IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/bamber/184.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Competition with limited attention to quality differences

Author

Listed:
  • Schmitt, Stefanie Y.

Abstract

I analyze the implication of consumers' limited attention to quality differences on market outcomes and welfare. I model this limited attention to quality differences with a perception threshold: Consumers only perceive quality differences between goods that exceed the consumers' perception threshold. The model allows for two types of equilibria: equilibria with distinguishable and equilibria with indistinguishable qualities. I show that horizontal product differentiation, which gives firms market power, affects equilibrium selection. If firms are horizontally differentiated, firms produce goods with indistinguishable qualities. Then, limited attention harms consumers and benefits firms. In contrast, if firms are not horizontally differentiated, firms produce goods with distinguishable qualities. Then, limited attention has no effect on consumers' welfare or firms' profits.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmitt, Stefanie Y., 2022. "Competition with limited attention to quality differences," BERG Working Paper Series 184, Bamberg University, Bamberg Economic Research Group.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:bamber:184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/264887/1/1816723606.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Armstrong & Yongmin Chen, 2009. "Inattentive Consumers and Product Quality," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 7(2-3), pages 411-422, 04-05.
    2. Allen, Beth & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1992. "Price Equilibria in Pure Strategies for Homogeneous Oligopoly," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 63-81, Spring.
    3. Hunt Allcott & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2015. "Evaluating Behaviorally Motivated Policy: Experimental Evidence from the Lightbulb Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(8), pages 2501-2538, August.
    4. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    5. Nicola Lacetera & Devin G. Pope & Justin R. Sydnor, 2012. "Heuristic Thinking and Limited Attention in the Car Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2206-2236, August.
    6. Geoffroy de Clippel & Kfir Eliaz & Kareen Rozen, 2014. "Competing for Consumer Inattention," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 122(6), pages 1203-1234.
    7. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2018. "Competing for Attention: Is the Showiest Also the Best?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(609), pages 827-844.
    8. Horan, Sean & Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco, 2022. "When is coarseness not a curse? Comparative statics of the coarse random utility model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    9. Xavier Gabaix & David Laibson, 2018. "Shrouded attributes, consumer myopia and information suppression in competitive markets," Chapters, in: Victor J. Tremblay & Elizabeth Schroeder & Carol Horton Tremblay (ed.), Handbook of Behavioral Industrial Organization, chapter 3, pages 40-74, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Meghan R. Busse & Nicola Lacetera & Devin G. Pope & Jorge Silva-Risso & Justin R. Sydnor, 2013. "Estimating the Effect of Salience in Wholesale and Retail Car Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(3), pages 575-579, May.
    11. Balart, Pau, 2021. "Semiorder preferences and price-oriented buyers in a Hotelling model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 394-407.
    12. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2018. "Competing for Attention: Is the Showiest Also the Best?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(609), pages 827-844, March.
    13. Chung, Kim-Sau & Liu, Erica Meixiazi & Lo, Melody, 2021. "Selling to consumers who cannot detect small differences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    14. Weijia Dai & Michael Luca, 2020. "Digitizing Disclosure: The Case of Restaurant Hygiene Scores," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 41-59, May.
    15. Astorne-Figari, Carmen & López, José Joaquín & Yankelevich, Aleksandr, 2019. "Advertising for consideration," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 653-669.
    16. Hunt Allcott, 2013. "The Welfare Effects of Misperceived Product Costs: Data and Calibrations from the Automobile Market," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 5(3), pages 30-66, August.
    17. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1988. "Similarity and decision-making under risk (is there a utility theory resolution to the Allais paradox?)," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 145-153, October.
    18. Jennifer Brown & Tanjim Hossain & John Morgan, 2010. "Shrouded Attributes and Information Suppression: Evidence from the Field," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(2), pages 859-876.
    19. Benjamin Bachi, 2016. "Competition with price similarities," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 4(2), pages 277-290, October.
    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. Saur, Marc P. & Schlatterer, Markus G. & Schmitt, Stefanie Y., 2022. "Limited perception and price discrimination in a model of horizontal product differentiation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 151-168.
    2. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Reto Foellmi & Stefan Legge & Lukas Schmid, 2016. "Do Professionals Get It Right? Limited Attention and Risk‐taking Behaviour," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(592), pages 724-755, May.
    4. Ginger Zhe Jin & Michael Luca & Daniel Martin, 2022. "Complex Disclosure," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(5), pages 3236-3261, May.
    5. Persson, Petra, 2018. "Attention manipulation and information overload," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 78-106, May.
    6. Florian Englmaier & Arno Schmöller & Till Stowasser, 2018. "Price Discontinuities in an Online Market for Used Cars," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(6), pages 2754-2766, June.
    7. Chioveanu, Ioana & Zhou, Jidong, 2009. "Price Competition and Consumer Confusion," MPRA Paper 17340, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Michael Grubb, 2015. "Behavioral Consumers in Industrial Organization: An Overview," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 47(3), pages 247-258, November.
    9. Meng, Charlotte C., 2023. "The price paid: Heuristic thinking and biased reference points in the housing market," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    10. Laura Abrardi, 2019. "Behavioral barriers and the energy efficiency gap: a survey of the literature," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 46(1), pages 25-43, March.
    11. Florian Englmaier & Andreas Roider & Lars Schlereth & Steffen Sebastian, 2023. "Round-Number Effects in Real Estate Prices: Evidence from Germany," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 446, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    12. Königsheim, C. & Lukas, M. & Nöth, M., 2019. "Salience theory: Calibration and heterogeneity in probability distortion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 477-495.
    13. Palmer, Karen & Walls, Margaret, 2015. "Does Information Provision Shrink the Energy Efficiency Gap? A Cross-City Comparison of Commercial Building Benchmarking and Disclosure Laws," RFF Working Paper Series dp-15-12, Resources for the Future.
    14. Zemin (Zachary) Zhong, 2022. "Chasing Diamonds and Crowns: Consumer Limited Attention and Seller Response," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 4380-4397, June.
    15. Luca Repetto & Alex Solís, 2020. "The Price of Inattention: Evidence from the Swedish Housing Market," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(6), pages 3261-3304.
    16. Andor, Mark Andreas & Götte, Lorenz & Price, Michael Keith & Schulze Tilling, Anna & Tomberg, Lukas, 2023. "Differences in how and why social comparisons and real-time feedback impact resource use: Evidence from a field experiment," Ruhr Economic Papers 1059, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    17. Eva M. Berger & Felix Schmidt, 2017. "Inattention in the Rental Housing Market: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Working Papers 1716, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, revised 06 Sep 2019.
    18. Sunde, Uwe & Roider, Andreas & Englmaier, Florian, 2012. "The Role of Salience in Performance Schemes: Evidence from a Field Experiment," CEPR Discussion Papers 8921, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Wichman, Casey J., 2017. "Information provision and consumer behavior: A natural experiment in billing frequency," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 13-33.
    20. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Mats Köster & Matthias Sutter, 2019. "To Buy or not to Buy? Shrouding and Partitioning of Prices in an Online Shopping Field Experiment," CESifo Working Paper Series 7475, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Limited Attention; Perception Threshold; Product Differentiation; Product Quality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    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:zbw:bamber:184. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bebamde.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.