Shelf space schemas: Myth or reality?
AbstractA series of studies identifies that consumers hold beliefs about how retailers organize product displays in stores. These beliefs do not reflect reality, but consumers pervasively use them even when discredited. Study 1 finds that consumers believe popular products are placed on middle shelves, expensive products on top shelves and promoted products on the extremes of a display. However, a field study encompassing two different geographical areas, eight stores and four product categories shows that retailer layouts contradict consumers' beliefs about middle and horizontal positions, but they follow consumers' intuitions about verticality, albeit, inconsistently. Based on these findings about the mismatch between consumers' beliefs and retailers' actual assortments, a laboratory experiment examines whether position effects are robust. The study finds that position effects are only partially attenuated when consumers are explicitly informed that store layouts are not informative. A discussion of implications for retailers and product managers follows.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Business Research.
Volume (Year): 66 (2013)
Issue (Month): 7 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres
Shelf placement; Cognitive schemas; Retail strategy; Congruency theory;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Raghubir, Priya & Valenzuela, Ana, 2006. "Center-of-inattention: Position biases in decision-making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 66-80, January.
- Anderson, Evan E, 1979. "An Analysis of Retail Display Space: Theory and Methods," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(1), pages 103-18, January.
- Inman, J Jeffrey & McAlister, Leigh & Hoyer, Wayne D, 1990. " Promotion Signal: Proxy for a Price Cut?," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(1), pages 74-81, June.
- Marcel Corstjens & Peter Doyle, 1981. "A Model for Optimizing Retail Space Allocations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(7), pages 822-833, July.
- Meyers-Levy, Joan & Tybout, Alice M, 1989. " Schema Congruity as a Basis for Product Evaluation," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 39-54, June.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.