2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.jretai.2012.08.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Why are Consumers Less Loss Averse in Internal than External Reference Prices?

Abstract: The literature has produced mixed support for loss aversion in a reference price context and the outcome may depend on the type of reference price. One extant study has reported empirical evidence that consumers are less loss averse in internal than external reference prices, but without discussing causes or implications. In the current study, we reconcile relevant literature and propose this asymmetric loss aversion result as an empirical generalization. Next, we provide and test an explanation: two empirical… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
5
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The contextual component includes the different prices of products within the same product category (Mazumdar and Papatla, 1995). This formulation of reference price, based on the current price of some contextual good or service, is denoted the "external reference price" (Hardie et al, 1993;van Oest, 2013). It is important to note, however, that some empirical evidence suggests that these two mechanisms operate simultaneously and should be assessed jointly (Mazumdar and Papatla, 2000).…”
Section: Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The contextual component includes the different prices of products within the same product category (Mazumdar and Papatla, 1995). This formulation of reference price, based on the current price of some contextual good or service, is denoted the "external reference price" (Hardie et al, 1993;van Oest, 2013). It is important to note, however, that some empirical evidence suggests that these two mechanisms operate simultaneously and should be assessed jointly (Mazumdar and Papatla, 2000).…”
Section: Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Speci c causes for this effect have been identi ed. Most prominently, loss aversion is lower for experts (Abdellaoui, Bleichrodt, & Kammoun, 2013) or if losses are faced more frequently (van Oest, 2013). Loss aversion is also reduced following recent gains (Barberis, Huang, & Santos, 2001) or if greater attention is attributed to the gain (Jarnebrant, 2012).…”
Section: Objective Versus Subjective Use Of Rewards: Prospect Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, the results presented herein reveal that customized pricing In addition, the present research contributes to an existing body of marketing and consumer research on reference prices (Bolton & Ockenfels, 2000;Kamins, Dreze, & Folkes, 2004;van Oest, 2013).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 59%