Evaluating the Efficacy of Application Costs for Managing Congestion in Online Matching Markets

References

• Albrecht J, Gautier PA, Vroman S (2006) Equilibrium directed search with multiple applications. Rev. Econom. Stud. 73(4):869–891.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aloui C, Jebsi K (2010) Optimal pricing of a two-sided monopoly platform with a one-sided congestion effect. Internat. Rev. Econom. 57(4):423–439.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aloui C, Jebsi K (2011) Optimal pricing of a duopoly platform with two-sided congestion effect. J. Res. Indust. Organ. 2011:1–10.Google Scholar
• Aloui C, Jebsi K (2012) Optimal pricing of a two-sided monopoly platform with two-sided congestion effect: The case of heterosexual websites. Accessed June 10, 2024, https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=82b216ecba46e011d7af2fc5289ff13f7c0d0e3f.Google Scholar
• Aloysius J, Deck C, Hao L, French R (2016) An experimental investigation of procurement auctions with asymmetric sellers. Production Oper. Management 25(10):1763–1777.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arkes HR, Blumer C (1985) The psychology of sunk cost. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 35(1):124–140.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Armstrong M (2006) Competition in two-sided markets. RAND J. Econom. 37(3):668–691.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arnosti N, Johari R, Kanoria Y (2014) Managing congestion in decentralized matching markets. EC’14: Proc. Fifteenth ACM Conf. Econom. Comput. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 451.Google Scholar
• Arnosti N, Johari R, Kanoria Y (2021) Managing congestion in matching markets. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 23(3):620–636.Link, Google Scholar
• Ashlagi I, Kanoria Y, Leshno JD (2017) Unbalanced random matching markets: The stark effect of competition. J. Political Econom. 125(1):69–98.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashlagi I, Braverman M, Kanoria Y, Shi P (2020) Clearing matching markets efficiently: Informative signals and match recommendations. Management Sci. 66(5):2163–2193.Link, Google Scholar
• Athey S, Bayati M, Doudchenko N, Imbens G, Khosravi K (2021) Matrix completion methods for causal panel data models. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 116(536):1716–1730.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Augenblick N (2016) The sunk-cost fallacy in penny auctions. Rev. Econom. Stud. 83(1):58–86.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Belleflamme P, Peitz M (2019) Managing competition on a two‐sided platform. J. Econom. Management Strategy 28(1):5–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bernal JL, Cummins S, Gasparrini A (2017) Interrupted time series regression for the evaluation of public health interventions: A tutorial. Internat. J. Epidemiology 46(1):348–355.Google Scholar
• Bernhardt M, Spann M (2010) An empirical analysis of bidding fees in name-your-own-price auctions. J. Interactive Marketing 24(4):283–296.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bernstein F, DeCroix GA, Keskin NB (2021) Competition between two-sided platforms under demand and supply congestion effects. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 23(5):1043–1061.Link, Google Scholar
• Bhole M, Fradkin A, Horton J (2021) Information about vacancy competition redirects job search. Accessed June 10, 2024, https://files.osf.io/v1/resources/p82fk/providers/osfstorage/606b9847f6585f01c361b403?action=download&direct &version=1.Google Scholar
• Bied G, Perennes E, Naya VA, Caillou P, Crépon B, Gaillac C, Sebag M (2021) Congestion-avoiding job recommendation with optimal transport. FEAST Workshop ECML-PKDD 2021 (Bilbao, Spain).Google Scholar
• Boh W, Constantinides P, Padmanabhan B, Viswanathan S (2023) Building digital resilience against major shocks. MIS Quart. 47(1):343–360.Google Scholar
• Carr SM (2003) Note on online auctions with costly bid evaluation. Management Sci. 49(11):1521–1528.Link, Google Scholar
• Castillo JC (2024) Who benefits from surge pricing? Preprint, submitted November 8, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3245533.Google Scholar
• Chandler D (2014) Essays in online labor markets. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.Google Scholar
• Chen MK, Sheldon M (2016) Dynamic pricing in a labor market: Surge pricing and flexible work on the Uber platform. EC ’16: ACM Conf. Econom. Comput. Maastricht (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 455.Google Scholar
