Experienced and Prospective Wait in Queues: A Behavioral Investigation

References

• Afeche P, Sarhangian V (2015) Rational abandonment from priority queues: Equilibrium strategy and pricing implications. Columbia Business School Research Paper No. 15-93, Columbia University, New York.Google Scholar
• Akşin Z, Gencer B, Gunes ED (2024) How observed queue length and service times drive reneging behavior in queues. Production Oper. Management 34(6):1440–1457.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Akşin Z, Ata B, Emadi SM, Su CL (2013) Structural estimation of callers’ delay sensitivity in call centers. Management Sci. 59(12):2727–2746.Link, Google Scholar
• Allon G, Kremer M (2018) Behavioral foundations of queueing systems. Donohue K, Katok E, Leider S, eds. The Handbook of Behavioral Operations (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ), 325–366.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Batt RJ, Terwiesch C (2015) Waiting patiently: An empirical study of queue abandonment in an emergency department. Management Sci. 61(1):39–59.Link, Google Scholar
• Becker GM, DeGroot MH, Marschak J (1964) Measuring utility by a single-response sequential method. Behav. Sci. 9(3):226–232.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bolandifar E, DeHoratius N, Olsen T, Wiler J (2019) An empirical study of the behavior of patients who leave the emergency department without being seen. J. Oper. Management 65(5):430–446.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brown AL, Liu J, Tsoi M (2025) Testing strategy-proofness and simplicity refinements in elicitation mechanisms. Working paper, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.Google Scholar
• Buell RW (2021) Last-place aversion in queues. Management Sci. 67(3):1430–1452.Link, Google Scholar
• Burchardi KB, De Quidt J, Gulesci S, Lerva B, Tripodi S (2021) Testing willingness to pay elicitation mechanisms in the field: Evidence from Uganda. J. Development Econom. 152(September):102701.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carmon Z, Kahneman D (1996) The experienced utility of queuing: Experience profiles and retrospective evaluations of simulated queues. Working paper, Fuqua School, Duke University, Durham, NC.Google Scholar
• Cason TN, Plott CR (2014) Misconceptions and game form recognition: Challenges to theories of revealed preference and framing. J. Political Econom. 122(6):1235–1270.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Conte A, Scarsini M, Sürücü O (2016) The impact of time limitation: Insights from a queueing experiment. Judgment Decision Making 11(3):260–274.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cui S, Veeraraghavan SK, Wang J, Zhang Y (2023) Observational reneging. Working paper, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Donohue K, Katok E, Leider S, eds. (2019) The Handbook of Behavioral Operations (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ).Google Scholar
• ElHaffar G, Durif F, Dubé L (2020) Towards closing the attitude-intention-behavior gap in green consumption: A narrative review of the literature and an overview of future research directions. J. Cleaner Production 275(December):122556.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elliott C (2019) Catch you later: The quiet rise of call back systems. Forbes (November 22), https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherelliott/2019/11/22/call-back-systems-rise.Google Scholar
• Flicker B, Hannigan C (2025) How a study on wait utility revealed an unexpected lesson on presentation format: People chose queues over clocks, 80% to 20%. Working paper, University of South Carolina, Columbia.Google Scholar
• Halevy Y (2007) Ellsberg revisited: An experimental study. Econometrica 75(2):503–536.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hayes AF (2009) Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Comm. Monographs 76(4):408–420.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hui MK, Tse DK (1996) What to tell consumers in waits of different lengths: An integrative model of service evaluation. J. Marketing 60(2):81–90.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iacobucci D, Schneider MJ, Popovich DL, Bakamitsos GA (2016) Mean centering helps alleviate “micro” but not “macro” multicollinearity. Behav. Res. Methods 48(4):1308–1317.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibrahim R, Estrada Rodriguez A, Zhan D (2024) On customer (dis)honesty in priority queues: The role of lying aversion. Management Sci. 71(1):844–860.Google Scholar
• Jaccard J, Wan CK, Turrisi R (1990) The detection and interpretation of interaction effects between continuous variables in multiple regression. Multivariate Behav. Res. 25(4):467–478.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Janakiraman N, Meyer RJ, Hoch SJ (2011) The psychology of decisions to abandon waits for service. J. Marketing Res. 48(6):970–984.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jiang Y, Zhao X, Zhu L, Liu JS, Deng K (2021) Total-effect test is superfluous for establishing complementary mediation. Statist. Sinica 31(4):1961–1983.Google Scholar
• Leclerc F, Schmitt BH, Dube L (1995) Waiting time and decision making: Is time like money? J. Consumer Res. 22(1):110–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lu Y, Musalem A, Olivares M, Schilkrut A (2013) Measuring the effect of queues on customer purchases. Management Sci. 59(8):1743–1763.Link, Google Scholar
• MacKinnon DP, Krull JL, Lockwood CM (2000) Equivalence of the mediation, confounding and suppression effect. Prevention Sci. 1(4):173–181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maister DH (1984) The psychology of waiting lines. Czepiel JA, Solomon MR, Suprenant CF, Gutman EG, eds. The Service Encounter: Managing Employee Customer Interaction in Service Business (Lexington Books, Lexington, MA), 113–123. Google Scholar
• Naor P (1969) The regulation of queue size by levying tolls. Econometrica 37(1):15–24.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Okada EM, Hoch SJ (2004) Spending time versus spending money. J. Consumer Res. 31(2):313–323.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Osuna EE (1985) The psychological cost of waiting. J. Math. Psych. 29(1):82–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Palan S, Schitter C (2018) Prolific.ac—A subject pool for online experiments. J. Behav. Experiment. Finance 17(March):22–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pallotta F (2021) Disney parks’ new ‘genie’ app helps you skip lines, but you’ll have to pay. CNN Bus. (August 18), https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/18/media/disney-parks-genie-app/index.html.Google Scholar
• Pazgal AI, Radas S (2008) Comparison of customer balking and reneging behavior to queueing theory predictions: An experimental study. Comput. Oper. Res. 35(8):2537–2548.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Peattie K (2001) Towards sustainability: The third age of green marketing. Marketing Rev. 2(2):129–146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Peer E, Rothschild D, Gordon A, Evernden Z, Damer E (2022) Data quality of platforms and panels for online behavioral research. Behav. Res. Methods 54(4):1643–1662.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Plott CR, Zeiler K (2005) The willingness to pay-willingness to accept gap, the “endowment effect,” subject misconceptions, and experimental procedures for eliciting valuations. Amer. Econom. Rev. 95(3):530–545.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rafaeli A, Barron G, Haber K (2002) The effects of queue structure on attitudes. J. Service Res. 5(2):125–139.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rigotti L, Wilson A, Gupta N (2023) The experimenters’ dilemma: Inferential preferences over populations. Working paper, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
• Soman D (2001) The mental accounting of sunk time costs: Why time is not like money. J. Behav. Decision Making 14(3):169–185.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ülkü S, Hydock C, Cui S (2020) Making the wait worthwhile: Experiments on the effect of queueing on consumption. Management Sci. 66(3):1149–1171.Link, Google Scholar
• Westaby JD (2005) Behavioral reasoning theory: Identifying new linkages underlying intentions and behavior. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 98(2):97–120.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhou R, Soman D (2003) Looking back: Exploring the psychology of queuing and the effect of the number of people behind. J. Consumer Res. 29(4):517–530.Crossref, Google Scholar