How to make a 29% increase look bigger: the unit effect in option comparisons
Publication typeFT ranked journal article
JournalJournal of Consumer Research
Publication Begin page308
Publication End page322
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractQuantitative information can appear in different units (e.g., 7-year warranty = 84-month warranty). This article demonstrates that attribute differences appear larger on scales with a higher number of units; expressing quality information on such an expanded scale makes consumers switch to a higher-quality option. Testifying to its practical importance, expressing the energy content of snacks in kilojoules rather than kilocalories increases the choice of a healthy snack. The unit effect occurs because consumers focus on the number rather than the type of units in which information is expressed (numerosity effect). Therefore, reminding consumers of alternative units in which information can be expressed eliminates the unit effect. Finally, the unit effect moderates relative thinking: consumers are more sensitive to relative attribute differences when the attribute is expressed on expanded scales. The relation with anchoring and implications for temporal discounting and loyalty programs are discussed.
KeywordConsumer Research, Anchoring Effect, Anchoring Effect, Decision Making, Consumer Preferences, Shopping, Consumer Attitudes, Consumer Goods, Consumer Research, Reference Pricing, Units of Measurement, Weights & Measures, Individuals' Preferences
Knowledge Domain/IndustryMarketing & Sales
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Navigating by the stars: Investigating the actual and perceived validity of online user ratingsDe Langhe, Bart; Fernbach, Philip M.; Lichtenstein, Donald R. (Journal of Consumer Research, 2016)This research documents a substantial disconnect between the objective quality information that online user ratings actually convey and the extent to which consumers trust them as indicators of objective quality. Analyses of a data set covering 1272 products across 120 vertically differentiated product categories reveal that average user ratings (1) lack convergence with Consumer Reports scores, the most commonly used measure of objective quality in the consumer behavior literature, (2) are often based on insufficient sample sizes which limits their informativeness, (3) do not predict resale prices in the used-product marketplace, and (4) are higher for more expensive products and premium brands, controlling for Consumer Reports scores. However, when forming quality inferences and purchase intentions, consumers heavily weight the average rating compared to other cues for quality like price and the number of ratings. They also fail to moderate their reliance on the average user rating as a function of sample size sufficiency. Consumers' trust in the average user rating as a cue for objective quality appears to be based on an "illusion of validity."
Star Wars: Response to Simonson, Winer/Fader, and KozinetsDe Langhe, Bart; Fernbach, Philip M.; Lichtenstein, Donald R. (Journal of Consumer Research, 2016)In de Langhe, Fernbach, and Lichtenstein (2016), we argue that consumers trust average user ratings as indicators of objective product performance much more than they should. This simple idea has provoked passionate commentaries from eminent researchers across three subdisciplines of marketing: experimental consumer research, modeling, and qualitative consumer research. Simonson challenges the premise of our research, asking whether objective performance even matters. We think it does and explain why in our response. Winer and Fader argue that our results are neither insightful nor important. We believe that their reaction is due to a fundamental misunderstanding of our goals, and we show that their criticisms do not hold up to scrutiny. Finally, Kozinets points out how narrow a slice of consumer experience our article covers. We agree, and build on his observations to reflect on some big-picture issues about the nature of research and the interaction between the subdisciplines.
Exploring Green Consumers' Mind-set towards green product design and life cycle assessment: the case of sceptical Brazilian and Portuguese green consumersLemke, Fred; Luzio, J.P.P. (Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2014)Businesses are increasingly interested in exploring the key concepts of industrial ecology (IE), particularly within the context of market‐oriented sustainability. However, few studies have researched how green consumers perceive production as having relevant product design and life cycle assessment (LCA) dimensions. In this article, we explore green consumers’ mind‐set toward such system tools of IE by conducting 18 in‐depth interviews with Brazilian and Portuguese green consumers. We propose a simplified theoretical framework for achieving market‐oriented sustainability based on the multidisciplinary potential between IE and marketing. Our analysis suggests that there are still important gaps between what green consumers demand and what businesses are currently able (or willing) to supply. Our findings support the idea that businesses interested in following IE within the context of market‐oriented sustainability should spend greater effort in understanding the green consumer's production‐related mind‐set. In particular, we propose (1) avoiding consumer skepticism and dissatisfaction with greenwashing and (2) establishing credibility and information transparency. Both seem to act as preconditions to better align the product design and LCA processes with green consumer needs within the emerging paradigm of market‐oriented sustainability.