2008
DOI: 10.1257/aer.98.4.1245
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Competition and Price Variation when Consumers Are Loss Averse

Abstract: We modify the Salop (1979) model of price competition with differentiated products by assuming that consumers are loss averse relative to a reference point given by their recent expectations about the purchase. Consumers' sensitivity to losses in money increases the price responsiveness of demand—and hence the intensity of competition—at higher relative to lower market prices, reducing or eliminating price variation both within and between products. When firms face common stochastic costs, in any symmetric equ… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
190
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 281 publications
(199 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
5
190
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The size of the coefficient is thus much larger than the respective value in regression (5-GF), which is consistent with the finding that substitutions are on average defensive if a team is in the gain frame. Understanding the determinants and behavioral effects of reference points is important for many fields in economics, such as worker morale and effort choices (e.g., Bewley (1999)), consumer goods pricing (e.g., Heidhues and Köszegi (2008)), or optimal contracting (e.g., Hart and Moore (2008), Herweg et al (2010)). Our paper provides evidence in support of models assuming that peoples'…”
Section: Gain Framementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The size of the coefficient is thus much larger than the respective value in regression (5-GF), which is consistent with the finding that substitutions are on average defensive if a team is in the gain frame. Understanding the determinants and behavioral effects of reference points is important for many fields in economics, such as worker morale and effort choices (e.g., Bewley (1999)), consumer goods pricing (e.g., Heidhues and Köszegi (2008)), or optimal contracting (e.g., Hart and Moore (2008), Herweg et al (2010)). Our paper provides evidence in support of models assuming that peoples'…”
Section: Gain Framementioning
confidence: 99%
“…2 In contrast, a growing stream of literature relaxes these assumptions to investigate the impacts of consumers' behavioral issues on their purchase decisions and the seller's optimal pricing strategies. The behavioral issues that have been studied include loss aversion (Popescu and Wu 2007, Heidhues and Kőszegi 2008, Nasiry and Popescu 2011, Baron et al 2014), hyperbolic discounting (Su 2009, Baucells et al 2014, and anticipated regret (Diecidue et al 2012, Nasiry andPopescu 2012). We refer the reader toÖzer and Zheng (2012) for a comprehensive review of the behavioral pricing literature.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our model of consumer behavior follows the approaches of Kőszegi and Rabin (2006) and Heidhues and Kőszegi (2008), but it adapts and simplifies these theories to fit the decision of whether to purchase a single product. The consumer's utility function has two components.…”
Section: Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…17 In all of these papers, each firm is left 15 Karle and Peitz (2010) qualify Heidhues and Kőszegi's (2008) prediction of reduced price variability by showing that in some asymmetric duopolistic environments-specifically, when consumers observe prices but not how much they will like each product before their expectations-based reference point is set-consumer loss aversion can actually increase price differences. Deviating from the expectations-based model, Zhou (2011) assumes that consumers take the first or most prominent price they see as the reference point for money outlays.…”
Section: Theories Of Pricingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation