Abstract:Problem definition: Firms heavily invest in big data technologies to collect consumer data and infer consumer preferences for price discrimination. However, consumers can use technological devices to manipulate their data and fool firms to obtain better deals. We examine how a firm invests in collecting consumer data and makes pricing decisions and whether it should disclose its scope of data collection to consumers who can manipulate their data. Methodology/results: We develop a game-theoretic model to consider a market in which a firm caters to consumers with heterogeneous preferences for a product. The firm collects consumer data to identify their types and issue an individualized price, whereas consumers can incur a cost to manipulate data and mimic the other type. We find that when the firm does not disclose its scope of data collection to consumers, it collects more consumer data. When the firm discloses its scope of data collection, it reduces data collection even when collecting more data is costless. The optimal scope of data collection increases when it is more costly for consumers to manipulate data but decreases when consumer demand becomes more heterogeneous. Moreover, a lower cost for consumers to manipulate data can be detrimental to both the firm and consumers. Lastly, disclosure of data collection scope increases firm profit, consumer surplus, and social welfare. Managerial implications: Our findings suggest that a firm should adjust its scope of data collection and prices based on whether the firm discloses the data collection scope, consumers’ manipulation cost, and demand heterogeneity. Public policies should require firms to disclose their data collection scope to increase consumer surplus and social welfare. Even without such a mandatory disclosure policy, firms should voluntarily disclose their data collection scope to increase profit. Moreover, public educational programs that train consumers to manipulate their data or raise their awareness of manipulation tools can ultimately hurt consumers and firms.

Tit for Tat? the Consequence of Private Information Misuse in Debt Collection

Digital Footprints as Collateral for Debt Collection

Carrot or Stick? Evidence from a Pair of Randomized Field Experiments Testing Lender Information Sharing Hypotheses

Predicting and Deterring Default with Social Media Information in Peer-to-Peer Lending.

Assessment of Borrowers' Delinquency and Default Behaviors in Online P2P Lending: A Two-stage Model.

Can Social Notifications Help to Mitigate Payment Delinquency in Online Peer-to-Peer Lending?

What if Borrowers Were Informed about Credit Reporting? Two Natural Field Experiments

Drivers and consequences of borrowers' voluntary privacy information disclosure—Evidence from a Chinese online consumer financing platform

Prosocial Compliance in P2P Lending: A Natural Field Experiment

Personalized Communication Strategies: Towards A New Debtor Typology Framework

Debtor income manipulation in consumer credit contracts

Individual Credit or Joint Reputation: Tackling Information Asymmetries in Online P2P Lending Markets

Understanding Default Behavior in Peer-to-Peer Lending

Borrower's Self-Disclosure of Social Media Information in P2P Lending

Social Influence and Defaults in Peer-to-Peer Lending Networks.

Bank Misconduct and Online Lending

Understanding Default Behavior in Online Lending

Friends, Colleagues or Neighbors? Influential Peers in Microloan Defaults

Competition and Distortion: A Theory of Information Bias on the Peer-to-Peer Lending Market

Racial Disparities in Debt Collection

Beating the Algorithm: Consumer Manipulation, Personalized Pricing, and Big Data Management