Theory of Product Differentiation in the Presence of the Attraction Effect

We apply the theoretical model of endogenous reference-dependence of Ok, Ortoleva and Riella (2011) to the theory of vertical product differentiation. We analyze the standard problem of a monopolist who offers a menu of alternatives to consumers of different types, but we allow for agents to exhibit a form of endogenous reference dependence like the attraction effect. We show that the presence of such biases might allow the monopolist to overcome some of the incentive compatibility constraints of the standard problem, leading the economy back towards the efficient equilibrium in which the monopolist extracts all the surplus. We then discuss welfare implications, showing that an increase in the fraction of customers who are subject to the attraction effect might not only increase the monopolist’s profits and total welfare, but consumer’s welfare as well. JEL Classification: D11, L12, L15

[1]  R. Spiegler.  Bounded Rationality and Industrial Organization , 2011 .

[2]  Ian J. Bateman,et al.  Decoy Effects in Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation: Asymmetric Dominance , 2008, Land Economics.

[3]  Jacob S. Sagi.  Anchored preference relations , 2006, J. Econ. Theory.

[4]  Susanna Esteban,et al.  Temptation, self-control, and competitive nonlinear pricing , 2006 .

[5]  Eiichi Miyagawa,et al.  Nonlinear Pricing with Self-Control Preferences , 2003, J. Econ. Theory.

[6]  David L. Schwarzkopf.  The Effects of Attraction on Investment Decisions , 2003 .

[7]  Itamar Simonson,et al.  The Role of Explanations and Need for Uniqueness in Consumer Decision Making: Unconventional Choices Based on Reasons , 2000 .

[8]  Scott Highhouse,et al.  Decoy effects and attribute-level inferences. , 1999 .

[9]  Faruk Gul,et al.  Temptation and Self‐Control , 1999 .

[10]  G. Chapman,et al.  Are More Options Always Better? , 1999, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[11]  Ran Kivetz.  Advances in Research on Mental Accounting and Reason-Based Choice , 1999 .

[12]  Kaisa Herne.  The Effects of Decoy Gambles on Individual Choice , 1999 .

[13]  J. Doyle,et al.  The robustness of the asymmetrically dominated effect: Buying frames, phantom alternatives, and in‐store purchases , 1999 .

[14]  Sankar Sen.  Knowledge, Information Mode, and the Attraction Effect , 1998 .

[15]  Kaisa Herne.  Decoy alternatives in policy choices: Asymmetric domination and compromise effects , 1997 .

[16]  Dan Ariely,et al.  Seeking Subjective Dominance in Multidimensional Space: An Explanation of the Asymmetric Dominance Effect , 1995 .

[17]  D. Redelmeier,et al.  Medical decision making in situations that offer multiple alternatives. , 1995, JAMA.

[18]  D. Lehmann,et al.  Context Effects, New Brand Entry, and Consideration Sets , 1994 .

[19]  S. Mishra,et al.  Antecedents of the Attraction Effect: An Information-Processing Approach , 1993 .

[20]  A. Tversky,et al.  Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion , 1992 .

[21]  D. H. Wedell,et al.  Distinguishing Among Models of Contextually Induced Preference Reversals , 1991 .

[22]  I. Simonson,et al.  Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects , 1989 .

[23]  G. Zinkhan,et al.  Changes in consumer choice: Further investigation of similarity and attraction effects , 1987 .

[24]  Allan D. Shocker,et al.  Toward understanding the attraction effect: The implications of product stimulus meaningfulness and familiarity. , 1987 .

[25]  Christopher P. Puto,et al.  Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity & the Similarity Hypothesis. , 1981 .

[26]  S. Rosen,et al.  Monopoly and product quality , 1978 .

[27]  J. Slaughter.  Effects of two selection batteries on decoy effects in job-finalist choice , 2007 .

[28]  S. Shafir,et al.  Context-dependent violations of rational choice in honeybees (Apis mellifera) and gray jays (Perisoreus canadensis) , 2001, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[29]  R. Srivastava,et al.  Explaining Context Effects on Choice Using a Model of Comparative Judgment , 2000 .

[30]  Scott Highhouse,et al.  Context-Dependent Selection: The Effects of Decoy and Phantom Job Candidates , 1996 .

[31]  K. Sivakumar,et al.  Role of product entry and exit on the attraction effect , 1995 .

[32]  Yigang Pan Sue O’Curry,et al.  The Attraction Effect and Political Choice in Two Elections , 1995 .