IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v49y2022i4p574-594..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experiential and Analytical Price Evaluations: How Experiential Product Description Affects Prices
[The Utility of an Information Processing Approach for Behavioral Price Research]

Author

Listed:
  • Arnaud Monnier
  • Manoj Thomas

Abstract

Quantity can be described using perceptual units (e.g., bags, pieces) or standardized units (e.g., ounces, grams). Merely making perceptual units more salient in quantity description can increase perceived economic value. Even when the objective information and numerosity are kept constant, merely presenting the perceptual unit first (e.g., Lay’s Chips 14 snack bags, 14 oz. of chips in snack bags of 1 oz. each) increases willingness to pay compared to presenting the standardized unit first (e.g., Lay’s Chips 14 oz., 14 oz. of chips in snack bags of 1 oz. each). This occurs because perceptual units activate more experiential evaluations whereas standardized units activate more analytical evaluations. An archival study shows that retailers charge higher unit prices for products when perceptual units are salient in quantity description. Six preregistered experiments show that even when both units are available, merely increasing the attentional salience of perceptual units increases willingness to pay. The demonstration that the mere salience of experiential information can alter subjective value offers new insights into the psychology of market prices.

Suggested Citation

  • Arnaud Monnier & Manoj Thomas, 2022. "Experiential and Analytical Price Evaluations: How Experiential Product Description Affects Prices [The Utility of an Information Processing Approach for Behavioral Price Research]," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 49(4), pages 574-594.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:49:y:2022:i:4:p:574-594.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jcr/ucac010
    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. Shiv, Baba & Huber, Joel, 2000. "The Impact of Anticipating Satisfaction on Consumer Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(2), pages 202-216, September.
    2. McGill, Ann L & Anand, Punam, 1989. "The Effect of Vivid Attributes on the Evaluation of Alternatives: The Role of Differential Attention and Cognitive Elaboration," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 188-196, September.
    3. Jingjing Ma & Neal J. Roese, 2013. "The Countability Effect: Comparative versus Experiential Reactions to Reward Distributions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(6), pages 1219-1233.
    4. Tatiana Sokolova & Aradhna Krishna, 2016. "Take It or Leave It: How Choosing versus Rejecting Alternatives Affects Information Processing," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 43(4), pages 614-635.
    5. Manoj Thomas, 2013. "Commentary on behavioral price research: the role of subjective experiences in price cognition," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(3), pages 141-145, September.
    6. William D. Grampp, 2000. "What Did Smith Mean by the Invisible Hand?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(3), pages 441-465, June.
    7. Ashwani Monga & Rajesh Bagchi, 2012. "Years, Months, and Days versus 1, 12, and 365: The Influence of Units versus Numbers," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(1), pages 185-198.
    8. M. Pandelaere & B. Briers, 2011. "How to Make a 29% Increase Look Bigger: Numerosity Effects in Option Comparisons," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 11/712, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    9. Kurt A. Carlson & Margaret G. Meloy & J. Edward Russo, 2006. "Leader-Driven Primacy: Using Attribute Order to Affect Consumer Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 32(4), pages 513-518, March.
    10. Benjamin Bushong & Lindsay M. King & Colin F. Camerer & Antonio Rangel, 2010. "Pavlovian Processes in Consumer Choice: The Physical Presence of a Good Increases Willingness-to-Pay," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1556-1571, September.
    11. Rashmi Adaval, 2013. "The utility of an information processing approach for behavioral price research," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(3), pages 130-134, September.
    12. 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.
    13. MacInnis, Deborah J & Price, Linda L, 1987. "The Role of Imagery in Information Processing: Review and Extensions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 13(4), pages 473-491, March.
    14. Adaval, Rashmi & Monroe, Kent B, 2002. "Automatic Construction and Use of Contextual Information for Product and Price Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(4), pages 572-588, March.
    15. Manoj Thomas & Vicki Morwitz, 2005. "Penny Wise and Pound Foolish: The Left-Digit Effect in Price Cognition," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 32(1), pages 54-64, June.
    16. Ratneshwar, Srinivasan & Shocker, Allan D & Stewart, David W, 1987. "Toward Understanding the Attraction Effect: The Implications of Product Stimulus Meaningfulness and Familiarity," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 13(4), pages 520-533, March.
    17. Christophe Lembregts & Mario Pandelaere, 2013. "Are All Units Created Equal? The Effect of Default Units on Product Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(6), pages 1275-1289.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:6:p:972-988 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Mario Herberz & Tobias Brosch & Ulf J. J. Hahnel, 2020. "Kilo what? Default units increase value sensitivity in joint evaluations of energy efficiency," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(6), pages 972-988, November.
    4. Lembregts, Christophe & Pandelaere, Mario, 2014. ""A 20% income increase for everyone?": The effect of relative increases in income on perceived income inequality," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 37-47.
    5. 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).
    6. 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).
    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. Tatiana Sokolova, 2023. "Days-of-the-Week Effect in Temporal Judgments," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 50(1), pages 167-189.
    9. Hsin-Hsien Liu & Hsuan-Yi Chou, 2022. "Attribute specification effect on hedonic and utilitarian options," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 47(2), pages 322-341, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Huang, Wen-Hsien & Cheng, Yi-Ching, 2015. "Threshold free shipping policies for internet shoppers," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 193-203.
    12. Cho, Yoon-Na & Taylor, Charles R., 2020. "The role of ambiguity and skepticism in the effectiveness of sustainability labeling," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 379-388.
    13. Ho, Edward & Kowatsch, Tobias & Ilic, Alexander, 2014. "The Sales Velocity Effect on Retailing," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 237-256.
    14. Hou, Chenxuan & Sarigöllü, Emine, 2022. "Is bigger better? How the scale effect influences green purchase intention: The case of washing machine," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    15. Johannes D. Hattula & Walter Herzog & Ravi Dhar, 2023. "The impact of touchscreen devices on consumers’ choice confidence and purchase likelihood," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 35-53, March.
    16. 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.
    17. Nagpal, Anish & Lei, Jing & Khare, Adwait, 2015. "To Choose or to Reject: The Effect of Decision Frame on Food Customization Decisions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 422-435.
    18. Jonathan W. Leland & Mark Schneider, 2016. "Salience, Framing, and Decisions under Risk, Uncertainty, and Time," Working Papers 16-08, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    19. Antonio J. Morales & Enrique Fatas, 2021. "Price competition and nominal illusion: experimental evidence and a behavioural model," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 607-632, December.
    20. Mukherjee, Sudipta & Pandelaere, Mario, 2023. "The influence of self-decided prices on expected quality," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    21. Oliver James & Gregg G. Van Ryzin, 2019. "Rates and the Judgment of Government Performance," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 2(2).

    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:574-594.. 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.