Retail fairness: Exploring consumer perceptions of fairness towards retailers’ marketing tactics

The concept of fairness has received great attention in consumer behavior research lately. However, the focus of these studies has mainly been the understanding of fairness in terms of pricing rather than exploring the consumers’ perceptions of fairness itself. This study explores the consumers’ perceptions of fairness as an outcome of a retailer’s marketing tactics. Based on 36 in-depth interviews this study submits a conceptualization of retail fairness from the consumers’ point-of-view. The concept of retail fairness constitutes of three dimensions and nine sub-dimensions, expanding our knowledge of the construct. The study posits a crucial link between increased honesty, ethical, and moral behavior and the understanding of retail fairness. Theoretical and managerial implications are discussed.     

Voluntary pricing mechanisms for green product purchase: altruistic versus self-enhancing consideration

Voluntary pricing mechanisms, such as Pay-What-You-Want (PWYW), could be a better pricing strategy to substitute for cash discount promotions. They can effectively promote the sales of conventional goods and services, while being influenced by socio-psychological variables. However, there is no clarity on the relative assessment of the impact of pricing frames, such as PWYW and Mark-Off-Your-Own-Price (MOYOP), on the consumers’ purchase of green products, where the purchase consideration might vary as the environment protection (altruistic) consideration versus the self-interest (self-enhancing) consideration. Further, there remains ambiguity on when and why such pricing mechanisms will work. This study, through an experiment, examines the buyers’ varied responses for the PWYW price frame versus the MOYOP price frame versus the fixed price frame under the environment protection (altruistic) consideration versus the self-interest (self-enhancing) consideration. It shows that although buyers do not show any difference in the mean voluntary payment between PWYW versus MOYOP frames as such; they prefer PWYW price frame under the environment protection (altruistic) consideration and MOYOP price frame under the self-interest (self-enhancing) consideration. The results show that the perception of price fairness mediates the relationship between pricing mechanism and willingness to buy (WTB). Furthermore, this study finds that price consciousness impacts the indirect effect of pricing mechanisms on WTB via perceived price fairness. The present study is the first to examine and analyze different considerations when the buyers’ preference varied for the PWYW versus MOYOP pricing frames. This study has suggested the underlying role of the perception of price fairness and price consciousness in the participative pricing mechanism on purchase.     

人工智能时代个性化定价行为的反垄断规制--从大数据杀熟展开

人工智能时代,数据规模显著扩张,算法能力持续优化。科技实力雄厚、市场力量强大的经营者凭借大数据与算法工具的紧密结合,收集和分析能够反映消费者特征和行为的相关信息,以无限接近消费者购买能力和支付意愿上限的方式对消费者实施个性化定价。个性化定价行为涉及对条件相同的交易相对人在交易价格上实施差别化待遇,可能构成反垄断法所禁止的价格歧视行为。但与以往反垄断实施重点关注的排他性价格歧视不同,个性化定价突出表现为直接针对终端消费者实施的剥削性价格歧视,且在具体情形下呈现出不同的限制竞争效果,引发消费者选择能力与选择范围的双重限制。鉴于此,个性化定价行为的反垄断规制需要准确识别涉案行为,综合判断竞争效果,慎重选择福利标准。对于同时降低消费者剩余和社会总福利的个性化定价行为,可认定其具有限制竞争效果且不具备正当理由,从而构成违法价格歧视;对于降低消费者剩余却提高社会总福利的个性化定价行为,如果选择消费者福利标准则可认定其构成违法价格歧视,如果选择社会总福利标准则可认定其具备正当理由;对于同时提高消费者剩余与社会总福利的个性化定价行为,因涉及消费者之间的剩余转移,对其竞争效果的评价仍待反垄断实施予以明确。     

Pricing practices: A critical review of their effects on consumer perceptions and behaviour

With the present challenge to compete on price or product assortment, retailers and manufacturers are increasingly focusing on state-of-the-art pricing strategies which have their roots in behavioural economics and psychology. The current review is an empirical investigation on the relative effectiveness of various pricing practices on consumer perceptions and behaviour. Six pricing strategies were reviewed; drip pricing, reference pricing, the use of the word ‘free’, bait pricing, bundling and time-limited offers. The review shows that the former three have received a significant amount of attention and have a robust impact on consumer perceptions and behaviour. There is less research on the latter three; however, the available evidence does suggest that they, too, may be capable of influencing consumers’ choices. Finally, it is also clear that the effects of pricing practices can be moderated by a variety of factors. Overall, the current review indicates that sellers are able to influence perceptions and purchase decisions of consumers based on the manner in which prices are displayed. The implications of these findings for retailers, policy makers and researchers are discussed.     

