IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v26y2007i1p118-129.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Price as a Stimulus to Think: The Case for Willful Overpricing

Author

Listed:
  • Luc Wathieu

    (Harvard Business School, Soldiers Field, Boston, Massachusetts 02163)

  • Marco Bertini

    (London Business School, Regent's Park, London, NW1 4SA United Kingdom)

Abstract

Consumers aware of a new benefit will often experience uncertainty about its personal relevance or usage value. This paper shows that the decision to deliberate further to resolve this uncertainty and reach a polarized judgment of personal relevance critically depends on the posted price. In particular, a price above the consumer's initial willingness to pay might be thought provoking and enhance the perception of relevance with a certain probability. This behavioral mechanism is introduced formally and by way of an experiment with reference to the purchase of organic lettuce and fair-trade coffee. Accounting for the effect of price as a stimulus to think, a monopolistic firm should either over price (“transgressive pricing”) or under price (“regressive pricing”) in comparison to the consumer's willingness to pay. Under certain circumstances, the firm should also empower consumers with means that reduce the effort of deliberation.

Suggested Citation

  • Luc Wathieu & Marco Bertini, 2007. "Price as a Stimulus to Think: The Case for Willful Overpricing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 118-129, 01-02.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:26:y:2007:i:1:p:118-129
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.1060.0222
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1060.0222
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.1060.0222?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Celsi, Richard L & Olson, Jerry C, 1988. "The Role of Involvement in Attention and Comprehension Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(2), pages 210-224, September.
    2. Belk, Russell W, 1988. "Possessions and the Extended Self," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(2), pages 139-168, September.
    3. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1986. "Price and Advertising Signals of Product Quality," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 796-821, August.
    4. Oliver D. Hart, 1979. "Monopolistic Competition in a Large Economy with Differentiated Commodities," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 46(1), pages 1-30.
    5. Hauser, John R & Wernerfelt, Birger, 1990. "An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(4), pages 393-408, March.
    6. John C. Liechty & Duncan K. H. Fong & Wayne S. DeSarbo, 2005. "Dynamic Models Incorporating Individual Heterogeneity: Utility Evolution in Conjoint Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 285-293, November.
    7. Lester G. Telser, 1964. "Advertising and Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 72(6), pages 537-537.
    8. Ozanne, Julie L & Brucks, Merrie & Grewal, Dhruv, 1992. "A Study of Information Search Behavior during the Categorization of New Products," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 18(4), pages 452-463, March.
    9. Eric J. Johnson & John W. Payne, 1985. "Effort and Accuracy in Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 395-414, April.
    10. Nelson, Philip, 1974. "Advertising as Information," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(4), pages 729-754, July/Aug..
    11. Michael D. Johnson, 1986. "Modeling Choice Strategies for Noncomparable Alternatives," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 37-54.
    12. Elie Ofek & V. Srinivasan, 2002. "How Much Does the Market Value an Improvement in a Product Attribute?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 398-411, June.
    13. Meyers-Levy, Joan & Tybout, Alice M, 1989. "Schema Congruity as a Basis for Product Evaluation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(1), pages 39-54, June.
    14. Avner Shaked & John Sutton, 1982. "Relaxing Price Competition Through Product Differentiation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 49(1), pages 3-13.
    15. John R. Hauser & Olivier Toubia, 2005. "The Impact of Utility Balance and Endogeneity in Conjoint Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 498-507, August.
    16. Shugan, Steven M, 1980. "The Cost of Thinking," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 7(2), pages 99-111, Se.
    17. Bernheim, B Douglas, 1994. "A Theory of Conformity," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(5), pages 841-877, October.
    18. Gregory S. Carpenter & Kent Nakamoto, 1990. "Competitive Strategies for Late Entry into a Market with a Dominant Brand," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(10), pages 1268-1278, October.
    19. Stayman, Douglas M & Alden, Dana L & Smith, Karen H, 1992. "Some Effects of Schematic Processing on Consumer Expectations and Disconfirmation Judgments," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 19(2), pages 240-255, September.
    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. Nick Vikander, 2011. "Targeted Advertising and Social Status," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 11-016/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    2. Krähmer, Daniel, 2005. "Advertising and Conspicuous Consumption," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 72, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    3. John Hauser, 2011. "A marketing science perspective on recognition-based heuristics (and the fast-and-frugal paradigm)," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(5), pages 396-408, July.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:5:p:396-408 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Ulrich Doraszelski & Sarit Markovich, 2007. "Advertising dynamics and competitive advantage," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(3), pages 557-592, September.
    6. Paolo G. Garella & Martin Peitz, 2000. "Intermediation Can Replace Certification," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, March.
    7. Wang, Shinn-Shyr & Stiegert, Kyle W., 2006. "The Duopolistic Firm with Endogenous Risk Control: Case of Persuasive Advertising and Product Differentiation," Staff Paper Series 496, University of Wisconsin, Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    8. DeSarbo, Wayne S. & Choi, Jungwhan, 1998. "A latent structure double hurdle regression model for exploring heterogeneity in consumer search patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 423-455, November.
    9. Hauser, John R., 2014. "Consideration-set heuristics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1688-1699.
    10. Grunewald, Andreas & Kräkel, Matthias, 2017. "Advertising as signal jamming," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 91-113.
    11. Kim, Aekyoung & Briley, Donnel, 2020. "Finding the self in chance events," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 853-867.
    12. Schoormans, Jan P. L. & Robben, Henry S. J., 1997. "The effect of new package design on product attention, categorization and evaluation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 18(2-3), pages 271-287, April.
    13. Anderson, Simon P. & Gabszewicz, Jean J., 2006. "The Media and Advertising: A Tale of Two-Sided Markets," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, in: V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 567-614, Elsevier.
    14. Yan, Huan & Chang, En-Chung & Chou, Ting-Jui & Tang, Xiaofei, 2015. "The over-categorization effect: How the number of categorizations influences shoppers' perceptions of variety and satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 631-638.
    15. Pradeep Bhardwaj & Yuxin Chen & David Godes, 2008. "Buyer-Initiated vs. Seller-Initiated Information Revelation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(6), pages 1104-1114, June.
    16. Sören Köcher & Hartmut H. Holzmüller, 2014. "Zu viel des Guten? Eine Analyse der Wirkung von Verbraucherschutzinformation," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 66(4), pages 306-343, June.
    17. Stivers, Andrew & Tremblay, Victor J., 2005. "Advertising, search costs, and social welfare," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 317-333, July.
    18. Soberman, David A. & Xiang, Yi, 2022. "Designing the content of advertising in a differentiated market," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 190-211.
    19. Wang, Shinn-Shyr & Stiegert, Kyle W., 2006. "The Duopolistic Firm with Endogenous Risk Control: Case of Persuasive Advertising and Product Differentiation," Staff Papers 12606, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    20. Liang Guo & Yue Wu, 2016. "Consumer deliberation and quality signaling," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 233-269, September.
    21. Georgios Halkias & Flora Kokkinaki, 2010. "Attention, Memory, and Evaluation of Schema Incongruent Brand Messages. An Empirical Study," Labsi Experimental Economics Laboratory University of Siena 032, University of Siena.

    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:inm:ormksc:v:26:y:2007:i:1:p:118-129. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.