When Two Plus Two Is Not Equal to Four: Errors in Processing Multiple Percentage Changes
Abstract
When evaluating the net impact of a series of percentage changes, we predict that consumers may employ a "whole number" computational strategy that yields a systematic error in their calculation. We report on three studies conducted to examine this issue. In the first study we identify the computational error and demonstrate its consequences. In a second study, we identify several theoretically driven boundary conditions for the observed phenomenon. Finally we demonstrate in a real-world retail setting that, consistent with our premise, sequential percentage discounts generate more purchasers, sales, revenue, and profit than the economically equivalent single percentage discount. (c) 2007 by JOURNAL OF CONSUMER RESEARCH, Inc..Download Info
If 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 Info
Article provided by University of Chicago Press in its journal Journal of Consumer Research.
Volume (Year): 34 (2007)
Issue (Month): 3 (06)
Pages: 327-340
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JCR/
Related research
Keywords:References
No references listed on IDEASYou can help add them by filling out this form.
Citations
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.Cited by:
- Annamaria Lusardi, 2012. "Numeracy, financial literacy, and financial decision-making," NBER Working Papers 17821, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Ludwig Ensthaler & Olga Nottmeyer & Georg Weizsäcker, 2012. "Hidden Skewness," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1238, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
Lists
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jconrs:v:34:y:2007:i:3:p:327-340For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division).
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.

