When Judgments and Preferences Fail to Conform: Research on Preference Reversals for Product Purchases
AbstractIn this paper, the preference reversal phenomenon known from risk research is investigated according to which subjects prefer gamble A over B in competitive decisions although they reveal higher valuations in terms of a cash equivalent (CE) or a willingness to pay (WTP) for the latter when gambles are assessed separately in monadic judgments. In contrast to the experimental settings of research on risky choices, our studies observed unforced and binding purchase decisions of experienced consumers between real products in natural shopping environments. Results confirm robustness of preference reversals in risk-free purchase decisions indicating that orderings of product preferences reverse significantly between evaluations in monadic and competitive designs. While recent pricing research has been largely focused on monadic designs and suggested BDM mechanisms or second-price auctions for elicitations of consumers’ true willingness to pay, results of our studies indicate a substantial discrepancy between preference orders based on monadic judgments and preferences that consumers reveal in competitive purchase decisions.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management in its series FEMM Working Papers with number 100003.
Length: 19 pages
Date of creation: Jan 2010
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Universitätsplatz 2, Gebäude W und I, 39106 Magdeburg
Phone: (0391) 67-18 584
Fax: (0391) 67-12 120
Web page: http://www.ww.uni-magdeburg.de
More information through EDIRC
Preference Reversals; Willingness to Pay; Monadic Designs; Competitive Designs; Pricing Research; Procedure Invariance;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2010-05-15 (All new papers)
- NEP-CBE-2010-05-15 (Cognitive & Behavioural Economics)
- NEP-DCM-2010-05-15 (Discrete Choice Models)
- NEP-MKT-2010-05-15 (Marketing)
- NEP-UPT-2010-05-15 (Utility Models & Prospect Theory)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Park, Jong-Won & Hastak, Manoj, 1994. " Memory-Based Product Judgments: Effects of Involvement at Encoding and Retrieval," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(3), pages 534-47, December.
- Noussair, C.N. & Ruffieux, B. & Robin , S., 2004.
"Revealing consumers' willingness to pay: A comparison of the BDM mechanism and the vickrey auction,"
Open Access publications from Tilburg University
urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-377937, Tilburg University.
- Noussair, Charles & Robin, Stephane & Ruffieux, Bernard, 2004. "Revealing consumers' willingness-to-pay: A comparison of the BDM mechanism and the Vickrey auction," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 725-741, December.
- Franziska Völckner & Julian Hofmann, 2007. "The price-perceived quality relationship: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its determinants," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 181-196, September.
- Simonson, Itamar, 1989. " Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(2), pages 158-74, September.
- E. Elisabet RutstrÃm, 1998. "Home-grown values and incentive compatible auction design," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 427-441.
- Tversky, Amos & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Anomalies: Preference Reversals," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(2), pages 201-11, Spring.
- David M. Grether & James C. Cox, 1996.
"The preference reversal phenomenon: Response mode, markets and incentives (*),"
Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 381-405.
- Cox, James C. & Grether, David M., 1993. "The Preference Reversal Phenomenon: Response Mode, Markets and Incentives," Working Papers 810, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- John A. List, 2002. "Preference Reversals of a Different Kind: The "More Is Less" Phenomenon," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1636-1643, December.
- Francisca Sinn & Sandra Milberg & Leonardo Epstein & Ronald Goodstein, 2007. "Compromising the compromise effect: Brands matter," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 223-236, December.
- McAfee, R Preston & McMillan, John, 1987. "Auctions and Bidding," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 25(2), pages 699-738, June.
- Hsee, Christopher K., 1996. "The Evaluability Hypothesis: An Explanation for Preference Reversals between Joint and Separate Evaluations of Alternatives," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 247-257, September.
- Huber, Joel & Payne, John W & Puto, Christopher, 1982. " Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(1), pages 90-98, June.
- Braga, Jacinto & Humphrey, Steven J. & Starmer, Chris, 2009.
"Market experience eliminates some anomalies--and creates new ones,"
European Economic Review,
Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 401-416, May.
- Jacinto Braga & Steven Humphrey & Chris Starmer, 2006. "Market Experience Eliminates Some Anomalies – And Creates New Ones," Discussion Papers 2006-19, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
- Karni, Edi & Safra, Zvi, 1987. ""Preference Reversal' and the Observability of Preferences by Experimental Methods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(3), pages 675-85, May.
- Bazerman, Max H. & Moore, Don A. & Tenbrunsel, Ann E. & Wade-Benzoni, Kimberly A. & Blount, Sally, 1999. "Explaining how preferences change across joint versus separate evaluation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 41-58, May.
- Xiaoyong Chai, 2005. "Cognitive Preference Reversal or Market Price Reversal?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 177-194, 04.
- Reilly, Robert J, 1982. "Preference Reversal: Further Evidence and Some Suggested Modifications in Experimental Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 576-84, June.
- Keane, Michael, 1997. "Current Issues in Discrete Choice Modeling," MPRA Paper 52515, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Peter Frykblom, 2000. "Willingness to pay and the choice of question format: experimental results," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(10), pages 665-667.
- Tversky, Amos & Slovic, Paul & Kahneman, Daniel, 1990. "The Causes of Preference Reversal," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 204-17, March.
- Grether, David M. & Plott, Charles R., .
"Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon,"
152, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Grether, David M & Plott, Charles R, 1979. "Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(4), pages 623-38, September.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guido Henkel).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.