Microcost-inertia in television viewing
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: Microcost-inertia in television viewing
Microcost-inertia in television viewing
Micro-costs: Inert ia in television viewing*Constanta Esteves-SorensonYale UniversityFabrizio Perret I iBocconi University40909AbstractWe document snl Microcost-inertia in television viewinglistantial default effects despite negligible switching costs in a novel setting: television program choice in Italy. Despite the low costs of clicking the remote and of searching across only six channels and despite viewers extensive experience with the decision, show choice depends strongly on whe Microcost-inertia in television viewingther viewers happened to watch the previous programme on the channel. Specifically, (i) male ami female viewership of the news depends on whether theMicrocost-inertia in television viewing
preceding programme appealed to men or women, and (ii) a show’s audience increases by 2-1% with an increase of 10% in the demand for the preceding proMicro-costs: Inert ia in television viewing*Constanta Esteves-SorensonYale UniversityFabrizio Perret I iBocconi University40909AbstractWe document snl Microcost-inertia in television viewingly exploit in their scheduling.’Corresponding author: Constanợi Esteves-Sorenson, Yale School of Management, 135 Prospect Street, New Haven, CT. 06520 (constanca.esteves-sorensonữyale.edu). We thank Stefano DellaVigna, Steven Tilde! is anil Catherine Wolfram for their valuable advice. We also thank Microcost-inertia in television viewingGregorio Castano, Arthur Campbell, Urmila Chatterjee, Keith Chen. Judy Chevalier, Liran Einav, Pedro Gardctc, Jeff Grocnbiiurn. Rachita Gullapalli, AhMicrocost-inertia in television viewing
med Khwaja, Botond Koszcgi, Kory Kroft, Rosario Macera. Alex Mas, Amy Nguycn-Chyung, Miguel Palacios, Gisela Rua, Rob Seamans, Olav Sorenson, Betsy StMicro-costs: Inert ia in television viewing*Constanta Esteves-SorensonYale UniversityFabrizio Perret I iBocconi University40909AbstractWe document snl Microcost-inertia in television viewingelbourne Business School, University of Pennsylvania Wharton School, University of Toronto Rotman School of Management , and Yale School of Management seminars for valuable suggestions at different stages of this project. We thank Mediaset S.p.A. for generously providing the data for this project.ht Microcost-inertia in television viewingtps://khothuvien.cori!Airing immediately after the hit show Seinfeld, Frasier’s initial time slot was Thursdays at 9:30 P.M. ... as good a schedulingMicrocost-inertia in television viewing
slot as existed in prime-time television ... Steve Sternberg, an advertising executive, quipped that “you could read the phone book after Seinfeld andMicro-costs: Inert ia in television viewing*Constanta Esteves-SorensonYale UniversityFabrizio Perret I iBocconi University40909AbstractWe document snl Microcost-inertia in television viewingefault in, for example, retirement plans, health plans, membership plans, organ donations, agents persistently choose it: that is, they display inertia. Moreover, they do so even when the default option appears suboptinial (e.g.. Choi Ct al., 2011).2The standard explanation for inertia is high switc Microcost-inertia in television viewinghing costs: both the direct cost of enacting the change and the indirect cost of evaluating the alternatives before doing so.3 When these costs exceedMicrocost-inertia in television viewing
the marginal iM-nefit of switching, agents should rationally choose the default.. If curbing default stickiness is desirable, t hen the main lever unMicro-costs: Inert ia in television viewing*Constanta Esteves-SorensonYale UniversityFabrizio Perret I iBocconi University40909AbstractWe document snl Microcost-inertia in television viewingsts inertia can persist even when switching costs arc very low: low costs induce procrastination in switching due to dynamically inconsistent time preferences (Slrotz. 1956; Phelps «v Pollak. 1968; Akcrlof, 1991: Laibson, 1997: O’Donoghue Ằ' Rabin, 1999). If procrastination accounts for inertia, oth Microcost-inertia in television viewinger measures to curb default stickiness, such as abolishing defaults in favour of active decisions may lx* warranted (c.g., Carroll et al., 2009).It isMicrocost-inertia in television viewing
an open empirical question whether inertia would persist in an environment with both extremely low direct and indirect switching costs. And if yes, wMicro-costs: Inert ia in television viewing*Constanta Esteves-SorensonYale UniversityFabrizio Perret I iBocconi University40909AbstractWe document snl Microcost-inertia in television viewingy first document ing substantial inertia in a novel environment wit h both ext remely low direct and indirect swit ching costs: the choice of television programs in Italy. Italy is uniquely well-suited for this question. The direct cost of switching Is nearly negligible: remote controls are ubiquito Microcost-inertia in television viewingus with switching requiring just a press of a button. Further,’Harvard Business School casc,"hYasier" (A). 2(101. p.2.3Sec Samuelson & Zcckhauscr (198Microcost-inertia in television viewing