• Chen K-M, Hsieh Y-W, Lin M-J (2019) Prediction and congestion in two-sided markets: Economist versus machine matchmakers. Preprint, submitted January 19, http://oxford-abstracts.s3.amazonaws.com/50fb75f6-37fa-411c-9bfd-f1450d16fb7a.pdf.Google Scholar
• Cheng HK, Bandyopadhyay S, Guo H (2011) The debate on net neutrality: A policy perspective. Inform. Systems Res. 22(1):60–82.Link, Google Scholar
• Cullen Z, Farronato C (2021) Outsourcing tasks online: Matching supply and demand on peer-to-peer internet platforms. Management Sci. 67(7):3985–4003.Link, Google Scholar
• Economides N, Tåg J (2012) Network neutrality on the internet: A two-sided market analysis. Inform. Econom. Policy 24(2):91–104.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Egger PH, Larch M (2013) Time zone differences as trade barriers. Econom. Lett. 119(2):172–175.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Egger PH, Lassmann A (2012) The language effect in international trade: A meta-analysis. Econom. Lett. 116(2):221–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Egger PH, Lassmann A (2015) The causal impact of common native language on international trade: Evidence from a spatial regression discontinuity design. Econom. J. 125(584):699–745.Google Scholar
• Evans DS, Schmalensee R (2007) Catalyst Code: The Strategies Behind the World’s Most Dynamic Companies (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Eyster E (2002) Rationalizing the past: A taste for consistency. Nuffield College Mimeograph. Retrieved from https://www.lse.ac.uk/economics/Assets/Documents/personal-pages/erik-eyster/rationalising-the-past-a-taste-for-consistency.pdf.Google Scholar
• Fan C, Wolfstetter E (2008) Procurement with costly bidding, optimal shortlisting, and rebates. Econom. Lett. 98(3):327–334.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fekih Romdhane S, Aloui C, Jebsi K (2020) On the net neutrality efficiency under congestion price discrimination. Networks Spatial Econom. 20(3):833–872.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fong J (2024) Effects of market size and competition in two-sided markets: Evidence from online dating. Marketing Sci. 43(5):971–985.Link, Google Scholar
• Gardner J (2022) Two-stage differences in differences. Preprint, submitted July 13, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2207.05943.Google Scholar
• Halaburda H, Jan Piskorski M, Yıldırım P (2018) Competing by restricting choice: The case of matching platforms. Management Sci. 64(8):3574–3594.Link, Google Scholar
• Hartman E, Hidalgo FD (2018) An equivalence approach to balance and placebo tests. Amer. J. Political Sci. 62(4):1000–1013.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holt CA, Laury SK (2002) Risk aversion and incentive effects. Amer. Econom. Rev. 92(5):1644–1655.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hong Y, Pavlou PA (2014) Is the world truly “flat?” Empirical evidence from online labor markets. Preprint, submitted October 1, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2371748.Google Scholar
• Horton JJ (2019) Buyer uncertainty about seller capacity: Causes, consequences, and a partial solution. Management Sci. 65(8):3518–3540.Link, Google Scholar
• Horton JJ, Tambe P (2025) The death of a technical skill. Inform. Systems Res., ePub ahead of print March 19, https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2022.0709.Google Scholar
• Huang N, Burtch G, He Y, Hong Y (2022) Managing congestion in a matching market via demand information disclosure. Inform. Systems Res. 33(4):1196–1220.Link, Google Scholar
• Jung J, Lim H, Lee D, Kim C (2022) The secret to finding a match: A field experiment on choice capacity design in an online dating platform. Inform. Systems Res. 33(4):1248–1263.Link, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Knetsch JL, Thaler RH (1990) Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the coase theorem. J. Political Econom. 98(6):1325–1348.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kanat I, Hong Y, Raghu TS (2018) Surviving in global online labor markets for IT services: A geo-economic analysis. Inform. Systems Res. 29(4):893–909.Link, Google Scholar
• Kanoria Y, Saban D (2021) Facilitating the search for partners on matching platforms. Management Sci. 67(10):5990–6029.Link, Google Scholar
• Karmegam SR, Ramaprasad J, Gopal A (2022) Gender gating? Addressing congestion to improve women’s welfare on online matching platforms. Accessed June 10, 2024, https://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2022/user_behaivor/user_behaivor/2/.Google Scholar
• Kikuchi T, Iwasa K (2010) A simple model of service trade with time zone differences. Internat. Rev. Econom. Finance 19(1):75–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kokkodis M (2023) Adjusting skillset cohesion in online labor markets: Reputation gains and opportunity losses. Inform. Systems Res. 34(3):1245–1258.Link, Google Scholar
