IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v49y2022i4p561-573..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Off by 100% Bias: The Effects of Percentage Changes Greater than 100% on Magnitude Judgments and Consumer Choice
[Numerosity and Consumer Behavior]

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew Fisher
  • Milica Mormann

Abstract

Percentage changes greater than 100% are frequently used in consumer contexts; for example, a cordless vacuum cleaner may boast “125% longer runtime” compared to competitors. Via six studies (n = 2,395) and 11 supplementary studies (n = 3,249), the current research shows that consumers systematically underestimate the magnitude of percentage changes greater than 100%. Specifically, many consumers apply the relative size usage (e.g., “125% of,” equivalent to 25% more) instead of the appropriate relative change (e.g., “125% more,” equivalent to 100% more + 25% more), which leads them to be off by exactly 100% in their magnitude estimates. The rate of bias decreases when the difference between these two usages is emphasized. The Off by 100% bias occurs across a variety of consumer contexts, influencing behavioral intentions and incentive-compatible choice. The findings make theoretical contributions to research on processing of percentages, probability versus frequency formats, and magnitude judgments. Finally, understanding how different presentation formats of the same information can lead to different magnitude judgments enables marketers and policymakers to ensure more effective communication.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew Fisher & Milica Mormann, 2022. "The Off by 100% Bias: The Effects of Percentage Changes Greater than 100% on Magnitude Judgments and Consumer Choice [Numerosity and Consumer Behavior]," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 49(4), pages 561-573.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:49:y:2022:i:4:p:561-573.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jcr/ucac006
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Daniella Kupor & Kristin Laurin & Chris Janiszewski & J Jeffrey Inman, 2020. "Probable Cause: The Influence of Prior Probabilities on Forecasts and Perceptions of Magnitude [Perceived Intent Motivates People to Magnify Observed Harms]," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 46(5), pages 833-852.
    2. Manoj Thomas & Ellie J Kyung & Gita V Johar & Rajesh Bagchi, 2019. "Slider Scale or Text Box: How Response Format Shapes Responses," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 45(6), pages 1274-1293.
    3. Y. Charles Zhang & Norbert Schwarz, 2012. "How and Why 1 Year Differs from 365 Days: A Conversational Logic Analysis of Inferences from the Granularity of Quantitative Expressions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(2), pages 248-259.
    4. Maarten C.J. van Rooij & Annamaria Lusardi & Rob J.M. Alessie, 2012. "Financial Literacy, Retirement Planning and Household Wealth," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 122(560), pages 449-478, May.
    5. Rajesh Bagchi & Xingbo Li, 2011. "Illusionary Progress in Loyalty Programs: Magnitudes, Reward Distances, and Step-Size Ambiguity," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(5), pages 888-901.
    6. Annamaria Lusardi & Olivia Mitchell, 2006. "Financial Literacy and Retirement Preparedness: Evidence and Implications for Financial Education Programs," Working Papers wp144, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
    7. Keith S. Coulter & Robin A. Coulter, 2010. "Small Sounds, Big Deals: Phonetic Symbolism Effects in Pricing," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(2), pages 315-328, August.
    8. Mario Pandelaere & Barbara Briers & Christophe Lembregts, 2011. "How to Make a 29% Increase Look Bigger: The Unit Effect in Option Comparisons," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 38(2), pages 308-322.
    9. Haipeng (Allan) Chen & Akshay R. Rao, 2007. "When Two Plus Two Is Not Equal to Four: Errors in Processing Multiple Percentage Changes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(3), pages 327-340, June.
    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. Park, Yookyung & Yi, Youjae, 2023. "Morning deals make me feel smart: Consumer evaluations of online sales promotions differ by time of day," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(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. Santana, Shelle & Thomas, Manoj & Morwitz, Vicki G., 2020. "The Role of Numbers in the Customer Journey," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 138-154.
    2. Ho, Edward & Kowatsch, Tobias & Ilic, Alexander, 2014. "The Sales Velocity Effect on Retailing," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 237-256.
    3. 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).
    4. C. Lembregts & M. Pandelaere, 2012. "Are All Units Created Equal?: The Effect of Default Units on Product Evaluations," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 12/812, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    5. 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.
    6. Yoshihiko Kadoya & Mostafa Saidur Rahim Khan, 2018. "Can financial literacy reduce anxiety about life in old age?," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(12), pages 1533-1550, December.
    7. Florian Deuflhard & Dimitris Georgarakos & Roman Inderst, 2019. "Financial Literacy and Savings Account Returns," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 131-164.
    8. Gerhard, Patrick & Hoffmann, Arvid O.I. & Post, Thomas, 2017. "Past performance framing and investors’ belief updating: Is seeing long-term returns always associated with smaller belief updates?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 38-51.
    9. M. Fort & F. Manaresi & S. Trucchi, 2012. "Banks Information Policies, Financial Literacy and Household Wealth," Working Papers wp852, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    10. Kadoya, Yoshihiko & Khan, Mostafa Saidur Rahim, 2020. "What determines financial literacy in Japan?," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(3), pages 353-371, July.
    11. Choi, Pilsik & Coulter, Keith S., 2012. "It's Not All Relative: The Effects of Mental and Physical Positioning of Comparative Prices on Absolute versus Relative Discount Assessment," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 88(4), pages 512-527.
    12. George Apostolakis & Gert Dijk, 2018. "Retirement concerns and planning of cooperative members: a study in the Dutch healthcare sector," Business Economics, Palgrave Macmillan;National Association for Business Economics, vol. 53(4), pages 209-224, October.
    13. Shu, Lei, 2017. "Essays on retirement income provision," Other publications TiSEM e5dd8c4e-03bf-4ec9-9651-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Bechly, Paul, 2018. "An Examination of Demographic Differences in Obtaining Investment and Financial Planning Information," EconStor Theses, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, number 233014, October.
    15. Sundar, B. & Virmani, Vineet, 2013. "Numeracy and Financial Literacy of Forest Dependent Communities Evidence from Andhra Pradesh," IIMA Working Papers WP2013-09-02, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    16. Jiang, Jinglin & Liao, Li & Wang, Zhengwei & Xiang, Hongyu, 2020. "Financial literacy and retail investors' financial welfare: Evidence from mutual fund investment outcomes in China," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    17. Zaheer Ahmed & Umara Noreen & Suresh A.L. Ramakrishnan & Dewi Fariha Binti Abdullah, 2021. "What explains the investment decision-making behaviour? The role of financial literacy and financial risk tolerance," Afro-Asian Journal of Finance and Accounting, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19.
    18. Heenkenda, Shirantha, 2016. "The Determinants of Dropouts from Voluntary Pension Scheme: Evidence from Sri Lanka," MPRA Paper 72481, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Lührmann, Melanie & Serra-Garcia, Marta & Winter, Joachim, 2015. "Teaching teenagers in finance: Does it work?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 160-174.
    20. Steven Malliaris & Daniel A. Rettl & Ruchi Singh, 2022. "Is competition a cure for confusion? Evidence from the residential mortgage market," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 50(1), pages 206-246, March.

    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:oup:jconrs:v:49:y:2022:i:4:p:561-573.. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    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.