Nudge Patterns

Sources and bibliography: all studies behind Nudge Patterns

The Nudge Patterns bibliography: all studies of the published pages with DOI and links to the pages that use them.

How we cite

We cite in APA style with DOI where available. Every page lists its sources in the Science Corner at the end. This list gathers all sources of the published pages and is generated automatically from them.

Status of the sources

Each entry has been cross-checked against a publisher or repository record (existence, authors, year, pages, DOI). That is not the same as a complete check of the content. We take figures from the originals only once we have read the source in full. How far a source has been checked is marked on each entry: “Entry checked” or “Full text checked”. The same information appears in the Science Corner of every page, there also as a ratio. How we work is described in the editorial process.

Reporting errors

If you find an error in a reference, write to us using the contact details in the imprint. We note corrections with a date in the change log of the affected page.

Bibliography

Source check: 95 / 95 read in full

  1. Full text checkedAggarwal, P., Jun, S. Y., & Huh, J. H. (2011). Scarcity messages: A consumer competition perspective. Journal of Advertising, 40(3), 19–30.Used in: Scarcity and urgency: genuine and artificial, Scarcity
  2. Full text checkedAmos, C., Holmes, G., & Strutton, D. (2008). Exploring the relationship between celebrity endorser effects and advertising effectiveness: A quantitative synthesis of effect size. International Journal of Advertising, 27(2), 209–234.Used in: Authority, trust badges and expert quotes: what is supported
  3. Full text checkedAnderson, E. T., & Simester, D. I. (2003). Effects of $9 price endings on retail sales: Evidence from field experiments. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 1(1), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023581927405Used in: Charm pricing and price presentation: .99 endings, round prices and currency symbols, Left-digit effect
  4. Full text checkedArkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985). The psychology of sunk cost. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35(1), 124–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4Used in: Micro-commitments in the funnel: what is supported and what is not, Sunk-cost fallacy
  5. Full text checkedBaymard Institute. (2026). Cart abandonment rate statistics: Why users abandon their cart (survey of US online shoppers, methodology not public). https://baymard.com/lists/cart-abandonment-rate (page last updated 28 October 2026, retrieved 7 November 2026).Used in: Micro-commitments in the funnel: what is supported and what is not
  6. Full text checkedBeaman, A. L., Cole, C. M., Preston, M., Klentz, B., & Steblay, N. M. (1983). Fifteen years of foot-in-the-door research: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9(2), 181–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167283092002Used in: Micro-commitments in the funnel: what is supported and what is not, Foot-in-the-door technique
  7. Full text checkedBergquist, M., Nilsson, A., & Schultz, W. P. (2019). A meta-analysis of field-experiments using social norms to promote pro-environmental behaviors. Global Environmental Change, 58, 101941.Used in: Social proof: what audience claims support and what they do not, Social proof
  8. Full text checkedBickman, L. (1974). The social power of a uniform. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 4(1), 47–61.Used in: Authority, trust badges and expert quotes: what is supported, Authority (the authority principle)
  9. Full text checkedBizer, G. Y., & Schindler, R. M. (2005). Direct evidence of ending-digit drop-off in price information processing. Psychology & Marketing, 22(10), 771–783.Used in: Charm pricing and price presentation: .99 endings, round prices and currency symbols, Left-digit effect
  10. Full text checkedBohner, G., & Schlüter, L. E. (2014). A room with a viewpoint revisited: Descriptive norms and hotel guests’ towel reuse behavior. PLoS ONE, 9(8), e104086.Used in: Social proof: what audience claims support and what they do not, Social proof
  11. Full text checkedBornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 265–289. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.265Used in: Processing fluency
  12. Full text checkedBrown, A. L., Imai, T., Vieider, F. M., & Camerer, C. F. (2024). Meta-analysis of empirical estimates of loss aversion. Journal of Economic Literature, 62(2), 485–516.Used in: Loss aversion in copy: an effect whose strength is debated, Loss aversion
