IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_10190.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Market Definition in the Attention Economy: An Experimental Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Guy Aridor

Abstract

I study demand for popular mobile phone applications by conducting an experiment where I monitor how participants spend time on digital services and shut off access to Instagram or YouTube on their Android phones. I characterize how participants substitute their time during the restrictions by estimating the magnitude of across product category and off phone substitution as well as computing diversion ratios between prominent social media applications. I relate the estimates to ongoing debates about relevant market definition for social media applications and conclude that they may be larger than those considered by regulatory authorities and smaller than those posited by technology companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Guy Aridor, 2022. "Market Definition in the Attention Economy: An Experimental Approach," CESifo Working Paper Series 10190, CESifo.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_10190
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp10190.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steven Berry & Philip Haile, 2016. "Identification in Differentiated Products Markets," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 27-52, October.
    2. Attila Ambrus & Emilio Calvano & Markus Reisinger, 2016. "Either or Both Competition: A "Two-Sided" Theory of Advertising with Overlapping Viewerships," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 189-222, August.
    3. Alberto Abadie & Joshua Angrist & Guido Imbens, 2002. "Instrumental Variables Estimates of the Effect of Subsidized Training on the Quantiles of Trainee Earnings," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 91-117, January.
    4. Bart J. Bronnenberg & Jean-Pierre H. Dube & Matthew Gentzkow, 2012. "The Evolution of Brand Preferences: Evidence from Consumer Migration," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2472-2508, October.
    5. Luca Braghieri & Ro'ee Levy & Alexey Makarin, 2022. "Social Media and Mental Health," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(11), pages 3660-3693, November.
    6. Simon P. Anderson & Stephen Coate, 2005. "Market Provision of Broadcasting: A Welfare Analysis," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(4), pages 947-972.
    7. Stéphane Bonhomme & Thibaut Lamadon & Elena Manresa, 2022. "Discretizing Unobserved Heterogeneity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(2), pages 625-643, March.
    8. Anindya Ghose & Sang Pil Han, 2014. "Estimating Demand for Mobile Applications in the New Economy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(6), pages 1470-1488, June.
    9. Avi Goldfarb, 2006. "The medium-term effects of unavailability," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 143-171, June.
    10. Erik Brynjolfsson & Avinash Collis & Felix Eggers, 2019. "Using massive online choice experiments to measure changes in well-being," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(15), pages 7250-7255, April.
    11. Han Yuan, 2020. "Competing for Time: A Study of Mobile Applications," 2020 Papers pyu309, Job Market Papers.
    12. Christopher T. Conlon & Julie Holland Mortimer, 2013. "Demand Estimation under Incomplete Product Availability," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 1-30, November.
    13. Hunt Allcott & Luca Braghieri & Sarah Eichmeyer & Matthew Gentzkow, 2020. "The Welfare Effects of Social Media," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(3), pages 629-676, March.
    14. Graeme Reynolds & Chris Walters, 2008. "The Use Of Customer Surveys For Market Definition And The Competitive Assessment Of Horizontal Mergers," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 411-431.
    15. Hoong, Ruru, 2021. "Self control and smartphone use: An experimental study of soft commitment devices," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    16. Ro'ee Levy, 2021. "Social Media, News Consumption, and Polarization: Evidence from a Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(3), pages 831-870, March.
    17. Susan Athey & Emilio Calvano & Joshua S. Gans, 2018. "The Impact of Consumer Multi-homing on Advertising Markets and Media Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1574-1590, April.
    18. Ruben Enikolopov & Alexey Makarin & Maria Petrova, 2020. "Social Media and Protest Participation: Evidence From Russia," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(4), pages 1479-1514, July.
    19. Jean‐Pierre Dubé & Günter J. Hitsch & Peter E. Rossi, 2010. "State dependence and alternative explanations for consumer inertia," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 417-445, September.
    20. Becker, Gary S & Murphy, Kevin M, 1988. "A Theory of Rational Addiction," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(4), pages 675-700, August.
    21. Steffen Andersen & Glenn Harrison & Morten Lau & E. Rutström, 2009. "Elicitation using multiple price list formats," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(3), pages 365-366, September.
    22. Erica R. Bailey & Sandra C. Matz & Wu Youyou & Sheena S. Iyengar, 2020. "Authentic self-expression on social media is associated with greater subjective well-being," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-9, December.
    23. Simon P. Anderson & Øystein Foros & Hans Jarle Kind, 2018. "Competition for Advertisers and for Viewers in Media Markets," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(608), pages 34-54, February.
    24. Brett R. Gordon & Baohong Sun, 2015. "A Dynamic Model of Rational Addiction: Evaluating Cigarette Taxes," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 452-470, May.
    25. Jay R Corrigan & Saleem Alhabash & Matthew Rousu & Sean B Cash, 2018. "How much is social media worth? Estimating the value of Facebook by paying users to stop using it," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-11, December.
    26. Matthew Shum, 2004. "Does Advertising Overcome Brand Loyalty? Evidence from the Breakfast‐Cereals Market," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 241-272, June.
    27. Bhat, Chandra R., 2008. "The multiple discrete-continuous extreme value (MDCEV) model: Role of utility function parameters, identification considerations, and model extensions," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 274-303, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Leonardo Bursztyn, 2023. "When Product Markets Become Collective Traps: The Case of Social Media," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 260, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    2. Jiménez-Durán, Rafael, 2022. "The economics of content moderation: Theory and experimental evidence from hate speech on Twitter," Working Papers 324, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.

