Unfair commercial practices in a pit market: evidence from an artefactual field experiment

  • Francesco Bogliacino*
  • , Rafael Charris
  • , Cristiano Codagnone
  • , Frans Folkvord
  • , Felipe Montealegre
  • , Francisco Lupiáñez-Villanueva
  • *Autore corrispondente per questo lavoro

Risultato della ricerca: Contributo in rivistaArticolopeer review

Abstract

Commercial practices such as drip pricing, reference pricing and best-price guarantee can be used to set higher prices and mislead consumers, but protective measures can restore efficiency. In a placebo-controlled market experiment, we examined a treatment allowing for the use and misuse of commercial practices. Three additional treatments tested the effects of formal sanctions, informal sanctions and a regret nudge. We found that commercial practices led to higher prices, cheating was systematic and regret nudging was ineffective. Furthermore, formal and informal sanctions reduced both the likelihood of using commercial practices and the likelihood of cheating, leading to welfare increases.
Lingua originaleInglese
pagine (da-a)1-18
Numero di pagine18
RivistaBehavioural Public Policy
Volume2022
Numero di pubblicazionefirst view
DOI
Stato di pubblicazionePubblicato - 2022

OSS delle Nazioni Unite

Questo processo contribuisce al raggiungimento dei seguenti obiettivi di sviluppo sostenibile

  1. SDG 9 - Imprese, innovazione e infrastrutture
    SDG 9 Imprese, innovazione e infrastrutture

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Psicologia Sociale
  • Sociologia e Scienze Politiche
  • Scienze Sociali (varie)
  • Psicologia Applicata
  • Scienze Politiche e Relazioni Internazionali

Keywords

  • cheating
  • commercial practices
  • formal sanctions
  • informal sanctions
  • regret

Fingerprint

Entra nei temi di ricerca di 'Unfair commercial practices in a pit market: evidence from an artefactual field experiment'. Insieme formano una fingerprint unica.

Cita questo