Product Line Extension in Consumer Software Markets in the Presence of Free Alternatives

References

• Aadland D, Caplan AJ (2006) Cheap talk reconsidered: New evidence from CVM. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 60(4):562–578.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 50(2):179–211.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ajzen I, Rosenthal LH, Brown TC (2000) Effects of perceived fairness on willingness to pay. J. Appl. Soc. Psych. 30(12):2439–2450.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arrow K, Solow R, Portney PR, Leamer EE, Radner R, Schuman H (1993) Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Federal Register 58(10):4601–4614.Google Scholar
• Banerjee DS (2003) Software piracy: A strategic analysis and policy instruments. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. 21(1):97–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berinsky AJ, Margolis MF, Sances MW (2014) Separating the shirkers from the workers? Making sure respondents pay attention on self-administered surveys. Amer. J. Political Sci. 58(3):739–753.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bishop RC, Heberlein TA (1979) Measuring values of extramarket goods: Are indirect measures biased? Amer. J. Agricultural Econom. 61(5):926–930.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bryce DJ, Dyer JH, Hatch NW (2011) Competing against free. Harvard Bus. Rev. 89(6):104–111.Google Scholar
• Business Software Alliance (2011) Global business software piracy study. http://globalstudy.bsa.org/2011/downloads/study_pdf/2011_BSA_Piracy_Study-Standard.pdf.Google Scholar
• Cameron TA, James MD (1987) Efficient estimation methods for “closed-ended” contingent valuation surveys. Rev. Econom. Statist. 69(2):269–276.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Campbell MC (2007) “Says who?!” How the source of price information and affect influence perceived price (un) fairness. J. Marketing Res. 44(2):261–271.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carson RT, Flores NE, Meade NF (2001) Contingent valuation: Controversies and evidence. Environ. Resource Econom. 19(2): 173–210.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chellappa RK, Shivendu S (2005) Managing digital piracy: Pricing and sampling strategies for digital experience goods in vertically segmented markets. Inform. Systems Res. 16(4):400–417.Link, Google Scholar
• Conner KR, Rumelt RP (1991) Software piracy: An analysis of protection strategies. Management Sci. 37(2):125–139.Link, Google Scholar
• Depoorter B, Parisi F, Vanneste S (2005) Problems with the enforcement of copyright law: Is there a social norm backlash? Internat. J. Econom. Bus. 12(3):361–369.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Erat S, Bhaskaran SR (2012) Consumer mental accounts and implications to selling base products and add-ons. Marketing Sci. 31(5):801–818.Link, Google Scholar
• Foster V, Mourato S (2003) Elicitation format and sensitivity to scope. Environment. Resource Econom. 24(2):141–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Givon M, Mahajan V, Muller E (1995) Software piracy: Estimation of lost sales and the impact on software diffusion. J. Marketing 59(1):29–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gopal RD, Sanders GL (1997) Preventive and deterrent controls for software piracy. J. Management Inform. Systems 13(4):29–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gopal RD, Sanders GL (2000) Global software piracy: You can’t get blood out of a turnip. Comm. ACM 43(9):82–89.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hanemann WM (1984) Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. Amer. J. Agricultural Econom. 66(3):332–341.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hanemann M (1994) Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. J. Econom. Perspect. 8(4):19–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hanley N, Mourato S, Wright RE (2001) Choice modelling approaches: A superior alternative for environmental valuation? Hanley N, Roberts CJ, eds. Issues in Environmental Economics (Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK), 185–212.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heath TB, DelVecchio D, McCarthy MS (2011) The asymmetric effects of extending brands to lower and higher quality. J. Marketing 75(4):3–20.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hertzendorf M (1993) I’m not a high-quality firm–but I play one on TV. RAND J. Econom. 24(2):236–247.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Homburg C, Koschate N, Hoyer WD (2005) Do satisfied customers really pay more? A study of the relationship between customer satisfaction and willingness to pay. J. Marketing 69(2):84–96.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jacobson M (2012) Dear Android: A 9:1 piracy rate for games is not good enough. Wired Magazine (May 2), http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-05/02/android-market-game-piracy.Google Scholar
• Kirmani A, Sood S, Bridges S (1999) The ownership effect in consumer responses to brand line stretches. J. Marketing 63(1):88–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leiner DJ, Doedens S (2010) Test-retest reliability in the research practice of the online survey. Jackob N, Zerback T, Jandura O, Maurer M, eds. The Internet as Research Tool and Object in Communication Science, Research Methods and Logic of Communication Science, Vol. 6 (von Halem, Cologne, Germany), 316–331.Google Scholar
