У нас вы можете посмотреть бесплатно 27 - The Endowment Effect или скачать в максимальном доступном качестве, видео которое было загружено на ютуб. Для загрузки выберите вариант из формы ниже:
Если кнопки скачивания не
загрузились
НАЖМИТЕ ЗДЕСЬ или обновите страницу
Если возникают проблемы со скачиванием видео, пожалуйста напишите в поддержку по адресу внизу
страницы.
Спасибо за использование сервиса ClipSaver.ru
When we own something, we value it more: this is the endowment effect. Related to loss aversion, it explains why we struggle to sell, change, or give up things. Kahneman shows implications in markets, negotiations, and habits. The endowment effect is the finding that people demand much more to give up an object than they would pay to acquire it. In classic experiments, people given coffee mugs randomly valued them at about $7 to sell, while people not given mugs valued them at about $3 to buy. Ownership creates a value gap that violates standard economic theory, which assumes buying and selling prices should converge. This effect stems from loss aversion: giving up the mug is framed as a loss (from the reference point of owning it), while acquiring the mug is framed as a gain. Since losses weigh more heavily than gains, the asymmetry appears. The endowment effect is strongest for goods that are used or consumed (like mugs) rather than held for exchange (like money or poker chips used in a game). The chapter explores implications for markets and negotiations. In market transactions, the endowment effect creates "stickiness"—people hold onto assets longer than rational models predict, demanding premium prices that buyers won't pay. This explains low trading volume in some markets and why people keep unwanted items instead of selling them. In negotiations, both parties anchor on their current positions as reference points, viewing concessions as losses rather than the opposing side's gains as equivalent. The endowment effect also illuminates status quo bias and resistance to change. Your current situation becomes your reference point, and any change involves giving something up (a loss) to get something else (a gain). Even when the change would be objectively beneficial, loss aversion makes staying put emotionally attractive. This explains organizational inertia, reluctance to switch service providers, and persistence of bad habits—the "pain" of changing feels larger than the benefits.