IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2610.14225.html

Shaping the Menu: Information Design under Screening

Author

Listed:
  • Panagiotis Kyriazis

Abstract

How should consumers learn when a seller chooses a menu of product qualities and prices? We study information design when the seller observes the learning policy, but not consumers' private signals, before choosing its menu. Under cost-curvature conditions, we characterize optimal learning when consumer surplus receives greater weight than profit. Even with two valuations, every optimal posterior distribution combines an interval of posterior types with an efficiently served atom at the highest valuation. The induced menu features a continuum of differentiated products. Strikingly, optimal learning can also induce a lower posterior atom, separated from this interval by a support gap. Buyers in this atom either purchase an isolated low-quality product or are excluded, even when trade with every buyer creates gains. Both configurations can be optimal for the same prior and welfare weight. Served buyers with distinct posterior types are never bunched at the same quality. General finite priors can yield several separating regions and trading atoms. We also characterize the optimal joint design of learning and valuation-dependent segmentation, showing, among other results, that every posterior type with positive gains from trade must be served. Joint design can raise both consumer surplus and profit relative to buyer-optimal private learning alone. Even random assignment to segments with different learning policies and separate menus can give consumers more surplus than any single market yielding the same profit. Additional price discrimination can therefore benefit consumers, even when privacy restrictions require segmentation to reveal nothing about valuations to the seller.

Suggested Citation

  • Panagiotis Kyriazis, 2026. "Shaping the Menu: Information Design under Screening," Papers 2610.14225, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2610.14225
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.14225
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anne-Katrin Roesler & Balázs Szentes, 2017. "Buyer-Optimal Learning and Monopoly Pricing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(7), pages 2072-2080, July.
    2. Lewis, Tracy R & Sappington, David E M, 1994. "Supplying Information to Facilitate Price Discrimination," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 35(2), pages 309-327, May.
    3. Andreas Kleiner & Benny Moldovanu & Philipp Strack, 2021. "Extreme Points and Majorization: Economic Applications," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(4), pages 1557-1593, July.
    4. Emir Kamenica & Matthew Gentzkow, 2011. "Bayesian Persuasion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2590-2615, October.
    5. Marco Ottaviani & Andrea Prat, 2001. "The Value of Public Information in Monopoly," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1673-1683, November.
    6. Jeffrey Mensch & Doron Ravid & Jo~ao Thereze, 2022. "Monopoly, Product Quality, and Costly Information," Papers 2202.09985, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2026.
    7. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    8. Doron Ravid & Anne-Katrin Roesler & Balázs Szentes, 2022. "Learning before Trading: On the Inefficiency of Ignoring Free Information," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(2), pages 346-387.
    9. Kolotilin, Anton, 2018. "Optimal information disclosure: a linear programming approach," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), May.
    10. Piotr Dworczak & Giorgio Martini, 2019. "The Simple Economics of Optimal Persuasion," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(5), pages 1993-2048.
    11. Dong Wei & Brett Green, 2024. "(Reverse) Price Discrimination with Information Design," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 267-295, May.
    12. Justin P. Johnson & David P. Myatt, 2006. "On the Simple Economics of Advertising, Marketing, and Product Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 756-784, June.
    13. Eric Maskin & John Riley, 1984. "Monopoly with Incomplete Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(2), pages 171-196, Summer.
    14. Heski Bar-Isaac & Guillermo Caruana & Vicente Cuñat, 2023. "Targeted Product Design," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 157-186, May.
    15. Panagiotis Kyriazis, 2026. "Designing Markets for Screening: Optimal Composition and the Geometry of Surplus," Papers 2604.09340, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2026.
    16. Fanqi Shi & Yutong Zhang & Litian Chen, 2026. "Multi‐Product Monopolist and Information Design," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 57(1), pages 16-38, March.
    17. Daniele Condorelli & Balázs Szentes, 2020. "Information Design in the Holdup Problem," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(2), pages 681-709.
    18. Jonas von Wangenheim, 2025. "Optimal Information Design of Online Marketplaces with Return Rights," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 133(9), pages 3019-3043.
    19. Carmona, Guilherme & Laohakunakorn, Krittanai, 2025. "Monopoly pricing with optimal information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    20. Kartik, Navin & Zhong, Weijie, 2026. "Lemonade from lemons: information design and adverse selection," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 21(1), January.
    21. Dirk Bergemann & Benjamin Brooks & Stephen Morris, 2015. "The Limits of Price Discrimination," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(3), pages 921-957, March.
    22. Condorelli, Daniele & Szentes, Balázs, 2020. "Information design in the holdup problem," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 90620, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    23. Matthew Gentzkow & Emir Kamenica, 2016. "A Rothschild-Stiglitz Approach to Bayesian Persuasion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 597-601, May.
    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. Mark Armstrong & Jidong Zhou, 2022. "Consumer Information and the Limits to Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(2), pages 534-577, February.
    2. Yang, Kai Hao, 2021. "Efficient demands in a multi-product monopoly," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    3. Zhou, Jidong, 2021. "Mixed bundling in oligopoly markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    4. Maxim Ivanov, 2021. "Optimal monotone signals in Bayesian persuasion mechanisms," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 72(3), pages 955-1000, October.
    5. Kai Hao Yang & Alexander K. Zentefis, 2022. "Gerrymandering and the Limits of Representative Democracy," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2328, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    6. Daniel Krähmer, 2024. "The hold-up problem with flexible unobservable investments," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2024_523, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    7. Dirk Bergemann & Tibor Heumann & Stephen Morris, 2026. "Screening with Persuasion," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 134(2), pages 570-625.
    8. Raphael Boleslavsky & Silvana Krasteva, 2025. "Limits of Disclosure in Search Markets," Papers 2506.06319, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2026.
    9. Daniel Krähmer, 2024. "The Hold-Up Problem with Flexible Unobservable Investments," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 278, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    10. Anja Prummer & Francesco Nava, 2023. "Value Design in Optimal Mechanisms," Economics working papers 2023-05, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    11. Maryam Saeedi & Ali Shourideh, 2020. "Optimal Rating Design under Moral Hazard," Papers 2008.09529, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2026.
    12. Tim S. G. van Eck & Pieter Kleer & Johan S. H. van Leeuwaarden, 2026. "Distributionally Robust Monopoly Pricing: Switching from Low to High Prices in Volatile Markets," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 1248-1265, July.
    13. Lyu, Chen, 2023. "Information design for selling search goods and the effect of competition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    14. Semyon Malamud & Andreas Schrimpf, 2021. "Persuasion by Dimension Reduction," Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 21-69, Swiss Finance Institute.
    15. Yang, Kai Hao, 2023. "On the continuity of outcomes in a monopoly market," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    16. Anton Kolotilin & Alexander Wolitzky, 2020. "Assortative Information Disclosure," Discussion Papers 2020-08, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    17. Anton Kolotilin & Tymofiy Mylovanov & Andriy Zapechelnyuk, 2019. "Censorship as Optimal Persuasion," Discussion Paper Series, School of Economics and Finance 201903, School of Economics and Finance, University of St Andrews, revised 05 Mar 2020.
    18. Ozan Candogan & Philipp Strack, 2021. "Optimal Disclosure of Information to a Privately Informed Receiver," Papers 2101.10431, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    19. Kim, Kyungmin & Koh, Youngwoo, 2022. "Auctions with flexible information acquisition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 256-281.
    20. Vasudha Jain & Mark Whitmeyer, 2021. "Search and Competition with Flexible Investigations," Papers 2104.13159, arXiv.org.

    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:arx:papers:2610.14225. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.