A Systematic Literature Review of Dynamic Pricing Strategies
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
Due to its success and acceptance in the airline and hospitality industry and the growing availability of behavioral, engagement, and attitudinal consumer data, dynamic pricing strategies are gaining popularity. The purpose of this systematic literature review is to answer the research question about how do dynamic pricing strategies affect customer perceptions and behaviors to avoid negative consumer reactions. The synthesis of over 50 articles revealed eight different research streams like for example the factors moderating the impact of dynamic pricing on customer behavior, strategic purchasing behavior in response to dynamic pricing, effect of dynamic pricing on customer perception of fairness, personalized dynamic pricing (PDP) and channel differentiated pricing. To advance future research, this systematic literature review identified the six propositions for further research like for example the assessment of the efficacy of different types of communication by firms seeking to mitigate the negative impacts of dynamic pricing and the assessment of the role and relevant importance of consumers’ personal characteristics upon their perceptions of price changes. The findings of this study have a practical impact for managers and scholars. Scholars may use them to update their research agendas and managers to optimize their pricing strategies to increase revenues.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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