IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/oup/jconrs/v21y1995i4p627-33.html

A Rational Reconstruction of the Compromise Effect: Using Market Data to Infer Utilities

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Devetag, M Giovanna, 1999. "From Utilities to Mental Models: A Critical Survey on Decision Rules and Cognition in Consumer Choice," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 8(2), pages 289-351, June.
  2. Caspar Chorus, 2011. "Random Regret Minimization: An Overview of Model Properties and Empirical Evidence," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 75-92, July.
  3. Jörg Rieskamp & Jerome R. Busemeyer & Barbara A. Mellers, 2006. "Extending the Bounds of Rationality: Evidence and Theories of Preferential Choice," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 44(3), pages 631-661, September.
  4. Jihwan Moon & Steven M. Shugan, 2018. "Explaining Bundle-Framing Effects with Signaling Theory," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(4), pages 668-681, August.
  5. Ekström, Mathias, 2021. "The (un)compromise effect: How suggested alternatives can promote active choice," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
  6. Eric T. Anderson & Gavan J. Fitzsimons & Duncan Simester, 2006. "Measuring and Mitigating the Costs of Stockouts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1751-1763, November.
  7. Marcel Lichters & Marko Sarstedt & Bodo Vogt, 2015. "On the practical relevance of the attraction effect: A cautionary note and guidelines for context effect experiments," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, June.
  8. Chorus, Caspar G. & Koetse, Mark J. & Hoen, Anco, 2013. "Consumer preferences for alternative fuel vehicles: Comparing a utility maximization and a regret minimization model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 901-908.
  9. Mortimer, Gary & Weeks, Clinton S., 2019. "How unit price awareness and usage encourages grocery brand switching and expenditure," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 346-356.
  10. 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.
  11. Caspar Chorus & Michel Bierlaire, 2013. "An empirical comparison of travel choice models that capture preferences for compromise alternatives," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 549-562, May.
  12. Pinger, Pia & Ruhmer-Krell, Isabel & Schumacher, Heiner, 2016. "The compromise effect in action: Lessons from a restaurant's menu," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 14-34.
  13. 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.
  14. Arno Apffelstaedt & Lydia Mechtenberg, 2021. "Competition for Context-Sensitive Consumers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2828-2844, May.
  15. Amelie Griesoph & Thomas F. Schreiner & Valentyna Melnyk & Holger D. Jänichen, 2025. "How altruistic alternatives reverse the compromise effect," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 465-479, September.
  16. Chorus, Caspar G. & Annema, Jan Anne & Mouter, Niek & van Wee, Bert, 2011. "Modeling politicians' preferences for road pricing policies: A regret-based and utilitarian perspective," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 856-861, November.
  17. Chorus, Caspar G. & de Jong, Gerard C., 2011. "Modeling experienced accessibility for utility-maximizers and regret-minimizers," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 1155-1162.
  18. Ronayne, David & Brown, Gordon D.A., "undated". "Multi-Attribute Decision By Sampling : An Account Of The Attraction, Compromise And Similarity Effects," Economic Research Papers 269322, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
  19. Sanjay Jain, 2012. "Self-Control and Incentives: An Analysis of Multiperiod Quota Plans," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(5), pages 855-869, September.
  20. Yi Zhu & Anthony Dukes, 2017. "Prominent Attributes Under Limited Attention," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(5), pages 683-698, September.
  21. Catherine Tucker & Juanjuan Zhang, 2010. "Growing Two-Sided Networks by Advertising the User Base: A Field Experiment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 805-814, 09-10.
  22. Sullivan, Nikki & Breslav, Alexander & Doré, Samyukta & Bachman, Matthew & Huettel, Scott A., 2025. "The golden halo of defaults in simple choices," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126086, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  23. Pronobesh Banerjee & Krishanu Rakshit & Sanjay Mishra & Tamara Masters, 2024. "Attribute ratings and their impact on attraction and compromise effects," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 439-450, September.
  24. Raphael Thomadsen & Robert P. Rooderkerk & On Amir & Neeraj Arora & Bryan Bollinger & Karsten Hansen & Leslie John & Wendy Liu & Aner Sela & Vishal Singh & K. Sudhir & Wendy Wood, 2018. "How Context Affects Choice," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 3-14, March.
  25. Junghyun Park & Minki Kim & Pradeep K Chintagunta, 2022. "Mapping Consumers’ Context-Dependent Consumption Preferences: A Multidimensional Unfolding Approach [An Empirical Comparison of Logit Choice Models with Discrete versus Continuous Representations o," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 49(2), pages 202-228.
  26. Cunningham, Thomas, 2013. "Biases and Implicit Knowledge," MPRA Paper 50292, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  27. 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.
  28. Sanjay Jain & Krista J. Li, 2018. "Pricing and Product Design for Vice Goods: A Strategic Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(4), pages 592-610, August.
