IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reecon/v68y2014i1p70-83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Test for the real option in consumer behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Eric A.L.

Abstract

Consumers become indecisive when facing too many choices. Economic analysis suggests that when a decision involves uncertain outcome, can be delayed and is irreversible, there will be a real option in the cost–benefit analysis. For example, the option to keep alive a consumer's purchasing decision has a significant value. It allows the consumer to take advantage of any future advantageous deals while avoiding the bad choices. This renders the consumer more hesitant. When a consumer decides to exercise his buying decision, he demands a compensation for the loss of this option. Hence, the benefits of a purchase must be over and above its costs by a wide margin (the option value). Data from a survey at a Turkish university on hypothetical purchase decisions confirmed the existence of this real option. We conclude with marketing policy recommendations and future research directions. Connection to the Prospect Theory is briefly explored.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Eric A.L., 2014. "Test for the real option in consumer behavior," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 70-83.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reecon:v:68:y:2014:i:1:p:70-83
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rie.2013.11.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090944313000689
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rie.2013.11.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, 1994. "Investment under Uncertainty," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 5474.
    2. Kahn, Barbara E & Wansink, Brian, 2004. "The Influence of Assortment Structure on Perceived Variety and Consumption Quantities," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(4), pages 519-533, March.
    3. Harrison, J. Michael & Kreps, David M., 1979. "Martingales and arbitrage in multiperiod securities markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 381-408, June.
    4. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    5. Dhar, Ravi, 1997. "Consumer Preference for a No-Choice Option," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(2), pages 215-231, September.
    6. John T. Gourville & Dilip Soman, 2005. "Overchoice and Assortment Type: When and Why Variety Backfires," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 382-395, July.
    7. Stephen J. Hoch & Eric T. Bradlow & Brian Wansink, 1999. "The Variety of an Assortment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 527-546.
    8. Dixit, Avinash & Pindyck, Robert S & Sodal, Sigbjorn, 1999. "A Markup Interpretation of Optimal Investment Rules," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(455), pages 179-189, April.
    9. Chernev, Alexander, 2003. "When More Is Less and Less Is More: The Role of Ideal Point Availability and Assortment in Consumer Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 170-183, September.
    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. Yan, Huan & Chang, En-Chung & Chou, Ting-Jui & Tang, Xiaofei, 2015. "The over-categorization effect: How the number of categorizations influences shoppers' perceptions of variety and satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 631-638.
    2. Jonah Berger & Michaela Draganska & Itamar Simonson, 2007. "The Influence of Product Variety on Brand Perception and Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 460-472, 07-08.
    3. Pizzi, Gabriele & Scarpi, Daniele, 2016. "The effect of shelf layout on satisfaction and perceived assortment size: An empirical assessment," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 67-77.
    4. Chang, Chingching, 2011. "The Effect of the Number of Product Subcategories on Perceived Variety and Shopping Experience in an Online Store," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 159-168.
    5. Claire Heeryung Kim & Joonkyung Kim, 2021. "The Role of Cause Involvement and Assortment Size on Decision Difficulty via Communal Relationships," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-16, December.
    6. Elvira Saez-Gonzalez & Juan Carlos Gazquez-Abad, 2024. "Could Assortment Rationalisation Help Reduce Food Waste in Grocery Stores?," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 26(Special 1), pages 1292-1292, November.
    7. Qin, Dan, 2024. "A simple model of two-stage choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    8. Mark Heitmann & Andreas Herrmann & Christian Kaiser, 2007. "The effect of product variety on purchase probability," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 111-131, August.
    9. Beneke, Justin & Cumming, Alice & Jolly, Lindsey, 2013. "The effect of item reduction on assortment satisfaction—A consideration of the category of red wine in a controlled retail setting," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 282-291.
    10. 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.
    11. Neeraj Arora & Ty Henderson & Qing Liu, 2011. "Noncompensatory Dyadic Choices," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1028-1047, November.
    12. Michele Moretto & Gianpaolo Rossini, 2008. "Entry Strategies of Partnerships versus Conventional Firms," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 75(1), pages 159-172, July.
    13. Spassova, Gerri & Isen, Alice M., 2013. "Positive affect moderates the impact of assortment size on choice satisfaction," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 89(4), pages 397-408.
    14. Lee, Ha Kyung & Choo, Ho Jung, 2019. "Birds of a feather flocked together look abundant: The visual gestalt effect of an assortment presentation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 170-182.
    15. Kwak, Kyuseop & Duvvuri, Sri Devi & Russell, Gary J., 2015. "An Analysis of Assortment Choice in Grocery Retailing," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 19-33.
    16. Sethuraman, Raj & Gázquez-Abad, Juan Carlos & Martínez-López, Francisco J., 2022. "The effect of retail assortment size on perceptions, choice, and sales: Review and research directions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 24-45.
    17. Kahn, Barbara E., 2017. "Using Visual Design to Improve Customer Perceptions of Online Assortments," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 29-42.
    18. Zhang, Xubing & Cao, Yong, 2014. "Selling Vertically Differentiated Products under One Roof or Two? A Signaling Model of a Retailer's Roof Policies," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(4), pages 538-551.
    19. Wiebach, Nicole & Hildebrandt, Lutz, 2012. "Explaining customers' switching patterns to brand delisting," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 1-10.
    20. Aurier, Philippe & Mejía, Victor D., 2020. "The interplay of brand-line assortment size and alignability in the sales of brand-lines and line-extensions of frequently purchased products," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 163-175.

    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:eee:reecon:v:68:y:2014:i:1:p:70-83. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622941 .

    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.