IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00522826.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Définition, mesure et déterminants du consentement à payer du consommateur : synthèse critique et voies de recherche

Author

Listed:
  • Marine Le Gall-Ely

    (ICI - Laboratoire Information, Coordination, Incitations - UEB - Université européenne de Bretagne - European University of Brittany - UBO - Université de Brest - Télécom Bretagne - IMT - Institut Mines-Télécom [Paris] - IBSHS - Institut Brestois des Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société - UBO - Université de Brest)

Abstract

Tarification différenciée, bouquets de services et offre groupée de produits, enchères sur Internet : les pratiques de prix des entreprises évoluent. Lorsque le marché n'existe pas ou quand les prix sont individualisés, le concept de consentement à payer du consommateur retient l'attention. Cet article vise à présenter une synthèse critique des recherches en marketing sur le consentement à payer. Une définition en est donnée et comparée à celles de concepts proches, prix de référence et prix acceptables notamment. Les méthodes de mesure du concept sont ensuite présentées, comparées à celles de l'élasticité-prix et critiquées, puis les travaux relatifs aux déterminants externes du consentement à payer sont commentés. Enfin, de nombreuses voies de recherche ouvertes par ces travaux sont proposées.

Suggested Citation

  • Marine Le Gall-Ely, 2009. "Définition, mesure et déterminants du consentement à payer du consommateur : synthèse critique et voies de recherche," Post-Print hal-00522826, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00522826
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-00522826
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-00522826/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Noussair, Charles & Robin, Stephane & Ruffieux, Bernard, 2004. "Revealing consumers' willingness-to-pay: A comparison of the BDM mechanism and the Vickrey auction," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 725-741, December.
    2. Shogren, Jason F. & Margolis, Michael & Koo, Cannon & List, John A., 2001. "A random nth-price auction," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 409-421, December.
    3. Sevdalis, Nick & Harvey, Nigel, 2006. "Determinants of willingness to pay in separate and joint evaluations of options: Context matters," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 377-385, June.
    4. Eric Thompson & Mark Berger & Glenn Blomquist & Steven Allen, 2002. "Valuing the Arts: A Contingent Valuation Approach," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 26(2), pages 87-113, May.
    5. Chandrashekaran, R., 2001. "The implications of individual differences in reference price utilization for designing effective price communications," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 85-91, August.
    6. Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2004. "South Koreans' willingness to pay for Korean unification," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 15-19.
    7. Layton, David F., 2000. "Random Coefficient Models for Stated Preference Surveys," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 21-36, July.
    8. Peter Frykblom, 2000. "Willingness to pay and the choice of question format: experimental results," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(10), pages 665-667.
    9. Laura O. Taylor & Ronald G. Cummings, 1999. "Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 649-665, June.
    10. Frykblom, Peter, 1997. "Hypothetical Question Modes and Real Willingness to Pay," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 275-287, November.
    11. Goldberg, Stephen M & Green, Paul E & Wind, Yoram, 1984. "Conjoint Analysis of Price Premiums for Hotel Amenities," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(1), pages 111-132, January.
    12. Horsky, Dan, 1984. "Comments on "Conjoint Analysis of Price Premiums for Hotel Amenities."," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(1), pages 139-147, January.
    13. McCurley Hortman, Sandra & Allaway, Arthur W. & Barry Mason, J. & Rasp, John, 1990. "Multisegment analysis of supermarket patronage," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 209-223, November.
    14. John Loomis & Thomas Brown & Beatrice Lucero & George Peterson, 1997. "Evaluating the Validity of the Dichotomous Choice Question Format in Contingent Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 109-123, September.
    15. Coppinger, Vicki M & Smith, Vernon L & Titus, Jon A, 1980. "Incentives and Behavior in English, Dutch and Sealed-Bid Auctions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(1), pages 1-22, January.
    16. Andre Gabor & C. W. J. Granger, 1961. "On the Price Consciousness of Consumers," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 10(3), pages 170-188, November.
