435
- ISSN
- 0012-9682 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-0262
- OpenAlex
- W2137623058
- Cited by
- 1,200
- References
- 14
- FWCI
- 17.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Temptation and Self-Control. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1468-0262.00252
- The paper
- Gul, F., & Pesendorfer, W. (2001). Temptation and Self-Control. Econometrica. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00252
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.