    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. Guy Aridor & Rafael Jiménez-Durán & Ro'ee Levy & Lena Song, 2024. "The Economics of Social Media," CESifo Working Paper Series 10934, CESifo.
    2. Roberto Mosquera & Mofioluwasademi Odunowo & Trent McNamara & Xiongfei Guo & Ragan Petrie, 2020. "The economic effects of Facebook," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(2), pages 575-602, June.
    3. Simon P. Anderson & Øystein Foros & Hans Jarle Kind, 2019. "The importance of consumer multihoming (joint purchases) for market performance: Mergers and entry in media markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 125-137, January.
    4. Jullien, Bruno & Pavan, Alessandro & Rysman, Marc, 2021. "Two-sided Markets, Pricing, and Network Effects," TSE Working Papers 21-1238, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    5. Anderson, Simon P. & Peitz, Martin, 2020. "Media see-saws: Winners and losers in platform markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    6. Ek, Claes & Samahita, Margaret, 2023. "Too much commitment? An online experiment with tempting YouTube content," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 21-38.
    7. Simon P. Anderson & Martin Peitz, 2023. "Ad Clutter, Time Use, and Media Diversity," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 227-270, May.
    8. Calvano, Emilio & Polo, Michele, 2021. "Market power, competition and innovation in digital markets: A survey," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    9. Zennyo, Yusuke, 2020. "Freemium competition among ad-sponsored platforms," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    10. Nicolás Ajzenman & Bruno Ferman & Pedro C. Sant’Anna, 2023. "Rooting for the Same Team: On the Interplay between Political and Social Identities in the Formation of Social Ties," Working Papers 231, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    11. Jay Pil Choi & Seung-Hyun Hong & Seonghoon Jeon, 2013. "Local Identity and Persistent Leadership in Market Share Dynamics: Evidence from Deregulation in the Korean Soju Industry," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 29, pages 267-304.
    12. Affeldt, P. & Argentesi, E. & Filistrucchi, Lapo, 2021. "Estimating Demand with Multi-Homing in Two-Sided Markets," Other publications TiSEM 1317bf39-d02e-4f61-a34f-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Shekhar, Shiva, 2020. "Zero Pricing Platform Competition," MPRA Paper 99364, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. van den Bijgaart, I.M., 2017. "Too slow a change? Deep habits, consumption shifts and transitory tax," Working Papers in Economics 701, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    15. Luca Braghieri & Ro'ee Levy & Alexey Makarin, 2022. "Social Media and Mental Health," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(11), pages 3660-3693, November.
    16. Andrea Tesei & Filipe Campante & Ruben Durante, 2022. "Media and Social Capital," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 69-91, August.
    17. Thomas D. Jeitschko & Mark J. Tremblay, 2020. "Platform Competition With Endogenous Homing," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(3), pages 1281-1305, August.
    18. Argentesi, Elena & Buccirossi, Paolo & Calvano, Emilio & Duso, Tomaso & Marrazzo, Alessia & Nava, Salvatore, 2021. "Merger Policy in Digital Markets: An Ex Post Assessment," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 17(1), pages 95-140.
    19. Bart J. Bronnenberg & Jean-Pierre H. Dube & Matthew Gentzkow, 2012. "The Evolution of Brand Preferences: Evidence from Consumer Migration," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2472-2508, October.
    20. Jiménez Durán, Rafael & Muller, Karsten & Schwarz, Carlo, 2024. "The Effect of Content Moderation on Online and Offline Hate: Evidence from Germany’s NetzDG," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 701, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    social media; mobile apps; attention markets; field experiment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L00 - Industrial Organization - - General - - - General
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ces:ceswps:_10190. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.