The Gift and Pay-What-You-Want Pricing
AbstractThis paper addresses the participative pricing mechanism of Pay-What-You-Want pricing as related to Marcel Mauss’s concept of the Gift. Reciprocity is a behavioural pattern imminent to the Gift as well as to Pay-What-You-Want pricing. The paper refers to results from behavioural economics in order to identify factors that positively influence reciprocity. It is argued that the aspects elaborated on in the Gift are also relevant to the PWYW pricing mechanism when it comes to implementations of the latter as one of the corporate pricing strategies.
Albert, M., Güth, W., Kirchler, E., and B. Maciejovsky. 2007 ‘Are we nice(r) to nice(r) people? An experimental analysis.’ Experimental Economics 10: 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-006-9131-3
Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., and K. McCabe. 1995 ‘Trust, reciprocity, and social history.’ Games and Economic Behavior 10(1): 122–142. https://doi.org/10.1006/game.1995.1027
Bowles, S., and H. Gintis. 2004 ‘The evolution of strong reciprocity: cooperation in heterogeneous populations.’ Theoretical Population Biology 65: 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tpb.2003.07.001
Bowles, S., Choi, J-K., and A. Hopfensitz. 2003 ‘The co-evolution of individual behaviors and social institutions.’ Journal of Theoretical Biology 223: 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5193(03)00060-2
Carrier, J. G. 2014 ‘Economic deviance.’ Anthropology Today 30(6): 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8322.12139
Douglas, M. 1990 ‘Introduction.’ In M. Mauss The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies (translated by W. D. Halls), pp. 1–7. London: Routledge.
Egbert, H. 2015 ‘The return of Homo oeconomicus to anthropology: comment on economic deviance.’ Anthropology Today 31(3): 17. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8322.12176
Egbert, H. 2017 ‘The Gift and the Centipede.’ (mimeo).
Falk, A. 2007 ‘Gift exchange in the field.’ Econometrica 75(5), 1501–1511. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2007.00800.x
Falk, A., and U. Fischbacher. 2006 ‘A theory of reciprocity.’ Games and Economic Behavior 54: 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geb.2005.03.001
Fehr, E., and U. Fischbacher. 2003 ‘The nature of human altruism.’ Nature 425: 785–791. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02043
Fehr, E., and S. Gächter. 1998 ‘Reciprocity and economics: the economic implications of Homo Reciprocans.’ European Economic Review 42: 845–859. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0014-2921(97)00131-1
Fehr, E., and S. Gächter. 2000 ‘Fairness and retaliation: the economics of reciprocity.’ Journal of Economic Perspectives 14(3): 159–181. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.14.3.159
Fehr, E., and K. M. Schmidt. 2006 ‘The economics of fairness, reciprocity and altruism: experimental evidence and new theories.’ In S-C. Kolm and J. Mercier Ythier (eds.) Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity, pp. 616–690. Amsterdam: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1574-0714(06)01008-6
Fehr, E., Kirchsteiger, G., and A. Riedl. 1993 ‘Does fairness prevent making clearing? An experimental investigation.’ Quarterly Journal of Economics 108(2): 437–460. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118338
Fehr, E., Kirchsteiger, G., and A. Riedl. 1998 ‘Gift exchange and reciprocity in competitive experimental markets.’ European Economic Review 42: 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0014-2921(96)00051-7
Fershtman, C., and U. Gneezy. 2001 ‘Discrimination in a segmented society: an experimental approach.’ Quarterly Journal of Economics 116(1): 351–377. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355301556338
Gerpott, T. 2017 ‘Pay-What-You-Want pricing: An integrative review of the empirical literature.’ Management Science Letters 7: 35–62. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2016.11.004
Gravert, C. 2017 ‘Pride and patronage – pay-what-you-want pricing at a charitable bookstore.’ Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (forthcoming). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2017.01.009
Greiff, M., and H. Egbert. 2016a ‘A survey of the empirical evidence on PWYW pricing.’ Bulgarian Economic Papers (BEP 02-2016). Sofia: Sofia University.
Greiff, M., and H. Egbert 2016b ‘The pay-what-you-want game and laboratory experiments.’ MPRA Paper No 75222 (November 2016).
