Product Variety and Endogenous Pricing with Evaluation Costs

References

• Beach L. R., Mitchell T. R. A contingency model for the selection of decision strategies. Acad. Management Rev. (1978) 3(3):439–449Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bénabou R., Tirole J. Willpower and personal rules. J. Political Econom. (2004) 112(4):848–886Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bettman J. R.An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice (1979) (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA) Google Scholar
• Boatwright P., Nunes J. C. Reducing assortment: An attribute-based approach. J. Marketing (2001) 65(3):50–63Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dhar R., Simonson I. The effect of forced choice on choice. J. Marketing Res. (2003) 40(2):146–160Crossref, Google Scholar
• Diamond P. A model of price adjustment. J. Econom. Theory (1971) 3(2):156–168Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dickson P. R., Sawyer A. G. The price knowledge and search of supermarket shoppers. J. Marketing (1990) 54(3):42–53Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fudenberg D., Levine D. K. A dual-self model of impulse control. Amer. Econom. Rev. (2006) 96(5):1449–1476Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gourville J. T., Soman D. Overchoice and assortment type: When and why variety backfires. Marketing Sci. (2005) 24(3):382–395Link, Google Scholar
• Gul F., Pesendorfer W. Temptation and self-control. Econometrica (2001) 69(6):1403–1436Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guo L. Consumption flexibility, product configuration, and market competition. Marketing Sci. (2006) 25(2):116–130Link, Google Scholar
• Hauser J. R., Wernerfelt B. An evaluation cost model of consideration sets. J. Consumer Res. (1990) 16(4):393–408Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huffman C., Kahn B. E. Variety for sale: Mass customization or mass confusion? J. Retailing (1998) 74(4):491–513Crossref, Google Scholar
• Irons B., Hepburn C. Regret theory and the tyranny of choice. Econom. Record (2007) 83(261):191–203Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iyengar S. S., Kamenica E. Choice proliferation, simplicity seeking, and asset allocation. (2007) . Working paper, Columbia University, New YorkGoogle Scholar
• Iyengar S. S., Lepper M. R. When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? J. Personality Soc. Psych. (2000) 79(6):995–1006Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jacoby J. Information load and decision quality: Some contested issues. J. Marketing Res. (1977) 14(4):569–573Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jacoby J., Olson J. C., Wind Y., Greenberg B. Consumer response to price: An attitudinal, information processing perspective. Moving Ahead with Attitude Research (1977) (American Marketing Association, Chicago) 73–86Google Scholar
• Kamenica E. Contextual inference in markets: On the informational content of product lines. (2007) . Working paper, University of Chicago, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
• Kamenica E. Contextual inference in markets: On the informational content of product lines. Amer. Econom. Rev. (2008) 98(5):2127–2149Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keller K. L., Staelin R. Effects of quality and quantity of information on decision effectiveness. J. Consumer Res. (1987) 14(2):200–213Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kuksov D. Buyer search costs and endogenous product design. Marketing Sci. (2004) 23(4):490–499Link, Google Scholar
• Kuksov D., Villas-Boas J. M. When more alternatives lead to less choice. (2006) . Working paper, University of California, Berkeley, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
• Lal R., Matutes C. Retail pricing and advertising strategies. J. Bus. (1994) 67(3):345–370Crossref, Google Scholar
• Loomes G., Sugden R. Some implications of a more general form of regret theory. J. Econom. Theory (1987) 41(2):270–287Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lurie N. H. Decision making in information-rich environments: The role of information structure. J. Consumer Res. (2004) 30(4):473–486Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mick G. L., Broniarczyk S. M., Haidt J. Choose, choose, choose, choose, choose, choose, choose: Emerging and prospective research on the deleterious effects of living in consumer hyperchoice. J. Bus. Ethics (2004) 52(2):207–211Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller G. A. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits of our capacity for processing information. Psych. Rev. (1956) 63(2):81–97Crossref, Google Scholar
• Norwood F. B. Less choice is better, sometimes. J. Agricultural Food Indust. Organ. (2006) 4(1). Article 3Google Scholar
• Payne J. W., Bettman J. R., Johnson E. J. Adaptive strategy selection in decision making. J. Experiment. Psych.: Learn., Memory, Cognition (1988) 14(3):534–552Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rao R. C., Syam N. Equilibrium price communication and unadvertised specials by competing supermarkets. Marketing Sci. (2001) 20(1):61–81Link, Google Scholar
• Sarver T. Anticipating regret: Why fewer options may be better. Econometrica (2008) 76(2):263–305Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shugan S. M. The cost of thinking. J. Consumer Res. (1980) 7(2):99–111Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simester D. Signalling price image using advertised prices. Marketing Sci. (1995) 14(2):166–188Link, Google Scholar
• Simon H. A. A behavioral model of rational choice. Quart. J. Econom. (1955) 69(1):99–118Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Zandt T. Information overload in a network of targeted communication. RAND J. Econom. (2004) 35(3):542–560Crossref, Google Scholar
• Villas-Boas J. M. Communication strategies and product line design. Marketing Sci. (2004) 23(3):304–316Link, Google Scholar
• Villas-Boas J. M. Information overload with endogenous pricing. (2008) . Working paper, University of California, Berkeley, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
• Wathieu L., Bertini M. Price as a stimulus to think: The case of willful overpricing. Marketing Sci. (2007) 26(1):118–129Link, Google Scholar
• Wernerfelt B. Selling formats for search goods. Marketing Sci. (1994) 13(3):298–308Link, Google Scholar
• Zhang J. The sound of silence: Observational learning in the U.S. kidney market. Marketing Sci. (2009) . ePub ahead of print July 23, http://mktsci.journal.informs.org/cgi/content/abstract/mksc.1090.0500v1Google Scholar