IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v41y2012i2p255-265.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Demand cross elasticity without substitutability: An experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Luini, Luigi
  • Sabbatini, Pierluigi

Abstract

We study a market in which goods are produced under low marginal costs with a poor degree of substitutability among products. In this environment we ran an experiment to explain why prices are interdependent even when preferences are independent. We compare our results to previous theoretical and laboratory experimental literature on price fairness. We find that even in the absence of interaction among subjects, price fairness/unfairness does play a major role in the decision to accept or reject a deal. Subjects tend to be more resistant to a price increase and reject a deal when the preferred product is not referenced to price increases of not substitute products, if these products are considered to be a benchmark for fair conduct. Thus demand cross elasticity can arise between products that are not substitutes. This result has important implications for antitrust policy. In delineating a market perimeter, fairness concerns suggest that products that are similar but not interchangeable should be included in the relevant antitrust market.

Suggested Citation

  • Luini, Luigi & Sabbatini, Pierluigi, 2012. "Demand cross elasticity without substitutability: An experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 255-265.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:41:y:2012:i:2:p:255-265
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2011.12.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053535711001636
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2011.12.011?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. Edi Karni & Tim Salmon & Barry Sopher, 2008. "Individual sense of fairness: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 11(2), pages 174-189, June.
    2. Kenneth S. Corts, 1998. "Third-Degree Price Discrimination in Oligopoly: All-Out Competition and Strategic Commitment," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 306-323, Summer.
    3. Motta,Massimo, 2004. "Competition Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521816632.
    4. Motta,Massimo, 2004. "Competition Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521016919.
    5. Julio J. Rotemberg, 2011. "Fair Pricing," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(5), pages 952-981, October.
    6. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1986. "Fairness and the Assumptions of Economics," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 285-300, October.
    7. 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..
    8. Alba, Joseph W, et al, 1994. "The Influence of Prior Beliefs, Frequency Cues, and Magnitude Cues on Consumers' Perceptions of Comparative Price Data," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(2), pages 219-235, September.
    9. Daskalopoulou, Irene, 2008. "Fairness perceptions and observed consumer behavior: Results of a partial observability model," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 31-44, February.
    10. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    11. Erik Brynjolfsson & Michael D. Smith, 2000. "Frictionless Commerce? A Comparison of Internet and Conventional Retailers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(4), pages 563-585, April.
    12. Phillip Leslie, 2004. "Price Discrimination in Broadway Theater," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(3), pages 520-541, Autumn.
    13. Briesch, Richard A, et al, 1997. "A Comparative Analysis of Reference Price Models," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(2), pages 202-214, September.
    14. Brown, Thomas C., 2005. "Loss aversion without the endowment effect, and other explanations for the WTA-WTP disparity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 367-379, July.
    15. Ball, Laurence & Mankiw, N. Gregory, 1994. "A sticky-price manifesto," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 127-151, December.
    16. Richard H. Thaler, 2008. "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 15-25, 01-02.
    17. Praveen K. Kopalle & Ambar G. Rao & João L. Assunção, 1996. "Asymmetric Reference Price Effects and Dynamic Pricing Policies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 60-85.
    18. Pierluigi Sabbatini, 2008. "Assessing the Impact of Antitrust Intervention by the Italian Competition Authority," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 491-505, December.
    19. Smith, Vernon L., 2005. "Behavioral economics research and the foundations of economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 135-150, March.
    20. Eric T. Anderson & Duncan I. Simester, 2008. "—Does Demand Fall When Customers Perceive That Prices Are Unfair? The Case of Premium Pricing for Large Sizes," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 492-500, 05-06.
    21. Franciosi, Robert, et al, 1995. "Fairness: Effect on Temporary and Equilibrium Prices in Posted-Offer Markets," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(431), pages 938-950, July.
