Telecommunications Consumers: A Behavioural Economic Analysis
This paper argues that telecommunications markets present the consumer with a decision-making environment that is particularly likely to be prone to established biases in consumer decision-making. The analysis identifies four properties of telecommunications markets, which in combination are probably unique and which may make the sector prey to biases identified by behavioural economics. The analysis offers a range of known behavioural phenomena that, first, may help to explain the generally low levels of switching between telecommunications providers and, second, could result in failure to select optimum contracts, because of inaccurate expectations of usage or time inconsistent preferences. While more research is required to assess the merit of these hypotheses, they raise the possibility that telecommunications markets may be inefficient and prone to less effective competition than many other consumer markets. Potential policy responses are also discussed.
|Date of creation:||Dec 2011|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (353-1) 863 2000
Fax: (353-1) 863 2100
Web page: http://www.esri.ie
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Stefano DellaVigna, 2009.
"Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field,"
Journal of Economic Literature,
American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-72, June.
- Hans-W. Micklitz & Lucia Reisch & Kornelia Hagen, 2011. "An Introduction to the Special Issue on “Behavioural Economics, Consumer Policy, and Consumer Law”," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 271-276, September.
- John A. List, 2003.
"Neoclassical Theory Versus Prospect Theory: Evidence from the Marketplace,"
NBER Working Papers
9736, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- John A. List, 2004. "Neoclassical Theory Versus Prospect Theory: Evidence from the Marketplace," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 615-625, 03.
- John List, 2004. "Neoclassical theory versus prospect theory: Evidence from the marketplace," Framed Field Experiments 00174, The Field Experiments Website.
- Chris M. Wilson & Catherine Waddams Price, 2010.
"Do consumers switch to the best supplier?,"
Oxford Economic Papers,
Oxford University Press, vol. 62(4), pages 647-668, October.
- Klemperer, Paul, 1987. "Markets with Consumer Switching Costs," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 102(2), pages 375-94, May.
- Xavier Gabaix & David Laibson, 2006.
"Shrouded Attributes, Consumer Myopia, and Information Suppression in Competitive Markets,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 121(2), pages 505-540, May.
- Xavier Gabaix & David Laibson, 2005. "Shrouded Attributes, Consumer Myopia, and Information Suppression in Competitive Markets," NBER Working Papers 11755, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Laibson, David I. & Gabaix, Xavier, 2006. "Shrouded Attributes, Consumer Myopia, and Information Suppression in Competitive Markets," Scholarly Articles 4554333, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Matthew Bennett & Unknown & Amelia Fletcher & Liz Hurley & David Ruck, 2010. "What Does Behavioral Economics Mean for Competition Policy?," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 6.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:esr:wpaper:wp417. 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: (Sarah Burns)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.