This article illustrates how the compromise effect alters consumers' selection of soft drinks. Using three within-subject studies, we show that extremeness aversion and price insensitivity cause consumers to increase their consumption when the smallest drink size is dropped or when a larger drink size is added to a set. As a result rational firms find it best to drop the smaller sizes and add a larger size, thus increasing overall consumption. After estimating each individual's demand as a function of price and drink size availability, policy experiments demonstrate how it is possible to reduce soft drink consumption without additional taxation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sharpe et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: