The Effect of Explicit Reference Points on Consumer Choice and Online Bidding Behavior

References

• Adaval Rashmi, Monroe Kent B. Automatic construction and use of contextual information for product and price evaluations. J. Consumer Res. (2002) 28(4):572–588Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ariely Dan, Simonson Itamar. Buying, bidding, playing or competing? Value assessment and decision dynamics in online auctions. J. Consumer Psych. (2003) 13(1/2):113–123Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bar-Hillel Maya, Neter Efrat. Why are people reluctant to exchange lottery tickets? J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1996) 70(1):17–27Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barnes James G. Factors influencing consumer reaction to retail newspaper ‘sale’ advertising. Proc. Fall Educators Conf. (1975) (American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL) 471–477Google Scholar
• Bettman James R., Luce Mary Frances, Payne John W. Constructive consumer choice processes. J. Consumer Res. (1998) 25(December):187–217Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brenner Lyle, Rottenstreich Yuval, Sood Sanjay. Comparison, grouping, and preference. Psych. Sci. (1999) 10(3):225–229Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burdick Richard E. Statement of hypotheses in the analysis of variance. J. Marketing Res. (1983) 20(August):320–324Crossref, Google Scholar
• Campbell Margaret C., Kirmani Amna. Consumers’ use of persuasion knowledge: The effects of accessibility and cognitive capacity on perceptions of an influence agent. J. Consumer Res. (2000) 27(1):69–83Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen Haiping (Allan), Rao Akshay R. Close encounters of two kinds: False alarms and dashed hopes. Marketing Sci. (2002) 21(2):178–196Link, Google Scholar
• Dhar Ravi, Nowlis Stephen, Sherman Steven J. Comparison effects on preference construction. J. Consumer Res. (1999) 26(December):293–303Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dhar Ravi, Simonson Itamar. The effect of the focus of comparison on consumer preferences. J. Marketing Res. (1992) 29(November):430–440Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dholakia Utpal M., Soltysinski Kerry. Coveted or overlooked? The psychology of bidding for comparable listings in digital auctions. Marketing Lett. (2001) 12(3):225–237Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dholakia Utpal M., Basuroy Suman, Soltysinski Kerry. Auction or agent (or both)? A study of moderators of the herding bias in digital auctions. Internat. J. Res. Marketing (2002) 19(2):115–130Crossref, Google Scholar
• Friestad Marian, Wright Peter. The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. J. Consumer Res. (1994) 21(June):1–31Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gourville John T. The effect of implicit versus explicit comparisons on temporal pricing claims. Marketing Lett. (1999) 10(2):113–124Crossref, Google Scholar
• Häubl Gerald, Leszczyc Peter T. L. Popkowski. Minimum prices and product valuations in auctions. (2003) . Working paper, Marketing Science Institute Reports, Issue 3, No. 03-117, 115-141. Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Häubl Gerald, Leszczyc Peter T. L. Popkowski. Bidding frenzy: How the speed of competitor reaction influences product valuations in auctions. (2004) . Working paper, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, CanadaGoogle Scholar
• Helson Harry. Adaptation-Level Theory (1964) (Harper and Row, New York) Google Scholar
• Huber Joel, Payne John W., Puto Christopher. Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. J. Consumer Res. (1982) 9(1):90–98Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman Daniel. Reference points, anchors, norms and mixed feelings. Organ. Behavior Human Decision Processes (1992) 51:296–312Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman Daniel, Tversky Amos. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica (1979) 47:263–291Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kardes Frank R. Spontaneous inference processes in advertising: The effects of conclusion omission and involvement on persuasion. J. Consumer Res. (1988) 15(September):225–233Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kivetz Ran. The effects of effort and intrinsic motivation on risky choice. Marketing Sci. (2003) 22(4):477–502Link, Google Scholar
• Kivetz Ran, Simonson Itamar. The role of effort advantage in consumer response to loyalty programs: The idiosyncratic fit heuristic. J. Marketing Res. (2003) 40(4):454–467Crossref, Google Scholar
• Monroe Kent B.Pricing: Making Profitable Decisions (2003) (McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York) Google Scholar
• Mussweiler Thomas. Comparison processes in social judgment: Mechanisms and consequences. Psych. Rev. (2003) 110(3):472–489Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nowlis Stephen M., Simonson Itamar. Attribute-task compatibility as a determinant of consumer preference reversals. J. Marketing Res. (1997) 24(May):205–248Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nunes Joseph C., Boatwright Peter. Incidental prices and their effect on consumer willingness to pay. J. Marketing Res. (2004) 41(4):457–466Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ockenfels Axel, Roth Alvin E. The timing of bids in internet auctions: Market design, bidder behavior, and artificial agents. Artificial Intelligence Magazine (2002) 23(Fall):79–87Google Scholar
• Petty Richard E., Cacioppo John T., Schumann David. Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. J. Consumer Res. (1983) 10(September):135–146Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puto Christopher P. The framing of buying decisions. J. Consumer Res. (1986) 14:301–316Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shafir Eldar. Choosing versus rejecting: Why some options are both better and worse than others. Memory Cognition (1993) 21(4):546–556Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shiv Baba, Edell Julie, Payne John W. Factors affecting the impact of negatively and positively framed ad messages. J. Consumer Res. (1997) 24(December):285–294Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simonson Itamar. Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects. J. Consumer Res. (1989) 16(September):158–174Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simonson Itamar, Nowlis Stephen. The role of explanations and need for uniqueness in consumer decision making: Unconventional choices based on reasons. J. Consumer Res. (2000) 27(1):49–68Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simonson Itamar, Tversky Amos. Choice in context: Tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. J. Marketing Res. (1992) 29:281–295Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky Amos, Kahneman Daniel. Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference dependent model. Quart. J. Econom. (1991) 106(4):1039–1061Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky Amos, Simonson Itamar. Context-dependent preferences. Management Sci. (1993) 39(10):1179–1189Link, Google Scholar
• Walster Elaine, Festinger Leon. Individual differences in the need for cognitive closure. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1962) 67:1049–1062Google Scholar
• Winer Russell S. A reference price model of demand for frequently-purchased products. J. Consumer Res. (1986) 13(September):250–256Crossref, Google Scholar
• Winer Russell S. Experimentation in the 21st century: The importance of external validity. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. (1999) 27(Summer):349–358Crossref, Google Scholar