English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In simple exchange experiments, participants have been reported to trade their endowments with similar objects less frequently than predicted by the neoclassical demand theory. Recent research has indicated that the experimental support for exchange asymmetry is fragile in alternative environments. In this article, we report an environment which is different from all other environments previously known in which exchange asymmetry is not observed. In this environment, participants knew at the time of making exchange decisions that they will have an opportunity to reverse their decisions. We find significant differences in exchange asymmetry in this environment, and an environment in which exchange decisions were final. Such differences suggest that  anticipated regret theory  provides an adequate explanation for exchange asymmetry which is often reported in the laboratory experiments. Our results underscore the importance of careful design for testing theories in the laboratory experiments.

Anticipated Regret or Endowment Effect? A Reconsideration of Exchange Asymmetry in Laboratory Experiments