IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v12y2021i2p36-d536368.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fairness and Efficiency in Online Advertising Mechanisms

Author

Listed:
  • Alison Watts

    (Department of Economics, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901, USA
    I would like to thank three anonymous referees whose comments and criticisms greatly improved the presentation and results.)

Abstract

Online advertising often involves targeting ads to certain types of consumers where ads are commonly sold by generalized second price auctions. However, such an auction or mechanism could be considered unfair if similar consumers are consistently shown different ads or consistently receive different payoffs. Results show that such ascending bid auctions may result in unfair treatment and additionally that uncertainty regarding an ad’s value can result in inefficiency. An alternative way to assign ads to consumers is presented called the random assignment mechanism. Results show that the random assignment can improve fairness while improving efficiency in some circumstances.

Suggested Citation

  • Alison Watts, 2021. "Fairness and Efficiency in Online Advertising Mechanisms," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-11, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:12:y:2021:i:2:p:36-:d:536368
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/12/2/36/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/12/2/36/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Choi & Anovia Yifan Dai & Kyungmin Kim, 2018. "Consumer Search and Price Competition," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(4), pages 1257-1281, July.
    2. Susan Athey & Glenn Ellison, 2011. "Position Auctions with Consumer Search," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(3), pages 1213-1270.
    3. John E. Roemer, 1986. "Equality of Resources Implies Equality of Welfare," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(4), pages 751-784.
    4. Chengsi Wang & Julian Wright, 2020. "Search platforms: showrooming and price parity clauses," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(1), pages 32-58, March.
    5. Anja Lambrecht & Catherine Tucker, 2019. "Algorithmic Bias? An Empirical Study of Apparent Gender-Based Discrimination in the Display of STEM Career Ads," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(7), pages 2966-2981, July.
    6. Hal R. Varian & Christopher Harris, 2014. "The VCG Auction in Theory and Practice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(5), pages 442-445, May.
    7. Tat Y. Chan & Young-Hoon Park, 2015. "Consumer Search Activities and the Value of Ad Positions in Sponsored Search Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 606-623, July.
    8. Haoyan Sun & Ming Fan & Yong Tan, 2020. "An Empirical Analysis of Seller Advertising Strategies in an Online Marketplace," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 37-56, March.
    9. Alessandro Acquisti & Curtis Taylor & Liad Wagman, 2016. "The Economics of Privacy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(2), pages 442-492, June.
    10. Marc Fleurbaey & François Maniquet, 2018. "Optimal Income Taxation Theory and Principles of Fairness," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(3), pages 1029-1079, September.
    11. Benjamin Edelman & Michael Ostrovsky & Michael Schwarz, 2007. "Internet Advertising and the Generalized Second-Price Auction: Selling Billions of Dollars Worth of Keywords," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 242-259, March.
    12. Leon Yang Chu & Hamid Nazerzadeh & Heng Zhang, 2020. "Position Ranking and Auctions for Online Marketplaces," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(8), pages 3617-3634, August.
    13. John E. Roemer & Alain Trannoy, 2016. "Equality of Opportunity: Theory and Measurement," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1288-1332, December.
    14. Przemyslaw Jeziorski & Ilya Segal, 2015. "What Makes Them Click: Empirical Analysis of Consumer Demand for Search Advertising," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 24-53, August.
    15. Alexandre de Cornière & Romain de Nijs, 2016. "Online advertising and privacy," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(1), pages 48-72, February.
    16. Alexandre de Corniere & Romain De Nijs, 2013. "Online Advertising and Privacy," Economics Series Working Papers 650, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    17. Amin Sayedi & Kinshuk Jerath & Marjan Baghaie, 2018. "Exclusive Placement in Online Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(6), pages 970-986, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jens Prüfer & Christoph Schottmüller, 2021. "Competing with Big Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(4), pages 967-1008, December.
    2. Carroni, Elias & Ferrari, Luca & Righi, Simone, 2019. "The price of discovering your needs online," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 317-330.
    3. Patrick Hummel, 2018. "Hybrid mechanisms for Vickrey–Clarke–Groves and generalized second-price bids," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 331-350, March.
    4. Leon Yang Chu & Hamid Nazerzadeh & Heng Zhang, 2020. "Position Ranking and Auctions for Online Marketplaces," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(8), pages 3617-3634, August.
    5. Yan, Haomin, 2021. "Position auctions with multi-unit demands," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 179-193.
    6. Amin Sayedi & Kinshuk Jerath & Marjan Baghaie, 2018. "Exclusive Placement in Online Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(6), pages 970-986, November.
    7. Mahsa Derakhshan & Negin Golrezaei & Vahideh Manshadi & Vahab Mirrokni, 2022. "Product Ranking on Online Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 4024-4041, June.
    8. Hana Choi & Carl F. Mela, 2019. "Monetizing Online Marketplaces," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(6), pages 948-972, November.
    9. Rafael P. Greminger, 2022. "Heterogeneous Position Effects and the Power of Rankings," Papers 2210.16408, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    10. Ying‐Ju Chen, 2021. "Optimal Design of Revenue‐Maximizing Position Auctions with Consumer Search," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(9), pages 3297-3316, September.
    11. Pallavi Pal, 2023. "Sponsored Search Auction and the Revenue- Maximizing Number of Ads per Page," CESifo Working Paper Series 10299, CESifo.
    12. Chen Jin & Luyi Yang & Kartik Hosanagar, 2023. "To Brush or Not to Brush: Product Rankings, Consumer Search, and Fake Orders," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 532-552, June.
    13. Dengler, Sebastian & Prüfer, Jens, 2021. "Consumers' privacy choices in the era of big data," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 499-520.
    14. Omid Rafieian & Hema Yoganarasimhan, 2021. "Targeting and Privacy in Mobile Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(2), pages 193-218, March.
    15. Fei Long & Kinshuk Jerath & Miklos Sarvary, 2022. "Designing an Online Retail Marketplace: Leveraging Information from Sponsored Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(1), pages 115-138, January.
    16. Caleb S. Fuller, 2019. "Is the market for digital privacy a failure?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 180(3), pages 353-381, September.
    17. Raluca M. Ursu, 2018. "The Power of Rankings: Quantifying the Effect of Rankings on Online Consumer Search and Purchase Decisions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(4), pages 530-552, August.
    18. Alexander Teytelboym & Shengwu Li & Scott Duke Kominers & Mohammad Akbarpour & Piotr Dworczak, 2021. "Discovering Auctions: Contributions of Paul Milgrom and Robert Wilson," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 123(3), pages 709-750, July.
    19. Shijie Lu & Yi Zhu & Anthony Dukes, 2015. "Position Auctions with Budget Constraints: Implications for Advertisers and Publishers," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(6), pages 897-905, November.
    20. Murali Agastya & Oleksii Birulin, 2023. "Optimal Task Scheduling under Adverse Selection and Hidden Actions," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 660-698, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:12:y:2021:i:2:p:36-:d:536368. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.