Dynamic Pricing in the Presence of Myopic and Strategic Consumers: Theory and Experiment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate retailers’ dynamic pricing decisions in a stylized two‐period setting with possible supply constraints and demand from both myopic and strategic consumers. We present an analytical model and then test its predictions in a behavioral experiment in which human subjects played the role of pricing managers. We find that the fraction of strategic consumers in the market systematically moderates the optimal pricing structure. When this fraction exceeds a certain threshold, the retailer offers relatively small late season markdowns to discourage strategic consumers from waiting and to incentivize them to buy during the early season; otherwise, the retailer offers relatively large markdowns to divert all strategic consumers to the late season, where the majority of revenue is made. Our model analyses suggest that the latter policy is optimal under fairly broad conditions. Our experiment shows that after some significant learning, aggregate behavior is able to approximate the key qualitative predictions from our model analysis, with one notable deviation: in the presence of a mixture of myopic and strategic consumers, subjects act somewhat myopically – they underprice and oversell in the main selling season, which significantly limits their ability to generate revenue in the markdown season.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it