From quality to quantity: The role of common features in consumer preference
AbstractAlthough previous studies of consumer choice have found that common features of alternatives are cancelled and that choices are based only on unique features, a recent study has suggested that common features are canceled only when they are irrelevant in regard to all unique features. The present study hypothesized that the role of a common feature in consumer choice depends on its quantity as well as its quality. Experiments 1 and 2 tested this hypothesis and the equate-to-differentiate account by varying the quality and the quantity of common features. Experiment 3 examined the cognitive process that was proposed to serve as the mechanism for the common feature effect using eye-tracking methodology. This study provided further insight into conditions when the cancellation-and-focus model applies. Study results revealed an attribute-based tradeoff process underlying multiple-attribute decision making, and suggested an avenue through which marketers might influence consumer choices.
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.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Economic Psychology.
Volume (Year): 33 (2012)
Issue (Month): 6 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joep
Common features; Cancellation-and-focus model; Equate-to-differentiate approach; Eye-tracking; Attribute-based strategies;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics; Underlying Principles
- D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
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.:
- Mantel, Susan Powell & Kardes, Frank R, 1999. " The Role of Direction of Comparison, Attribute-Based Processing, and Attitude-Based Processing in Consumer Preference," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(4), pages 335-52, March.
- Dhar, Ravi & Sherman, Steven J, 1996. " The Effect of Common and Unique Features in Consumer Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(3), pages 193-203, December.
- Chernev, Alex, 1997. " The Effect of Common Features on Brand Choice: Moderating Role of Attribute Importance," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(4), pages 304-11, March.
- Sanbonmatsu, David M. & Kardes, Frank R. & Gibson, Bryan D., 1991. "The role of attribute knowledge and overall evaluations in comparative judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 131-146, February.
- Chernev, Alexander, 2001. " The Impact of Common Features on Consumer Preferences: A Case of Confirmatory Reasoning," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(4), pages 475-88, March.
- Li, Shu & Zheng, Rui & Li, Li-Bo, 2007. "Do shared features of offered alternatives have an effect in consumer choice?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 658-677, December.
- Anish Nagpal & Adwait Khare & Tilottama Chowdhury & Lauren Labrecque & Ameet Pandit, 2011. "The impact of the amount of available information on decision delay: The role of common features," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 405-421, November.
- Marc Scholten & Daniel Read, 2006. "Discounting by Intervals: A Generalized Model of Intertemporal Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(9), pages 1424-1436, September.
- Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages S251-78, October.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979.
"Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,"
Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
- Anja Dieckmann & Katrin Dippold & Holger Dietrich, 2009. "Compensatory versus noncompensatory models for predicting consumer preferences," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 4(3), pages 200-213, April.
- Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-61, November.
- Timothy J. Gilbride & Greg M. Allenby, 2004. "A Choice Model with Conjunctive, Disjunctive, and Compensatory Screening Rules," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 391-406, October.
- Bettman, James R & Park, C Whan, 1980. " Effects of Prior Knowledge and Experience and Phase of the Choice Process on Consumer Decision Processes: A Protocol Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(3), pages 234-48, December.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.