Remanufacturing and consumers' risky choices: Behavioral modeling and the role of ambiguity aversion

被引:40
作者
Abbey, James D. [1 ]
Kleber, Rainer [2 ]
Souza, Gilvan C. [3 ]
Voigt, Guido [4 ]
机构
[1] Texas A&M Univ, Mays Business Sch, College Stn, TX 77843 USA
[2] Otto von Guericke Univ, Fac Econ & Management, Magdeburg, Germany
[3] Indiana Univ, Kelley Sch Business, Bloomington, IN USA
[4] Univ Hamburg, Logist & Supply Chain Management, Hamburg, Germany
关键词
behavioral operations; closed-loop supply chains; decision heuristics and decision rules; remanufacturing; COMPARATIVE IGNORANCE; UNCERTAINTY; DECISION; UTILITY; MARKET; PREFERENCES; COMPETITION; BELIEF; GAINS;
D O I
10.1002/joom.1001
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
Willingness to pay (WTP) is known to be lower for remanufactured products than for comparable new products. Normative work to date has assumed that a consumer's WTP for a remanufactured product is a fraction, called discount factor, of the consumer's WTP for a corresponding new product, and that this discount factor is constant across consumers. Recent empirical research demonstrates, however, that the discount factor is not constant across consumers. This discovery has led researchers to call for an exploration of more refined utility models that incorporate heterogeneous risk preferences through elements such as risk aversion, loss aversion, and ambiguity aversion. To address this call, this article assesses each of these risk preference elements by empirically deriving WTP distributions from two interlinked studies. To provide triangulation in both the empirical method and sample, the interlinked studies employ an online survey and a laboratory experiment that elicits WTP for framed lotteries that proxy the situation of buying remanufactured products. The empirical results and robustness verifications demonstrate that a parsimonious standard utility model incorporating only risk aversion explains the WTP data reasonably well.
引用
收藏
页码:4 / 21
页数:18
相关论文
共 70 条
[41]   PREFERENCE AND BELIEF - AMBIGUITY AND COMPETENCE IN CHOICE UNDER UNCERTAINTY [J].
HEATH, C ;
TVERSKY, A .
JOURNAL OF RISK AND UNCERTAINTY, 1991, 4 (01) :5-28
[42]   Effects of outcome and probabilistic ambiguity on managerial choices [J].
Ho, JLY ;
Keller, LR ;
Keltyka, P .
JOURNAL OF RISK AND UNCERTAINTY, 2002, 24 (01) :47-74
[43]   EXPERIMENTAL TESTS OF THE ENDOWMENT EFFECT AND THE COASE THEOREM [J].
KAHNEMAN, D ;
KNETSCH, JL ;
THALER, RH .
JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, 1990, 98 (06) :1325-1348
[44]   Using laboratory experiments to build better operations management models [J].
Katok, Elena .
Foundations and Trends in Technology, Information and Operations Management, 2012, 5 (01) :1-88
[45]   An index of loss aversion [J].
Köbberling, V ;
Wakker, PP .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC THEORY, 2005, 122 (01) :119-131
[46]   A model of reference-dependent preferences [J].
Koszegi, Botond ;
Rabin, Matthew .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 2006, 121 (04) :1133-1165
[47]   Prospect Theory Explains Newsvendor Behavior: The Role of Reference Points [J].
Long, Xiaoyang ;
Nasiry, Javad .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2015, 61 (12) :3009-3012
[48]  
Luce R. Duncan, 1959, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE BE
[49]  
LUND RT, 1984, TECHNOL REV, V87, P18
[50]   Probabilistic sophistication and multiple priors [J].
Marinacci, M .
ECONOMETRICA, 2002, 70 (02) :755-764