Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Customer Needs and Solutions
Erschienen in: Customer Needs and Solutions 3/2014

01.09.2014 | Research Article

Understanding Homeowners’ Pricing Decisions: An Investigation of the Roles of Ownership Duration and Financial and Emotional Reference Points

verfasst von: Katherine E. Loveland, Naomi Mandel, Utpal M. Dholakia

Erschienen in: Customer Needs and Solutions | Ausgabe 3/2014

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

In this research, we examined the interactive effects of duration of ownership with both financial (change relative to purchase price) and emotional (accumulation of positive vs. negative memories) reference points on home sellers’ initial asking prices and the stickiness of those prices. We found convergent results in a field study of house listings in four US markets (Phoenix, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, and Wilmington) and a laboratory experiment. In particular, we found that after a long ownership duration, sellers ask for higher prices when they are in the gains domain than in the losses domain (a reversal of Prospect Theory), whereas after a short ownership duration, sellers ask for lower prices when they are in the gains domain than when they are in the losses domain.
Vorheriger Artikel The Price Knowledge Paradox: Why Consumers Have Lower Confidence in, but Better Recall of Unfamiliar Prices
Nächster Artikel There’s Something in a Name: Value Relevance of Congruent Ticker Symbols

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
1
According to www.​zillow.​com, “The Zestimate home valuation is Zillow's estimated market value, computed using a proprietary formula. It is not an appraisal. It is a starting point in determining a home's value. The Zestimate is pulled from data; your real estate agent or appraiser physically inspects the home and takes special features, location, and market conditions into account.”
 
2
Like Zillow, eppraisal uses public record data from over 120 million homes and a proprietary formula to calculate a value estimate for a particular house.
 
3
It is important to note that factoring in the realtor’s commission (up to 6 %) could flip the financial reference point from a gain to a loss. To address this issue, we calculated an adjusted gain or loss variable with a 6 % realtor’s commission. In our dataset, only six houses flipped directions in this way. We repeated all the analyses reported herein using this adjusted gain or loss variable. Unsurprisingly, all the results remain substantively unchanged. These results are available upon request from the authors.
 
Literatur
1.
Bernstein P (2008) What happens if we’re wrong? New York Times, Economic View. June 22
2.
3.
Glaeser EL, Sinai T (2013) Postmortem for a housing crash. Hous Financ Crisis 1(2):117–128
4.
Streitfeld D (2010) Housing fades as a means to build wealth, analysts say. New York Times, August 22
5.
Case KE, Quigley JM (2007) How housing booms unwind: income effects, wealth effects, and sticky prices. Paper presented at a joint session of the American Economic Association and the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, Chicago
6.
Case KE, Shiller RJ (1988) The behavior of home buyers in boom and post boom markets. New England Economic Review, November/December, 29-46
7.
Case KE, Shiller RJ (2003) Is there a bubble in the housing market? Brook Pap Econ Act 2:299–342CrossRef
8.
Nocera J (2011) To fix the housing crisis, see the data. New York Times, November 4
9.
Liu CH, Nowak A, Rosenthal S (2014) Bubbles, post-crash dynamics, and the housing market. Working paper, Syracuse University
10.
Mellers BA, Ritov I (2010) How beliefs influence the relative magnitude of pleasure and pain. J Behav Decis Mak 23:369–382
11.
Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–291CrossRef
12.
Kahneman D, Knetsch JL, Thaler RH (1990) Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem. J Polit Econ 99:1325–1348CrossRef
13.
Strahilevitz MA, Loewenstein G (1998) The effect of ownership history on the valuation of objects. J Consum Res 25:276–289CrossRef
14.
Dommer SL, Swaminathan V (2013) Explaining the endowment effect through ownership: the role of identity, gender, and self-threat. J Consum Res 39(5):1034–1050CrossRef
15.
Nayakankuppam D, Mishra A (2005) The endowment effect: rose-tinted and dark-tinted glasses. J Consum Res 32:390–395CrossRef
16.
Saqib NU, Frohlich N, Bruning E (2010) The influence of involvement on the endowment effect: the moveable value function. J Consum Psychol 20(3):355–368CrossRef
17.
Aggarwal P, Zhang M (2006) The moderating effect of relationship norm salience on consumers’ loss aversion. J Consum Res 33(3):413–419CrossRef
18.
Carmon Z, Ariely D (2000) Focusing on the forgone: how value can appear so different to buyers and sellers. J Consum Res 27(3):360–370CrossRef
19.
Irmak C, Wakslak CJ, Trope Y (2013) Selling the forest, buying the trees: the effect of construal level on seller-buyer price discrepancy. J Consum Res 40(2):284–297CrossRef
20.
Coursey DL, Hovis JL, Schulze WD (1987) The disparity between willingness to accept and willingness to pay measures of value. Q J Econ 102:679–690CrossRef
21.
22.
Kell J (2010) S&P raises risk of moving M/I homes to highly speculative. Wall Street Journal, September 28
23.
Bils M, Klenow PJ (2004) Some evidence on the importance of sticky prices. J Polit Econ 102:947–985CrossRef
24.
Carlton DW (1986) Rigidity of prices. Am Econ Rev 76(4):637–658
25.
Leonhardt D (2008) Be it ever so illogical: homeowners who won’t cut the price. New York Times, Economic Scene, March 26
26.
Price D (2008) Ready to rumble: buyers and sellers both refuse to give ground as power in the housing market shifts. The News and Observer (Raleigh, NC). May 18
27.
Mowen JC, Mowen MM (1991) Time and outcome valuation: implications for marketing decision making. J Mark 4:54–62CrossRef
28.
Blount S, Thomas-Hunt MC, Neale MA (1996) The price is right—or is it? A reference point model of two-party price negotiations. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1:1–12CrossRef
29.
Buchan NR, Croson RTA, Johnson EJ (2004) When do fair beliefs influence bargaining behavior? Experimental bargaining in Japan and the United States. J Consum Res 31:181–190CrossRef
30.
Chapman GB (2000) Preferences for improving and declining sequences of health outcomes. J Behav Decis Mak 13(2):203–218CrossRef
31.
Carnevale PJ (2008) Positive affect and decision frame in negotiation. Group Decis Negot 17:51–63CrossRef
32.
Hoch SJ, Loewenstein GF (1991) Time-inconsistent preferences and consumer self-control. J Consum Res 17:492–507CrossRef
33.
Carmon Z, Wertenbroch K, Zeelenberg M (2003) Option attachment: when deliberating makes choosing feel like losing. J Consum Res 30:15–29CrossRef
34.
Akalis SA (2008) A new spin on losses looming larger than gains: asymmetric implicit associations from slot machine experience. J Behav Decis Mak 21:378–398CrossRef
35.
Witte CL, Grünhagen M, Gentry JW (2008) An empirical investigation of framing effects in negotiations: a study of single-family home sales. Psychol Mark 25(5):465–484CrossRef
36.
Beggan JK (1992) On the social nature of nonsocial perception: the mere ownership effect. J Pers Soc Psychol 62(2):229–237CrossRef
37.
Amaldoss W, Jain S (2005) Pricing of conspicuous goods: a competitive analysis of social effects. J Mark Res 42(1):30–42CrossRef
38.
Belk RW (1988) Possessions and the extended self. J Consum Res 15:139–168CrossRef
39.
McCracken G (1986) Culture and consumption: a theoretical account of the structure and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods. J Consum Res 13:71–84CrossRef
40.
Kleine SS, Kleine RE III, Allen CT (1995) How is a possession ‘me’ or ‘not me?’ Characterizing types and an antecedent of material possession attachment. J Consum Res 22:327–343CrossRef
41.
Belk RW (1992) Attachment to possessions. In: Altman I, Low SM (eds) Place attachment. Plenum, New York, pp 37–55CrossRef
42.
Kleine SS, Baker SM (2004) An integrative review of material possession attachment. Acad Mark Sci Rev 1:1–35
43.
Rhodes E (2008) Home sales dive, but prices don’t; ‘stickiness’ factor: owners stick to asking price despite low sales, high inventory in King County. Seattle Times, April 5
44.
Belk RW (1987) Identity and the relevance of market, personal and community objects. In: Umiker-Sebeok J (ed) Marketing and semiotics: new directions in the study of signs for sale. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 151–164
45.
Lastovicka JL, Fernandez KV (2005) Three paths to disposition: the movement of meaningful possessions to strangers. J Consum Res 31:813–823CrossRef
46.
Shu SB, Peck J (2011) Psychological ownership and affective reaction: emotional attachment process variables and the endowment effect. J Consum Psychol 21(4):439–452CrossRef
47.
Lerner JS, Small DA, Loewenstein G (2004) Heart strings and purse strings: carryover effects of emotions on economic decisions. Psychol Sci 15(5):337–341CrossRef
48.
Wallendorf M, Arnould EJ (1988) My favorite things: a cross-cultural inquiry into object attachment, possessiveness, and social linkage. J Consum Res 14(4):531–547CrossRef
49.
Flavin M, Yamashita T (2000) Owner occupied housing and the composition of the household portfolio. Am Econ Rev 92(1):345–362CrossRef
50.
Bazerman MH, Magliozzi T, Neale MA (1985) Integrative bargaining in a competitive market. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 34:294–313CrossRef
51.
Kahneman D (1992) Reference points, anchors, norms, and mixed feelings. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 51(2):296–312CrossRef
52.
Kristensen H, Gärling T (1997) Determinants of buyers’ aspiration and reservation price. J Econ Psychol 18(5):487–503CrossRef
53.
Weber M, Camerer CF (1998) The disposition effect in securities trading: an experimental analysis. J Econ Behav Organ 33(2):167–184CrossRef
54.
Genesove D, Mayer C (2001) Loss aversion and seller behavior: evidence from the housing market. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, 1233-60
55.
56.
Nelson AA (2010) Bailing out underwater mortgages. SPEA Insights, May 2010
Metadaten
Titel
Understanding Homeowners’ Pricing Decisions: An Investigation of the Roles of Ownership Duration and Financial and Emotional Reference Points
verfasst von
Katherine E. Loveland
Naomi Mandel
Utpal M. Dholakia
Publikationsdatum
01.09.2014
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Customer Needs and Solutions / Ausgabe 3/2014
Print ISSN: 2196-291X
Elektronische ISSN: 2196-2928
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40547-014-0013-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2014

Customer Needs and Solutions 3/2014 Zur Ausgabe

Research Article

Symbiotic Theorization

Research Article

There’s Something in a Name: Value Relevance of Congruent Ticker Symbols

Research Article

Exploring the Relationship Between Online Search and Offline Sales for Better “Nowcasting”

Perspectives

Perspectives on Bayesian Methods and Big Data

Research Article

The Price Knowledge Paradox: Why Consumers Have Lower Confidence in, but Better Recall of Unfamiliar Prices

Research Article

The Strategic Implications of Switching Costs Under Customized Pricing