IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v21y2004i1p1-24.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fixed Cost Magnitude, Fixed Cost Reporting Format, and Competitive Pricing Decisions: Some Experimental Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • STEVE BUCHHEIT

Abstract

Although neoclassical economic theory predicts that fixed cost magnitude and fixed cost reporting format will not influence short†term pricing decisions, these factors systematically affected pricing decisions in a duopoly experiment. Increasing fixed cost magnitude (a pure sunk cost in this study) across experimental conditions caused participants to first lower, then raise, competitive prices. Consistent with the psychological phenomenon of loss aversion, this change in pricing behavior reduced the frequency of reported losses. This study further reveals that the accounting format for reporting fixed costs influenced pricing behavior. Specifically, participants receiving capacity costing feedback reports established increasingly lower selling prices relative to the prices established by participants receiving contribution margin feedback reports. Given that a very simple cosmetic reporting manipulation produced increasingly significant competitive pricing differences in a market setting, this study provides evidence that functional fixation is not necessarily eliminated by market forces.

Suggested Citation

  • Steve Buchheit, 2004. "Fixed Cost Magnitude, Fixed Cost Reporting Format, and Competitive Pricing Decisions: Some Experimental Evidence," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 1-24, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:21:y:2004:i:1:p:1-24
    DOI: 10.1506/NBX3-EF5Q-4JMU-84DE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1506/NBX3-EF5Q-4JMU-84DE
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1506/NBX3-EF5Q-4JMU-84DE?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. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    2. Van Boening, Mark V & Wilcox, Nathaniel T, 1996. "Avoidable Cost: Ride a Double Auction Roller Coaster," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 461-477, June.
    3. Brown-Kruse, Jamie, et al, 1994. "Bertrand-Edgeworth Competition in Experimental Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(2), pages 343-372, March.
    4. Partha Dasgupta & Eric Maskin, 1986. "The Existence of Equilibrium in Discontinuous Economic Games, I: Theory," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 53(1), pages 1-26.
    5. R. L. Hall & C. J. Hitch, 1939. "Price Theory And Business Behaviour," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 0(1), pages 12-45.
    6. Partha Dasgupta & Eric Maskin, 1986. "The Existence of Equilibrium in Discontinuous Economic Games, II: Applications," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 53(1), pages 27-41.
    7. Sprinkle, Geoffrey B., 2003. "Perspectives on experimental research in managerial accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 287-318.
    8. Hirst, DE & Hopkins, PE, 1998. "Comprehensive income reporting and analysts' valuation judgments," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36, pages 47-75.
    9. Burgstahler, David & Dichev, Ilia, 1997. "Earnings management to avoid earnings decreases and losses," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 99-126, December.
    10. Davis, Douglas D. & Holt, Charles A., 2008. "The Exercise of Market Power in Laboratory Experiments," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 17, pages 138-145, Elsevier.
    11. Buchheit, Steve, 2003. "Reporting the cost of capacity," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 549-565, August.
    12. Libby, Robert & Bloomfield, Robert & Nelson, Mark W., 2002. "Experimental research in financial accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 775-810, November.
    13. Waller, William S. & Shapiro, Brian & Sevcik, Galen, 1999. "Do cost-based pricing biases persist in laboratory markets?," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 24(8), pages 717-739, November.
    14. Allen, Beth & Hellwig, Martin, 1993. "Bertrand-Edgeworth Duopoly with Proportional Residual Demand," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 34(1), pages 39-60, February.
    15. Vernon L. Smith, 1994. "Economics in the Laboratory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 113-131, Winter.
    16. Hopkins, PE, 1996. "The effect of financial statement classification of hybrid financial instruments on financial analysts' stock price judgments," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34, pages 33-50.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ranjani Krishnan, 2019. "Discussion of “Information Asymmetries about Measurement Quality”," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 72-81, March.
    2. David T. Dearman & Michael D. Shields, 2005. "Avoiding Accounting Fixation: Determinants of Cognitive Adaptation to Differences in Accounting Method," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 351-384, June.
    3. Gopalakrishnan, Mohan & Libby, Theresa & Samuels, Janet A. & Swenson, Dan, 2015. "The effect of cost goal specificity and new product development process on cost reduction performance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-11.
    4. Gyun Cheol Gu, 2015. "Why Have U.S. Prices Become Independent of Business Cycles?," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(4), pages 661-685, November.

