Transparency as a solution?
A possible solution seems to be more transparency. And often price transparency is legally required. Only that is the price for yourself, the consumer does not know the context or the price for others.
Researchers from Leiden and Utrecht have conducted research into online personalised pricing . An experimental group was given more transparency, the price differentiation was made known with a warning. The transparency/extra information appeared to have an increasing effect on the purchase intention, which may lead to overconsumption. A good illustration of the importance of testing the framing and effects of transparency obligations:
Framing as a result of regulatory intervention may inadvertently appeal to consumers' wishes, desires, and in the process of doing so, increase the likelihood of (over)spending
This supports the conclusions of a 2019 study by the AFM and its Australian counterpart. We concluded that legally required information to consumers is necessary, but not always enough. Or research by the European Commission from 2018 which showed that explicit transparency only helped consumers to recognize personalization to a south africa telegram data limited extent. The same study also showed that consumers overestimate how often personalized pricing occurs.
That is why policy rules and guidelines, such as on information provision by the AFM or online influence by the ACM , are good to make clearer what is and is not allowed. Within that, there is still enough room for the creative marketer to seduce his customers.
As my colleague Lars van de Ven blogged : “Can we determine in advance when influence turns into deception? I don’t think so, because there will always be a grey area. That is why a good moral compass of the (financial) provider is so important”. Clear beacons from the supervisor make it easier to steer the right course with the moral compass.
From the research I describe, we can conclude that there is no one-size-fits-all. What consumers find honest and fair varies. What is acceptable for one consumer is not necessarily acceptable for another. It therefore remains a challenge (and a profession) to convey the most convincing message possible in marketing, without offending too many people. Please share (examples of) how you deal with this dilemma in the comments.
