Pricing and Customer Returns Policies with Loss Averse Customers

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 241)


Customer returns policies are common after sale services offered by a retailer in order to boost sales, improve customer satisfaction and diminish customer fit uncertainty. With such a service, the retailer accepts the return of a product after the sale has occurred, if it does not satisfy the customer’s expectations. This paper studies a retailer’s return policy problem when the market consists of loss-averse customers who are more sensitive to losses than gains. We examine the situation in which a seller makes price and quantity decisions and also designs an appropriate returns policy in order to maximize his profit. The seller may offer either a full-refund or a partial-refund policy if he decides to accept returns or chooses not to accept any returns. With the full-refund policy, the seller reimburses the consumer the full price of the product if it does not fit the customer’s preferences. With a partial-refund policy, the seller offers a refund which is strictly less than the purchase price. We assume that customers are strategic customers aiming to maximize her utility of the product. Under this setting, this study analyzes the impact of loss aversion on the seller’s price and order quantity decisions.


Consumer returns Loss-averse customers Pricing 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Reference N, Reference H, Reference R et al (2003) The ins and outs of the joint conference on information sciences. In: The Joint Conference on Information Sciences 200–204Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Che YK (1996) Customer return policies for experience goods. Journal of Industrial Economics 44(1):17–24Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heidhues P, Koszegi B (2004) The impact of consumer loss aversion on pricing. WZB, Markets and Political Economy Working Paper No. SP II 17Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heidhues P, Koszegi B (2008) Competition and price variation when consumers are loss averse. The American Economic Review 98(4):1245–1268Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kahneman D, Knetsch JL, Thaler RH (1991) Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion and status quo bias. The Journal of Economic Perspectives 5(1):193–206Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–291Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kahneman D, Tversky A (1984) Choices, values and frames. American Psychologist 39:341–350Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    NRF (2009) National retail federation. Customer Returns in the Retail Industry ReportGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Popescu I, Wu Y (2007) Dynamic pricing strategies with reference effects. Operations Research 55(3):413–429Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Putler DS (1992) Incorporating reference price effects into a theory of consumer choice. Marketing Science 11(3):287–309Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Su X (2009) Consumer returns policies and supply chain performance. Manufacturing and Service Operations Management 11(4):595–612Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Thaler RH (1980) Toward a positive theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 1:39–60Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Decision Science Department, LeBow College of BusinessDrexel UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations