快讯研究自由裁量定价中的行为偏差:来自现场和实验室实验的证据

IF 4.8 3区 管理学 Q1 ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING Production and Operations Management Pub Date : 2024-04-12 DOI:10.1177/10591478241248747
Xinyu Liang, Yixin (Iris) Wang, Jun Li
{"title":"快讯研究自由裁量定价中的行为偏差:来自现场和实验室实验的证据","authors":"Xinyu Liang, Yixin (Iris) Wang, Jun Li","doi":"10.1177/10591478241248747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In theory, discretionary pricing enhances company performance by enabling managers to incorporate local information. However, in practice, managers may be prone to behavioral biases that can lead to sub-optimal decisions. This paper investigates the effectiveness of discretionary pricing and behavioral elements on pricing decisions via field and lab experiments. Collaborating with a pharmacy chain retailer, we first analyzed a field experiment that delegated pricing authority to store managers. We find that managers began engaging in discretionary pricing after two months of experiment implementation and tended to raise the prices of high-priced drugs, resulting in significant sales and revenue losses. This effect was particularly prominent among less experienced managers and in low-competition stores. We further designed a set of lab experiments to generalize our field observations and explore possible behavioral drivers. We requested lab participants to make pricing decisions under different information display scenarios and compared the average price adjustments between the direct display and click-to-view designs. We observe that participants also tended to raise product prices, and the magnitude of elevation was higher in the click-to-view group where the demand function information is less salient and accessible. Follow-up lab experiments support our field observations, suggesting that experience through repeated decisions and real-time feedback could alleviate the bias effect. Additionally, participants focused on high-priced products when given a list of items for discretionary pricing. Our results highlight the need to consider behavioral biases in human-algorithm collaborations and provide practical insights for improving information provision and training in discretionary settings.","PeriodicalId":20623,"journal":{"name":"Production and Operations Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EXPRESS: Examining Behavioral Biases in Discretionary Pricing: Evidence from Field and Lab Experiments\",\"authors\":\"Xinyu Liang, Yixin (Iris) Wang, Jun Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10591478241248747\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In theory, discretionary pricing enhances company performance by enabling managers to incorporate local information. However, in practice, managers may be prone to behavioral biases that can lead to sub-optimal decisions. This paper investigates the effectiveness of discretionary pricing and behavioral elements on pricing decisions via field and lab experiments. Collaborating with a pharmacy chain retailer, we first analyzed a field experiment that delegated pricing authority to store managers. We find that managers began engaging in discretionary pricing after two months of experiment implementation and tended to raise the prices of high-priced drugs, resulting in significant sales and revenue losses. This effect was particularly prominent among less experienced managers and in low-competition stores. We further designed a set of lab experiments to generalize our field observations and explore possible behavioral drivers. We requested lab participants to make pricing decisions under different information display scenarios and compared the average price adjustments between the direct display and click-to-view designs. We observe that participants also tended to raise product prices, and the magnitude of elevation was higher in the click-to-view group where the demand function information is less salient and accessible. Follow-up lab experiments support our field observations, suggesting that experience through repeated decisions and real-time feedback could alleviate the bias effect. Additionally, participants focused on high-priced products when given a list of items for discretionary pricing. Our results highlight the need to consider behavioral biases in human-algorithm collaborations and provide practical insights for improving information provision and training in discretionary settings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20623,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Production and Operations Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Production and Operations Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10591478241248747\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Production and Operations Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10591478241248747","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从理论上讲,酌情定价可使管理者纳入当地信息,从而提高公司业绩。然而,在实践中,管理者可能容易出现行为偏差,从而导致次优决策。本文通过实地和实验室实验,研究了酌情定价和行为因素对定价决策的影响。我们与一家连锁药店零售商合作,首先分析了一项将定价权下放给门店经理的现场实验。我们发现,在实验实施两个月后,经理们开始酌情定价,并倾向于提高高价药品的价格,从而造成了巨大的销售和收入损失。这种效应在经验较少的经理和低竞争店中尤为突出。我们进一步设计了一组实验室实验,以推广我们的实地观察结果,并探索可能的行为驱动因素。我们要求实验室参与者在不同的信息显示情景下做出定价决策,并比较了直接显示和点击查看两种设计的平均价格调整幅度。我们观察到,参与者也倾向于提高产品价格,而在点击查看组中,需求函数信息的显著性和可获取性更低,因此价格提高的幅度也更大。后续的实验室实验支持了我们的实地观察,表明通过重复决策和实时反馈获得的经验可以减轻偏差效应。此外,当参与者得到一份可自行定价的商品清单时,他们会将注意力集中在高价产品上。我们的研究结果强调了在人类与算法合作中考虑行为偏差的必要性,并为改进自由定价环境中的信息提供和培训提供了实用的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
EXPRESS: Examining Behavioral Biases in Discretionary Pricing: Evidence from Field and Lab Experiments
In theory, discretionary pricing enhances company performance by enabling managers to incorporate local information. However, in practice, managers may be prone to behavioral biases that can lead to sub-optimal decisions. This paper investigates the effectiveness of discretionary pricing and behavioral elements on pricing decisions via field and lab experiments. Collaborating with a pharmacy chain retailer, we first analyzed a field experiment that delegated pricing authority to store managers. We find that managers began engaging in discretionary pricing after two months of experiment implementation and tended to raise the prices of high-priced drugs, resulting in significant sales and revenue losses. This effect was particularly prominent among less experienced managers and in low-competition stores. We further designed a set of lab experiments to generalize our field observations and explore possible behavioral drivers. We requested lab participants to make pricing decisions under different information display scenarios and compared the average price adjustments between the direct display and click-to-view designs. We observe that participants also tended to raise product prices, and the magnitude of elevation was higher in the click-to-view group where the demand function information is less salient and accessible. Follow-up lab experiments support our field observations, suggesting that experience through repeated decisions and real-time feedback could alleviate the bias effect. Additionally, participants focused on high-priced products when given a list of items for discretionary pricing. Our results highlight the need to consider behavioral biases in human-algorithm collaborations and provide practical insights for improving information provision and training in discretionary settings.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Production and Operations Management
Production and Operations Management 管理科学-工程:制造
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
16.00%
发文量
278
审稿时长
24 months
期刊介绍: The mission of Production and Operations Management is to serve as the flagship research journal in operations management in manufacturing and services. The journal publishes scientific research into the problems, interest, and concerns of managers who manage product and process design, operations, and supply chains. It covers all topics in product and process design, operations, and supply chain management and welcomes papers using any research paradigm.
期刊最新文献
Selection of Small and Diverse Suppliers and Contractual Performance: Do Set-Asides Pay Off? Aligning With Metrics: Differential Impact of IT and Organizational Metrics on Cognitive Coordination in Top Management Teams Will Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Commitment Improve Manufacturing Firms’ Market Performance? A Signaling Theory Perspective on DEI Announcements Ups and Downs in Experience Design Career Incentives of Political Leaders and Corporate Operational Efficiency
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1