  13. Full text checkedBurger, J. M. (1999). The foot-in-the-door compliance procedure: A multiple-process analysis and review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(4), 303–325. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0304_2Used in: Micro-commitments in the funnel: what is supported and what is not, Foot-in-the-door technique
  14. Full text checkedBurger, J. M. (2009). Replicating Milgram: Would people still obey today? American Psychologist, 64(1), 1–11.Used in: Authority, trust badges and expert quotes: what is supported, Authority (the authority principle)
  15. Full text checkedBurnkrant, R. E., & Unnava, H. R. (1995). Effects of self-referencing on persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(1), 17–26.Used in: Tone of address: what research on formal and informal gives us, Self-referencing
  16. Full text checkedChen, S.-F. S., Monroe, K. B., & Lou, Y.-C. (1998). The effects of framing price promotion messages on consumers’ perceptions and purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing, 74(3), 353–372.Used in: Discount framing: percent or euro? The Rule of 100 put to the test
  17. Full text checkedChoi, C., & Mattila, A. S. (2014). The effects of promotion framing on consumers’ price perceptions: The moderating role of a personal sense of power. Journal of Service Management, 25(1), 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-11-2012-0234Used in: Discount framing: percent or euro? The Rule of 100 put to the test
  18. Full text checkedCialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015–1026.Used in: Social proof: what audience claims support and what they do not, Social proof
  19. Full text checkedDelVecchio, D., Krishnan, H. S., & Smith, D. C. (2007). Cents or percent? The effects of promotion framing on price expectations and choice. Journal of Marketing, 71(3), 158–170.Used in: Discount framing: percent or euro? The Rule of 100 put to the test
  20. Full text checkedDillard, J. P., & Shen, L. (2005). On the nature of reactance and its role in persuasive health communication. Communication Monographs, 72(2), 144–168.Used in: Tone of address: what research on formal and informal gives us, Reactance
  21. Full text checkedDillard, J. P., Hunter, J. E., & Burgoon, M. (1984). Sequential-request persuasive strategies: Meta-analysis of foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face. Human Communication Research, 10(4), 461–488. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1984.tb00028.xUsed in: Micro-commitments in the funnel: what is supported and what is not, Foot-in-the-door technique
  22. Full text checkedDoliński, D., Grzyb, T., Folwarczny, M., Grzybała, P., Krzyszycha, K., Martynowska, K., & Trojanowski, J. (2017). Would you deliver an electric shock in 2015? Obedience in the experimental paradigm developed by Stanley Milgram in the 50 years following the original studies. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(8), 927–933.Used in: Authority, trust badges and expert quotes: what is supported, Authority (the authority principle)
  23. Full text checkedFrederick, S., Lee, L., & Baskin, E. (2014). The limits of attraction. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(4), 487–507. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.12.0061Used in: The decoy effect in pricing tables: what the research shows, Decoy effect (attraction effect)
  24. Full text checkedFreedman, J. L., & Fraser, S. C. (1966). Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(2), 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0023552Used in: Micro-commitments in the funnel: what is supported and what is not, Foot-in-the-door technique
  25. Full text checkedFudenberg, D., Levine, D. K., & Maniadis, Z. (2012). On the robustness of anchoring effects in WTP and WTA experiments. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 4(2), 131–145. https://doi.org/10.1257/mic.4.2.131Used in: Anchoring in pricing: why the first price shapes every later one, Anchoring effect
  26. Full text checkedFurnham, A., & Boo, H. C. (2011). A literature review of the anchoring effect. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40(1), 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2010.10.008Used in: Anchoring in pricing: why the first price shapes every later one
  27. Full text checkedGal, D., & Rucker, D. D. (2018). The loss of loss aversion: Will it loom larger than its gain? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(3), 497–516.Used in: Loss aversion in copy: an effect whose strength is debated, Loss aversion
  28. Full text checkedGamian-Wilk, M., & Dolinski, D. (2020). The foot-in-the-door phenomenon 40 and 50 years later: A direct replication of the original Freedman and Fraser study in Poland and in Ukraine. Psychological Reports, 123(6), 2582–2596. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294119872208Used in: Micro-commitments in the funnel: what is supported and what is not, Foot-in-the-door technique
  29. Full text checkedGhibellini, R., & Meier, B. (2025). Interruption, recall and resumption: A meta-analysis of the Zeigarnik and Ovsiankina effects. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12, Article 962. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05000-wUsed in: Progress indicators: why they work and when they do not, Ovsiankina effect (resumption tendency), Zeigarnik effect
  30. Full text checkedGoldstein, N. J., Cialdini, R. B., & Griskevicius, V. (2008). A room with a viewpoint: Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 472–482.Used in: Social proof: what audience claims support and what they do not, Social proof
  31. Full text checkedGonzález, E. M., Esteva, E., Roggeveen, A. L., & Grewal, D. (2016). Amount off versus percentage off: When does it matter? Journal of Business Research, 69(3), 1022–1027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.08.014Used in: Discount framing: percent or euro? The Rule of 100 put to the test
  32. Full text checkedGreene, D., Zinn, A. K., Demeter, C., & Dolnicar, S. (2025). „Hi, I’m Terri Towel. Please Reuse Me.“ Can anthropomorphizing towels prompt tourists to reuse them? Journal of Travel Research, 65(7), 2031–2052.Used in: Social proof: what audience claims support and what they do not, Social proof
  33. Full text checkedHead, M. M., & Hassanein, K. (2002). Trust in e-commerce: Evaluating the impact of third-party seals. Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce, 3(3), 307–325.Used in: Authority, trust badges and expert quotes: what is supported
  34. Full text checkedHeath, T. B., & Chatterjee, S. (1995). Asymmetric decoy effects on lower-quality versus higher-quality brands: Meta-analytic and experimental evidence. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 268–284. https://doi.org/10.1086/209449Used in: The decoy effect in pricing tables: what the research shows, Decoy effect (attraction effect)
  35. Full text checkedHsee, C. K. (1996). The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation for preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(3), 247–257. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.0077Used in: Evaluability
  36. Full text checkedHsee, C. K., & Leclerc, F. (1998). Will products look more attractive when presented separately or together? Journal of Consumer Research, 25(2), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1086/209534Used in: Evaluability
  37. Full text checkedHsee, C. K., Loewenstein, G. F., Blount, S., & Bazerman, M. H. (1999). Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of options: A review and theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125(5), 576–590. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.5.576Used in: Evaluability
  38. Full text checkedHuber, J., Payne, J. W., & Puto, C. (1982). Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 90–98. https://doi.org/10.1086/208899Used in: The decoy effect in pricing tables: what the research shows, Decoy effect (attraction effect)
  39. Full text checkedHuber, J., Payne, J. W., & Puto, C. P. (2014). Let’s be honest about the attraction effect. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(4), 520–525. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.14.0208Used in: The decoy effect in pricing tables: what the research shows, Decoy effect (attraction effect)
  40. Full text checkedHull, C. L. (1932). The goal-gradient hypothesis and maze learning. Psychological Review, 39(1), 25–43.Used in: Progress indicators: why they work and when they do not, Goal-gradient effect
  41. Full text checkedKahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.Used in: Loss aversion in copy: an effect whose strength is debated, Loss aversion
  42. Full text checkedKim, D. J., Ferrin, D. L., & Rao, H. R. (2008). A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decision Support Systems, 44(2), 544–564.Used in: Authority, trust badges and expert quotes: what is supported, Authority (the authority principle)
  43. Full text checkedKivetz, R., Urminsky, O., & Zheng, Y. (2006). The goal-gradient hypothesis resurrected: Purchase acceleration, illusionary goal progress, and customer retention. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(1), 39–58.Used in: Progress indicators: why they work and when they do not, Endowed progress, Goal-gradient effect
  44. Full text checkedKlein, R. A., et al. (2014). Investigating variation in replicability: A “Many Labs” replication project. Social Psychology, 45(3), 142–152. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000178Used in: Anchoring in pricing: why the first price shapes every later one, Anchoring effect, Framing effect, Pain of paying, Sunk-cost fallacy