Is transparency a good thing? How online price transparency and variability can benefit firms and influence consumer decision making

The internet has empowered consumers and changed the way they search and shop for products and services by increasing the availability and transparency of pricing and other comparative information. However, what is less clear from a managerial perspective is just how transparent pricing information should be. While it might seem that increasing price transparency would reduce consumer search, we find that it may actually increase search and delay. In this article, we review the use of firms’ application of price transparency in practice and propose that specific types of information can influence how transparent prices are to consumers, and how such transparency can influence consumer decisions in a way that is beneficial for the firm. We focus on a specific form of transparency: whether or not the consumer knows the range of pricing. We also discuss whether a high variability pricing approach versus a low variability pricing approach influences consumer decision making—and whether this influence is moderated by transparency.     

Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Procedural Justice in a Complaint Context

The idea of procedural justice as perceived by consumers has not been explored in the consumer behavior literature, although there has been some mention of consumer perceptions of fair treatment. This article describes the development of a scale using procedural justice as its theoretic base to measure consumers' perceptions of fair treatment when they complain. Results indicate that consumers make a distinction between the complaint process and the outcome of their complaint, indicating that procedural justice has further research potential. In addition, the proposed scale possesses the psychometric properties of an acceptable scale.     

Healthy Food: Determinants of Price Knowledge of Functional Dairy Products

Agri-food business pricing practices assume that consumers know about prices and that price is an impediment to healthy food purchase and consumption. The present article assesses functional dairy food shoppers’ price knowledge accuracy and its determinants. The data were gathered from 207 face-to-face interviews with shoppers at the point of sale and were analyzed with binary logistic regression testing a number of set hypotheses. Results show that healthy food price knowledge is higher than for conventional food but still low, and consumers tend to underestimate the price paid. Price knowledge accuracy increases with high purchase frequency, promotional products, hedonistic consumption, and for enhanced function products. Results provide a basis for higher sustainable pricing strategies. Consumers’ inability to distinguish misleading pricing strategies calls for regulators to ensure fair and ethical market practices, especially for healthy food.     

Partitioned pricing,price fairness perceptions,and the moderating effects of brand relationships in SME business markets

Partitioned pricing effects on price perceptions have been studied in the consumer (B2C) market context, but not in the business (B2B) market, and particularly not in the small- and medium-sized enterprise (SME), context. The current research investigates SME managers' affective and cognitive (e.g., price fairness perceptions) responses to partitioned pricing and extent of relationship with the selling brand. The first of three experimental studies finds that a partitioned price generates greater price fairness perceptions than an all-inclusive price. Study 2 finds that SME buyers elicit the greatest positive affect and the lowest negative affect when the buyer's firm has an established relationship with the brand and the seller partitions the price. The third study further examines the effects of relationship with the brand by separating brand mandate (i.e., when the buying firm requires employees to purchase from a specific brand) and relationship longevity.     

Many a little makes a mickle: Why do consumers negatively react to sequential price disclosure?

Drip pricing (DP) is distinct from partitioned pricing as it sequentially discloses surcharges to consumers. Critics see DP as a deceptive pricing tactic because it obscures the final price of an offer. We examine the effects of the timing of the final price disclosure and the number of sequentially presented surcharges on consumers' attention to the final price and, ultimately, perceived price fairness. In an eye‐tracking study with 225 participants, we find that the sequential (vs. up‐front) disclosure of the final price lowers perceived price fairness by increasing consumers' attention to the final price, in particular, when the number of surcharges is high. In addition, the sequential disclosure of the final price lowers perceived price fairness because of higher perceived price complexity and lower pricing transparency perceptions. The findings suggest that firms need to be aware of both attentional and cognitive effects of the final price disclosure when designing DP.     

Price Intransparency,Consumer Decision Making and European Consumer Law

Price comparison is a basic element of competition. For comparison to work, at least prices need to be transparent. Moreover, price is usually a focal point in consumer thinking and deciding on transactions. Hence, obfuscating prices can be detrimental to consumers. Therefore, it is vital for policymakers to know how transparent pricing is in reality. Commercial practices involving price intransparency can be detrimental to consumer decision making and may be associated with market failure. So, legislative intervention to ensure price transparency is sometimes warranted. Suppliers may disclose and frame pricing information in such ways as to influence consumers. For some suppliers, advantages may be gained by obfuscating price—through practices ranging from the outright hiding of price terms in the small print to subtle ways of throwing in gifts or adding charges during the vending process. Do consumers appreciate the implications of the fact that by framing price in different ways suppliers actually try to influence their demand for products? And how does the law broadly speaking respond to problems of price intransparency? In this article, behavioural science insights are combined with a legal analysis of European consumer law in order to chart some of the detrimental influences of price intransparency on the consumer decision-making process and to answer whether and to what extent European consumer law addresses these issues. In doing so, this article first reviews research from consumer psychology, marketing, and behavioural law, and economics regarding the influence of presentation, framing, and transparency of price on the consumer decision-making process. Subsequently, it describes and evaluates the legal framework offered by European consumer law and how this framework responds to practices of price intransparency. Particular problematic pricing techniques are identified and discussed. In conclusion, attention is drawn to the disadvantages of the increasing full harmonization character of European consumer law for combating price intransparency at Member State level.     

