IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Consideration-set heuristics

  • Hauser, John R.
Registered author(s):

    Consumers often choose products by first forming a consideration set and then choosing from among considered products. When there are many products to screen (or many features to evaluate), it is rational for consumers to use consider-then-choose decision processes and to do so with heuristic decision rules. Managerial decisions (product development, marketing communications, etc.) depend upon the ability to identify and react to consumers' heuristic consideration-set rules. We provide managerial examples and review the state-of-the-art in the theory and measurement of consumers' heuristic consideration-set rules. Advances in greedoid methods, Bayesian inference, machine-learning, incentive alignment, measurement formats, and unstructured direct elicitation make it feasible and cost-effective to understand, quantify, and simulate “what-if” scenarios for a variety of heuristics. These methods now apply to a broad set of managerial problems including applications in complex product categories with large numbers of product features and feature-levels.

    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.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296314000903
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Business Research.

    Volume (Year): 67 (2014)
    Issue (Month): 8 ()
    Pages: 1688-1699

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:67:y:2014:i:8:p:1688-1699
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Lohse, Gerald L. & Johnson, Eric J., 1996. "A Comparison of Two Process Tracing Methods for Choice Tasks," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 28-43, October.
    2. Min Ding & Young-Hoon Park & Eric T. Bradlow, 2009. "Barter Markets for Conjoint Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(6), pages 1003-1017, June.
    3. Moore, William L. & Semenik, Richard J., 1988. "Measuring preferences with hybrid conjoint analysis: The impact of a different number of attributes in the master design," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 261-274, May.
    4. Vroomen, B.L.K. & Franses, Ph.H.B.F. & van Nierop, J.E.M., 2001. "Modeling Consideration Sets and Brand Choice Using Artificial Neural Networks," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2001-10-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    5. Toubia, Olivier & Simester, Duncan & Hauser, John & Dahan, Ely, 2003. "Fast Polyhedral Adaptive Conjoint Estimation," Working papers 4279-02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    6. Daria Dzyabura & John R. Hauser, 2011. "Active Machine Learning for Consideration Heuristics," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 801-819, September.
    7. Jianan Wu & Arvind Rangaswamy, 2003. "A Fuzzy Set Model of Search and Consideration with an Application to an Online Market," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 411-434, March.
    8. Dennis H. Gensch, 1987. "A Two-Stage Disaggregate Attribute Choice Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 223-239.
    9. George J. Stigler, 1961. "The Economics of Information," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69, pages 213.
    10. Amos Tversky & Itamar Simonson, 1993. "Context-Dependent Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(10), pages 1179-1189, October.
    11. Rajeev Kohli & Kamel Jedidi, 2007. "Representation and Inference of Lexicographic Preference Models and Their Variants," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 380-399, 05-06.
    12. Shugan, Steven M, 1980. " The Cost of Thinking," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(2), pages 99-111, Se.
    13. Peter C. Fishburn, 1974. "Exceptional Paper--Lexicographic Orders, Utilities and Decision Rules: A Survey," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(11), pages 1442-1471, July.
    14. Lynch, John G, Jr & Srull, Thomas K, 1982. " Memory and Attentional Factors in Consumer Choice: Concepts and Research Methods," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(1), pages 18-37, June.
    15. John R. Hauser & Kenneth J. Wisniewski, 1982. "Dynamic Analysis of Consumer Response to Marketing Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 455-486, May.
    16. 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.
    17. Robin M. Hogarth & Natalia Karelaia, 2005. "Simple Models for Multiattribute Choice with Many Alternatives: When It Does and Does Not Pay to Face Trade-offs with Binary Attributes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(12), pages 1860-1872, December.
    18. Nedungadi, Prakash, 1990. " Recall and Consumer Consideration Sets: Influencing Choice without Altering Brand Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(3), pages 263-76, December.
