IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v96y2022ics2214804321001294.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Limited attention in beverage choice: Evidence from a field experiment1

Author

Listed:
  • Shin, Jinwook
  • Kim, Kookdong

Abstract

This study provides experimental evidence on consumers’ inattention in a beverage choice setting and estimates the degree of inattention under a theoretical framework. In the field experiment, the shelf placement of the beverage varied exogenously. Displaying less (more) sugary beverages at eye height (the farthest position from eye height) increases (decreases) consumers’ demand by 24.8% (25.3%). The estimated consumers’ degree of inattention to the farthest position from eye height was around 20%. Changing the display reduced consumers’ sugar intake from beverages by 5573 g during the intervention, about 6.86 g per consumption (about 13.7% of the World Health Organization's (WHO) daily sugar intake recommendation). Our findings support the idea that the limited attention in beverage choice can be harnessed as a nudge policy to reduce consumers’ intake of sugar from sugar-sweetened beverages.

Suggested Citation

  • Shin, Jinwook & Kim, Kookdong, 2022. "Limited attention in beverage choice: Evidence from a field experiment1," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:96:y:2022:i:c:s2214804321001294
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2021.101789
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804321001294
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2021.101789?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. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    2. Basu, S. & McKee, M. & Galea, G. & Stuckler, D., 2013. "Relationship of soft drink consumption to global overweight, obesity, and diabetes: A cross-national analysis of 75 countries," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 103(11), pages 2071-2077.
    3. Nicola Lacetera & Devin G. Pope & Justin R. Sydnor, 2012. "Heuristic Thinking and Limited Attention in the Car Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2206-2236, August.
    4. Denis Drexler & Martin Souček, 2017. "The Level of Shelves and Space Solution as One of the Key Factors for Consumer Attention," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 65(5), pages 1679-1686.
    5. Michael D. Grubb & Matthew Osborne, 2015. "Cellular Service Demand: Biased Beliefs, Learning, and Bill Shock," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 234-271, January.
    6. Alex Rees-Jones & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2018. "Taxing Humans: Pitfalls of the Mechanism Design Approach and Potential Resolutions," Tax Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 107-133.
    7. Yuval Salant & Ariel Rubinstein, 2008. "(A, f): Choice with Frames -super-1," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(4), pages 1287-1296.
    8. Jennifer Brown & Tanjim Hossain & John Morgan, 2010. "Shrouded Attributes and Information Suppression: Evidence from the Field," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(2), pages 859-876.
    9. Kenney, E.L. & Gortmaker, S.L. & Carter, J.E. & Howe, M.C.W. & Reiner, J.F. & Cradock, A.L., 2015. "Grab a cup, fill it up! an intervention to promote the 1 of drinking water and increase student water consumption during school lunch," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 105(9), pages 1777-1783.
    10. Thorndike, A.N. & Sonnenberg, L. & Riis, J. & Barraclough, S. & Levy, D.E., 2012. "A 2-phase labeling and choice architecture intervention to improve healthy food and beverage choices," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 102(3), pages 527-533.
    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. Andor, Mark Andreas & Götte, Lorenz & Price, Michael Keith & Schulze Tilling, Anna & Tomberg, Lukas, 2023. "Differences in how and why social comparisons and real-time feedback impact resource use: Evidence from a field experiment," Ruhr Economic Papers 1059, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    2. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Avi Goldfarb & Mo Xiao, 2024. "Transitory shocks, limited attention, and a firm’s decision to exit," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 223-255, September.
    4. Reto Foellmi & Stefan Legge & Lukas Schmid, 2016. "Do Professionals Get It Right? Limited Attention and Risk‐taking Behaviour," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(592), pages 724-755, May.
    5. Florian Englmaier & Arno Schmöller & Till Stowasser, 2018. "Price Discontinuities in an Online Market for Used Cars," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(6), pages 2754-2766, June.
    6. Thomas Fujiwara & Carlos Sanz, 2017. "Norms in bargaining: evidence from government formation in Spain," Working Papers 1741, Banco de España.
    7. Schmitt, Stefanie Y., 2022. "Competition with limited attention to quality differences," BERG Working Paper Series 184, Bamberg University, Bamberg Economic Research Group.
    8. Friesen, Lana & Earl, Peter E., 2015. "Multipart tariffs and bounded rationality: An experimental analysis of mobile phone plan choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 239-253.
    9. Meng, Charlotte C., 2023. "The price paid: Heuristic thinking and biased reference points in the housing market," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    10. Florian Englmaier & Andreas Roider & Lars Schlereth & Steffen Sebastian, 2023. "Round-Number Effects in Real Estate Prices: Evidence from Germany," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 446, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    11. Saur, Marc P. & Schlatterer, Markus G. & Schmitt, Stefanie Y., 2022. "Limited perception and price discrimination in a model of horizontal product differentiation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 151-168.
    12. Allcott, Hunt & Mullainathan, Sendhil & Taubinsky, Dmitry, 2014. "Energy policy with externalities and internalities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 72-88.
    13. Kevin Ducbao Tran, 2020. "Partitioned Pricing and Consumer Welfare," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1888, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    14. Katrina Jessoe & David Rapson, 2014. "Knowledge Is (Less) Power: Experimental Evidence from Residential Energy Use," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1417-1438, April.
    15. Palmer, Karen & Walls, Margaret, 2015. "Does Information Provision Shrink the Energy Efficiency Gap? A Cross-City Comparison of Commercial Building Benchmarking and Disclosure Laws," RFF Working Paper Series dp-15-12, Resources for the Future.
    16. Zemin (Zachary) Zhong, 2022. "Chasing Diamonds and Crowns: Consumer Limited Attention and Seller Response," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 4380-4397, June.
    17. Luca Repetto & Alex Solís, 2020. "The Price of Inattention: Evidence from the Swedish Housing Market," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(6), pages 3261-3304.
    18. Eva M. Berger & Felix Schmidt, 2017. "Inattention in the Rental Housing Market: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Working Papers 1716, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, revised 06 Sep 2019.
    19. Sunde, Uwe & Roider, Andreas & Englmaier, Florian, 2012. "The Role of Salience in Performance Schemes: Evidence from a Field Experiment," CEPR Discussion Papers 8921, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Lukas Buchheim & Thomas Kolaska, 2017. "Weather and the Psychology of Purchasing Outdoor Movie Tickets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(11), pages 3718-3738, November.

    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:96:y:2022:i:c:s2214804321001294. 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.