Consumers' Interpretations of the Semantic Phrases Found in Reference Price Advertisements

Consumers are frequently presented with a higher reference price to compare with a lower advertised selling price. The research on reference prices has traditionally been conducted based on the implicit assumption that consumers’ interpretations of a given semantic phrase, e.g., “Regular Price/Sale Price,”are consistent across all consumers, but this fundamental assumption has never been tested. Guidelines issued by the Federal Trade Commission and the Council of Better Business Bureaus, as well as regulations enacted by approximately half of all states, appear to be based on a similar assumption. However, given the variability among consumers’ perceptions found in other areas of consumer research, it is reasonable to expect that consumer interpretations of semantic phrases may vary. Given the potential variability, a pricing claim may be deemed informative or deceptive depending on the meaning the particular consumer attaches to the claim. This article presents a discussion of the vagueness in pricing claims as a step toward evaluating deception.     

Effects of Expiration Date-Based Pricing on Brand Image Perceptions

Expiration date-based pricing (EDBP) occurs when a grocery retailer reduces the price of a perishable product according to its remaining shelf life. While, conventional wisdom suggests that this practice leads to negative consumer evaluations of brand quality, a series of field experiments reveal negative effects on brand quality perceptions only among loyal consumers and those who perceive low risk associated with perishables. The effect is also mediated by consumer distrust (Study 1). In addition, EDBP has no effect on brand quality image if consumers are already familiar with this pricing practice (Study 2), and it may even generate positive consumer evaluations when framed as a cause-related marketing activity to reduce waste (Study 3). Additional evidence indicates that psychological contract violation perceptions provide the underlying mechanism for explaining consumer responses to EDBP (Study 4). This article ends with an agenda for further research and implications for retail practice.     

Consumer response to norm-breaking pricing events in e-commerce

e-commerce allows for many innovations in pricing: some have been embraced by consumers, others rejected. Using an online experiment, we explore the role of norms in predicting consumer responses to differential pricing arrived at either by violating an established pricing norm (dynamic posted pricing; setting prices based on individual consumer demand) or not (two retailers pricing differently). Our findings support the critical role of norms, such that belief in the norm is a strong predictor of negative responses (i.e., fairness, trust, purchase, search and complaint intentions) and priming people to consider norms generally increases the negative response. We also find that prior trust in the firm acts as a partial buffer against the negative response to norm breaking but at a diminishing rate as prior trust increases.     

Consumers’ choice of private label considering reference price and moderating effect

Retailers frequently place private labels (PLs) next to the top-moving sales national brands (NBs) and utilize comparative pricing that is related to the national brands. There is thus always an external reference price between the private labels and the national brands. In this study, two categories of products were selected, and a hierarchical non-linear model used to study the impact of external reference prices on consumers’ choice of private labels. In addition, the effects of package size and average disposable income (ADI) were introduced into the analysis for the relationship between external reference price and consumers’ choice of private label. The findings show an inverted U-shaped curve between consumers’ choice of private labels and the external reference price discrepancy. Consumers in areas with high ADI are more likely to buy private labels. Package size and ADI have different direct and moderating effects on two categories of products. This study contributes to reference dependence theory and category management.     

The multichannel pricing dilemma: Do consumers accept higher offline than online prices?

Whether to unify or discriminate prices in offline and online channels is a controversial topic that can be central to whether offline retailers survive in the marketplace. Field data evidence from a large multichannel retailer reveals a sobering picture. On average, only offline price premiums of approximately 2% seem feasible, and such premiums vary largely by product categories and price levels. High-priced products, which consumers perceive as risky, tend to allow offline price premiums, as do low-priced, takeaway items. However, in between these two extremes, the results show no potential for offline price premiums. Drawing on price fairness theory, we further explore consumer responses to higher offline prices in three experimental studies. In contrast with the assumptions of price fairness theory, the provision of purchase advisory services and communication of the price motive hardly stimulate consumer acceptance of higher offline prices in our context. However, the findings reveal important heterogeneity in consumer responses depending on their market segment, because some market segments indeed respond less negatively to higher offline prices. In addition, consumers accept offline price premiums for unplanned purchases.     

