Ephemeral State-Dependent Recommendation for Digital Content

References

• Abraham M, Burbano V (2022) Congruence between leadership gender and organizational claims affects the gender composition of the applicant pool: Field experimental evidence. Organ. Sci. 33(1):393–413.Link, Google Scholar
• Adomavicius G, Kwon Y (2014) Optimization-based approaches for maximizing aggregate recommendation diversity. INFORMS J. Comput. 26(2):351–369.Link, Google Scholar
• Adomavicius G, Tuzhilin A (2005) Toward the next generation of recommender systems: A survey of the state-of-the-art and possible extensions. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Engrg. 17(6):734–749.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adomavicius G, Bockstedt JC, Curley SP, Zhang J (2018) Effects of online recommendations on consumers’ willingness to pay. Inform. Systems Res. 29(1):84–102.Link, Google Scholar
• Amir O, Levav J (2008) Choice construction versus preference construction: The instability of preferences learned in context. J. Marketing Res. 45(2):145–158.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Andrews M, Luo X, Fang Z, Ghose A (2016) Mobile ad effectiveness: Hyper-contextual targeting with crowdedness. Marketing Sci. 35(2):218–233.Link, Google Scholar
• Ansari A, Li Y, Zhang JZ (2018) Probabilistic topic model for hybrid recommender systems: A stochastic variational Bayesian approach. Marketing Sci. 37(6):987–1008.Link, Google Scholar
• Bardhi F, Eckhardt GM (2017) Liquid consumption. J. Consumer Res. 44(3):582–597.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bardhi F, Eckhardt GM, Arnould EJ (2012) Liquid relationship to possessions. J. Consumer Res. 39(3):510–529.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Belanche D, Casaló LV, Flavián M, Ibáñez-Sánchez S (2021) Understanding influencer marketing: The role of congruence between influencers, products and consumers. J. Bus Res. 132(2021):186–195.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bettman JR, Luce MF, Payne JW (1998) Constructive consumer choice processes. J. Consumer Res. 25(3):187–217.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Binkley S (2008) Liquid consumption: Anti-consumerism and the fetishized de-fetishization of commodities. Cultural Stud. 22(5):599–623.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boman L, Hewage GU, Hasford J (2020) The effect of emoji incongruency in social media: An abstract. Marketing Opportunities Challenges Changing Global Marketplace Proc. 2019 Acad. Marketing Sci. AMS Annu. Conf. (Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland), 171–172.Google Scholar
• Buechel EC, Li R (2023) Mysterious consumption: Preference for horizontal (vs. vertical) uncertainty and the role of surprise. J. Consumer Res. 49(6):987–1013.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Castells P, Hurley NJ, Vargas S (2021) Novelty and diversity in recommender systems. Ricci F, Rokach L, Shapira B, eds. Recommender Systems Handbook (Springer, Boston), 881–918.Google Scholar
• Chaney AJ (2021) Recommendation system simulations: A discussion of two key challenges. Preprint, submitted August 25, https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.02475.Google Scholar
• Chaney AJ, Stewart BM, Engelhardt BE (2018) How algorithmic confounding in recommendation systems increases homogeneity and decreases utility. RecSys’18 Proc. 12th ACM Conf. Recommender Systems (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 224–232.Google Scholar
• Che H, Sudhir K, Seetharaman PB (2007) Bounded rationality in pricing under state-dependent demand: Do firms look ahead, and if so, how far? J. Marketing Res. 44(3):434–449.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Harper FM, Konstan J, Li SX (2010) Social comparisons and contributions to online communities: A field experiment on MovieLens. Amer. Econom. Rev. 100(4):1358–1398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ching AT, Erdem T, Keane MP (2013) Learning models: An assessment of progress, challenges, and new developments. Marketing Sci. 32(6):913–938.Link, Google Scholar
• Choi AA, Cho D, Yim D, Moon JY, Oh W (2019) When seeing helps believing: The interactive effects of previews and reviews on e-book purchases. Inform. Systems Res. 30(4):1164–1183.Link, Google Scholar