  45. Full text checkedKlein, R. A., et al. (2018). Many Labs 2: Investigating variation in replicability across sample and setting. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(4), 443–490. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918810225Used in: Anchoring in pricing: why the first price shapes every later one, Anchoring effect
  46. Full text checkedKnutson, B., Rick, S., Wimmer, G. E., Prelec, D., & Loewenstein, G. (2007). Neural predictors of purchases. Neuron, 53(1), 147–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2006.11.010Used in: Charm pricing and price presentation: .99 endings, round prices and currency symbols, Pain of paying
  47. Full text checkedKumar, S., & Pandey, M. (2017). The impact of psychological pricing strategy on consumers’ buying behaviour: A qualitative study. International Journal of Business and Systems Research, 11(1/2), 101–117.Used in: Charm pricing and price presentation: .99 endings, round prices and currency symbols
  48. Full text checkedLi, M., & Feldman, G. (2025). Revisiting mental accounting classic paradigms: Replication Registered Report of the problems reviewed in Thaler (1999). Royal Society Open Science, 12(9), 250979. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.250979Used in: Framing effect, Mental accounting
  49. Full text checkedLópez Jiménez, D., Dittmar, E. C., & Vargas Portillo, J. P. (2021). The use of trust seals in European and Latin American commercial transactions. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(2), 150.Used in: Authority, trust badges and expert quotes: what is supported
  50. Full text checkedLynn, M. (1991). Scarcity effects on value: A quantitative review of the commodity theory literature. Psychology & Marketing, 8(1), 43–57.Used in: Scarcity and urgency: genuine and artificial, Scarcity
  51. Full text checkedMacé, S. (2012). The impact and determinants of nine-ending pricing in grocery retailing. Journal of Retailing, 88(1), 115–130.Used in: Charm pricing and price presentation: .99 endings, round prices and currency symbols
  52. Full text checkedMelnyk, V., Carrillat, F. A., & Melnyk, V. (2022). The influence of social norms on consumer behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marketing, 86(3), 98–120.Used in: Social proof: what audience claims support and what they do not, Social proof
  53. Full text checkedMeyer, A., Frederick, S., Burnham, T. C., Guevara Pinto, J. D., Boyer, T. W., Ball, L. J., Pennycook, G., Ackerman, R., Thompson, V. A., & Schuldt, J. P. (2015). Disfluent fonts don’t help people solve math problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(2), e16–e30. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000049Used in: Processing fluency
  54. Full text checkedMilgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371–378.Used in: Authority, trust badges and expert quotes: what is supported, Authority (the authority principle)
  55. Full text checkedMiron, A. M., & Brehm, J. W. (2006). Reactance theory — 40 years later. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 37(1), 9–18.Used in: Scarcity and urgency: genuine and artificial, Reactance
  56. Full text checkedMrkva, K., Johnson, E. J., Gächter, S., & Herrmann, A. (2020). Moderating loss aversion: Loss aversion has moderators, but reports of its death are greatly exaggerated. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 30(3), 407–428.Used in: Loss aversion in copy: an effect whose strength is debated, Loss aversion
  57. Full text checkedNeumann, N., Böckenholt, U., & Sinha, A. (2016). A meta-analysis of extremeness aversion. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26(2), 193–212.Used in: Compromise effect
  58. Full text checkedNunes, J. C., & Drèze, X. (2006). The endowed progress effect: How artificial advancement increases effort. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 504–512. https://doi.org/10.1086/500480Used in: Progress indicators: why they work and when they do not, Endowed progress
  59. Full text checkedOvsiankina, M. (1928). Untersuchungen zur Handlungs- und Affektpsychologie: VI. Die Wiederaufnahme unterbrochener Handlungen. Psychologische Forschung, 11, 302–379. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00410261Used in: Progress indicators: why they work and when they do not, Ovsiankina effect (resumption tendency)
  60. Full text checkedPackard, G., Moore, S. G., & McFerran, B. (2018). (I'm) happy to help (you): The impact of personal pronoun use in customer–firm interactions. Journal of Marketing Research, 55(5), 541–555.Used in: Tone of address: what research on formal and informal gives us, Self-referencing
