Narratives and Valuations
SSRN Electronic Journal
2023
- 1Citations
- 3,967Usage
- 11Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
While the significance of narrative thinking has been increasingly recognized by social scientists, very little empirical research has documented its consequences for economically significant outcomes. The current paper addresses this gap in one important domain: valuations. In three experiments, participants were given the opportunity to sell an item they owned (mug in Study 1, hat in studies 2 and 3) using an incentive-compatible procedure (multiple price list). Prior to making selling decisions, participants were randomly assigned to either a narrative treatment, in which they were asked to tell the story of their item, or a list treatment, in which they were asked to list the characteristics of their item. The narrative treatment led to significantly higher selling prices and increased rates of participants refusing all offered prices. We further explore potential mechanisms, and the impact of different types of narratives, by analyzing self-reported classifications of, and employing natural language processing techniques on, participants' narratives.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know