• Chou TJ, Ting CC (2003) The role of flow experience in cyber-game addiction. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 6(6):663–675.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chung TS, Rust RT, Wedel M (2009) My mobile music: An adaptive personalization system for digital audio players. Marketing Sci. 28(1):52–68.Link, Google Scholar
• Cialdini RB, Trost MR, Newsom JT (1995) Preference for consistency: The development of a valid measure and the discovery of surprising behavioral implications. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 69(2):318.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dai H, Milkman KL, Riis J (2014) The fresh start effect: Temporal landmarks motivate aspirational behavior. Management Sci. 60(10):2563–2582.Link, Google Scholar
• De Bruyn A, Liechty JC, Huizingh EK, Lilien GL (2008) Offering online recommendations with minimum customer input through conjoint-based decision aids. Marketing Sci. 27(3):443–460.Link, Google Scholar
• Deng J, Yang M, Pelster M, Tan Y (2024) Social trading, communication, and networks. Inform. Systems Res. 35(4):1546–1564.Link, Google Scholar
• Etkin J (2016) The hidden cost of personal quantification. J. Consumer Res. 42(6):967–984.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fitzsimons GJ, Lehmann DR (2004) Reactance to recommendations: When unsolicited advice yields contrary responses. Marketing Sci. 23(1):82–94.Link, Google Scholar
• Fleder D, Hosanagar K (2009) Blockbuster culture’s next rise or fall: The impact of recommender systems on sales diversity. Management Sci. 55(5):697–712.Link, Google Scholar
• Fong NM, Fang Z, Luo X (2015) Geo-conquesting: Competitive locational targeting of mobile promotions. J. Marketing Res. 52(5):726–735.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fong N, Zhang Y, Luo X, Wang X (2019) Targeted promotions on an e-book platform: Crowding out, heterogeneity, and opportunity costs. J. Marketing Res. 56(2):310–323.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Franke N, Keinz P, Steger CJ (2009) Testing the value of customization: When do customers really prefer products tailored to their preferences? J. Marketing 73(5):103–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galak J, Kruger J, Loewenstein G (2013) Slow down! Insensitivity to rate of consumption leads to avoidable satiation. J. Consumer Res. 39(5):993–1009.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ghose A, Ipeirotis PG, Li B (2012) Designing ranking systems for hotels on travel search engines by mining user-generated and crowdsourced content. Marketing Sci. 31(3):493–520.Link, Google Scholar
• Gomez-Uribe CA, Hunt N (2015) The Netflix recommender system: Algorithms, business value, and innovation. ACM Trans. Management Inform. Systems 6(4):13.Google Scholar
• Gori M, Pucci A (2007) ItemRank: A random-walk based scoring algorithm for recommender engines. Sangal R, Mehta H, Bagga RK, eds. IJCAI’07 Proc. 20th Internat. Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence (Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., San Francisco), 2766–2771.Google Scholar
• Goulding C, Shankar A, Elliott R, Canniford R (2009) The marketplace management of illicit pleasure. J. Consumer Res. 35(5):759–771.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greve A, Cooper E, Tibon R, Henson RN (2019) Knowledge is power: Prior knowledge aids memory for both congruent and incongruent events, but in different ways. J. Experiment. Psych. Gen. 148(2):325.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gu X, Kannan PK, Ma L (2018) Selling the premium in freemium. J. Marketing 82(6):10–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gullo K, Berger J, Etkin J, Bollinger B (2019) Does time of day affect variety-seeking? J. Consumer Res. 46(1):20–35.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guo L (2016) Contextual deliberation and preference construction. Management Sci. 62(10):2977–2993.Link, Google Scholar
• Hoch SJ, Loewenstein GF (1991) Time-inconsistent preferences and consumer self-control. J. Consumer Res. 17(4):492–507.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang Z, Liang Y, Weinberg CB, Gorn GJ (2019) The sleepy consumer and variety seeking. J. Marketing Res. 56(2):179–196.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hunt RR, Lamb CA (2001) What causes the isolation effect? J Experiment. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 27(6):1359.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jiang J, Ponnada A, Li A, Lacker B, Way SF (2024) A genre-based analysis of new music streaming at scale. WEBSCI’24 Proc. 16th ACM Web Sci. Conf. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 191–201.Google Scholar
