Rebates, Matches, and Consumer Behavior
An experiment conducted to examine the effects of different discount formats on consumer purchases is reported. Participants made a series of purchase decisions for chocolate bars given (1) “rebates” from the listed price, (2) “matching” quantities of chocolates for each bar purchased, and (3) simple price reductions. Contrary to standard theoretical predictions, and consistent with results in the context of charitable contributions by Eckel and Grossman (2003), we find that participants purchase significantly more chocolate bars under a “matching” sales format than under a comparable “rebate” format. Inattention to the net consequences of decisions, as well as some “rebate aversion,” explain the preference for matching discounts.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Volume (Year): 72 (2005)
Issue (Month): 2 (October)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.southerneconomic.org/|
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.:
- Philippe Fevrier & Michael Visser, 2000.
"A Study of Consumer Behavior Using Laboratory Data,"
Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers
1095, Econometric Society.
- Philippe FÃ©vrier & Michael Visser, 2004. "A Study of Consumer Behavior Using Laboratory Data," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 93-114, February.
- Elizabeth Hoffman & Dale J. Menkhaus & Dipankar Chakravarti & Ray A. Field & Glen D. Whipple, 1993. "Using Laboratory Experimental Auctions in Marketing Research: A Case Study of New Packaging for Fresh Beef," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 318-338.
- Douglas Davis & Edward Millner & Robert Reilly, 2005. "Subsidy Schemes and Charitable Contributions: A Closer Look," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 85-106, June.
- Glenn W. Harrison & Ronald M. Harstad & E. Elisabet Rutstr–m, 2004.
"Experimental Methods and Elicitation of Values,"
Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 123-140, 06.
- James Andreoni & Lise Vesterlund, 2001.
"Which Is The Fair Sex? Gender Differences In Altruism,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 116(1), pages 293-312, February.
- Andreoni,J. & Vesterlund,L., 1998. "Which is the fair sex? : Gender differences in altruism," Working papers 10, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- Andreoni, James & Vesterlund, Lise, 2001. "Which is the Fair Sex? Gender Differences in Altruism," Staff General Research Papers 1951, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- John Kagel & Leonard Green & Raymond Battalio, 1995. "Economic choice theory. an experimental analysis of animal behavior," Framed Field Experiments 00166, The Field Experiments Website.
- Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 2003. "Rebate versus matching: does how we subsidize charitable contributions matter?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(3-4), pages 681-701, March.
- James Andreoni & John Miller, 2002. "Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 737-753, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sej:ancoec:v:72:2:y:2005:p:410-421. 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: (Laura Razzolini)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.