Consumer processing of foreign advertisements: roles of country-of-origin perceptions,consumer ethnocentrism,and country attitude

This paper reports the findings of a study that examined the impact of consumers’ three cross-national individual difference variables — country-of-origin perceptions, consumer ethnocentrism, and country attitudes — on their responses and attitudes toward foreign advertisements and advertised products. A model of consumer processing of international advertising has been proposed that consolidates a dual-element thesis comprising research on consumer processing of advertising, and several streams of research on cross-national individual difference variables. Empirical analysis of the hypothetical model through structural equation modeling yields supportive results: positive effects of consumers’ country attitudes on their responses to the creative presentation of international advertising, and positive effects of consumers’ country-of-origin perceptions on their responses to the buying proposal of international advertising. However, the hypothesized negative effects of consumer ethnocentrism on their responses to international advertising was not confirmed. The study contributes to our understanding of cross-national individual difference variables that precede and determine consumers’ attitudes toward foreign advertisements. It has practical implications for standardization versus localization of international advertising strategy.     

An assessment of ethical obligation and self‐identity in ethical consumer decision‐making: a structural equation modelling approach

Research has supported the addition of ethical obligation and self‐identity to models of consumer decision‐making in ‘ethical’ contexts. The particular placement of ethical obligation and self‐identity within a model of ethical consumer decision‐making remains unclear. Are these measures an antecedent to attitude or behavioural intention? This paper presents findings from a large scale survey of ethical consumers that explores, through structural equation modelling, the specific placement of these measures within a validated model of ethical consumer decision‐making, which uses the theory of planned behaviour as an initial framework. This research is examined within the ‘ethical’ context of fair trade grocery purchasing. (Fairly traded products are those purchased under equitable trading agreements, involving co‐operative rather than competitive trading principles, ensuring a fair price and fair working conditions for the producers and suppliers.)     

Online Price Discrimination and EU Data Privacy Law

Online shops could offer each website customer a different price. Such personalized pricing can lead to advanced forms of price discrimination based on individual characteristics of consumers, which may be provided, obtained, or assumed. An online shop can recognize customers, for instance through cookies, and categorize them as price-sensitive or price-insensitive. Subsequently, it can charge (presumed) price-insensitive people higher prices. This paper explores personalized pricing from a legal and an economic perspective. From an economic perspective, there are valid arguments in favour of price discrimination, but its effect on total consumer welfare is ambiguous. Irrespectively, many people regard personalized pricing as unfair or manipulative. The paper analyses how this dislike of personalized pricing may be linked to economic analysis and to other norms or values. Next, the paper examines whether European data protection law applies to personalized pricing. Data protection law applies if personal data are processed, and this paper argues that that is generally the case when prices are personalized. Data protection law requires companies to be transparent about the purpose of personal data processing, which implies that they must inform customers if they personalize prices. Subsequently, consumers have to give consent. If enforced, data protection law could thereby play a significant role in mitigating any adverse effects of personalized pricing. It could help to unearth how prevalent personalized pricing is and how people respond to transparency about it.     

The influence of multi-channel pricing strategy on price fairness and customer confusion

ABSTRACT

Multi-channel retailers face the challenge of coordinating marketing variables across their channels. In this respect, one of the main issues arising is whether to differentiate or integrate prices. Our study examines the impact of three multi-channel price differentiation instruments on perceived price fairness, customer confusion, and their consequences. In a scenario-based online experiment, we use a 2 x 2 × 2 between-subjects design and manipulate product price differentiation, online promotion and online shipping fees. The results indicate that price differentiation has an impact on fairness evaluations and customer confusion. Product price differentiation and online promotion are perceived as more unfair and lead to more confusion than price parity. Price fairness perceptions of shipping fees depend on product price differentiation. Customers perceive shipping fees as fairer than no shipping fees when prices are cheaper online but perceive shipping fees as less fair when prices are integrated. These results suggest that customers expect a consistent consideration of channel cost advantages and disadvantages and that shipping fees might serve as a cue for customers to consider the retailer’s channel costs. We further show that price fairness and customer confusion mediate effects of pricing instruments (in particular online promotion) on attitudinal and behavioral consequences.     

Consumer responses to characteristics of price-matching guarantees: The moderating role of price consciousness

The present study develops and tests a conceptual model of consumer response to different types of price-matching characteristics (i.e., refund depth, length, and scope) across consumer segments with varying levels of price consciousness. A computer shopping simulation results show that a deep refund is interpreted as a signal of low prices by nonprice conscious consumers. However, price conscious consumers are found to associate deep refunds with increased prices, an unintended outcome for the retailer. The effects of price-matching characteristics on search and purchase behavior were also found to vary across more and less price conscious consumer segments.