IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Optimal Product Line Design When Consumers Exhibit Choice Set-Dependent Preferences

  • A. Ye(scedilla)im Orhun


    (Booth School of Business, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637)

Registered author(s):

    In a market of consumers with varying willingness to pay, using product line as a discrimination tool may extract higher profits than serving all consumers with a single product. Local context effects, however, point to yet another consideration in designing product lines: how the appeal of a product changes with the context provided by other products in the choice set. I present a model of product line design that incorporates both discrimination and context management goals and offers recommendations for the variety and positioning of products. To this end, the model makes use of a framework that allows preferences to be choice set dependent. Given this framework, I study how the firm manages externalities between products created by such dependencies. The firm creates distortions above and beyond those resulting from discrimination motives alone. For example, in a vertically differentiated market for quality, quality distortions exist even for the consumers with the highest valuations. The range of quality provisions, given the number of products, is compressed as the relative importance of unfavorable comparisons among products increases. Surprisingly, this compression may even lead the firm to forego discrimination among consumers regardless of the cost of offering distinct products.

    If 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.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by INFORMS in its journal Marketing Science.

    Volume (Year): 28 (2009)
    Issue (Month): 5 (09-10)
    Pages: 868-886

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:28:y:2009:i:5:p:868-886
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA

    Phone: +1-443-757-3500
    Fax: 443-757-3515
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:

    as in new window
    1. K. Sridhar Moorthy, 1988. "Product and Price Competition in a Duopoly," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 141-168.
    2. Wernerfelt, Birger, 1995. " A Rational Reconstruction of the Compromise Effect: Using Market Data to Infer Utilities," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(4), pages 627-33, March.
    3. Dhar, Ravi, 1997. " Consumer Preference for a No-Choice Option," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(2), pages 215-31, September.
    4. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    5. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    6. Bruce G. S. Hardie & Eric J. Johnson & Peter S. Fader, 1993. "Modeling Loss Aversion and Reference Dependence Effects on Brand Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 378-394.
    7. Taylor Randall & Karl Ulrich & David Reibstein, 1998. "Brand Equity and Vertical Product Line Extent," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 356-379.
    8. Hsee, Christopher K & Leclerc, France, 1998. " Will Products Look More Attractive When Presented Separately or Together?," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 175-86, September.
    9. J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 1999. "Dynamic Competition with Customer Recognition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(4), pages 604-631, Winter.
    10. Robert J. Dolan, 1987. "Quantity Discounts: Managerial Issues and Research Opportunities," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 1-22.
    11. David R. Bell & James M. Lattin, 2000. "Looking for Loss Aversion in Scanner Panel Data: The Confounding Effect of Price Response Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 185-200, May.
    12. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    13. 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.
    14. Eric T. Anderson & Duncan I. Simester, 2001. "Price Discrimination as an Adverse Signal: Why an Offer to Spread Payments May Hurt Demand," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 315-327, November.
    15. Peter H. Farquhar & Vithala R. Rao, 1976. "A Balance Model for Evaluating Subsets of Multiattributed Items," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 528-539, January.
    16. Prelec, Drazen & Wernerfelt, Birger & Zettelmeyer, Florian, 1997. " The Role of Inference in Context Effects: Inferring What You Want from What Is Available," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(1), pages 118-25, June.
    17. Preyas S. Desai, 2001. "Quality Segmentation in Spatial Markets: When Does Cannibalization Affect Product Line Design?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 265-283, August.
    18. Inseong Song & Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 2006. "Measuring Cross-Category Price Effects with Aggregate Store Data," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(10), pages 1594-1609, October.
    19. Chakravarthi Narasimhan & Chuan He & Eric Anderson & Lyle Brenner & Preyas Desai & Dmitri Kuksov & Paul Messinger & Sridhar Moorthy & Joseph Nunes & Yuval Rottenstreich & Richard Staelin & George Wu &, 2005. "Incorporating Behavioral Anomalies in Strategic Models," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 361-373, December.
    20. Chernev, Alexander, 2003. " When More Is Less and Less Is More: The Role of Ideal Point Availability and Assortment in Consumer Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(2), pages 170-83, September.
    21. John T. Gourville & Dilip Soman, 2005. "Overchoice and Assortment Type: When and Why Variety Backfires," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 382-395, July.
    22. Emir Kamenica, 2008. "Contextual Inference in Markets: On the Informational Content of Product Lines," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 2127-49, December.
    23. J. Miguel Villas-Boas & Udo Schmidt-Mohr, 1999. "Oligopoly with Asymmetric Information: Differentiation in Credit Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(3), pages 375-396, Autumn.
    24. Stephen W. Salant, 1989. "When is Inducing Self-Selection Suboptimal for a Monopolist?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 104(2), pages 391-397.
    25. P. Seetharaman & Siddhartha Chib & Andrew Ainslie & Peter Boatwright & Tat Chan & Sachin Gupta & Nitin Mehta & Vithala Rao & Andrei Strijnev, 2005. "Models of Multi-Category Choice Behavior," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 239-254, December.
    26. K. Sridhar Moorthy, 1984. "Market Segmentation, Self-Selection, and Product Line Design," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(4), pages 288-307.
    27. Stole, Lars A, 1995. "Nonlinear Pricing and Oligopoly," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(4), pages 529-62, Winter.
    28. 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 158-74, September.
    29. Axel Stock & Subramanian Balachander, 2005. "The Making of a "Hot Product": A Signaling Explanation of Marketers' Scarcity Strategy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(8), pages 1181-1192, August.
    30. Puneet Manchanda & Asim Ansari & Sunil Gupta, 1999. "The “Shopping Basket”: A Model for Multicategory Purchase Incidence Decisions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 95-114.
    31. Shugan, Steven M, 1984. "Comments on "Pricing a Product Line."," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(1), pages S101-07, January.
    32. Armstrong, Mark & Vickers, John, 2001. "Competitive Price Discrimination," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(4), pages 579-605, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:28:y:2009:i:5:p:868-886. 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: (Mirko Janc)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.