Hann, C. 2006 ‘The gift and reciprocity: perspectives from economic anthropology.’ In S-C. Kolm and J. Mercier Ythier (eds.) Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity, chapter 4. Amsterdam: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1574-0714(06)01004-9
Hart, K. 2007 ‘Marcel Mauss: in pursuit of the whole.’ Comparative Studies in Society and History 49(2): 473–485. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0010417507000564
Hilbert, L. P., and A. Suessmair. 2015 ‘The effects of social interaction and social norm compliance in pay-what-you-want situations.’ American Journal of Industrial and Business Management 5: 548–556. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2015.58054
Johnson, N., and A. Mislin. 2008. ‘Trust games: a meta-analysis.’ Journal of Economic Psychology 32: 865–889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2011.05.007
Kim, J-Y., Natter, M., and M. Spann. 2009. ‘Pay What You Want: a new participative pricing mechanism.’ Journal of Marketing 73(1): 44–58. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.73.1.44
Krzyżanowska, M., and J. Tkaczyk. 2016 ‘Pay-what-you-want as a participative pricing mechanism: meta-analysis of development and knowledge dissemination.’ International Journal of Management Cases 18(2): 21–38.
Léon, F. J., Noguera, J. A., and J. Tena-Sánchez 2012 ‘How much would you like to pay? Trust, reciprocity and prosocial motivations in El trato.’ Social Science Information 51(3): 389–417. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018412441756
Liebersohn, H. 2011 The Return of the Gift. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mak, V., Zwick, R., Rao, A., and J. A. Pattaratanakun 2015. ‘`Pay what you want` as threshold public good provision.’ Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 127: 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.11.004
Malinowski, B. 1922 Argonauts of the Western Pacific. New York: E.P. Dutton.
Malinowski, B. 1926 Crime and Custom in Savage Society. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & CO. LTD.
Mauss M. (1923/1924) ‘Essai sur le don. Forme et raison de l’échange dans les sociétés primitives.’ L'Année Sociologique 1923/24(1): 30–186. https://doi.org/10.1522/cla.mam.ess3
Mauss, M. 1990 The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies (translated by W. D. Halls). London: Routledge.
Mercier Ythier, J. 2006 ‘The economic theory of gift-giving: perfect substitutability of transfers and redistribution of wealth.’ In S.-C. Kolm and J. Mercier Ythier (eds.) Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity, chapter 5. Amsterdam: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1574-0714(06)01005-0
Oosterbeek, H., Sloof, R., and G. van de Kuilen 2004 ‘Cultural differences in Ultimatum game experiments: evidence from a meta-analysis.’ Experimental Economics 7: 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:exec.0000026978.14316.74
Ortmann, A., Fitzgerald, J., and C. Boeing 2000 ‘Trust, reciprocity, and social history: a re-examination.’ Experimental Economics 3(1): 81–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01669208
Park, S., Nam, S., and J. Lee 2016 ‘Charitable giving, suggestion, and learning from others: pay-what-you-want experiments at a coffee shop.’ Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (forthcoming). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2016.04.010
Parry, J. 1986 ‘The gift, the Indian gift and the ‘Indian Gift’’. Man 21(3): 453–473. https://doi.org/10.2307/2803096
Regner, T. 2015 ‘Why consumers pay voluntarily: evidence from online music.’ Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics 57: 205–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2014.10.006
Regner, T., and G. Riener 2012 ‘Voluntary payments, privacy and social pressure on the internet: a natural field experiment.’ DICE Discussion Paper, No. 82, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
Reisman, R. 2016. FairPay: Adaptively Win–Win Customer Relationships. Business Expert Press.
Riener, G., and C. Traxler. 2012 ‘Norms, moods, and free lunch: longitudinal evidence on payments from a pay-what-you-want restaurant.’ Journal of Socio-Economics 41(4): 476–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2011.07.003
Santana, S., and V. G. Morwitz. 2015. ‘Because we’re partners: how social values and relationship norms influence consumer payments in pay-what-you-want contexts.’ Advances in Consumer Research 43, 8-9.
Weiner, A. 1992. Inalienable Possessions: The Paradox of Keeping-While Giving. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Copyright (c) 2017 Henrik Egbert
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).