IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v51y2025i6p1167-1185..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Visual Complexity = Higher Production Cost Lay Belief

Author

Listed:
  • Lauren Min
  • Peggy J Liu
  • Cary L Anderson

Abstract

Brands and retailers often offer different aesthetic versions of the same base product, which vary from visually simple to visually complex. How should managers price these different aesthetic versions of the same base product? This research provides insights for such decisions through uncovering a novel consumer lay belief about the relationship between visual complexity and production costs. Consumers associate simple (vs. complex) visual aesthetics with lower production costs when evaluating different aesthetic versions of a product. This lay belief occurs in joint evaluation mode but is mitigated in separate evaluation mode. An important downstream implication of this lay belief is that consumers’ willingness to pay is lower for visually simple (vs. complex) versions. This gap in willingness to pay occurs even when consumers like both product versions or aesthetics equally, and it is only eliminated when consumers like the visually simple version substantially more than the complex version. Finally, reducing the diagnosticity of the lay belief by disclosing information that the two versions took similar amounts of production time and effort reduces the gap in willingness to pay between visually simple (vs. complex) versions.

Suggested Citation

  • Lauren Min & Peggy J Liu & Cary L Anderson, 2025. "The Visual Complexity = Higher Production Cost Lay Belief," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 51(6), pages 1167-1185.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:51:y:2025:i:6:p:1167-1185.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jcr/ucae044
    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.

    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:51:y:2025:i:6:p:1167-1185.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.