  61. Full text checkedPiñón, A., & Gambara, H. (2005). A meta-analytic review of framing effect: Risky, attribute and goal framing. Psicothema, 17(2), 325–331.Used in: Loss aversion in copy: an effect whose strength is debated, Framing effect
  62. Full text checkedPornpitakpan, C. (2004). The persuasiveness of source credibility: A critical review of five decades' evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(2), 243–281.Used in: Authority, trust badges and expert quotes: what is supported
  63. Full text checkedPrelec, D., & Loewenstein, G. (1998). The red and the black: Mental accounting of savings and debt. Marketing Science, 17(1), 4–28.Used in: Charm pricing and price presentation: .99 endings, round prices and currency symbols, Pain of paying
  64. Full text checkedRains, S. A. (2013). The nature of psychological reactance revisited: A meta-analytic review. Human Communication Research, 39(1), 47–73.Used in: Social proof: what audience claims support and what they do not, Scarcity and urgency: genuine and artificial, Tone of address: what research on formal and informal gives us, Reactance
  65. Full text checkedReber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(4), 364–382. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3Used in: Processing fluency
  66. Full text checkedRodrigues, G. V., Soares, E. D., Lopes, E. L., & Freire, O. B. L. (2019). Reactance theory: A bibliometric review. Revista de Administração Unimep, 17(3), 47–69.Used in: Reactance
  67. Full text checkedRogers, T. B., Kuiper, N. A., & Kirker, W. S. (1977). Self-reference and the encoding of personal information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(9), 677–688.Used in: Tone of address: what research on formal and informal gives us, Self-referencing
  68. Full text checkedRosenberg, B. D., & Siegel, J. T. (2018). A 50-year review of psychological reactance theory: Do not read this article. Motivation Science, 4(4), 281–300.Used in: Scarcity and urgency: genuine and artificial, Tone of address: what research on formal and informal gives us, Reactance
  69. Full text checkedSchomburgk, L., Belli, A., & Hoffmann, A. O. I. (2024). Less cash, more splash? A meta-analysis on the cashless effect. Journal of Retailing, 100, 382–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2024.05.003Used in: Pain of paying
  70. Full text checkedSchultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., & Griskevicius, V. (2007). The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological Science, 18(5), 429–434.Used in: Social proof: what audience claims support and what they do not, Social proof
  71. Full text checkedSchultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., & Griskevicius, V. (2018). The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms: Reprise. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 249–254.Used in: Social proof: what audience claims support and what they do not, Social proof
  72. Full text checkedSher, S., & McKenzie, C. R. M. (2014). Options as information: Rational reversals of evaluation and preference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(3), 1127–1143. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035128Used in: Evaluability
  73. Full text checkedShi, X., Li, F., & Chumnumpan, P. (2020). The use of product scarcity in marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 54(2), 380–418.Used in: Scarcity and urgency: genuine and artificial, Scarcity
  74. Full text checkedSimonson, I. (1989). Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(2), 158–174. https://doi.org/10.1086/209205Used in: The decoy effect in pricing tables: what the research shows, Compromise effect
  75. Full text checkedSimonson, I., & Tversky, A. (1992). Choice in context: Tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(3), 281–295.Used in: Compromise effect
  76. Full text checkedSirota, M., Theodoropoulou, A., & Juanchich, M. (2021). Disfluent fonts do not help people to solve math and non-math problems regardless of their numeracy. Thinking & Reasoning, 27(1), 1–16.Used in: Processing fluency
  77. Full text checkedSteiger, A., & Kühberger, A. (2018). A meta-analytic re-appraisal of the framing effect. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 226(1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000321Used in: Loss aversion in copy: an effect whose strength is debated, Framing effect
  78. Full text checkedSteindl, C., Jonas, E., Sittenthaler, S., Traut-Mattausch, E., & Greenberg, J. (2015). Understanding psychological reactance: New developments and findings. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 223(4), 205–214.Used in: Scarcity and urgency: genuine and artificial, Reactance