    17. Min Ding & Rajdeep Grewal & John Liechty, 2005. "Incentive-aligned conjoint analysis," Framed Field Experiments 00139, The Field Experiments Website.
    18. Lichtenstein, Donald R & Bloch, Peter H & Black, William C, 1988. "Correlates of Price Acceptability," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(2), pages 243-252, September.
    19. Kagel, John H & Harstad, Ronald M & Levin, Dan, 1987. "Information Impact and Allocation Rules in Auctions with Affiliated Private Values: A Laboratory Study," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(6), pages 1275-1304, November.
    20. Franziska Voelckner, 2006. "An empirical comparison of methods for measuring consumers’ willingness to pay," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 137-149, April.
    21. Kagel, John H & Levin, Dan, 1993. "Independent Private Value Auctions: Bidder Behaviour in First-, Second- and Third-Price Auctions with Varying Numbers of Bidders," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(419), pages 868-879, July.
    22. Anja Lambrecht & Katja Seim & Bernd Skiera, 2007. "Does Uncertainty Matter? Consumer Behavior Under Three-Part Tariffs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 698-710, 09-10.
    23. Baltas, George & Doyle, Peter, 2001. "Random utility models in marketing research: a survey," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 115-125, February.
    24. Kalyanaram, Gurumurthy & Little, John D C, 1994. "An Empirical Analysis of Latitude of Price Acceptance in Consumer Package Goods," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(3), pages 408-418, December.
    25. H. J. Davenport, 1902. "Proposed Modifications in Austrian Theory and Terminology," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 16(3), pages 355-384.
    26. Feinberg, Richard A, 1986. "Credit Cards as Spending Facilitating Stimuli: A Conditioning Interpretation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 13(3), pages 348-356, December.
    27. Rao, Akshay R & Sieben, Wanda A, 1992. "The Effect of Prior Knowledge on Price Acceptability and the Type of Information Examined," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 19(2), pages 256-270, September.
    28. Klaus Peter Kaas & Heidrun Ruprecht, 2006. "Are the Vickrey Auction and the BDM Mechanism Really Incentive Compatible? - Empirical Results and Optimal Bidding Strategies in Cases of Uncertain Willingness-to-pay," Schmalenbach Business Review (sbr), LMU Munich School of Management, vol. 58(1), pages 37-55, January.
    29. Dou, Wenyu, 2004. "Will Internet Users Pay for Online Content?," Journal of Advertising Research, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(4), pages 349-359, December.
    30. Elizabeth Hoffman & Dale J. Menkhaus & Dipankar Chakravarti & Ray A. Field & Glen D. Whipple, 1993. "Using Laboratory Experimental Auctions in Marketing Research: A Case Study of New Packaging for Fresh Beef," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 318-338.
    31. Kamel Jedidi & Z. John Zhang, 2002. "Augmenting Conjoint Analysis to Estimate Consumer Reservation Price," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(10), pages 1350-1368, October.
    32. Kamel Jedidi & Sharan Jagpal & Puneet Manchanda, 2003. "Measuring Heterogeneous Reservation Prices for Product Bundles," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 107-130, July.
    33. McAfee, R Preston & McMillan, John, 1987. "Auctions and Bidding," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 25(2), pages 699-738, June.
    34. Lambin, Jean-Jacques & Naert, Philippe A. & Bultez, Alain, 1975. "Optimal marketing behavior in oligopoly," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 105-128, April.
    35. Winer, Russell S, 1986. "A Reference Price Model of Brand Choice for Frequently Purchased Products," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 13(2), pages 250-256, September.
    36. Monique Zollinger, 2004. "Le jugement comparatif des prix par le consommateur," Post-Print hal-02023008, HAL.
    37. Philippe Aurier & Yves Evrard & Gilles N'Goala, 2004. "Comprendre et mesurer la valeur du point de vue du consommateur," Post-Print hal-02023028, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fabienne Chameroy & Jean-Louis Chandon, 2011. "Are All Labels Ethical? [Les labels sont-ils tous éthiques ?]," Post-Print hal-02092068, HAL.
    2. Denis Fougère & Arthur Heim, 2019. "L'évaluation socioéconomique de l'investissement social," Working Papers hal-03456048, HAL.
    3. Ivan Dufeu & Jean-Marc Ferrandi & Patrick Gabriel & Marine Le Gall-Ely, 2014. "Socio-environmental multi-labelling and consumer willingness to pay [Multi-labellisation socio-environnementale et consentement à payer du consommateur]," Post-Print hal-02794529, HAL.
