Cellular Service Demand: Biased Beliefs, Learning, and Bill Shock

S-Tier
Journal: American Economic Review
Year: 2015
Volume: 105
Issue: 1
Pages: 234-71

Authors (2)

Michael D. Grubb (Boston College) Matthew Osborne (not in RePEc)

Score contribution per author:

4.022 = (α=2.01 / 2 authors) × 4.0x S-tier

α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count

Abstract

Following FCC pressure to end bill shock, cellular carriers now alert customers when they exceed usage allowances. We estimate a model of plan choice, usage, and learning using a 2002-2004 panel of cellular bills. Accounting for firm price adjustment, we predict that implementing alerts in 2002-2004 would have lowered average annual consumer welfare by $33. We show that consumers are inattentive to past usage, meaning that bill-shock alerts are informative. Additionally, our estimates imply that consumers are overconfident, underestimating the variance of future calling. Overconfidence costs consumers $76 annually at 2002-2004 prices. Absent overconfidence, alerts would have little to no effect. (JEL D12, D18, L11, L96, L98)

Technical Details

RePEc Handle
repec:aea:aecrev:v:105:y:2015:i:1:p:234-71
Journal Field
General
Author Count
2
Added to Database
2026-01-25