    19. Gensch, Dennis H. & Soofi, Ehsan S., 1995. "An information-theoretic two-stage, two-decision rule, choice model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 271-280, March.
    20. Arndt Br�der & Ben Newell, 2008. "Challenging some common beliefs: Empirical work within the adaptive toolbox metaphor," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 3, pages 205-214, March.
    21. Nitin Mehta & Surendra Rajiv & Kannan Srinivasan, 2003. "Price Uncertainty and Consumer Search: A Structural Model of Consideration Set Formation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 58-84, June.
    22. Timothy J. Gilbride & Greg M. Allenby, 2006. "Estimating Heterogeneous EBA and Economic Screening Rule Choice Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 494-509, September.
    23. Theodoros Evgeniou & Constantinos Boussios & Giorgos Zacharia, 2005. "Generalized Robust Conjoint Estimation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 415-429, May.
    24. Ganzach, Yoav & Czaczkes, Benjamin, 1995. "On Detecting Nonlinear Noncompensatory Judgment Strategies: Comparison of Alternative Regression Models," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 168-176, February.
    25. Anja Dieckmann & Katrin Dippold & Holger Dietrich, 2009. "Compensatory versus noncompensatory models for predicting consumer preferences," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 4(3), pages 200-213, April.
    26. Nils Reisen & Ulrich Hoffrage & Fred W. Mast, 2008. "Identifying decision strategies in a consumer choice situation," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 3(8), pages 641-658, December.
    27. Janiszewski, Chris, 1993. " Preattentive Mere Exposure Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(3), pages 376-92, December.
    28. Robin Hogarth & Natalia Karelaia, 2004. "Simple models for multi-attribute choice with many alternatives: When it does and does not pay to face tradeoffs with binary attributes," Economics Working Papers 739, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Apr 2005.
    29. Eric J. Johnson & John W. Payne, 1985. "Effort and Accuracy in Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 395-414, April.
    30. Chu, P. C. & Spires, Eric E., 2003. "Perceptions of accuracy and effort of decision strategies," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 203-214, July.
    31. Swait, Joffre & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 1987. "Incorporating random constraints in discrete models of choice set generation," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 91-102, April.
    32. Peter E. Rossi & Greg M. Allenby, 2003. "Bayesian Statistics and Marketing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 304-328, July.
    33. Punj, Girish N & Staelin, Richard, 1983. " A Model of Consumer Information Search Behavior for New Automobiles," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(4), pages 366-80, March.
    34. Peter J. Lenk & Wayne S. DeSarbo & Paul E. Green & Martin R. Young, 1996. "Hierarchical Bayes Conjoint Analysis: Recovery of Partworth Heterogeneity from Reduced Experimental Designs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 173-191.
    35. Nakamura, Yutaka, 2002. "Lexicographic quasilinear utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 157-178, May.
    36. Michael Yee & Ely Dahan & John R. Hauser & James Orlin, 2007. "Greedoid-Based Noncompensatory Inference," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 532-549, 07-08.
    37. Olivier Toubia & John Hauser & Rosanna Garcia, 2007. "Probabilistic Polyhedral Methods for Adaptive Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis: Theory and Application," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 596-610, 09-10.
    38. Hauser, John R & Wernerfelt, Birger, 1990. " An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(4), pages 393-408, March.
    39. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. " Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    40. Bettman, James R & Park, C Whan, 1980. " Effects of Prior Knowledge and Experience and Phase of the Choice Process on Consumer Decision Processes: A Protocol Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(3), pages 234-48, December.
    41. Wayne DeSarbo & Donald Lehmann & Gregory Carpenter & Indrajit Sinha, 1996. "A stochastic multidimensional unfolding approach for representing phased decision outcomes," Psychometrika, Springer, vol. 61(3), pages 485-508, September.
    42. John Liechty & Min Ding & Rajdeep Grewal, 2005. "Incentive-aligned conjoint analysis," Framed Field Experiments 00139, The Field Experiments Website.
    43. Laura Martignon & Ulrich Hoffrage, 2002. "Fast, frugal, and fit: Simple heuristics for paired comparison," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 29-71, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:67:y:2014:i:8:p:1688-1699. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.