[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2011.13900.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Persuasion Produces the (Diamond) Paradox

Author

Listed:
  • Mark Whitmeyer
Abstract
This paper extends the sequential search model of Wolinsky (1986) by allowing firms to choose how much match value information to disclose to visiting consumers. This restores the Diamond paradox (Diamond 1971): there exist no symmetric equilibria in which consumers engage in active search, so consumers obtain zero surplus and firms obtain monopoly profits. Modifying the scenario to one in which prices are advertised, we discover that the no-active-search result persists, although the resulting symmetric equilibria are ones in which firms price at marginal cost.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Whitmeyer, 2020. "Persuasion Produces the (Diamond) Paradox," Papers 2011.13900, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2021.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2011.13900
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2011.13900
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jidong Zhou, 2020. "Improved Information in Search Markets," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2264R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Jun 2022.
    2. Weitzman, Martin L, 1979. "Optimal Search for the Best Alternative," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 641-654, May.
    3. Emir Kamenica & Matthew Gentzkow, 2011. "Bayesian Persuasion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2590-2615, October.
    4. Diamond, Peter A., 1971. "A model of price adjustment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 156-168, June.
    5. Mark Armstrong & Jidong Zhou, 2022. "Consumer Information and the Limits to Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(2), pages 534-577, February.
    6. Asher Wolinsky, 1986. "True Monopolistic Competition as a Result of Imperfect Information," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(3), pages 493-511.
    7. Simon Board & Jay Lu, 2018. "Competitive Information Disclosure in Search Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(5), pages 1965-2010.
    8. Stahl, Dale O, II, 1989. "Oligopolistic Pricing with Sequential Consumer Search," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(4), pages 700-712, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. He, Wei & Li, Jiangtao, 2023. "Competitive information disclosure in random search markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 132-153.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pak Hung Au & Mark Whitmeyer, 2021. "Attraction Versus Persuasion," HKUST CEP Working Papers Series 202102, HKUST Center for Economic Policy.
    2. Lyu, Chen, 2023. "Information design for selling search goods and the effect of competition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    3. Yongmin Chen & Tianle Zhang, 2018. "Entry and Welfare in Search Markets," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(608), pages 55-80, February.
    4. He, Wei & Li, Jiangtao, 2023. "Competitive information disclosure in random search markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 132-153.
    5. Zhou, Jidong, 2020. "Improved Information in Search Markets," MPRA Paper 100509, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Michael Choi & Guillaume Rocheteau, 2024. "Information acquisition and price discrimination in dynamic, decentralized markets," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 53, pages 1-46, July.
    7. Chia-Ling Hsu & Rafael Matta & Sergey V. Popov & Takeharu Sogo, 2017. "Optimal Product Placement," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 51(1), pages 127-145, August.
    8. Astorne-Figari, Carmen & Yankelevich, Aleksandr, 2014. "Consumer search with asymmetric price sampling," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 331-333.
    9. Fershtman, Chaim & Fishman, Arthur & Zhou, Jidong, 2018. "Search and categorization," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 225-254.
    10. Dutta, Champa Bati & Das, Debasish Kumar, 2017. "What drives consumers' online information search behavior? Evidence from England," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 36-45.
    11. T. Tony Ke & Song Lin, 2020. "Informational Complementarity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(8), pages 3699-3716, August.
    12. Fernando Branco & Monic Sun & J. Miguel Villas-Boas, 2012. "Optimal Search for Product Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(11), pages 2037-2056, November.
    13. Zheyin (Jane) Gu & Yunchuan Liu, 2013. "Consumer Fit Search, Retailer Shelf Layout, and Channel Interaction," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(4), pages 652-668, July.
    14. Makoto Hanazono & Noritaka Kudoh, 2024. "Prominence And Market Power: Asymmetric Oligopoly With Sequential Consumer Search," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 65(3), pages 1249-1281, August.
    15. José Tudón, 2021. "Can price dispersion be supported solely by information frictions?," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 9(1), pages 75-90, April.
    16. Moraga-González, José L. & Sándor, Zsolt & Wildenbeest, Matthijs R., 2014. "Prices, Product Differentiation, And Heterogeneous Search Costs," IESE Research Papers D/1097, IESE Business School.
    17. Andrew Rhodes & Jidong Zhou, 2019. "Consumer Search and Retail Market Structure," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 2607-2623, June.
    18. Armstrong, Mark & Zhou, Jidong, 2010. "Exploding offers and buy-now discounts," MPRA Paper 22531, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Pak Hung Au & Mark Whitmeyer, 2018. "Attraction versus Persuasion: Information Provision in Search Markets," Papers 1802.09396, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    20. Gamp, Tobias & Krähmer, Daniel, 2022. "Biased Beliefs in Search Markets," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 365, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2011.13900. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.