Why more can be less: An inference-based explanation for hyper-subadditivity in bundle valuation

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Volumn 105, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 233-246

  Popkowski Leszczyc, Peter T L ^a   Pracejus, John W ^a   Shen, Yingtao ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b DOMINICAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bundle valuation; Decision making; Hyper subadditivity; Inference; Superadditivity

Indexed keywords

EID: 39749147061     PISSN: 07495978     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.10.001     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Adams W., and Yellen J. Commodity bundling and the burden of monopoly. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 90 3 (1976) 475-498
2. Anderson N.H. Methods of information integration theory (1982), Academic Press, New York
3. Ariely D., and Simonson I. Buy buying, bidding, playing, or competing? Value assessment and decision dynamics in online auctions. Journal of Consumer Psychology 13 2 (2003) 113-123
4. Bettman R., Luce M.F., and Payne J.W. Constructive consumer choice processes. Journal of Consumer Research 25 (1998) 187-217
5. Chapman G.B., and Johnson E.J. Anchoring, activation, and the construction of values. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 79 (1999) 1-39
6. Cooke, A. & Pecheux, C. (2001). Subadditive bundle preferences and the value of variety. Unpublished working paper, Marketing Department, University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611.
7. Ebenbach D.H., and Moore C.F. Judgments and the environment: Incomplete information, inferences, and individual differences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 81 (2000) 1-27
8. Gaeth G.J., Levin I.P., Chakraborty G., and Levin A.M. Consumer evaluation of multi-product bundles: An information integration analysis. Marketing Letters 2 (1990) 47-57
9. González-Vallejo C., and Moran E. The evaluability hypothesis revisited: Joint and separate evaluation preference reversals as a function of attribute importance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 86 (2001) 216-233
10. Grewal D., Monroe K.B., and Krishnan R. The effects of price-comparison advertising on buyers' perception of acquisition value, transaction value and behavioral intentions. Journal of Marketing 62 (1998) 46-59
11. Guiltinan J.P. The Price Bundling of Services: A normative framework. Journal of Marketing 51 (1987) 74-85
12. Harlam B., Krishna A., Lehman D.R., and Mela C. Impact of bundle type, price framing and familiarity on purchase intention for the bundle. Journal of Business Research 33 (1995) 57-66
13. Hays W.L. Statistics for psychologists. 3rd ed. (1973), Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York
14. Higgins E.T., Bargh J.A., and Lombardi W. Nature of priming effects on categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 11 (1985) 59-69
15. Hsee C.K. The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation for preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 67 (1996) 247-257
16. Hsee C. Less is better: When low-value options are judged more highly than high-value options. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 11 (1998) 107-121
17. Hsee C., Blount S., Loewenstein G., and Bazerman M. Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations: A review and theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin 125 (1999) 576-590
18. Irwin J.R. Buying/selling price preference reversals. Preference for environmental changes in buying versus selling modes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 60 (1994) 431-451
19. Johnson E.J., Hershey J.C., Meszaros J.R., and Kunreuther H. Framing probability distortions and insurance decisions. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 7 (1993) 35-53
20. Johnson M.D., Herrmann A., and Bauer H.H. The effects of price bundling on consumer evaluations of product offerings. International Journal of Research in Marketing 16 (1999) 129-142
21. Johnson R.D., and Levin I.P. More than meets the eye: The effect of missing information on purchase evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research 12 (1985) 169-177
22. Jorgensen B.S., Syme G.J., Smith L.M., and Bishop B.J. Random error in willingness to pay measurement: A multiple indicators, latent variable approach to the reliability of contingent values. Journal of Economic Psychology 25 (2004) 41-59
23. Kahneman D., and Tversky A. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47 (1979) 263-291
24. Keppel G. Design and analysis a researchers handbook. 3rd ed. (1991), Prentice Hall, New York
25. Kristensen H., and Garling T. The effects of anchor points and reference points on negotiation processes and outcome. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 71 1 (1997) 85-94
26. Levin I.P., Johnson R.D., Deldin P.J., Carstens L.M., Cressey L.J., and Davis C.R. Framing effects in decisions with completely and incompletely described alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 38 (1986) 48-64
27. List J.A. Preference reversals of a different kind: the more is less phenomenon. American Economic Review 92 (2002) 1636-1643
28. Milgrom P. Putting auction theory to work (2004), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
29. Moon J., and Tikoo S. Consumer use of available information for making inferences about missing information. Journal of Business Research 39 (1997) 135-146
30. Nunes J.C., and Boatwright P. Incidental prices and their effect on willingness to pay. Journal of Marketing Research 16 (2004) 457-466
31. Palfrey T.R. Bundling decisions by a multiproduct monopolist with incomplete information. Econometrica 51 (1983) 463-484
32. Prelec D., Wernerfelt B., and Zettelmeyer F. The role of inference in context effects: Inferring what you want from what is available. Journal of Consumer Research 24 (1997) 118-126
33. Ramsey F.L., and Schafer D.W. The statistical sleuth: A course in methods of data analyses. 2nd ed. (2002), Duxbury Press, Belmont, CA
34. Ratcliff R., and McKoon G. A retrieval theory of priming in memory. Psychological Review 95 (1988) 385-408
35. Rottenstreich Y., and Tversky A. Unpacking, repacking, and anchoring: Advances in support theory. Psychological Review 104 (1997) 406-415
36. Schmalensee R. Gaussian demand and commodity bundling. The Journal of Business 57 (1984) S211-S230
37. Simonson I., Carmon Z., and O'Curry S. Experimental evidence on the negative effect of product features and sales promotions on brand choice. Marketing Science 13 (1994) 23-40
38. Simonson I., and Tversky A. Choice in context: Tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. Journal of Marketing Research 29 (1992) 281-295
39. Suter T.A., and Hardesty D.M. Maximizing earnings and price fairness perceptions in online consumer-to-consumer auctions. Journal of Retailing 81 4 (2005) 307-317
40. Thaler R. Mental accounting and consumer choice. Marketing Science 4 (1985) 199-214
41. Tversky A., and Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185 (1974) 1124-1131
42. Tversky A., and Koehler D.J. Support theory: A non-extensional representation of subjective probability. Psychological Review 101 (1994) 547-567
43. Tversky A., Sattath S., and Slovic P. Contingent weighting in judgment and choice. Psychological Review 95 (1988) 371-384
44. Vickrey W. Counter speculation, auctions, and competitive sealed tenders. Journal of Finance 16 (1961) 8-37
45. Wills C.E., and Moore C.F. Perspective-taking judgments of medication acceptance: Inference from relative importance about the impact and combination of information. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 66 (1996) 251-267
46. Yadav M.S. How buyers evaluate product bundles: A model of anchoring and adjustment. Journal of Consumer Research 21 (1994) 342-353