    4. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/5lge9h8e809258uvvpjn34ekm4 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Kinkpe, T. & Adegbola, P. & Fiamohe, R. & Aza, F. & Agossadou, A.J. & Codjo, O.S., 2018. "Which Local Rice To Satisfy The Urban Consumers In Benin In Order To Ensure Rice Self-Sufficiency?," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 275877, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5lge9h8e809258uvvpjn34ekm4 is not listed 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. Franziska Voelckner, 2006. "An empirical comparison of methods for measuring consumers’ willingness to pay," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 137-149, April.
    2. Sebastian Lehmann, 2014. "Toward an Understanding of the BDM: Predictive Validity, Gambling Effects, and Risk Attitude," FEMM Working Papers 150001, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    3. Lusk Jayson L & Alexander Corinne & Rousu Matthew C., 2007. "Designing Experimental Auctions for Marketing Research: The Effect of Values, Distributions, and Mechanisms on Incentives for Truthful Bidding," Review of Marketing Science, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-32, October.
    4. Dost, Florian & Wilken, Robert, 2012. "Measuring willingness to pay as a range, revisited: When should we care?," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 148-166.
    5. Jonas Schmidt & Tammo H. A. Bijmolt, 2020. "Accurately measuring willingness to pay for consumer goods: a meta-analysis of the hypothetical bias," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 499-518, May.
    6. Hofstetter, Reto & Miller, Klaus M. & Krohmer, Harley & Zhang, Z. John, 2021. "A de-biased direct question approach to measuring consumers' willingness to pay," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 70-84.
    7. Noussair, Charles & Robin, Stephane & Ruffieux, Bernard, 2004. "Revealing consumers' willingness-to-pay: A comparison of the BDM mechanism and the Vickrey auction," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 725-741, December.
    8. Cerroni, S. & Watson, V. & Macdiarmid, J., 2018. "Preferences for healthy and environmentally sustainable food: Combining induced-value and home-grown experiments," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277155, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Müller, Holger & Kroll, Eike B. & Vogt, Bodo, 2012. "Violations of procedure invariance—The case of preference reversals in monadic and competitive product evaluations," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 406-412.
    10. Holger Müller & Eike Benjamin Kroll & Bodo Vogt, 2010. "When Judgments and Preferences Fail to Conform: Research on Preference Reversals for Product Purchases," FEMM Working Papers 100003, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    11. Lusk, Jayson L. & Daniel, M. Scott & Mark, Darrell R. & Lusk, Christine L., 2001. "Alternative Calibration And Auction Institutions For Predicting Consumer Willingess To Pay For Nongenetically Modified Corn Chips," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, July.
    12. James Agarwal & Wayne DeSarbo & Naresh K. Malhotra & Vithala Rao, 2015. "An Interdisciplinary Review of Research in Conjoint Analysis: Recent Developments and Directions for Future Research," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 2(1), pages 19-40, March.
    13. Bernard Ruffieux & Anne Rozan & Stéphane Robin, 2008. "Mesurer les préférences du consommateur pour orienter les décisions des pouvoirs publics : l'apport de la méthode expérimentale," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 182(1), pages 113-127.
    14. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, March.
    15. Morawetz, Ulrich B. & De Groote, Hugo & Kimenju, Simon Chege, 2011. "Improving the Use of Experimental Auctions in Africa: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-17, August.
    16. Raghuram Iyengar & Kamel Jedidi, 2012. "A Conjoint Model of Quantity Discounts," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 334-350, March.
    17. Jayson Lusk & Leatta McLaughlin & Sara Jaeger, 2007. "Strategy and response to purchase intention questions," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 31-44, June.
    18. Jaikumar, Saravana & Sahay, Arvind, 2016. "Effect of Overlapping Price Ranges on Price Perception: Revisiting the Range Theory of Price Perception," IIMA Working Papers WP2016-02-02, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    19. David L. Ortega & Robert S. Shupp & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Jayson L. Lusk, 2018. "Mitigating overbidding behavior in agribusiness and food marketing research: Results from induced value hybrid auction experiments," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(4), pages 887-893, October.
    20. Rosato, Antonio & Tymula, Agnieszka A., 2024. "A novel experimental test of truthful bidding in second-price auctions with real objects," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 111(C).

    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:hal:journl:hal-00522826. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.