• Kaminskas M, Bridge D (2016) Diversity, serendipity, novelty, and coverage: A survey and empirical analysis of beyond-accuracy objectives in recommender systems. ACM Trans. Interactive Intelligent Systems 7(1):2.Google Scholar
• Kozinets RV (2002) Can consumers escape the market? Emancipatory illuminations from burning man. J. Consumer Res. 29(1):20–38.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kumar A, Hosanagar K (2019) Measuring the value of recommendation links on product demand. Inform. Systems Res. 30(3):819–838.Link, Google Scholar
• Kunaver M, Požrl T (2017) Diversity in recommender systems—A survey. Knowledge-Based Systems 123(2017):154–162.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Larrain S, Trattner C, Parra D, Graells-Garrido E, Nørvåg K (2015) Good times bad times: A study on recency effects in collaborative filtering for social tagging. RecSys’15 Proc. 9th ACM Conf. Recommender Systems (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 269–272.Google Scholar
• Lawson SJ, Gleim MR, Hartline MD (2021) Decisions, decisions: Variations in decision-making for access-based consumption. J. Marketing Theory Practice 29(3):358–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee D, Hosanagar K (2019) How do recommender systems affect sales diversity? A cross-category investigation via randomized field experiment. Inform. Systems Res. 30(1):239–259.Link, Google Scholar
• Lee EJ, Schumann DW (2004) Explaining the special case of incongruity in advertising: Combining classic theoretical approaches. Marketing Theory 4(1–2):59–90.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee D, Gopal A, Park SH (2020) Different but equal? A field experiment on the impact of recommendation systems on mobile and personal computer channels in retail. Inform. Systems Res. 31(3):892–912.Link, Google Scholar
• Li SS, Karahanna E (2015) Online recommendation systems in a B2C E-commerce context: A review and future directions. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 16(2):2.Google Scholar
• Li P, Tuzhilin A (2024) When variety seeking meets unexpectedness: Incorporating variety-seeking behaviors into design of unexpected recommender systems. Inform. Systems Res. 35(3):1257–1273.Link, Google Scholar
• Li X, Grahl J, Hinz O (2022) How do recommender systems lead to consumer purchases? A causal mediation analysis of a field experiment. Inform. Systems Res. 33(2):620–637.Link, Google Scholar
• Liang C, Shi Z, Raghu TS (2019) The spillover of spotlight: Platform recommendation in the mobile app market. Inform. Systems Res. 30(4):1296–1318.Link, Google Scholar
• Linden G, Smith B, York J (2003) Amazon.com recommendations: Item-to-item collaborative filtering. IEEE Internet Comput. 7(1):76–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lu S, Xiao L, Ding M (2016) A video-based automated recommender (VAR) system for garments. Marketing Sci. 35(3):484–510.Link, Google Scholar
• Luo X, Andrews M, Fang Z, Phang CW (2014) Mobile targeting. Management Sci. 60(7):1738–1756.Link, Google Scholar
• Manski CF (2004) Measuring expectations. Econometrica 72(5):1329–1376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McAlister L, Pessemier E (1982) Variety seeking behavior: An interdisciplinary review. J. Consumer Res. 9(3):311–322.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miner JB, Crane DP, Vandenberg RJ (1994) Congruence and fit in professional role motivation theory. Organ. Sci. 5(1):86–97.Link, Google Scholar
• Mitchell DJ, Kahn BE, Knasko SC (1995) There’s something in the air: Effects of congruent or incongruent ambient odor on consumer decision making. J. Consumer Res. 22(2):229–238.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morozov I, Tuchman A (2024) Where does advertising content lead you? We created a bookstore to find out. Marketing Sci. 43(5):925–1151.Link, Google Scholar
• Mousavi N, Adamopoulos P, Bockstedt J (2023) The decoy effect and recommendation systems. Inform. Systems Res. 34(4):1533–1553.Link, Google Scholar
• Nadler DA, Tushman ML (1980) A model for diagnosing organizational behavior. Organ. Dynam. 9(2):35–51.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Narasimhan C, Turut Ö (2013) Differentiate or imitate? The role of context-dependent preferences. Marketing Sci. 32(3):393–410.Link, Google Scholar
