IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v35y2024i3p978-991.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Attention Economy: Measuring the Value of Free Goods on the Internet

Author

Listed:
  • Erik Brynjolfsson

    (Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI at Stanford University, Stanford Digital Economy Laboratory, Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford Department of Economics, National Bureau of Economic Research, Stanford, California 94305)

  • Seon Tae Kim

    (School of Management and Economics, Handong Global University, Pohang, Gyeongbuk 37554, Republic of Korea)

  • Joo Hee Oh

    (School of Management and Economics, Handong Global University, Pohang, Gyeongbuk 37554, Republic of Korea)

Abstract

We develop a framework to measure the value of free goods and services available on the internet. The conventional method of measuring consumer surplus based on monetary expenditures is ineffective because these goods’ prices are predominantly zero. Our proposed method addresses this challenge by quantifying the economic value of the time that consumers devote to consuming these free goods. Using data on consumers’ time and monetary expenditures, we calibrate an economic model of the allocation of individuals’ time among internet, television, leisure, and work. We measure the consumer surplus of free goods on the internet as the reduction in gross domestic product (GDP) required to create an equivalent welfare loss to that which would occur if these free goods were no longer available. We find that the average incremental welfare gain from the internet between 2002 and 2011 was about $38 billion per year in the United States, equivalent to approximately 0.29% of the annual GDP. In contrast, if we had not considered the value of time, then the estimated annual incremental welfare gain would have been significantly smaller at about $2.7 billion, only 7% of the estimate derived from our proposed time-based model. Our approach can be readily extended to the valuation of other zero-priced goods and services, such as television. In addition, our results show the importance of not only quantity but also quality (e.g., internet speed) in determining the welfare contributions of free goods.