• Liebowitz SJ, Margolis SE (1999) Causes and consequences of market leadership in application software. Competition Innovation Personal Comput. Indust., 1–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• List JA (2001) Do explicit warnings eliminate the hypothetical bias in elicitation procedures? Evidence from field auctions for sportscards. Amer. Econom. Rev. 91(5):1498–1507.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Loken B, John DR (1993) Diluting brand beliefs: When do brand extensions have a negative impact? J. Marketing 57(3):71–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lopes AB, Galletta DF (2006) Consumer perceptions and willingness to pay for intrinsically motivated online content. J. Management Inform. Systems 23(2):203–231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• MacKenzie SB, Podsakoff PM, Podsakoff NP (2011) Construct measurement and validation procedures in MIS and behavioral research: Integrating new and existing techniques. MIS Quart. 35(2):293–334.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meade AW, Bartholomew CS (2012) Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psych. Methods 17(2):437–455.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitchell RC, Carson RT (1989) Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method (Resources for the Future, Washington, DC).Google Scholar
• Muchmore M (2012) Stolen software: Piracy hits more than movies and music. PC Magazine (January 25), http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2399318,00.asp.Google Scholar
• Murphy JJ, Stevens TH (2004) Contingent valuation, hypothetical bias, and experimental economics. Agriculture Resource Econom. Rev. 33(2):182–192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nascimento F, Vanhonacker WR (1988) Optimal strategic pricing of reproducible consumer products. Management Sci. 34(8):921–937.Link, Google Scholar
• Nelson B (2012) Do you read fast enough to be successful? The most successful people I know don’t just read—they inhale information. Forbes (June 4), http://www.forbes.com/sites/brettnelson/2012/06/04/do-you-read-fast-enough-to-be-successful/.Google Scholar
• Ostrom AL, Iacobucci D (1998) The effect of guarantees on consumers’ evaluation of services. J. Services Marketing 12(5):362–378.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park CW, MacInnis D, Priester J, Eisingerich A, Iacobucci D (2010) Brand attachment and brand attitude strength: Conceptual and empirical differentiation of two critical brand equity drivers. J. Marketing 74(6):1–17.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park JH, MacLachlan DL (2008) Estimating willingness to pay with exaggeration bias-corrected contingent valuation method. Marketing Sci. 27(4):691–698.Link, Google Scholar
• Payne JW, Bettman JR, Johnson EJ (1992) Behavioral decision research: A constructive processing perspective. Annual Rev. Psych. 43(1):87–131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raghu TS, Sinha R, Vinze A, Burton O (2009) Willingness to pay in an open source software environment. Inform. Systems Res. 20(2):218–236.Link, Google Scholar
• Randall T, Ulrich K, Reibstein D (1998) Brand equity and vertical product line extent. Marketing Sci. 17(4):356–379.Link, Google Scholar
• Reid B (2015) How to download Adobe Photoshop CS2 for free legally. Redmond Pie (May 24), http://www.redmondpie.com/download-adobe-photoshop-cs2-for-free-legally-while-you-still-can/.Google Scholar
• Shampanier K, Mazar N, Ariely D (2007) Zero as a special price: The true value of free products. Marketing Sci. 26(6):742–757.Link, Google Scholar
• Sinha RK, Mandel N (2008) Preventing digital music piracy: The carrot or the stick? J. Marketing 72(1):1–15.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sinha RK, Machado F, Sellman C (2010) Don’t think twice, it’s all right: DRM, peer-to-peer piracy and the pricing of digital music. J. Marketing 74(2):40–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith D (2015) Android still has a massive piracy problem. Business Insider (January 8), http://www.businessinsider.com/android-piracy-problem-2015-1.Google Scholar
• Steelman ZR, Hammer BI, Limayem M (2014) Data collection in the digital age: Innovative alternatives to student samples. MIS Quart. 38(2):355–378.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stevens TH, Belkner R, Dennis D, Kittredge D, Willis C (2000) Comparison of contingent valuation and conjoint analysis in ecosystem management. Ecological Econom. 32(1):63–74.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sun B, Xie J, Cao HH (2004) Product strategy for innovators in markets with network effects. Marketing Sci. 23(2):243–254.Link, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Simonson I (1993) Context-dependent preferences. Management Sci. 39(10):1179–1189.Link, Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V, Thong JYL, Xu X (2012) Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quart. 36(1):157–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wertenbroch K, Skiera B (2002) Measuring consumers’ willingness to pay at the point of purchase. J. Marketing Res. 39(2):228–241.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wilson LO, Norton JA (1989) Optimal entry timing for a product line extension. Marketing Sci. 8(1):1–17.Link, Google Scholar
• Wu SY, Chen PY (2008) Versioning and piracy control for digital information goods. Oper. Res. 56(1):157–172.Link, Google Scholar
• Zeithaml VA (1988) Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. J. Marketing 52(3):2–22.Crossref, Google Scholar