    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. Buchheit, Steve & Feltovich, Nick, 2010. "Experimental evidence of a sunk–cost paradox: a study of pricing behavior in Bertrand–Edgeworth duopoly," SIRE Discussion Papers 2010-124, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    2. Jacobs, Martin & Requate, Till, 2016. "Bertrand-Edgeworth markets with increasing marginal costs and voluntary trading: Experimental evidence," Economics Working Papers 2016-01, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    3. David Hirshleifer & Sonya S. Lim & Siew Hong Teoh, 2011. "Limited Investor Attention and Stock Market Misreactions to Accounting Information," The Review of Asset Pricing Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 1(1), pages 35-73.
    4. Attila Tasnádi, 2016. "Endogenous timing of moves in Bertrand–Edgeworth triopolies," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 12(4), pages 317-334, December.
    5. Emett, Scott A. & Nelson, Mark W., 2017. "Reporting accounting changes and their multi-period effects," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 52-72.
    6. Daniel, Kent & Hirshleifer, David & Teoh, Siew Hong, 2002. "Investor psychology in capital markets: evidence and policy implications," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 139-209, January.
    7. Martin, Rachel, 2019. "Examination and implications of experimental research on investor perceptions," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 145-169.
    8. Prabal Roy Chowdhury, 2004. "Bertrand-Edgeworth equilibrium: Manipulable residual demand," Discussion Papers 04-15, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    9. Ramnath, Sundaresh & Rock, Steve & Shane, Philip, 2008. "The financial analyst forecasting literature: A taxonomy with suggestions for further research," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 34-75.
    10. Allison, Blake A. & Lepore, Jason J., 2014. "Verifying payoff security in the mixed extension of discontinuous games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 291-303.
    11. Hirshleifer, David & Teoh, Siew Hong, 2003. "Limited attention, information disclosure, and financial reporting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-3), pages 337-386, December.
    12. Mario Blázquez de Paz & Nikita Koptyug, 2023. "Equilibrium Selection in Hawk–Dove Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-30, December.
    13. Prabal Roy Chowdhury, 2004. "Bertrand-Edgeworth equilibrium with a large number of firms," Discussion Papers 04-12, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    14. Tasnádi, Attila, 2001. "A Bertrand-Edgeworth-oligopóliumok. Irodalmi áttekintés [Bertrand-Edgeworth oligopolies - a survey of the literature]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1081-1092.
    15. Gaynor, Lisa Milici & McDaniel, Linda & Yohn, Teri Lombardi, 2011. "Fair value accounting for liabilities: The role of disclosures in unraveling the counterintuitive income statement effect from credit risk changes," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 125-134, April.
    16. Richard Cornes & Roger Hartley, 2012. "Loss Aversion in Contests," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1204, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    17. Ragland, Linda & Reck, Jacqueline L., 2016. "The effects of the method used to present a complex item on the face of a financial statement on nonprofessional investors' judgments," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 77-89.
    18. Athanasakou, Vasiliki E. & Simpson, Ana, 2016. "Investor attention to salient features of analyst forecasts," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 65745, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. van den Berg, Anita & Bos, Iwan, 2017. "Collusion in a price-quantity oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 159-185.
    20. Lachmann, Maik & Stefani, Ulrike & Wöhrmann, Arnt, 2015. "Fair value accounting for liabilities: Presentation format of credit risk changes and individual information processing," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 21-38.

    More about this item

    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:wly:coacre:v:21:y:2004:i:1:p:1-24. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.