The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Moderating Role of Familiarity in Fairness Perceptions of Revenue Management Pricing
Abstract
Perceived fairness of revenue management (RM) pricing is a serious concern, as RM uses different prices for fundamentally the same service. The authors examine the effects of familiarity with an RM pricing practice, framing of prices, and fencing condition (i.e., whether a respondent was advantaged or disadvantaged by an RM price) on fairness perceptions. The authors conduct two experiments and find that familiarity moderated the effects of framing and fencing condition on consumers’ fairness perceptions. Specifically, framing and fencing condition had strong effects on perceived fairness when respondents were less familiar with a pricing practice. However, when familiarity was high, neither the framing nor fencing condition effect was significant. Our findings suggest that familiarity may be a boundary condition for prospect theory.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion
Weiner, B. (1985) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.92.4.548 · Cited by 7,846
Oliver, R. L., & Swan, J. E. (1989) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224298905300202 · Cited by 2,084
Yield management at American airlines
Smith, B. C., Leimkuhler, J. F., & Darrow, R. M. (1992) · Interfaces · doi:10.1287/inte.22.1.8 · Cited by 697 · cited 1×
“KEYWORDS: revenue management; perceived fairness; rate fence; framing; familiarity Revenue management (RM) has been practiced in the airline (Smith, Leimkuhler, and Darrow 1992), hotel (Hanks, Noland, and Cross 1992) and car rental industries (Carroll and Grimes 1995; Geraghty and Johnson 1997) for…”
BackgroundPerceived fairness of yield management
Kimes, S. (2002) · The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1016/s0010-8804(02)80005-2 · Cited by 268
Self-citationThe strategic levers of yield management
Kimes, S. E., & Chase, R. B. (1998) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/109467059800100205 · Cited by 158
Self-citationAustin, W., McGinn, N. C., & Susmilch, C. (1980) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-1031(80)90049-9 · Cited by 149
Cited by
Heo, C. Y., & Lee, S. (2011) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.07.002 · Cited by 121
Viglia, G., Mauri, A., & Carricano, M. (2016) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.09.010 · Cited by 115
Priester, A., Robbert, T., & Roth, S. (2020) · Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management · doi:10.1057/s41272-019-00224-3 · Cited by 90
A model to evaluate the effects of price fairness perception in online hotel booking
Andrés-Martínez, M.-E., Gómez-Borja, M.-Á., & Mondéjar-Jiménez, J.-A. (2014) · Electronic Commerce Research · doi:10.1007/s10660-014-9137-4 · Cited by 40
Metadata
- Authors
- Wirtz, J., & Kimes, S. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Service Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2007-02
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 229-240
- ISSN
- 1094-6705 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7379
- OpenAlex
- W2119086978
- Cited by
- 230
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 34.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
