The catalogue contains study descriptions in various languages. The system searches with your search terms from study descriptions available in the language you have selected. The catalogue does not have ‘All languages’ option as due to linguistic differences this would give incomplete results. See the User Guide for more detailed information.
Does products complexity matter for competition in experimental retail markets?
Creator
Sitzia, S, University of East Anglia
Zizzo, D, University of Newcastle
Study number / PID
851698 (UKDA)
10.5255/UKDA-SN-851698 (DOI)
Data access
Restricted
Series
Not available
Abstract
Data are collected by means of an economic experiments. The description of the experiment is as follows: We ran two experiments: a posted offer market experiment with three treatments (Experiment 1) and an individual choice experiment with two treatments and with a posted offer market frame (Experiment 2). A posted offer market setup corresponds to the reality of retail markets where sellers post prices and buyers simply decide whether and how much to buy at the given price. Both experiments involved the same two pairs of products (S1 and C1 or S2 and C2), two trial periods using an example product and four phases; each phase had 10 independent trading periods.
In Experiment 1, subjects were randomly assigned to the role either of seller or buyer while in Experiment 2 all subjects were buyers. They were handed instructions, questionnaires, and consent forms. After they read the instructions they answered the questionnaire and if they had any doubts they could ask for clarification. When all the participants were ready, after they did the two trial periods, the experiment started. In the trial periods we employed an example product, which was the same across sessions. The reason why we used an example product is two-fold. Firstly, we did not want to disclose any information regarding both lotteries. Secondly, we wanted to avoid any possible anchoring effect to the outcomes occurred in the trial phase that could have affected buyers’ decisions. In both experiments we used ‘points’ as the experimental currency (the conversion rate being 975 points to one pound). Experiment 1 involved 3 treatments: B (Baseline), IS1 (Informed Seller with one product on sale), and IS2 (Informed Seller with two products on sale simultaneously). The key difference relative to Experiment 1 was that this was an individual choice experiment. Since there was not a seller, prices were randomly generated from a uniform distribution. Half of the subjects faced high prices ranging between 75...
Terminology used is generally based on DDI controlled vocabularies: Time Method, Analysis Unit, Sampling Procedure and Mode of Collection, available at CESSDA Vocabulary Service.
Methodology
Data collection period
01/09/2009 - 30/11/2014
Country
United Kingdom
Time dimension
Not available
Analysis unit
Individual
Universe
Not available
Sampling procedure
Not available
Kind of data
Numeric
Data collection mode
Economic Experiment
Funding information
Grant number
CCP’s ESRC grant number RES-578-28-0002
Access
Publisher
UK Data Service
Publication year
2015
Terms of data access
The Data Collection is available for download to users registered with the UK Data Service.