How do people respond when decision-relevant information is withheld by sellers? The authors address this general question by examining how prospective diners respond when sanitation inspection grades (SIGs) are not reported by a restaurant. Despite disclosure mandates in some municipalities, SIGs are not always available when dining choices are made, especially when food is ordered for delivery. After documenting participants’ failure to discount appropriately for a missing SIG, the authors demonstrate, through a series of follow-up studies, the robustness of the phenomenon in the face of interventions designed to increase the salience of the missing information. The authors find evidence of increased discounting, however, in a study designed to draw attention to the missing information via a side-by-side comparison of restaurants that did and did not provide SIGs.
AlmanzaBarbara A.IsmailJosephMillsJuline E. (2002), “The Impact of Publishing Foodservice Inspection Scores,” Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 5 (4), 45–62.
2.
ArielyDanLoewensteinGeorge (2000), “When Does Duration Matter in Judgment and Decision Making?” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General129 (4), 508–29.
3.
BrantRollin (1990), “Assessing Proportionality in the Proportional Odds Model for Ordinal Logistic Regression,” Biometrics, 46 (4), 1171–78.
4.
BrownAlexander L.CamererColin F.LovalloDan (2012), “To Review or Not to Review? Limited Strategic Thinking at the Movie Box Office,” American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 4 (2), 1–26.
5.
BrownAlexander L.CamererColin F.LovalloDan (2013), “Estimating Structural Models of Equilibrium and Cognitive Hierarchy Thinking in the Field: The Case of Withheld Movie Critic Reviews,” Management Science, 59 (3), 733–47.
6.
CamererColin F.HoTeck-HuaChongJuin-Kuan (2004), “A Cognitive Hierarchy Model of Games,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119 (3), 861–98.
7.
CamererColin F.HogarthRobin M. (1999), “The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework,” in Elicitation of Preferences, FischhoffBaruchManskiCharles F., eds. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, 7–48.
8.
CarlssonFredrikMartinssonPeter (2001), “Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments? Application to the Valuation of the Environment,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 41 (2), 179–92.
9.
CrawfordVincent P. (2003), “Lying for Strategic Advantage: Rational and Boundedly Rational Misrepresentation of Intentions,” The American Economic Review, 93 (1), 133–49.
10.
CummingsRonald G.TaylorLaura O. (1999), “Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method,” American Economic Review, 89 (3), 649–65.
11.
DaiDaisyLucaMichael (2019), “Digitizing Disclosure: The Case of Restaurant Hygiene Scores,” working paper No. 18-088, Harvard Business School Negotiation, Organizations & Markets Unit, http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3131900.
12.
De LangheBartvan OsselaerStijn M.J.PuntoniStefanoMcGillAnn L. (2014), “Fooled by Heteroscedastic Randomness: Local Consistency Breeds Extremity in Price-Based Quality Inferences,” Journal of Consumer Research, 41 (4), 978–94.
13.
DranoveDavidJinGinger Zhe (2010), “Quality Disclosure and Certification: Theory and Practice,” Journal of Economic Literature, 48 (4), 935–63.
14.
EvansJonathan St. B.T.Curtis-HolmesJodie (2005), “Rapid Responding Increases Belief Bias: Evidence for the Dual-Process Theory of Reasoning,” Thinking & Reasoning, 11 (4), 382–89.
ForsytheRobert R.IsaacMarkPalfreyThomas R. (1989), “Theories and Tests of ‘Blind Bidding’ in Sealed-Bid Auctions,” RAND Journal of Economics, 20 (2), 214–38.
17.
Gregan-PaxtonJenniferJohnDeborah Redder (1997). “Consumer Learning by Analogy: A Model of Internal Knowledge Transfer,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (3), 266–84.
18.
GrossmanSanford J. (1981), “The Informational Role of Warranties and Private Disclosure About Product Quality,” The Journal of Law and Economics, 24 (3), 461–83.
19.
GrossmanSanford J.HartOliver D. (1980), “Disclosure Laws and Takeover Bids,” Journal of Finance, 35 (2), 323–34.
20.
HeidhuesPaulKőszegiBotondMurookaTakeshi (2016), “Inferior Products and Profitable Deception,” Review of Economic Studies, 84 (1), 323–56.
21.
HseeChristopher K. (1996), “The Evaluability Hypothesis: An Explanation for Preference Reversals Between Joint and Separate Evaluations of Alternatives,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67 (3), 247–57.
22.
HseeChristopher K.LoewensteinGeorge F.BlountSallyBazermanMax H. (1999), “Preference Reversals Between Joint and Separate Evaluations of Options: A Review and Theoretical Analysis,” Psychological Bulletin, 125 (5), 576–90.
23.
HseeChristopher K.YangYangLiNaiheShenLuxi (2009), “Wealth, Warmth, and Well-Being: Whether Happiness Is Relative or Absolute Depends on Whether It Is About Money, Acquisition, or Consumption,” Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (3), 396–409.
24.
HseeChristopher K.ZhangJiao (2004), “Distinction Bias: Misprediction and Mischoice Due to Joint Evaluation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86 (5), 680–95.
HuberJoelMcCannJohn (1982), “The Impact of Inferential Beliefs on Product Evaluations,” Journal of Marketing Research, 19 (3), 324–33.