    22. Ben Shiller & Joel Waldfogel, 2011. "Music for a Song: An Empirical Look at Uniform Pricing and Its Alternatives," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(4), pages 630-660, December.
    23. Utpal M. Dholakia & Itamar Simonson, 2005. "The Effect of Explicit Reference Points on Consumer Choice and Online Bidding Behavior," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 206-217, October.
    24. Frey, Bruno S. & Pommerehne, Werner W., 1993. "On the fairness of pricing -- An empirical survey among the general population," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 295-307, April.
    25. Daniel S. Putler, 1992. "Incorporating Reference Price Effects into a Theory of Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 287-309.
    26. Bruno S. Frey & Beat Gygi, 1988. "Die Fairness von Preisen," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 124(IV), pages 519-541, December.
    27. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard, 1986. "Fairness as a Constraint on Profit Seeking: Entitlements in the Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 728-741, 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. Richards, Timothy J. & Liaukonyte, Jura & Streletskaya, Nadia A., 2016. "Personalized pricing and price fairness," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 138-153.
    2. Konow, James, 1996. "A positive theory of economic fairness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 13-35, October.
    3. Sojin Jung & Hyeon Jeong Cho & Byoungho Ellie Jin, 2020. "Does effective cost transparency increase price fairness? An analysis of apparel brand strategies," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(5), pages 495-507, September.
    4. Kalyanaram, Gurumurthy & Winer, Russell S., 2022. "Behavioral response to price: Data-based insights and future research for retailing," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 46-70.
    5. Sojin Jung & Hyeon Jeong Cho & Byoungho Ellie Jin, 0. "Does effective cost transparency increase price fairness? An analysis of apparel brand strategies," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 0, pages 1-13.
    6. Richards, Timothy & Liaukonyte, Jura & Nadia, Streletskya, 2016. "Personalized Pricing and Price Fairness," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235809, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Ioana Popescu & Yaozhong Wu, 2007. "Dynamic Pricing Strategies with Reference Effects," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(3), pages 413-429, June.
    8. Suresh P. Sethi & Sushil Gupta & Vipin K. Agrawal & Vijay K. Agrawal, 2022. "Nobel laureates’ contributions to and impacts on operations management," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(12), pages 4283-4303, December.
    9. Ahrens, Steffen & Pirschel, Inske & Snower, Dennis J., 2014. "A theory of price adjustment under loss aversion," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2014-065, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    10. Ahrens, Steffen & Pirschel, Inske & Snower, Dennis J., 2017. "A theory of price adjustment under loss aversion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 78-95.
    11. Dmitri Kuksov & Kangkang Wang, 2014. "The Bright Side of Loss Aversion in Dynamic and Competitive Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(5), pages 693-711, September.
    12. Amit Mehra & Sajeesh Sajeesh & Sudhir Voleti, 2020. "Impact of Reference Prices on Product Positioning and Profits," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(4), pages 882-892, April.
    13. Elshiewy, Ossama & Peschel, Anne O., 2022. "Internal reference price response across store formats," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 496-509.
    14. Friesen, Mark, 2020. "A dynamic perspective on consumers’ price fairness perception: Empirical evidence from the airline industry," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 74(4), pages 403-425.
    15. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    16. Mathies, Christine & Gudergan, Siegfried P., 2011. "The role of fairness in modelling customer choice," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 22-29.
    17. van Oest, Rutger, 2013. "Why are Consumers Less Loss Averse in Internal than External Reference Prices?," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 62-71.
    18. Seligman, David A. & Schwartz, Barry, 1997. "Domain specificity of fairness judgments in economic transactions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 579-604, November.
    19. William J. Allender & Jura Liaukonyte & Sherif Nasser & Timothy J. Richards, 2021. "Price Fairness and Strategic Obfuscation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(1), pages 122-146, January.
    20. Andreas Leibbrandt, 2016. "Behavioral Constraints on Pricing: Experimental Evidence on Price Discrimination and Customer Antagonism," CESifo Working Paper Series 6214, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Demand cross elasticity; Price reference; Unfairness; Antitrust relevant market;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law

    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:eee:soceco:v:41:y:2012:i:2:p:255-265. 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/620175 .

    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.