  29. Bogard, Jonathan E. & Reiff, Joseph S. & Caruso, Eugene M. & Hershfield, Hal E., 2024. "Social inferences from choice context: Dominated options can engender distrust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
  30. Marcel Lichters & Marko Sarstedt & Bodo Vogt, 2015. "On the practical relevance of the attraction effect: A cautionary note and guidelines for context effect experiments," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 5(1), pages 1-19, June.
  31. Irene Maria Buso, 2020. "Choice overload and contextual inference: An experimental test," Working Papers in Public Economics 192, Department of Economics and Law, Sapienza University of Roma.
  32. Lipovetsky, Stan & Conklin, Michael, 2014. "Finding items cannibalization and synergy by BWS data," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 1-9.
  33. Niladri Syam & Partha Krishnamurthy & James D. Hess, 2008. "What I Thought I Wanted? Miswanting and Regret for a Standard Good in a Mass-Customized World," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 379-397, 05-06.
  34. Junnan He, 2021. "Bayesian Contextual Choices under Imperfect Perception of Attributes," Working Papers hal-03878378, HAL.
  35. Dahremöller, Carsten & Fels, Markus, 2015. "Product lines, product design, and limited attention," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 437-456.
  36. J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 2004. "Communication Strategies and Product Line Design," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 304-316, January.
  37. Liang Guo & Juanjuan Zhang, 2012. "Consumer Deliberation and Product Line Design," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 995-1007, November.
  38. J-J Huang, 2009. "Revised behavioural models for riskless consumer choice," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(9), pages 1237-1243, September.
  39. Zibin Xu & Anthony Dukes, 2019. "Product Line Design Under Preference Uncertainty Using Aggregate Consumer Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 669-689, July.
  40. Jonathan Levav & Mark Heitmann & Andreas Herrmann & Sheena S. Iyengar, 2010. "Order in Product Customization Decisions: Evidence from Field Experiments," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(2), pages 274-299, April.
  41. Sanjay Jain, 2009. "Self-Control and Optimal Goals: A Theoretical Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(6), pages 1027-1045, 11-12.
  42. Liang Guo, 2016. "Contextual Deliberation and Preference Construction," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2977-2993, October.
  43. Liang Guo, 2022. "Testing the Role of Contextual Deliberation in the Compromise Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 4326-4355, June.
  44. Coker, Brent & Nagpal, Anish, 2013. "Building-Up versus Paring-Down: Consumer Responses to Recommendations When Customizing," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 190-206.
  45. Junnan He, 2021. "Bayesian Contextual Choices under Imperfect Perception of Attributes," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-03878378, HAL.
  46. Caspar G. Chorus & John M. Rose, 2013. "Selecting a date: a matter of regret and compromises," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Choice Modelling, chapter 11, pages 229-242, Edward Elgar Publishing.
  47. Li, Shengwu & Yu, Ning Neil, 2018. "Context-dependent choice as explained by foraging theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 159-177.
  48. Pronobesh Banerjee & Tamara Masters, 2021. "When consumers do not compromise - An Eye Tracking Study!," Working papers 446, Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode.
  49. Sanjay Jain, 2012. "Marketing of Vice Goods: A Strategic Analysis of the Package Size Decision," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 36-51, January.
  50. T. Tony Ke & Jiwoong Shin & Jungju Yu, 2023. "A Model of Product Portfolio Design: Guiding Consumer Search Through Brand Positioning," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(6), pages 1101-1124, November.
  51. Catherine Tucker & Juanjuan Zhang, 2011. "How Does Popularity Information Affect Choices? A Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 828-842, May.
  52. A. Ye(scedilla)im Orhun, 2009. "Optimal Product Line Design When Consumers Exhibit Choice Set-Dependent Preferences," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 868-886, 09-10.
  53. repec:plo:pcbi00:1002607 is not listed on IDEAS
  54. Jang, Sunghoon & Hong, Doosun & Kim, Youngho & Lee, Chungwon, 2025. "Investigation of preferences for ride-sourcing taxis: Compromise effect and regret-based latent class modeling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
  55. Holger Müller & Eike Kroll & Bodo Vogt, 2012. "Do real payments really matter? A re-examination of the compromise effect in hypothetical and binding choice settings," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 73-92, March.
  56. Catherine Tucker & Juanjuan Zhang, 2008. "Decomposing the Congestion Effect and the Cross-Platform Effect in Two-Sided Networks: A Field Experiment," Working Papers 08-12, NET Institute, revised Oct 2008.
  57. Juanjuan Zhang, 2010. "The Sound of Silence: Observational Learning in the U.S. Kidney Market," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 315-335, 03-04.
  58. Caspar G. Chorus, 2014. "Capturing alternative decision rules in travel choice models: a critical discussion," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 13, pages 290-310, Edward Elgar Publishing.
  59. Jinhong Xie & Steven M. Shugan, 2001. "Electronic Tickets, Smart Cards, and Online Prepayments: When and How to Advance Sell," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 219-243, June.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.