Disclosure Statement
I state that there are no competing interests to declare.
Notes
1 Throughout the economics and marketing literature, consideration sets have also been called “search sets,” “evoked sets,” or “(endogenous) choice sets.”
2 For example, see Hauser and Wernerfelt (Citation1990) for a variety of grocery store products, Roberts and Lattin (Citation1991) for cereal, De los Santos, Hortçsu, and Wildenbeest (Citation2012) for books, Honka (Citation2014) for auto insurance, Koulayev (Citation2014) and Ursu (Citation2018) for hotels, Bronnenberg, Kim, and Mela (Citation2016) for digital cameras, Honka, Hortçsu, and Vitorino (Citation2017) for savings accounts, Ursu, Wang, and Chintagunta (Citation2020) for restaurants, Kapor (Citation2020) for colleges, Yavorsky, Honka, and Chen (Citation2021), Gardete and Hunter (Citation2020), and Moraga-González et al. (Citation2022) for cars, Morozov et al. (Citation2021) for cosmetics, and Zhang et al. (Citation2023) for shoes.
3 For example, consumers’ average consideration set sizes are 2.4 for auto insurance (Honka Citation2014), 2.8–6.4 for digital cameras (Bronnenberg, Kim, and Mela Citation2016), 2.5 for savings accounts (Honka, Hortçsu, and Vitorino Citation2017), 2.3 for online used cars (Gardete and Hunter Citation2020), 1.4 for cosmetics (Morozov et al. Citation2021), 1.1 for new car purchases (Yavorsky, Honka, and Chen Citation2021), 1.7 for home improvement products (Amano, Rhodes, and Seiler Citation2022), and 1.9 for shoes (Zhang et al. Citation2023).
Hauser, J., and Wernerfelt, B. (1990), “An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 393–408. DOI: 10.1086/209225. Roberts, J., and Lattin, J. (1991), “Development and Testing of a Model of Consideration Set Composition,” Journal of Marketing Research, 28, 429–440. DOI: 10.1177/002224379102800405. De los Santos, B., Hortçsu, A., and Wildenbeest, M. R. (2012), “Testing Models of Consumer Search Using Data on Web Browsing and Purchasing Behavior,” American Economic Review, 102, 2955–2980. DOI: 10.1257/aer.102.6.2955. Honka, E. (2014), “Quantifying Search and Switching Costs in the U.S. Auto Insurance Industry,” RAND Journal of Economics, 45, 847–884. DOI: 10.1111/1756-2171.12073. Koulayev, S. (2014), “Search for Differentiated Products: Identification and Estimation,” RAND Journal of Economics, 45, 553–575. DOI: 10.1111/1756-2171.12062. Ursu, R. (2018), “The Power of Rankings: Quantifying the Effect of Rankings on Online Consumer Search and Purchase Decisions,” Marketing Science, 37, 530–552. DOI: 10.1287/mksc.2017.1072. Bronnenberg, B., Kim, J., and Mela, C. (2016), “Zooming in on Choice: How Do Consumers Search for Cameras Online?” Marketing Science, 35, 693–712. DOI: 10.1287/mksc.2016.0977. Honka, E., Hortçsu, A., and Vitorino, M. A. (2017), “Advertising, Consumer Awareness, and Choice: Evidence from the U.S. Banking Industry,” RAND Journal of Economics, 48, 611–646. DOI: 10.1111/1756-2171.12188. Ursu, R., Wang, Q., and Chintagunta, P. (2020), “Search Duration,” Marketing Science, 39, 849–871. DOI: 10.1287/mksc.2020.1225. Kapor, A. (2020), “Distributional Effects of Race-Blind Affirmative Action,” working pper, Princeton University. Yavorsky, D., Honka, E., and Chen, K. (2021), “Consumer Search in the U.S. Auto Industry: The Role of Dealership Visits,” Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 19, 1–52. DOI: 10.1007/s11129-020-09229-4. Gardete, P., and Hunter, M. (2020), “Guiding Consumers through Lemons and Peaches: A Dynamic Model of Search over Multiple Attributes,” working paper, Boston College. Moraga-González, J. L., Sándor, Z., and Wildenbeest, M. (2022), “Consumer Search and Prices in the Automobile Market,” Review of Economic Studies, forthcoming. Morozov, I., Seiler, S., Dong, X., and Hou, L. (2021), “Estimation of Preference Heterogeneity in Markets with Costly Search,” Marketing Science, 40, 871–899. DOI: 10.1287/mksc.2021.1287. Zhang, L., Ursu, R., Honka, E., and Yao, O. (2023), “Product Discovery and Consumer Search Routes: Evidence from a Mobile App,” working paper, University of Washington Tacoma. Honka, E. (2014), “Quantifying Search and Switching Costs in the U.S. Auto Insurance Industry,” RAND Journal of Economics, 45, 847–884. DOI: 10.1111/1756-2171.12073. Bronnenberg, B., Kim, J., and Mela, C. (2016), “Zooming in on Choice: How Do Consumers Search for Cameras Online?” Marketing Science, 35, 693–712. DOI: 10.1287/mksc.2016.0977. Honka, E., Hortçsu, A., and Vitorino, M. A. (2017), “Advertising, Consumer Awareness, and Choice: Evidence from the U.S. Banking Industry,” RAND Journal of Economics, 48, 611–646. DOI: 10.1111/1756-2171.12188. Gardete, P., and Hunter, M. (2020), “Guiding Consumers through Lemons and Peaches: A Dynamic Model of Search over Multiple Attributes,” working paper, Boston College. Morozov, I., Seiler, S., Dong, X., and Hou, L. (2021), “Estimation of Preference Heterogeneity in Markets with Costly Search,” Marketing Science, 40, 871–899. DOI: 10.1287/mksc.2021.1287. Yavorsky, D., Honka, E., and Chen, K. (2021), “Consumer Search in the U.S. Auto Industry: The Role of Dealership Visits,” Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 19, 1–52. DOI: 10.1007/s11129-020-09229-4. Amano, T., Rhodes, A., and Seiler, S. (2022), “Flexible Demand Estimation with Search Data,” working paper, Imperial College London. Zhang, L., Ursu, R., Honka, E., and Yao, O. (2023), “Product Discovery and Consumer Search Routes: Evidence from a Mobile App,” working paper, University of Washington Tacoma.
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0435-4220
![Sample our Mathematics & Statistics journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5943/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Mathematics-Statistics.jpg"})
