Utility Maximization with Behavioral Constraints in E-Commerce

Authors

  • Zekang Zhang Bishop Montgomery high school, 5430 Torrance Blvd Torrance, CA 90503 United States

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54097/3syxc771

Keywords:

Behavioral economics, Utility maximization, Loss aversion, Dynamic pricing, E-commerce.

Abstract

The boom of e-commerce and live-stream shopping show that the classical utility models become inadequate due to the breakdown of rationality and constant preferences. In practice, online consumers follow known-to-be irrational purchasing behaviors that are fast, emotional, time-pressured, and influenced by social influence. In this paper, we develop a behavioral utility maximization model that captures three behavioral constraints: loss aversion, social comparison, and dynamic pricing. The model generalizes the classical Lagrangian model by considering time-varying elasticity and psychological constraints of loss aversion and mental accounting. We estimate the model using both survey data and simulated shopping sessions and compare it against the Cobb-Douglas baseline. The model has a better fit to the data in terms of decision-making, i.e., explaining quicker responses when facing countdown timers and explaining higher willingness to pay when there are peer activities/influencer endorsements. These results provide strong evidence that psychology and social influence significantly impact consumer decisions. The contributions of this research are dual. On the theoretical side, this paper extends utility theory by introducing behavioral realism. On the applied side, our research reveals the decisions’ designs of platforms and raise ethical issues that whether it is right to manipulate consumers. This research shows that researching digital consumer behavior requires inputs from both economics, psychology and computation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Von Neumann, John, and Oskar Morgenstern. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton UP, 1944.

[2] Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk.” Econometrica, vol. 47, no. 2, 1979, pp. 263–291.

[3] Thaler, Richard. “Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice.” Marketing Science, vol. 4, no. 3, 1985, pp. 199–214.

[4] Laibson, David. “Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 112, no. 2, 1997, pp. 443–477.

[5] Ariely, Dan. Are We in Control of Our Own Decisions? TED, 2009, www.ted.com/talks/dan_ariely_are_we_in_control_of_our_own_decisions.

[6] OECD. Gen Z in the Spotlight: How Social Comparison Drives Consumption. OECD Youth Outlook 2023, pp. 67–89.

[7] “How TikTok Is Reshaping Teen Spending Habits.” The Economist, 12 May 2023.

[8] China Household Finance Survey (CHFS). Annual Report on Household Finance in China 2024. Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, 2024.

[9] Varian, Hal R. Microeconomic Analysis. 3rd ed., W. W. Norton & Company, 1992.

[10] Mas-Colell, Andreu, Michael D. Whinston, and Jerry R. Green. Microeconomic Theory. Oxford UP, 1995.

Downloads

Published

13-03-2026

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Zhang, Z. (2026). Utility Maximization with Behavioral Constraints in E-Commerce. Journal of Innovation and Development, 14(3), 315-320. https://doi.org/10.54097/3syxc771