Assortment and Price Optimization Under a Multiattribute (Contextual) Choice Model

References

• Charnes A, Cooper W (1973) An explicit general solution in linear fractional programming. Naval Res. Logist. Quart. 20(3):449–467.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davis JM, Gallego G, Topaloglu H (2014) Assortment optimization under variants of the nested logit model. Oper. Res. 62(2):250–273.Link, Google Scholar
• Doyle JR, O’Connor DJ, Reynolds GM, Bottomley PA (1999) The robustness of the asymmetrically dominated effect: Buying frames, phantom alternatives, and in-store purchases. Psych. Marketing 16(3):225–243.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fader PS, Hardie BGS (1996) Modeling consumer choice among skus. J. Marketing Res. 33(4):442–452.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Feldman J, Topaloglu H (2015) Bounding optimal expected revenues for assortment optimization under mixtures of multinomial logits. Production Oper. Management 24(10):1598–1620.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gao X, Jasin S, Najafi S, Zhang H (2022) Joint learning and optimization for multi-product pricing (and ranking) under a general cascade click model. Management Sci. 68(10):7362–7382.Link, Google Scholar
• Hardie BG, Johnson EJ, Fader PS (1993) Modeling loss aversion and reference dependence effects on brand choice. Marketing Sci. 12(4):378–394.Link, Google Scholar
• He J (2024) Bayesian contextual choices under imperfect perception of attributes. Management Sci. 70(3):1465–1482.Link, Google Scholar
• Huber J, Payne JW, Puto C (1982) Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. J. Consumer Res. 9(1):90–98.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jasin S (2014) Reoptimization and self-adjusting price control for network revenue management. Oper. Res. 62(5):1168–1178.Link, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–291.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kivetz R, Netzer O, Srinivasan V (2004a) Alternative models for capturing the compromise effect. J. Marketing Res. 41(3):237–257.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kivetz R, Netzer O, Srinivasan V (2004b) Extending compromise effect models to complex buying situations and other context effects. J. Marketing Res. 41(3):262–268.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li H, Huh WT (2011) Pricing multiple products with the multinomial logit and nested logit models: Concavity and implications. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 13(4):549–563.Link, Google Scholar
• Miyazaki AD, Grewal D, Goodstein RC (2005) The effect of multiple extrinsic cues on quality perceptions: A matter of consistency. J. Consumer Res. 32(1):146–153.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Najafi S, Duenyas I, Jasin S, Uichanco J (2024) Multiproduct dynamic pricing with limited inventories under a cascade click model. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 26(2):554–572.Link, Google Scholar
• Nasiry J, Popescu I (2011) Dynamic pricing with loss-averse consumers and peak-end anchoring. Oper. Res. 59(6):1361–1368.Link, Google Scholar
• Otto AR, Devine S, Schulz E, Bornstein AM, Louie K (2022) Context-dependent choice and evaluation in real-world consumer behavior. Sci. Rep. 12(1):17744.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pinger P, Ruhmer-Krell I, Schumacher H (2016) The compromise effect in action: Lessons from a restaurant’s menu. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 128:14–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Popescu I, Wu Y (2007) Dynamic pricing strategies with reference effects. Oper. Res. 55(3):413–429.Link, Google Scholar
• Rooderkerk RP, Heerde HJV, Bijmolt TH (2011) Incorporating context effects into a choice model. J. Marketing Res. 48(4):767–780.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld N, Oshiba K, Singer Y (2020) Predicting choice with set-dependent aggregation. Daumé H III, Singh A, eds. Proc. 37th Internat. Conf. Machine Learn., vol. 119 (PMLR, Cambridge, MA), 8220–8229.Google Scholar
• Rusmevichientong P, Shen ZJM, Shmoys DB (2010) Dynamic assortment optimization with a multinomial logit choice model and capacity constraint. Oper. Res. 58(6):1666–1680.Link, Google Scholar
• Sherali HD, Adams WP (2013) A Reformulation-Linearization Technique for Solving Discrete and Continuous Nonconvex Problems, vol 31 (Springer Science & Business Media, Boston).Google Scholar
• Simonson I (1989) Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects. J. Consumer Res. 16(2):158–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simonson I, Tversky A (1992) Choice in context: Tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. J. Marketing Res. 29(3):281–295.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Talluri K, van Ryzin G (2004) Revenue management under a general discrete choice model of consumer behavior. Management Sci. 50(1):15–33.Link, Google Scholar
• Tereyağoğlu N, Fader PS, Veeraraghavan S (2018) Multiattribute loss aversion and reference dependence: Evidence from the performing arts industry. Management Sci. 64(1):421–436.Link, Google Scholar
• Train KE (2009) Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tserenjigmid G (2019) Choosing with the worst in mind: A reference-dependent model. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 157:631–652.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1991) Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. Quart. J. Econom. 106(4):1039–1061.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Simonson I (1993) Context-dependent preferences. Management Sci. 39(10):1179–1189.Link, Google Scholar
• Wang Z (2016) Technical note—Intertemporal price discrimination via reference price effects. Oper. Res. 64(2):290–296.Link, Google Scholar
• Wang R (2018) When prospect theory meets consumer choice models: Assortment and pricing management with reference prices. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 20(3):583–600.Link, Google Scholar
• Wu C, Cosguner K (2020) Profiting from the decoy effect: A case study of an online diamond retailer. Marketing Sci. 39(5):974–995.Link, Google Scholar
• Yousefi Maragheh R, Chen X, Davis J, Cho J, Kumar S, Achan K (2020) Choice modeling and assortment optimization in the presence of context effects. Preprint, submitted December 11, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3747354.Google Scholar