IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ijrema/v33y2016i4p961-965.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Less of this one? I'll take it: New insights on the influence of shelf-based scarcity

Author

Listed:
  • Robinson, Stacey G.
  • Brady, Michael K.
  • Lemon, Katherine N.
  • Giebelhausen, Michael

Abstract

Recently, Parker and Lehmann (2011) demonstrated shelf-based scarcity influences consumer preference. In addition to replicating their work across four studies, we extend their findings with evidence that shelf-based scarcity cues 1) impact consumer willingness-to-pay, 2) increase the likelihood of selecting an unfamiliar brand, and 3) influence actual product choice in a field study. Furthermore, we replicate the original study in a different research context that extends beyond packaged goods, with visible inventories that are only 25% different from one another, utilizing a different presentation format. Taken together, this research demonstrates that shelf-based scarcity is a robust heuristic that has far-reaching and stable effects on consumer purchase decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Robinson, Stacey G. & Brady, Michael K. & Lemon, Katherine N. & Giebelhausen, Michael, 2016. "Less of this one? I'll take it: New insights on the influence of shelf-based scarcity," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 961-965.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ijrema:v:33:y:2016:i:4:p:961-965
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.03.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167811616300520
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.03.005?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. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    2. Parker, Jeffrey R. & Lehmann, Donald R., 2011. "When Shelf-Based Scarcity Impacts Consumer Preferences," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 142-155.
    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. Antonio Usai & Daniele Porcheddu & Veronica Scuotto & Jean-Paul Susini, 2020. "Converting Shelf-Based Scarcity into Innovation by Adopting Customer-Focused Innovation Approach," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(1), pages 70-83, March.
    2. Henkel, Laura & Toporowski, Waldemar, 2021. "Hurry up! The effect of pop-up stores’ ephemerality on consumers’ intention to visit," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    3. Tu, Gengyang & Faure, Corinne & Schleich, Joachim & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte, 2021. "The heat is off! The role of technology attributes and individual attitudes in the diffusion of Smart thermostats – findings from a multi-country survey," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    4. Wansink, Brian, 2017. "Healthy Profits: An Interdisciplinary Retail Framework that Increases the Sales of Healthy Foods," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 65-78.
    5. Gupta, Shipra & Coskun, Merve, 2021. "The influence of human crowding and store messiness on consumer purchase intention– the role of contamination and scarcity perceptions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    6. Kirk, Colleen P. & Rifkin, Laura S., 2020. "I'll trade you diamonds for toilet paper: Consumer reacting, coping and adapting behaviors in the COVID-19 pandemic," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 124-131.
    7. Islam, Tahir & Pitafi, Abdul Hameed & Arya, Vikas & Wang, Ying & Akhtar, Naeem & Mubarik, Shujaat & Xiaobei, Liang, 2021. "Panic buying in the COVID-19 pandemic: A multi-country examination," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    8. Ashutosh Sarkar & Debadyuti Das & Arindam Debroy, 2024. "Panic Buying, Product Substitution and Channel-Shifting Behaviour During Pandemic," IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, , vol. 13(1), pages 25-43, January.

    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. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:2:p:136-149 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. John A. List, 2007. "On the Interpretation of Giving in Dictator Games," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(3), pages 482-493.
    3. Li, Hui & Xu, Yunjie & Huang, Lihua, 2021. "When less is more? The contingent effect of product supply limitation in the release of new electronic products," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    4. H. Henry Cao & Bing Han & David Hirshleifer & Harold H. Zhang, 2011. "Fear of the Unknown: Familiarity and Economic Decisions," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 15(1), pages 173-206.
    5. Xia, Lan & Kukar-Kinney, Monika, 2014. "For our valued customers only: Examining consumer responses to preferential treatment practices," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(11), pages 2368-2375.
    6. de Meza, David & Pathania, Vikram, 2021. "Is the Second-Cheapest Wine a Rip-Off? Economics vs. Psychology in Product-Line Pricing," Working Papers 321852, American Association of Wine Economists.
    7. Jonathan C. Pettibone, 2012. "Testing the effect of time pressure on asymmetric dominance and compromise decoys in choice," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(4), pages 513-523, July.
    8. Chorus, Caspar & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Sobhani, Anae & Szép, Teodóra, 2021. "Obfuscation maximization-based decision-making: Theory, methodology and first empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 28-44.
    9. Chorus, Caspar G., 2014. "Benefit of adding an alternative to one׳s choice set: A regret minimization perspective," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 49-59.
    10. Nicola Gennaioli & Alberto Martin & Stefano Rossi, 2014. "Sovereign Default, Domestic Banks, and Financial Institutions," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(2), pages 819-866, April.
    11. Ekström, Mathias, 2018. "The (un)compromise effect," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 10/2018, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics, revised 16 May 2018.
    12. Todd McElroy & David L. Dickinson & Irwin P. Levin, 2019. "Thinking About Decisions: An Integrative Approach of Person and Task Factors," Working Papers 19-04, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    13. Ivo Vlaev & Nick Chater & Neil Stewart, 2007. "Relativistic financial decisions: Context effects on retirement saving and investment risk preferences," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 2, pages 292-311, October.
    14. Chang, Shin-Shin & Chang, Chung-Chau & Liao, Yen-Yi, 2015. "A joint examination of effects of decision task type and construal level on the attraction effect," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 168-182.
    15. Pronobesh Banerjee & Tamara Masters, 2021. "When consumers do not compromise - An Eye Tracking Study!," Working papers 446, Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode.
    16. Gerasimou, Georgios, 2010. "Rational indecisive choice," MPRA Paper 25481, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Boissonnet, Niels & Ghersengorin, Alexis & Gleyze, Simon, 2020. "Revealed Deliberate Preference Changes," MPRA Paper 101756, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Nunnari, Salvatore & Zapal, Jan, 2017. "A Model of Focusing in Political Choice," CEPR Discussion Papers 12407, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Zhang, Tao & Zhang, David, 2007. "Agent-based simulation of consumer purchase decision-making and the decoy effect," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(8), pages 912-922, August.
    20. Kim, Hee Jin & Song, Hayeon, 2020. "Effort justification for fun activities?: The effect of location-based mobile coupons using games," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    21. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Salience and Consumer Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(5), pages 803-843.

    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:eee:ijrema:v:33:y:2016:i:4:p:961-965. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-journal-of-research-in-marketing/ .

    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.