Price Perception
Distinguish arithmetic, impressions and a useful purchase.
Connected topics
Sources & further reading
- Morwitz, Greenleaf & Johnson (1998) — Divide and Prosper
University abstract on partitioned pricing. It does not establish one universal reaction to delivery fees.
- Chen & Ngwe (2018) — Shipping Fees and Product Assortment in Online Retail
HBS Working Paper 19-034. Observational Philippine retailer data from 2012–2016 and a demand model, not a randomized threshold experiment.
- Lewis, Singh & Fay (2006) — Nonlinear Shipping and Handling Fees
Publisher abstract reports additional sales but unprofitable promotions in the retailer studied; not a universal profit result.
- Thomas & Morwitz (2005) — A Penny Saved, author-written research summary
Authors' NYU Stern adaptation of their June 2005 Journal of Consumer Research paper, checked October 27, 2026. Describes pen-price judgments; not purchase behavior. The journal full text was not retrieved.
- Anderson & Simester (2003) — Effects of $9 Price Endings on Retail Sales
Publisher abstract checked October 27, 2026: three retail field studies and context-dependent demand effects. The pilot-price table was not independently inspected, so its exact prices are not reproduced here.
- Troll et al. (2024; online 2023) — A Meta-analysis on Just-below Versus Round Prices
Varied outcomes and heterogeneous effects. Purchase-related measures include intentions, choices and actual purchases; bias adjustments matter.
- Fenneman et al. (2022) — Psychological Price Perception and Purchasing Decisions
Incentivized lottery decisions did not reliably reproduce the tested price-ending effects. This is not a test of every retail context.
- Escher et al. (2026) — Precise, Just-below and Round Prices
Official full-text results and discussion checked October 27, 2026. Two preregistered student experiments distinguish recall from purchase intentions and quality judgments; no statistical reanalysis was performed.