8). Madrian &' Shea (2001), Handel (2009) for research on inertia in retirement and health plans choices; Johnson & Goldstein (2003) and Abadie kc GayMicro-costs: Inert ia in television viewing*Constanta Esteves-SorensonYale UniversityFabrizio Perret I iBocconi University40909AbstractWe document snl Microcost-inertia in television viewingsing the service, c. Anderson (2003) surveys lab findings on inertia.’These direct and indirect costs can be broadly thought of as, respectively, transactional and learning switching costs, as defined in Farrel ki Klemperer (2007).1the indirect switching costs stemming from the number and complexity Microcost-inertia in television viewing of alternatives or from inexperience with the decision arc very low. Italian viewers choose among only a few channels mainly six which account for 90Microcost-inertia in television viewing
% of viewership. Moreover, viewers arc very experienced:Italians, as Americans, watch, on average, more than four hours of television daily.1We find tMicro-costs: Inert ia in television viewing*Constanta Esteves-SorensonYale UniversityFabrizio Perret I iBocconi University40909AbstractWe document snl Microcost-inertia in television viewingset of demand for television shows in Italy, supplied by Italy’s superior audience tracking system, containing: (i) minutc-by minute aggregate audiences for women and men between 6:00 P.M. and 12:00 A.M. for 2002-2003 for each of t he six channels and television overall; (ii) aggregate audiences ami Microcost-inertia in television viewing shares for all shows on t hese channels between 6:00 P.M. ami 12:00 A.M., from 1990 to 2003.Our evidence stems from two complementary approaches, exaMicrocost-inertia in television viewing
mining how the audience of a focal show is systematically affected by variations in the audience of the preceding program on the same channel, conditiMicro-costs: Inert ia in television viewing*Constanta Esteves-SorensonYale UniversityFabrizio Perret I iBocconi University40909AbstractWe document snl Microcost-inertia in television viewingould also arise from correlated omitted shocks, such as from endogenous scheduling by channels, or weat her (e.g., it. rains that day so more people watch television) or reverse causality, as consumers t unein to the earlier program to ensure seeing the subsequent show from the beginning. Our tests Microcost-inertia in television viewingovercome these challenges to identification and estimate I he causal effect of the demand for a program on that of the sultscquent show, unbiased by tMicrocost-inertia in television viewing
hese confounds.First, a minute-by-minute event-study exploits the variation in the differing appeal of programs to women and men before the news in 20Micro-costs: Inert ia in television viewing*Constanta Esteves-SorensonYale UniversityFabrizio Perret I iBocconi University40909AbstractWe document snl Microcost-inertia in television viewingsoccer, precedes the news, more men watcli tin* news than women. Female and male viewership converges during the news, however, suggesting that inertia decays over time. These results arc robust to unobservables affecting male ami female viewership.Second, ordinary least squares (OLS) and instrument Microcost-inertia in television viewingal variables (IV) estimation of the de mand for programs for the larger 1990 2003 sample, finds that the audience for a show increases by 2-4% with anMicrocost-inertia in television viewing
increase' of 10%, in the demand for the preceding program. Although ỌLS yields an estimate of 3-8%, which is statistically significant despite numeroMicro-costs: Inert ia in television viewing*Constanta Esteves-SorensonYale UniversityFabrizio Perret I iBocconi University40909AbstractWe document snl Microcost-inertia in television viewingic of channel pcrsislxncc on program choice io l.hc U.S., jLM-ribing inertia primarily to asymmetric information, advertising of the current show during the preceding program on the channel. We will describe them later.2https://khothuvien.cori!scheduling or viewers tuning to the channel early could Microcost-inertia in television viewingbias t his estimate.We address these correlated shocks with two IV specifications. First, we analyse how the audience for a show varies with that, ofMicrocost-inertia in television viewing
the movie preceding it, by instrumenting the audience of each movie wit h its t heatrical audience in Italy. Further, we address endogenous schedulingMicro-costs: Inert ia in television viewing*Constanta Esteves-SorensonYale UniversityFabrizio Perret I iBocconi University40909AbstractWe document snl Microcost-inertia in television viewinguably not suscept ible to manipulation by channels, rhe IV estimate of 3.9% is marginally significant despite the small sample size and is 44%I lower than the OLS estimate of 7.0% on this sample, indicating that, correlated unobserved shocks are a significant source of bias.Second, we analyse how th Microcost-inertia in television viewinge audience for a show varies with that of the program preceding it, by instrument ing t he audience of each preceding program by its average audienceMicrocost-inertia in television viewing
in the previous month. This instrument provides a larger sample on which to conduct, robust ness checks and test for explanations of inertia. Again, wGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook