IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/dicedp/216.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Demand shifts due to salience effects: Experimental evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus
  • Köhler, Katrin
  • Lange, Mirjam R. J.
  • Wenzel, Tobias

Abstract

We conduct a laboratory experiment that tests two fundamental predictions unique to salience theory. If an agent purchases one of two vertically differentiated products, salience theory makes the following two distinct predictions. First, it hypothesizes that a higher expected price level for both products shifts demand toward the more expensive, high-quality product. Second, it predicts that demand for the high-quality product is larger if the price level is expectedly high than if it is unexpectedly high. In our experiment, subjects purchased fast or slow internet access at different price levels. Our results strongly support both predictions of salience theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köhler, Katrin & Lange, Mirjam R. J. & Wenzel, Tobias, 2016. "Demand shifts due to salience effects: Experimental evidence," DICE Discussion Papers 216, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:dicedp:216
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/129973/1/855619937.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    2. Alexander L. Brown & Zhikang Eric Chua & Colin F. Camerer, 2009. "Learning and Visceral Temptation in Dynamic Saving Experiments," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(1), pages 197-231.
    3. David S. Lee, 2009. "Training, Wages, and Sample Selection: Estimating Sharp Bounds on Treatment Effects," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(3), pages 1071-1102.
    4. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2012. "Salience in Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(3), pages 47-52, May.
    5. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2006:i:35:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köhler, Katrin, 2016. "Exchange asymmetries for bads? Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 231-241.
    7. Houser, Daniel & Schunk, Daniel & Winter, Joachim & Xiao, Erte, 2018. "Temptation and commitment in the laboratory," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 329-344.
    8. Ben Greiner, 2004. "The Online Recruitment System ORSEE 2.0 - A Guide for the Organization of Experiments in Economics," Working Paper Series in Economics 10, University of Cologne, Department of Economics.
    9. Barzel, Yoram, 1976. "An Alternative Approach to the Analysis of Taxation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 84(6), pages 1177-1197, December.
    10. Borcherding, Thomas E & Silberberg, Eugene, 1978. "Shipping the Good Apples Out: The Alchian and Allen Theorem Reconsidered," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 86(1), pages 131-138, February.
    11. Azar, Ofer H., 2007. "Relative thinking theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 1-14, February.
    12. Botond Koszegi & Adam Szeidl, 2013. "A Model of Focusing in Economic Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(1), pages 53-104.
    13. Timothy B. Heath & Subimal Chatterjee, 1995. "Asymmetric Decoy Effects on Lower-Quality Versus Higher-Quality Brands: Meta-Analytic and Experimental Evidence," Post-Print hal-00670480, HAL.
    14. Highhouse, Scott, 1996. "Context-Dependent Selection: The Effects of Decoy and Phantom Job Candidates," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 68-76, January.
    15. T Nesbit, 2007. "Excise Taxation and Product Quality: The Gasoline Market," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 12(2), pages 1-14, September.
    16. Behaghel, Luc & Crépon, Bruno & Gurgand, Marc & Le Barbanchon, Thomas, 2009. "Sample Attrition Bias in Randomized Experiments: A Tale of Two Surveys," IZA Discussion Papers 4162, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Sobel, Russell S & Garrett, Thomas A, 1997. "Taxation and Product Quality: New Evidence from Generic Cigarettes," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(4), pages 880-887, August.
    18. Ben Greiner, 2004. "The Online Recruitment System ORSEE - A Guide for the Organization of Experiments in Economics," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2003-10, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    19. R. Morris Coats & Gary M. Pecquet & Leon Taylor, 2005. "The pricing of gasoline grades and the third law of demand," Microeconomics 0506006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Sippel, Reinhard, 1997. "An Experiment on the Pure Theory of Consumer's Behaviour," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(444), pages 1431-1444, September.
    21. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    22. Kaisa Herne, 1999. "The Effects of Decoy Gambles on Individual Choice," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(1), pages 31-40, August.
    23. Pagel, Michaela, 2013. "Expectations-Based Reference-Dependent Life-Cycle Consumption," MPRA Paper 47138, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    24. Robert Lawson & Lauren Raymer, 2006. "Testing the Alchian-Allen Theorem: A Study of Consumer Behavior in the Gasoline Market," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(35), pages 1-6.
    25. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:2:p:176-185 is not listed on IDEAS
    26. Jesse M. Shapiro, 2013. "Fungibility and Consumer Choice: Evidence from Commodity Price Shocks," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(4), pages 1449-1498.
    27. Heath, Timothy B & Chatterjee, Subimal, 1995. "Asymmetric Decoy Effects on Lower-Quality versus Higher-Quality Brands: Meta-analytic and Experimental Evidence," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 22(3), pages 268-284, December.
    28. repec:lmu:muenar:19377 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Salience and Consumer Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(5), pages 803-843.
    2. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köhler, Katrin, 2016. "Exchange asymmetries for bads? Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 231-241.
    3. Justine Hastings & Jesse M. Shapiro, 2012. "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice: Evidence from Commodity Price Shocks," NBER Working Papers 18248, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Castillo, Geoffrey, 2020. "The attraction effect and its explanations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 123-147.
    5. Minagawa, Junichi, 2012. "On Giffen-like goods," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 282-285.
    6. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köster, Mats, 2020. "Attention to online sales: The role of brand image concerns," DICE Discussion Papers 335, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    7. Charlotte Emlinger & Viola Lamani, 2020. "International trade, quality sorting and trade costs: the case of Cognac," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 156(3), pages 579-609, August.
    8. Chen Lian & Yueran Ma & Carmen Wang, 2019. "Low Interest Rates and Risk-Taking: Evidence from Individual Investment Decisions," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 32(6), pages 2107-2148.
    9. Philip DeCicca & Donald Kenkel & Feng Liu, 2015. "Reservation Prices: An Economic Analysis of Cigarette Purchases on Indian Reservations," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 68(1), pages 93-118, March.
    10. Astrid Gamba & Elena Manzoni & Luca Stanca, 2017. "Social comparison and risk taking behavior," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(2), pages 221-248, February.
    11. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    12. Haijiao Cui & Bin Cao & Aimei Li & Zhaohui Li, 2023. "A General Model of Subjective Value and Stimulus-Intensity-Sensitive Hedonic Editing Strategy," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 1191-1217, March.
    13. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2012. "Salience Theory of Choice Under Risk," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(3), pages 1243-1285.
    14. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köster, Mats, 2017. "Salient compromises in the newsvendor game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 301-315.
    15. Sürücü, Oktay & Djawadi, Behnud Mir & Recker, Sonja, 2019. "The asymmetric dominance effect: Reexamination and extension in risky choice – An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 102-122.
    16. Liu, Liqun, 2011. "The Alchian-Allen theorem and the law of relative demand: The case of multiple quality-differentiable brands," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 52-57, January.
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:3:p:275-286 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Peter Landry, 2019. "Sunk ‘Decision Points’: a theory of the endowment effect and present bias," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(1), pages 23-39, February.
    19. Blum, Bianca, 2018. "Ausgestaltung einer Steuerpolitik zur Förderung von LED-Beleuchtung," The Constitutional Economics Network Working Papers 01-2018, University of Freiburg, Department of Economic Policy and Constitutional Economic Theory.
    20. Douven, Rudy & van der Heijden, Ron & McGuire, Thomas & Schut, Frederik, 2020. "Premium levels and demand response in health insurance: relative thinking and zero-price effects," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 903-923.
    21. Ola Andersson & Jim Ingebretsen Carlson & Erik Wengström, 2021. "Differences Attract: An Experimental Study of Focusing in Economic Choice," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(639), pages 2671-2692.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    salience theory; attention; relative thinking;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:dicedp:216. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diduede.html .

    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.