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. Pagel, Michaela, 2013. "Expectations-Based Reference-Dependent Life-Cycle Consumption," MPRA Paper 47138, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Jesse M. Shapiro, 2013. "Fungibility and Consumer Choice: Evidence from Commodity Price Shocks," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 128(4), pages 1449-1498.
    3. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köhler, Katrin, 2016. "Exchange asymmetries for bads? Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 231-241.
    4. 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.
    5. 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).
    6. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    7. Alexander L. Brown & Zhikang Eric Chua & Colin F. Camerer, 2009. "Learning and Visceral Temptation in Dynamic Saving Experiments," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 124(1), pages 197-231.
    8. 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.
    9. David S. Lee, 2009. "Training, Wages, and Sample Selection: Estimating Sharp Bounds on Treatment Effects," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 76(3), pages 1071-1102.
    10. T Nesbit, 2007. "Excise Taxation and Product Quality: The Gasoline Market," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 12(2), pages 1-14, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Botond Koszegi & Adam Szeidl, 2013. "A Model of Focusing in Economic Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 128(1), pages 53-104.
    13. Ofer H. Azar, 2011. "Relative thinking in consumer choice between differentiated goods and services and its implications for business strategy," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(2), pages 176-185, February.
    14. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2006:i:35:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. 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, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 268-284, December.
    22. 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.
    23. 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.
    24. 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.
    25. Kaisa Herne, 1999. "The Effects of Decoy Gambles on Individual Choice," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(1), pages 31-40, August.
    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. Helfrich, Magdalena & Herweg, Fabian, 2017. "Salience in Retailing: Vertical Restraints on Internet Sales," CEPR Discussion Papers 11948, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Mats Köster, 2017. "Salience and Online Sales: The Role of Brand Image Concerns," CESifo Working Paper Series 6787, CESifo.
    3. 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).
    4. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Wenzel, Tobias, 2019. "Focusing and framing of risky alternatives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 289-304.
    5. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köster, Mats, 2017. "Local thinking and skewness preferences," DICE Discussion Papers 248, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    6. Herweg, Fabian & Müller, Daniel & Weinschenk, Philipp, 2017. "Salience, competition, and decoy goods," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 28-31.
    7. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köster, Mats & Peiseler, Florian, 2019. "Attention-driven demand for bonus contracts," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 1-24.
    8. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Mats Köster, 2020. "Salience and Skewness Preferences [Risk-neutral Firms can Extract Unbounded Profits from Consumers with Prospect Theory Preferences]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(5), pages 2057-2107.
    9. Adrian Bruhin & Maha Manai & Luis Santos-Pinto, 2018. "Risk and Rationality:The Relative Importance of Probability Weighting and Choice Set Dependence," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 18.04, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    10. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köster, Mats, 2017. "Salient compromises in the newsvendor game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 301-315.
    11. Céline Bonnet & Jan Philip Schain, 2020. "An Empirical Analysis Of Mergers: Efficiency Gains And Impact On Consumer Prices," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 1-35.
    12. Adrian Bruhin & Maha Manai & Luis Santos-Pinto, 2018. "Risk and Rationality:The Relative Importance of Probability Weighting and Choice Set Dependence," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 18.04, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    13. Ola Andersson & Jim Ingebretsen Carlson & Erik Wengström, 2021. "Differences Attract: An Experimental Study of Focusing in Economic Choice," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(639), pages 2671-2692.
    14. Adrian Bruhin & Maha Manai & Luis Santos-Pinto, 2019. "Risk and Rationality:The Relative Importance of Probability Weighting and Choice Set Dependence," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 19.01new, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    15. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Clark, Derek J. & Mathisen, Terje Andreas, 2020. "Salience in a simple transport market," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    17. Nana Adrian, 2019. "Price Discrimination and Salient Thinking," Diskussionsschriften dp1906, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    18. Jan Engelmann & Alejandro Hirmas & Joël van der Weele, 2021. "Top Down or Bottom Up? Disentangling the Channels of Attention in Risky Choice," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-031/I, Tinbergen Institute.

    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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Minagawa, Junichi, 2012. "On Giffen-like goods," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 282-285.
    5. 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).
    6. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köhler, Katrin, 2016. "Exchange asymmetries for bads? Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 231-241.
    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. 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.
    9. Ola Andersson & Jim Ingebretsen Carlson & Erik Wengström, 2021. "Differences Attract: An Experimental Study of Focusing in Economic Choice," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(639), pages 2671-2692.
    10. Campbell Pryor & Amy Perfors & Piers D. L. Howe, 2018. "Reversing the endowment effect," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(3), pages 275-286, May.
    11. Castillo, Geoffrey, 2020. "The attraction effect and its explanations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 123-147.
    12. Junichi Minagawa & Thorsten Upmann, 2012. "The Generalized Alchian-Allen Theorem," CESifo Working Paper Series 3969, CESifo.
    13. Helfrich, Magdalena & Herweg, Fabian, 2020. "Context-dependent preferences and retailing: Vertical restraints on internet sales," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    14. 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.
    15. Wu, Linhai & Liu, Pingping & Chen, Xiujuan & Hu, Wuyang & Fan, Xuesen & Chen, Yuhuan, 2020. "Decoy effect in food appearance, traceability, and price: Case of consumer preference for pork hindquarters," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    16. Tserenjigmid, Gerelt, 2019. "Choosing with the worst in mind: A reference-dependent model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 631-652.
    17. 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.
    18. Todd M. Nesbit, 2005. "Excise Taxation and Product Quality: The Gasoline Market," Working Papers 05-11 Classification-, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    19. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2020. "Memory, Attention, and Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 135(3), pages 1399-1442.
    20. Nicola Gennaioli & Alberto Martin & Stefano Rossi, 2014. "Sovereign Default, Domestic Banks, and Financial Institutions," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(2), pages 819-866, April.

    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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diduede.html .

    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 hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.