IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v149y2016icp38-43.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A monetary measure of the strength and robustness of the attraction effect

Author

Listed:
  • Crosetto, Paolo
  • Gaudeul, Alexia

Abstract

The Attraction Effect has been studied in conditions of indifference among options and measured at the aggregate level. We introduce a new within-subjects design based on induced preferences and psychometrics. Our method yields two individual-level measures: the traditional, frequency measure and a new, monetary indicator. The monetary indicator measures the robustness of the effect to decreases in the relative utility of the target with respect to the competitor. We find choice frequencies consistent with the literature. Our monetary measure shows that subjects still prefer the target up to the point where it is 8% more expensive than the competitor.

Suggested Citation

  • Crosetto, Paolo & Gaudeul, Alexia, 2016. "A monetary measure of the strength and robustness of the attraction effect," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 38-43.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:149:y:2016:i:c:p:38-43
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2016.09.031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176516303901
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. " Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    2. Doron Sonsino, 2010. "The irrelevant-menu affect on valuation," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 13(3), pages 309-333, September.
    3. Paolo Crosetto & Alexia Gaudeul, 2011. "Do consumers prefer offers that are easy to compare? An experimental investigation," Jena Economic Research Papers 2011-044, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    4. Huber, Joel & Payne, John W & Puto, Christopher, 1982. " Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 90-98, June.
    5. Lunn, Pete & Somerville, Jason J., 2015. "Surplus Identification with Non-Linear Returns," Papers WP522, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    6. Huber, Joel & Puto, Christopher, 1983. " Market Boundaries and Product Choice: Illustrating Attraction and Substitution Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 31-44, June.
    7. Marcel Lichters & Marko Sarstedt & Bodo Vogt, 2015. "On the practical relevance of the attraction effect: A cautionary note and guidelines for context effect experiments," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, June.
    8. Kaisa Herne, 1999. "The Effects of Decoy Gambles on Individual Choice," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(1), pages 31-40, August.
    9. Kroll, Eike Benjamin & Vogt, Bodo, 2012. "The relevance of irrelevant alternatives," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 435-437.
    10. Crosetto, Paolo & Gaudeul, Alexia, 2012. "Do consumers prefer offers that are easy to compare? An experimental investigation," MPRA Paper 41462, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Asymmetric dominance; Attraction effect; Psychometrics; Induced preferences; Experimental economics;

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    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:eee:ecolet:v:149:y:2016:i:c:p:38-43. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.