• Oestreicher-Singer G, Sundararajan A (2012) The visible hand? Demand effects of recommendation networks in electronic markets. Management Sci. 58(11):1963–1981.Link, Google Scholar
• Panniello U, Gorgoglione M, Tuzhilin A (2016) Research note—In CARSs we trust: How context-aware recommendations affect customers’ trust and other business performance measures of recommender systems. Inform. Systems Res. 27(1):182–196.Link, Google Scholar
• Payne JW, Bettman JR, Johnson EJ (1993) The Adaptive Decision Maker (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Peng J, Liang C (2023) On the differences between view-based and purchase-based recommender systems. MIS Quart. 47(2):875–900.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Peng CH, Yin D, Zhang H (2020) More than words in medical question-and-answer sites: A content-context congruence perspective. Inform. Systems Res. 31(3):913–928.Link, Google Scholar
• Pezdek K, Whetstone T, Reynolds K, Askari N, Dougherty T (1989) Memory for real-world scenes: The role of consistency with schema expectation. J Experiment. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 15(4):587.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ratner RK, Kahn BE (2002) The impact of private versus public consumption on variety-seeking behavior. J. Consumer Res. 29(2):246–257.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rigby D, Burton M, Pluske J (2016) Preference stability and choice consistency in discrete choice experiments. Environ. Resource Econom. 65(2):441–461.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rindfleisch A, Burroughs JE, Wong N (2009) The safety of objects: Materialism, existential insecurity, and brand connection. J. Consumer Res. 36(1):1–16.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Salisbury LC, Feinberg FM (2012) All things considered? The role of choice set formation in diversification. J. Marketing Res. 49(3):320–335.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schaper ML, Kuhlmann BG, Bayen UJ (2019) Metamemory expectancy illusion and schema-consistent guessing in source monitoring. J. Experiment. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 45(3):470–496.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schützwohl A (1998) Surprise and schema strength. J. Experiment. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 24(5):1182–1199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schweidel DA, Moe WW (2016) Binge watching and advertising. J Marketing 80(5):1–19.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shaddy F, Fishbach A, Simonson I (2021) Trade-offs in choice. Annual Rev. Psych. 72(1):181–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simonov A, Dubé J-P, Hitsch G, Rossi P (2020) State-dependent demand estimation with initial conditions correction. J. Marketing Res. 57(5):789–809.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Song Y, Sahoo N, Ofek E (2019) When and how to diversify—A multicategory utility model for personalized content recommendation. Management Sci. 65(8):3737–3757.Link, Google Scholar
• Trijp HCV, Hoyer WD, Inman JJ (1996) Why switch? Product category–level explanations for true variety-seeking behavior. J Marketing Res. 33(3):281–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wan X, Kumar A, Li X (2024a) How do product recommendations help consumers search? Evidence from a field experiment. Management Sci. 70(9):5776–5794.Abstract, Google Scholar
• Wan X, Kumar A, Li X (2024b) Retargeted versus generic product recommendations: When is it valuable to present retargeted recommendations? Inform. Systems Res. 35(3):1403–1421.Link, Google Scholar
• Weiss L, Johar GV (2016) Products as self-evaluation standards: When owned and unowned products have opposite effects on self-judgment. J. Consumer Res. 42(6):915–930.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xiao B, Benbasat I (2007) E-commerce product recommendation agents: Use, characteristics, and impact. MIS Quart. 31(1):137–209.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yin K, Fang X, Chen B, Liu Sheng OR (2023) Diversity preference-aware link recommendation for online social networks. Inform. Systems Res. 34(4):1398–1414.Link, Google Scholar
• Yoon HJ (2013) Understanding schema incongruity as a process in advertising: Review and future recommendations. J. Marketing Commun. 19(5):360–376.Crossref, Google Scholar