• Kontopantelis E, Doran T, Springate DA, Buchan I, Reeves D (2015) Regression based quasi-experimental approach when randomisation is not an option: Interrupted time series analysis. BMJ 350:h2750.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee S, Niederle M (2015) Propose with a rose? Signaling in internet dating markets. Experiment. Econom. 18(4):731–755.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liang C, Hong Y, Gu B (2025) Monitoring and home bias in global hiring: Evidence from an online labor platform. Inform. Systems Res. 36(2):736–760.Link, Google Scholar
• Liu L, Wang Y, Xu Y (2024) A practical guide to counterfactual estimators for causal inference with time‐series cross‐sectional data. Amer. J. Political Sci. 68(1):160–176.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mikolov T, Sutskever I, Chen K, Corrado GS, Dean J (2013) Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. Proc. 27th Internat. Conf. Neural Inform. Processing Systems, vol. 2 (Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY), 3111–3119. Google Scholar
• Naya VA, Bied G, Caillou P, Crépon B, Gaillac C, Pérennes E, Sebag M (2021) Designing labor market recommender systems: The importance of job seeker preferences and competition. IDSC IZA Workshop Matching Workers Jobs Online—New Developments Opportunities Soc. Sci. Practice (France).Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2009) Roundtable on two-sided markets—Note by the delegation of the United States. Accessed June 10, 2024, https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/attachments/us-submissions-oecd-2000-2009/roundtabletwosided.pdf.Google Scholar
• Pallais A (2014) Inefficient hiring in entry-level labor markets. Amer. Econom. Rev. 104(11):3565–3599.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Qiu L, Kumar S, Sen A, Sinha AP (2022) Impact of the Hospital Readmission Reduction Program on hospital readmission and mortality: An economic analysis. Production Oper. Management 31(5):2341–2360.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rauch JE (2001) Business and social networks in international trade. J. Econom. Literature 39(4):1177–1203.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Řehůřek R, Sojka P (2011) Gensim—Statistical Semantics in Python. Accessed June 10, 2024, https://www.fi.muni.cz/usr/sojka/posters/rehurek-sojka-scipy2011.pdf.Google Scholar
• Rysman M (2004) Competition between networks: A study of the market for yellow pages. Rev. Econom. Stud. 71(2):483–512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Samuelson WF (1985) Competitive bidding with entry costs. Econom. Lett. 17(1–2):53–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Seabright P, Sen A (2015) Statistical externalities and the labour market in the digital age. Preprint, submitted July 24, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2636514.Google Scholar
• Sharma S (2018) Competition in two sided markets with congestion. Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research Working Paper No. WP-2018-024, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2018-024, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.Google Scholar
• Shi P (2023) Optimal matchmaking strategy in two-sided marketplaces. Management Sci. 69(3):1323–1340.Link, Google Scholar
• Shimer R, Smith L (2001) Matching, search, and heterogeneity. Topics Macroeconomics 1(1):153460131010.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Snir EM, Hitt LM (2003) Costly bidding in online markets for IT services. Management Sci. 49(11):1504–1520.Link, Google Scholar
• Sun M (2006) Dynamic Network Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets (Stanford University, Stanford, CA).Google Scholar
• Tucker C, Zhang J (2008) Decomposing the congestion effect and the cross-platform effect in two-sided networks: A field experiment. Working paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Tudón J (2022) Prioritization vs. congestion on platforms: Evidence from Amazon’s Twitch.tv. RAND J. Econom. 53(2):328–355.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. J. Risk Uncertainty 5(4):297–323.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang X, Ma RTB, Xu Y (2017) On optimal two-sided pricing of congested networks. SIGMETRICS’ 17 Abstracts Proc. 2017 ACM SIGMETRICS/Internat. Conf. Measurement Model. Comput Systems (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 61.Google Scholar
• Xu Y (2017) Generalized synthetic control method: Causal inference with interactive fixed effects models. Political Anal. 25(1):57–76.Crossref, Google Scholar