IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joreco/v51y2019icp1-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the applicability of the BDM mechanism in product evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Lichters, Marcel
  • Wackershauser, Verena
  • Han, Shixing
  • Vogt, Bodo

Abstract

The Becker-DeGroot-Marschak (BDM) procedure for measuring consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) is widely esteemed, since it is considered to be incentive-compatible. This study investigates BDM's applicability in product evaluation by implementing a facultative resell option at the actual market price. Under this condition, rational individuals should bid at least the market price. However, the results demonstrate that participants’ stated WTP is significantly lower. They also confirm that consumers’ purchase interest governs their inclination to engage in "irrational" bidding behavior and, thereby, provide a deeper understanding on consumers’ misconceptions about the BDM procedure.

Suggested Citation

  • Lichters, Marcel & Wackershauser, Verena & Han, Shixing & Vogt, Bodo, 2019. "On the applicability of the BDM mechanism in product evaluation," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-7.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:joreco:v:51:y:2019:i:c:p:1-7
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.02.021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969698918305721
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chatterjee, Patrali & Kumar, Archana, 2017. "Consumer willingness to pay across retail channels," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 264-270.
    2. 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.
    3. Nils Wlömert & Felix Eggers, 2016. "Predicting new service adoption with conjoint analysis: external validity of BDM-based incentive-aligned and dual-response choice designs," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 195-210, March.
    4. Parsa, H.G. & Lord, Kenneth R. & Putrevu, Sanjay & Kreeger, Jeff, 2015. "Corporate social and environmental responsibility in services: Will consumers pay for it?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 250-260.
    5. Nawel Ayadi & Magali Giraud & Christine Gonzalez, 2013. "An investigation of consumers' self-control mechanisms when confronted with repeated purchase temptations: Evidence from online private sales," Post-Print halshs-00801296, HAL.
    6. Florence Charton-Vachet & Cindy Lombart, 2018. "Impact of the link between individuals and their region on the customer-regional brand relationship," Post-Print hal-01760245, HAL.
    7. Corrigan, Jay R. & Rousu, Matthew C. & Depositario, Dinah Pura T., 2014. "Do practice rounds affect experimental auction results?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 123(1), pages 42-44.
    8. Vogel, Julia & Paul, Michael, 2015. "One firm, one product, two prices: Channel-based price differentiation and customer retention," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 126-139.
    9. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    10. Lee, Min-Young & Kim, Youn-Kyung & Fairhurst, Ann, 2009. "Shopping value in online auctions: Their antecedents and outcomes," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 75-82.
    11. Corrigan, Jay R. & Rousu, Matthew C., 2008. "Testing Whether Field Auction Experiments Are Demand Revealing in Practice," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(2).
    12. Ayadi, Nawel & Giraud, Magali & Gonzalez, Christine, 2013. "An investigation of consumers' self-control mechanisms when confronted with repeated purchase temptations: Evidence from online private sales," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 272-281.
    13. repec:feb:framed:0078 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Ligas, Mark & Chaudhuri, Arjun, 2012. "The moderating roles of shopper experience and store type on the relationship between perceived merchandise value and willingness to pay a higher price," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 249-258.
    15. Dong, Songting & Ding, Min & Huber, Joel, 2010. "A simple mechanism to incentive-align conjoint experiments," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 25-32.
    16. Rombach, Meike & Widmar, Nicole Olynk & Byrd, Elizabeth & Bitsch, Vera, 2018. "Do all roses smell equally sweet? Willingness to pay for flower attributes in specialized retail settings by German consumers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 91-99.
    17. Marcel Lichters & Marko Sarstedt & Bodo Vogt, 2015. "On the practical relevance of the attraction effect: A cautionary note and guidelines for context effect experiments," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, June.
    18. Lichters, Marcel & Müller, Holger & Sarstedt, Marko & Vogt, Bodo, 2016. "How durable are compromise effects?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4056-4064.
    19. Charles R. Plott & Kathryn Zeiler, 2005. "The Willingness to Pay–Willingness to Accept Gap, the "Endowment Effect," Subject Misconceptions, and Experimental Procedures for Eliciting Valuations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(3), pages 530-545, June.
    20. Irwin, Julie R, et al, 1998. "Payoff Dominance vs. Cognitive Transparency in Decision Making," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(2), pages 272-285, April.
    21. Lindblom, Arto & Lindblom, Taru & Wechtler, Heidi, 2018. "Collaborative consumption as C2C trading: Analyzing the effects of materialism and price consciousness," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 244-252.
    22. Bahn, Kenneth D. & Boyd, Eric, 2014. "Information and its impact on consumers׳ reactions to restrictive return policies," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 415-423.
    23. Bohm, Peter & Linden, Johan & Sonnegard, Joakim, 1997. "Eliciting Reservation Prices: Becker-DeGroot-Marschak Mechanisms vs. Markets," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(443), pages 1079-1089, July.
    24. Richard H. Thaler & Eric J. Johnson, 1990. "Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 643-660, June.
    25. Charton-Vachet, Florence & Lombart, Cindy, 2018. "Impact of the link between individuals and their region on the customer-regional brand relationship," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 170-187.
    26. 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.
    27. Wei, Shuqin & Ang, Tyson & Jancenelle, Vivien E., 2018. "Willingness to pay more for green products: The interplay of consumer characteristics and customer participation," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 230-238.
    28. Franziska Voelckner, 2006. "An empirical comparison of methods for measuring consumers’ willingness to pay," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 137-149, April.
    29. Fisher, Robert J, 1993. "Social Desirability Bias and the Validity of Indirect Questioning," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 303-315, September.
    30. Cindy Lombart & Blandine Labbé-Pinlon & Marc Filser & Blandine Anteblian & Didier Louis, 2018. "Regional product assortment and merchandising in grocery stores: Strategies and target customer segments," Post-Print hal-01715072, HAL.
    31. Timothy N. Cason & Charles R. Plott, 2014. "Misconceptions and Game Form Recognition: Challenges to Theories of Revealed Preference and Framing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 122(6), pages 1235-1270.
    32. Gupta, Anil & Arora, Neelika, 2017. "Understanding determinants and barriers of mobile shopping adoption using behavioral reasoning theory," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 1-7.
    33. Müller, Holger & Kroll, Eike B. & Vogt, Bodo, 2012. "Violations of procedure invariance—The case of preference reversals in monadic and competitive product evaluations," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 406-412.
    34. Ortega, David L. & Wolf, Christopher A., 2018. "Demand for farm animal welfare and producer implications: Results from a field experiment in Michigan," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 74-81.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:joreco:v:51:y:2019:i:c:p:1-7. 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: (Haili He). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-retailing-and-consumer-services .

    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.