← Every exhibit

Table Figure 1 Go-to-market & pricing

The willingness-to-pay measurement fidelity matrix

Compare measurement mechanisms across behavioral fidelity, hypothetical bias, operational complexity, and decision validity.

MethodologyBehavioral mechanismCost & complexityHypothetical biasPrimary strategic utility
Direct Open-Ended SurveysSelf-reported maximum price point ("What would you pay?")Low cost; rapid executionHigh; stated intent overstates purchase, and no source held here gives a general rateExploratory boundary screening for completely novel concepts
Van Westendorp (PSM)Four-question psychological price map (cheap vs too expensive)Moderate cost; standardized formatModerate; identifies perceptual range, not transaction pointsMapping psychological price corridors and sticker-shock thresholds
Choice-Based Conjoint (CBC)Trade-off choices across simulated multi-attribute bundlesHigh cost; requires experimental designControlled; decomposes part-worth utilities across featuresPackaging, feature tiering, and willingness to trade off specific attributes
Incentive-Aligned BDM LotteriesBecker-DeGroot-Marschak auction where stated bids trigger real binding purchasesHigh complexity; requires real transaction setupZero hypothetical bias; reflects real cash commitmentsPrecision testing of consumer reservation prices in experimental settings
In-Market A/B Cohort TestingLive commercial transaction observations on separated customer cohortsModerate-high; requires operational governanceZero bias; observes real conversions under market frictionsFinal price validation before company-wide list price deployment

Swipe or scroll horizontally if the table is wider than your screen.

Cite Embed

Reference & Evidence

Source: Author's pricing research framework grounded in empirical methodology comparisons and behavioral choice literature from Anderson and Simester (2003), Kloss and Kunter (2016), Kuijken et al. (2017), and Simonson and Tversky (1992).

Each line is a claim from the register this journal publishes against, resolved from the register at build time.

  • B Tradeoff contrast, in the authors' words: "the tendency to prefer an alternative is enhanced or hindered depending on whether the tradeoffs within the set under" consideration are favourable or unfavourable to that option. Checked against the PDF, because the extract warns that it mangles hyphenation simonson-tversky-1992-choice-in-context · ST92-C1

Grades: A, verified against the printed page of the primary source · B, primary source, text layer only · C, authoritative secondary · D, reported.