27.
IppolitoPauline M.MathiosAlan D. (1990), “The Regulation of Science-Based Claims in Advertising,” Journal of Consumer Policy, 13 (4), 413–45.
28.
IppolitoRichard A. (1992), “Consumer Reaction to Measures of Poor Quality: Evidence from the Mutual Fund Industry,” Journal of Law and Economics, 35 (1), 45–70.
29.
JinGinger ZheLesliePaul (2003), “The Effect of Information on Product Quality: Evidence from Restaurant Hygiene Grade Cards,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118 (2), 409–51.
30.
JinGinger ZheLucaMichaelMartinDaniel (2015), “Is No News (Perceived as) Bad News? An Experimental Investigation of Information Disclosure,” working paper No. w21099, National Bureau of Economic Research.
31.
JohnsonRichard D.LevinIrwin P. (1985), “More Than Meets the Eye: The Effect of Missing Information on Purchase Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (2), 169–77.
32.
KardesFrank R.CronleyMaria L.KellarisJames J.PosavacSteven S. (2004), “The Role of Selective Information Processing in Price-Quality Inference,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (2), 368–74.
33.
KivetzRanSimonsonItamar (2000), “The Effects of Incomplete Information on Consumer Choice,” Journal of Marketing Research, 37 (4), 427–48.
34.
KoehlerJonathan J.MercerMolly (2009), “Selection Neglect in Mutual Fund Advertisements,” Management Science, 55 (7), 1107–21.
35.
ListJohn A. (2001), “Do Explicit Warnings Eliminate the Hypothetical Bias in Elicitation Procedures? Evidence from Field Auctions for Sportscards,” American Economic Review, 91 (5), 1498–507.
LucaMichael (2016), “Reviews, Reputation, and Revenue: The Case of Yelp.com,” working paper No. 12-016, Harvard Business School Negotiation, Organizations & Markets Unit, http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1928601.
40.
LuskJayson L.SchroederTed C. (2004), “Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 86 (2), 467–82.
41.
LynchJohn G.JrWoodWendy (2006), “Special Issue Editors’ Statement: Helping Consumers Help Themselves,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 25 (1), 1–7.
42.
MilgromPaul R. (1981), “Good News and Bad News: Representation Theorems and Applications,” Bell Journal of Economics, 12 (2), 380–91.
43.
MilgromPaul R.RobertsJohn (1986), “Relying on the Information of Interested Parties,” RAND Journal of Economics, 17 (1), 18–32.
44.
MoormanChristine (1996), “A Quasi Experiment to Assess the Consumer and Informational Determinants of Nutrition Information Processing Activities: The Case of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 15 (1), 28–44.
45.
MurphyJames J.AllenP.GeoffreyStevensThomas H.WeatherheadDarryl (2005), “A Meta-Analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation,” Environmental and Resource Economics, 30 (3), 313–25.
46.
NaylorRebecca W.LambertonCait PoynorNortonDavid A. (2011), “Seeing Ourselves in Others: Reviewer Ambiguity, Egocentric Anchoring, and Persuasion,” Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (3), 617–31.
47.
NeillHellen R.CummingsRonald G.GandertonPhilip T.HarrisonGlenn W.McGuckinThomas (1994), “Hypothetical Surveys and Real Economic Commitments,” Land Economics, 70 (2), 145–54.
48.
NeysWim De (2006), “Dual Processing in Reasoning: Two Systems but One Reasoner,” Psychological Science, 17 (5), 428–33.
49.
PelozaJohnYeChristineMontfordWilliam J. (2015), “When Companies Do Good, Are Their Products Good for You? How Corporate Social Responsibility Creates a Health Halo,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 34 (1), 19–31.
50.
ReevesLaurettaWeisbergRobert W. (1994). “The Role of Content and Abstract Information in Analogical Transfer,” Psychological Bulletin, 115 (3), 381–400.
51.
SanbonmatsuDavid M.KardesFrank R.HerrPaul M. (1992), “The Role of Prior Knowledge and Missing Information in Multiattribute Evaluation,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51 (1), 76–91.
52.
SanbonmatsuDavid M.KardesFrank R.HoughtonDavid C.HoEdward A.PosavacSteven S. (2003), “Overestimating the Importance of the Given Information in Multiattribute Consumer Judgment,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13 (3), 289–300.
53.
SchaefferNora CatePresserStanley (2003), “The Science of Asking Questions,” Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 65–88.
54.
SimmonsCarolyn J.LynchJohn G.Jr. (1991), “Inference Effects Without Inference Making? Effects of Missing Information on Discounting and Use of Presented Information,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (4), 477–91.
55.
SimonHerbert A. (1972), “Theories of Bounded Rationality,” Decision and Organization, 1 (1), 161–76.
56.
SlovicPaulMacPhillamyDouglas (1974), “Dimensional Commensurability and Cue Utilization in Comparative Judgment,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 11 (2), 172–94.
VanEppsEric M.DownsJulie S.LoewensteinGeorge (2016), “Calorie Label Formats: Using Numeric and Traffic Light Calorie Labels to Reduce Lunch Calories,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 35 (1), 26–36.
59.
WilliamsRichard (2016), “Understanding and Interpreting Generalized Ordered Logit Models,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 40 (1), 7–20.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
