退货政策和预期的遗憾

IF 1.4 4区 管理学 Q3 ECONOMICS
Lin Liu, Ramarao Desiraju, Gan Zou
{"title":"退货政策和预期的遗憾","authors":"Lin Liu,&nbsp;Ramarao Desiraju,&nbsp;Gan Zou","doi":"10.1111/jems.12620","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Restrictions on returning an undesirable purchase may make consumers feel regret, and they may account for such a potential postpurchase regret when selecting products. This paper incorporates regret-averse consumers into a model of returns policy and compares two policies—a returns policy (which allows consumers to return undesirable purchases) and a no-returns policy (which restricts consumer returns). We explore a canonical shopping setting where the no-returns policy makes mismatched products unreturnable and triggers postpurchase consumer regret, whereas the alternative policy avoids such regret. Intuitively, one would expect businesses to not use the no-returns policy when consumers can anticipate regret. Our stylized analytical model, however, shows that the no-returns policy is not optimal unless it induces regret. In addition, contrary to conventional wisdom on competition in a vertically differentiated market, our results show that the no-returns policy may be related to conceding a high-quality advantage—that is, where a higher-quality firm would charge a higher price, earning a higher profit. Essentially, to raise profit, the no-returns policy serves as an instrument (through anticipated regret) by deliberately repositioning consumers' perceived quality to a lower level. Our results also show that consumers' regret intensity has an inverted-U-shaped relationship with profitability. In addition, we have examined the cases of firms and consumers incurring costs when dealing with returns, repurchasing after returning, and a strategic platform which decides the returns policy; and these analyses help highlight the robustness of our basic model. Echoing the long-noted sentiment from industry experts and academics that, after products are introduced in the market, changing consumers' perceptions of those attributes is admittedly easier than altering actual product characteristics, our analysis suggests an approach to alter perceptions via the choice of a returns policy.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47931,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economics & Management Strategy","volume":"34 3","pages":"773-781"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Returns Policy and Anticipated Regret\",\"authors\":\"Lin Liu,&nbsp;Ramarao Desiraju,&nbsp;Gan Zou\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jems.12620\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Restrictions on returning an undesirable purchase may make consumers feel regret, and they may account for such a potential postpurchase regret when selecting products. This paper incorporates regret-averse consumers into a model of returns policy and compares two policies—a returns policy (which allows consumers to return undesirable purchases) and a no-returns policy (which restricts consumer returns). We explore a canonical shopping setting where the no-returns policy makes mismatched products unreturnable and triggers postpurchase consumer regret, whereas the alternative policy avoids such regret. Intuitively, one would expect businesses to not use the no-returns policy when consumers can anticipate regret. Our stylized analytical model, however, shows that the no-returns policy is not optimal unless it induces regret. In addition, contrary to conventional wisdom on competition in a vertically differentiated market, our results show that the no-returns policy may be related to conceding a high-quality advantage—that is, where a higher-quality firm would charge a higher price, earning a higher profit. Essentially, to raise profit, the no-returns policy serves as an instrument (through anticipated regret) by deliberately repositioning consumers' perceived quality to a lower level. Our results also show that consumers' regret intensity has an inverted-U-shaped relationship with profitability. In addition, we have examined the cases of firms and consumers incurring costs when dealing with returns, repurchasing after returning, and a strategic platform which decides the returns policy; and these analyses help highlight the robustness of our basic model. Echoing the long-noted sentiment from industry experts and academics that, after products are introduced in the market, changing consumers' perceptions of those attributes is admittedly easier than altering actual product characteristics, our analysis suggests an approach to alter perceptions via the choice of a returns policy.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47931,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Economics & Management Strategy\",\"volume\":\"34 3\",\"pages\":\"773-781\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Economics & Management Strategy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jems.12620\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economics & Management Strategy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jems.12620","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

限制退货可能会让消费者感到后悔,他们可能会在选择产品时考虑到这种潜在的购后后悔。本文将后悔厌恶消费者纳入退货政策模型,并比较了两种政策-退货政策(允许消费者退回不希望购买的商品)和不退货政策(限制消费者退货)。我们探索了一种规范的购物设置,其中无退货政策使不匹配的产品无法退货并触发消费者购买后后悔,而替代政策避免了这种后悔。直觉上,人们会期望商家在消费者可能后悔的情况下不会使用不退货政策。然而,我们的程式化分析模型表明,除非引起后悔,否则无退货策略不是最优的。此外,与关于垂直差异化市场竞争的传统观点相反,我们的研究结果表明,无退货政策可能与放弃高质量优势有关——即,高质量的公司会收取更高的价格,从而获得更高的利润。从本质上讲,为了提高利润,不退货政策是一种工具(通过预期的后悔),它故意将消费者对质量的感知重新定位到较低的水平。我们的研究结果还表明,消费者后悔强度与盈利能力呈倒u型关系。此外,我们还研究了企业和消费者在处理退货时产生成本的情况,退货后再购买,以及决定退货政策的战略平台;这些分析有助于强调我们基本模型的稳健性。业内专家和学者长期以来的观点是,在产品进入市场后,改变消费者对这些属性的看法显然比改变产品的实际特性要容易得多。我们的分析表明,可以通过选择退货政策来改变消费者的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Returns Policy and Anticipated Regret

Restrictions on returning an undesirable purchase may make consumers feel regret, and they may account for such a potential postpurchase regret when selecting products. This paper incorporates regret-averse consumers into a model of returns policy and compares two policies—a returns policy (which allows consumers to return undesirable purchases) and a no-returns policy (which restricts consumer returns). We explore a canonical shopping setting where the no-returns policy makes mismatched products unreturnable and triggers postpurchase consumer regret, whereas the alternative policy avoids such regret. Intuitively, one would expect businesses to not use the no-returns policy when consumers can anticipate regret. Our stylized analytical model, however, shows that the no-returns policy is not optimal unless it induces regret. In addition, contrary to conventional wisdom on competition in a vertically differentiated market, our results show that the no-returns policy may be related to conceding a high-quality advantage—that is, where a higher-quality firm would charge a higher price, earning a higher profit. Essentially, to raise profit, the no-returns policy serves as an instrument (through anticipated regret) by deliberately repositioning consumers' perceived quality to a lower level. Our results also show that consumers' regret intensity has an inverted-U-shaped relationship with profitability. In addition, we have examined the cases of firms and consumers incurring costs when dealing with returns, repurchasing after returning, and a strategic platform which decides the returns policy; and these analyses help highlight the robustness of our basic model. Echoing the long-noted sentiment from industry experts and academics that, after products are introduced in the market, changing consumers' perceptions of those attributes is admittedly easier than altering actual product characteristics, our analysis suggests an approach to alter perceptions via the choice of a returns policy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.30%
发文量
43
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信