Suggested Citation

  • Erik Brynjolfsson & Seon Tae Kim & Joo Hee Oh, 2024. "The Attention Economy: Measuring the Value of Free Goods on the Internet," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 978-991, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:35:y:2024:i:3:p:978-991
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.2021.0153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.2021.0153
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.2021.0153?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Per Krusell & Lee E. Ohanian & JosÈ-Victor RÌos-Rull & Giovanni L. Violante, 2000. "Capital-Skill Complementarity and Inequality: A Macroeconomic Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1029-1054, September.
    2. Austan Goolsbee & Peter J. Klenow, 2006. "Valuing Consumer Products by the Time Spent Using Them: An Application to the Internet," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 108-113, May.
    3. Diewert, Erwin & FOX, Kevin J. Fox & SCHREYER, Paul, 2017. "The Digital Economy, New Products and Consumer Welfare," Microeconomics.ca working papers erwin_diewert-2017-12, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 14 Dec 2017.
    4. Jeremy Greenwood & Karen A. Kopecky, 2013. "Measuring The Welfare Gain From Personal Computers," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(1), pages 336-347, January.
    5. Carol Corrado & Charles Hulten & Daniel Sichel, 2009. "Intangible Capital And U.S. Economic Growth," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 55(3), pages 661-685, September.
    6. Erik Brynjolfsson & Avinash Collis & Felix Eggers, 2019. "Using massive online choice experiments to measure changes in well-being," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(15), pages 7250-7255, April.
    7. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    8. Bresnahan, Timothy F, 1986. "Measuring the Spillovers from Technical Advance: Mainframe Computers inFinancial Services," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 742-755, September.
    9. Michael Spence & Bruce Owen, 1977. "Television Programming, Monopolistic Competition, and Welfare," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 91(1), pages 103-126.
    10. Hunt Allcott & Luca Braghieri & Sarah Eichmeyer & Matthew Gentzkow, 2020. "The Welfare Effects of Social Media," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(3), pages 629-676, March.
    11. David M. Byrne & John G. Fernald & Marshall B. Reinsdorf, 2016. "Does the United States Have a Productivity Slowdown or a Measurement Problem?," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 47(1 (Spring), pages 109-182.
    12. Erik Brynjolfsson, 1996. "The Contribution of Information Technology to Consumer Welfare," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 281-300, September.
    13. Zhiqiang (Eric) Zheng & Paul A. Pavlou & Bin Gu, 2014. "Latent Growth Modeling for Information Systems: Theoretical Extensions and Practical Applications," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 547-568, 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. Erik Brynjolfsson & Avinash Collis & Felix Eggers, 2019. "Using massive online choice experiments to measure changes in well-being," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(15), pages 7250-7255, April.
    2. Charles Hulten & Leonard I. Nakamura, 2020. "Expanded GDP for Welfare Measurement in the 21st Century," NBER Chapters, in: Measuring and Accounting for Innovation in the Twenty-First Century, pages 19-59, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Ian Goldin & Pantelis Koutroumpis & François Lafond & Julian Winkler, 2024. "Why Is Productivity Slowing Down?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 62(1), pages 196-268, March.
    4. Brynjolfsson, Erik & Collis, Avinash & Diewert, W. Erwin & Eggers, Felix & Fox, Kevin J., 2019. "GDP-B: Accounting for the Value of New and Free Goods in the Digital Economy," OSF Preprints sptfu, Center for Open Science.
    5. Leonard I. Nakamura, 2020. "Evidence of Accelerating Mismeasurement of Growth and Inflation in the U.S. in the 21st Century," Working Papers 20-41, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    6. Diewert, Erwin & Fox, Kevin J., 2019. "Productivity Indexes and National Statistics: Theory, Methods and Challenges," Microeconomics.ca working papers erwin_diewert-2019-8, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 25 Apr 2019.
    7. Stefan Schweikl & Robert Obermaier, 2020. "Lessons from three decades of IT productivity research: towards a better understanding of IT-induced productivity effects," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 70(4), pages 461-507, November.
    8. Sobolewski, Maciej, 2021. "Measuring consumer well-being from using free-of-charge digital services. The case of navigation apps," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    9. Wulong Gu, 2018. "Accounting for Slower Productivity Growth in the Canadian Business Sector after 2000: The Role of Capital Measurement Issues," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 34, pages 21-39, Spring.
    10. David M. Byrne & John G. Fernald & Marshall B. Reinsdorf, 2016. "Does the United States Have a Productivity Slowdown or a Measurement Problem?," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 47(1 (Spring), pages 109-182.
    11. Hersh, Jonathan & Voth, Hans-Joachim, 2022. "Sweet diversity: Colonial goods and the welfare gains from global trade after 1492," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    12. Jennifer Bruner & Dylan G. Rassier & Kim J. Ruhl, 2018. "Multinational Profit Shifting and Measures throughout Economic Accounts," NBER Chapters, in: Challenges of Globalization in the Measurement of National Accounts, pages 153-205, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Diewert, Erwin & FOX, Kevin J. Fox & SCHREYER, Paul, 2017. "The Digital Economy, New Products and Consumer Welfare," Microeconomics.ca working papers erwin_diewert-2017-12, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 14 Dec 2017.
    14. Shekhar, Shiva, 2020. "Zero Pricing Platform Competition," MPRA Paper 99364, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Daniel Sichel & Eric von Hippel, 2021. "Household Innovation and R&D: Bigger than You Think," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 67(3), pages 639-658, September.
    16. Jeremy Greenwood & Yueyuan Ma & Mehmet Yorukoglu, 2020. "`You Will:' A Macroeconomic Analysis of Digital Advertising," Economie d'Avant Garde Research Reports 32, Economie d'Avant Garde.
    17. Ariel Goldszmidt & John A. List & Robert D. Metcalfe & Ian Muir & V. Kerry Smith & Jenny Wang, 2020. "The Value of Time in the United States: Estimates from Nationwide Natural Field Experiments," NBER Working Papers 28208, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. John Creedy, 2022. "Measuring the Welfare Gain from a New Good: An Introduction," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 55(3), pages 417-425, September.
    19. Diane Coyle & Leonard Nakamura, 2019. "Towards a Framework for Time Use, Welfare and Household-centric Economic Measurement," Economic Statistics Centre of Excellence (ESCoE) Discussion Papers ESCoE DP-2019-01, Economic Statistics Centre of Excellence (ESCoE).
    20. David Byrne & Carol Corrado, 2020. "Accounting for Innovations in Consumer Digital Services: IT Still Matters," NBER Chapters, in: Measuring and Accounting for Innovation in the Twenty-First Century, pages 471-517, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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:inm:orisre:v:35:y:2024:i:3:p:978-991. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.