  79. Full text checkedSymons, C. S., & Johnson, B. T. (1997). The self-reference effect in memory: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 121(3), 371–394.Used in: Tone of address: what research on formal and informal gives us, Self-referencing
  80. Full text checkedThaler, R. (1985). Mental accounting and consumer choice. Marketing Science, 4(3), 199–214.Used in: Mental accounting
  81. Full text checkedThaler, R. H. (1999). Mental accounting matters. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12(3), 183–206.Used in: Mental accounting
  82. Full text checkedThomas, M., & Morwitz, V. (2005). Penny wise and pound foolish: The left-digit effect in price cognition. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(1), 54–64. https://doi.org/10.1086/429600Used in: Charm pricing and price presentation: .99 endings, round prices and currency symbols, Left-digit effect
  83. Full text checkedTroll, E. S., Frankenbach, J., Friese, M., & Loschelder, D. D. (2024). A meta-analysis on the effects of just-below versus round prices. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 34(2), 299–325. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1353Used in: Charm pricing and price presentation: .99 endings, round prices and currency symbols, Left-digit effect
  84. Full text checkedTrueblood, J. S., Brown, S. D., Heathcote, A., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2013). Not just for consumers: Context effects are fundamental to decision making. Psychological Science.Used in: Compromise effect
  85. Full text checkedTversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124Used in: Anchoring in pricing: why the first price shapes every later one, Anchoring effect
  86. Full text checkedTversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7455683Used in: Framing effect
  87. Full text checkedTversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(4), 1039–1061.Used in: Loss aversion in copy: an effect whose strength is debated, Loss aversion
  88. Full text checkedVillar, A., Callegaro, M., & Yang, Y. (2013). Where am I? A meta-analysis of experiments on the effects of progress indicators for web surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 31(6), 744–762. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439313497468Used in: Progress indicators: why they work and when they do not, Goal-gradient effect
  89. Full text checkedVonasch, A. J., Hung, W. Y., Leung, W. Y., Nguyen, A. T. B., Chan, S., Cheng, B. L., & Feldman, G. (2023). „Less is better“ in separate evaluations versus „more is better“ in joint evaluations: Mostly successful close replication and extension of Hsee (1998). Collabra: Psychology, 9(1), 77859. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.77859Used in: Evaluability
  90. Full text checkedWieseke, J., Kolberg, A., & Schons, L. M. (2016). Life could be so easy: The convenience effect of round price endings. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(4), 474–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0428-7Used in: Charm pricing and price presentation: .99 endings, round prices and currency symbols, Processing fluency
  91. Full text checkedWorchel, S., Lee, J., & Adewole, A. (1975). Effects of supply and demand on ratings of object value. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(5), 906–914.Used in: Scarcity and urgency: genuine and artificial, Scarcity
  92. Full text checkedWu, C., & Cosguner, K. (2020). Profiting from the decoy effect: A case study of an online diamond retailer. Marketing Science, 39(5), 974–995. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2020.1231Used in: The decoy effect in pricing tables: what the research shows, Decoy effect (attraction effect)
  93. Full text checkedYang, S. S., Kimes, S. E., & Sessarego, M. M. (2009). Menu price presentation influences on consumer purchase behavior in restaurants. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28(1), 157–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2008.06.012Used in: Charm pricing and price presentation: .99 endings, round prices and currency symbols, Pain of paying
  94. Full text checkedYang, S., & Lynn, M. (2014). More evidence challenging the robustness and usefulness of the attraction effect. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(4), 508–513. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.14.0020Used in: The decoy effect in pricing tables: what the research shows
  95. Full text checkedZeigarnik, B. (1927). Das Behalten erledigter und unerledigter Handlungen. Psychologische Forschung, 9, 1–85.Used in: Progress indicators: why they work and when they do not, Zeigarnik effect