IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jcopol/v43y2020i3d10.1007_s10603-020-09456-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unit Price Measures in Retailing: Consistency Effects on Product Choice and Store Evaluations

Author

Listed:
  • A. Fecher

    (TU Kaiserslautern)

  • T. Robbert

    (TU Kaiserslautern)

  • S. Roth

    (TU Kaiserslautern)

Abstract

Unit prices help consumers identify the cheapest product. Yet, guidelines for their implementation vary considerably. Depending on regional regulations, retailers have substantial leeway in choosing a measure in which the unit price is expressed (e.g., per kilogramme vs. per wash load). Sometimes retailers even apply different measures for one product category at a time, which might be confusing for consumers. This study investigates the impact of consistent unit price measures on processing fluency of price information and product choice. The results of three studies reveal that the effectiveness of unit prices heavily depends on the consistency level. The findings suggest that consistency enhances processing fluency and makes it easier for consumers to compare prices. In addition, it unfolds positive effects for the retailer, as it leads to higher satisfaction and repatronage intentions.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Fecher & T. Robbert & S. Roth, 2020. "Unit Price Measures in Retailing: Consistency Effects on Product Choice and Store Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 611-633, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jcopol:v:43:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10603-020-09456-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10603-020-09456-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10603-020-09456-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10603-020-09456-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mosteller, Jill & Donthu, Naveen & Eroglu, Sevgin, 2014. "The fluent online shopping experience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(11), pages 2486-2493.
    2. Scott Motyka & Rajneesh Suri & Dhruv Grewal & Chiranjeev Kohli, 2016. "Disfluent vs. fluent price offers: paradoxical role of processing disfluency," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 44(5), pages 627-638, September.
    3. Shirai, Miyuri, 2017. "Effects of price reframing tactics on consumer perceptions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 82-87.
    4. Weeks, Clinton S. & Mortimer, Gary & Page, Lionel, 2016. "Understanding how consumer education impacts shoppers over time: A longitudinal field study of unit price usage," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 198-209.
    5. Yao, Jun & Oppewal, Harmen, 2016. "Unit Pricing Increases Price Sensitivity Even When Products are of Identical Size," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 109-121.
    6. Orth, Ulrich R. & Crouch, Roberta C., 2014. "Is Beauty in the Aisles of the Retailer? Package Processing in Visually Complex Contexts," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(4), pages 524-537.
    7. Jan R. Landwehr & Aparna A. Labroo & Andreas Herrmann, 2011. "Gut Liking for the Ordinary: Incorporating Design Fluency Improves Automobile Sales Forecasts," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 416-429, 05-06.
    8. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. "Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    9. Bogomolova, Svetlana & Oppewal, Harmen & Cohen, Justin & Yao, Jun, 2020. "How the layout of a unit price label affects eye-movements and product choice: An eye-tracking investigation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 102-116.
    10. Fecher, André & Robbert, Thomas & Roth, Stefan, 2020. "Per piece or per kilogram? Default-unit effects in retailing," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    11. Kachersky, Luke, 2011. "Reduce Content or Raise Price? The Impact of Persuasion Knowledge and Unit Price Increase Tactics on Retailer and Product Brand Attitudes," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 87(4), pages 479-488.
    12. Bettman, James R. & Johnson, Eric J. & Payne, John W., 1990. "A componential analysis of cognitive effort in choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 111-139, February.
    13. Fecher, André & Robbert, Thomas & Roth, Stefan, 2019. "Same price, different perception: Measurement-unit effects on price-level perceptions and purchase intentions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 129-142.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ohlwein, Martin, 2022. "Same but different - The effect of the unit of measure on the valuation of a unit price," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ohlwein, Martin, 2022. "Same but different - The effect of the unit of measure on the valuation of a unit price," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    2. Fecher, André & Robbert, Thomas & Roth, Stefan, 2020. "Per piece or per kilogram? Default-unit effects in retailing," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    3. Jun Yao & Harmen Oppewal & Di Wang, 2020. "Cheaper and smaller or more expensive and larger: how consumers respond to unit price increase tactics that simultaneously change product price and package size," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 1075-1094, November.
    4. Yao, Jun & Oppewal, Harmen, 2016. "Unit Pricing Increases Price Sensitivity Even When Products are of Identical Size," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 109-121.
    5. Northey, Gavin & Chan, Eugene Y., 2020. "Political conservatism and preference for (a)symmetric brand logos," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 149-159.
    6. Sohn, Stefanie, 2017. "Consumer processing of mobile online stores: Sources and effects of processing fluency," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 137-147.
    7. Fecher, André & Robbert, Thomas & Roth, Stefan, 2019. "Same price, different perception: Measurement-unit effects on price-level perceptions and purchase intentions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 129-142.
    8. Dörnyei, Krisztina Rita & Lunardo, Renaud, 2021. "When limited edition packages backfire: The role of emotional value, typicality and need for uniqueness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 233-243.
    9. Mortimer, Gary & Weeks, Clinton S., 2019. "How unit price awareness and usage encourages grocery brand switching and expenditure," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 346-356.
    10. Qin, Chang-Xiong & Liu, Zhao, 2022. "Reference price effect of partially similar online products in the consideration stage," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 70-81.
    11. Müller, Holger & Benjamin Kroll, Eike & Vogt, Bodo, 2010. "“Fact or artifact? Empirical evidence on the robustness of compromise effects in binding and non-binding choice contextsâ€," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 441-448.
    12. S. Iglesias-Parro & A. Ortega & E. De la Fuente & I. Martín, 2001. "Context Variables as Cognitive Effort Modulators in Decision Making Using an Alternative-Based Processing Strategy," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 311-323, August.
    13. Bharadwaj, Neeraj & Naylor, Rebecca Walker & ter Hofstede, Frenkel, 2009. "Consumer response to and choice of customized versus standardized systems," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 216-227.
    14. Hannu Kuusela & Mark T. Spence & Pallab Paul, 2017. "How objective and subjective knowledge affect insurance choices," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(4), pages 161-172, December.
    15. Kim, Jungkeun & Kim, Jae-Eun & Marshall, Roger, 2014. "Search for the underlying mechanism of framing effects in multi-alternative and multi-attribute decision situations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 378-385.
    16. Alan L. Montgomery & Kartik Hosanagar & Ramayya Krishnan & Karen B. Clay, 2004. "Designing a Better Shopbot," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 189-206, February.
    17. Kahn, Barbara E., 2017. "Using Visual Design to Improve Customer Perceptions of Online Assortments," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 29-42.
    18. Qin, Fei & Ma, Meilin, 2022. "Unit Pricing Regulation and Non-Price Responses of Retailers: Evidence from the U.S. Yogurt Market," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322243, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W. & Bettman, James R., 2000. "Coping with Unfavorable Attribute Values in Choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 274-299, March.
    20. 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.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jcopol:v:43:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10603-020-09456-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.