IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joamsc/v52y2024i2d10.1007_s11747-023-00933-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How product complexity affects consumer adoption of new products: The role of feature heterogeneity and interrelatedness

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Fürst

    (Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg
    University of Eastern Finland (UEF))

  • Nina Pecornik

    (Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg)

  • Wayne D. Hoyer

    (University of Texas at Austin)

Abstract

Recent technological advancements allow companies to incorporate increasingly heterogeneous and interrelated features into their products, which heightens the products’ complexity. In four experimental studies conducted with two product categories, this article reveals similarities and differences in terms of how the heterogeneity and interrelatedness of product features influence consumer attitudes (i.e., expected product usability and capability) and, in turn, purchase intentions. Moreover, it shows that both neglected dimensions of product complexity affect the corresponding influence of the number of product features but do so in considerably different ways. The findings suggest that companies can foster consumer adoption by deemphasizing a product’s feature heterogeneity, thereby avoiding low expected product usability, and by emphasizing its feature interrelatedness, thereby promoting high expected product capability. This article provides insights into how companies can manage the complexity of products during both product design (i.e., before market launch) and product advertising and selling (i.e., after market launch).

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Fürst & Nina Pecornik & Wayne D. Hoyer, 2024. "How product complexity affects consumer adoption of new products: The role of feature heterogeneity and interrelatedness," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 329-348, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:joamsc:v:52:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s11747-023-00933-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11747-023-00933-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11747-023-00933-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11747-023-00933-7?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. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2004. "Modularity and Innovation in Complex Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 159-173, February.
    2. Kannan, P.K. & Li, Hongshuang “Alice”, 2017. "Digital marketing: A framework, review and research agenda," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 22-45.
    3. Jenni Sipilä & Sascha Alavi & Laura Marie Edinger-Schons & Sabrina Dörfer & Christian Schmitz, 2021. "Corporate social responsibility in luxury contexts: potential pitfalls and how to overcome them," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 280-303, March.
    4. Shugan, Steven M, 1980. "The Cost of Thinking," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 7(2), pages 99-111, Se.
    5. Silvia Bellezza & Francesca Gino & Anat Keinan, 2014. "The Red Sneakers Effect: Inferring Status and Competence from Signals of Nonconformity," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(1), pages 35-54.
    6. Donna L Hoffman & Thomas P Novak & Eileen FischerEditor & Robert KozinetsAssociate Editor, 2018. "Consumer and Object Experience in the Internet of Things: An Assemblage Theory Approach," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(6), pages 1178-1204.
    7. Luis Hernan Contreras Pinochet & Evandro Luiz Lopes & Caio Henrique Fernandes Srulzon & Luciana Massaro Onusic, 2018. "The influence of the attributes of “Internet of Things” products on functional and emotional experiences of purchase intention," Innovation & Management Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 15(3), pages 303-320, August.
    8. Scott, John, 1988. "Social Network Analysis and Intercorporate Relations," Hitotsubashi Journal of commerce and management, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 23(1), pages 53-68, December.
    9. Marco Bertini & Elie Ofek & Dan Ariely, 2009. "The Impact of Add-On Features on Consumer Product Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(1), pages 17-28, June.
    10. Eric J. Johnson & John W. Payne, 1985. "Effort and Accuracy in Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 395-414, April.
    11. Sawyer, Alan G & Lynch, John G, Jr & Brinberg, David L, 1995. "A Bayesian Analysis of the Information Value of Manipulation and Confounding Checks in Theory Tests," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(4), pages 581-595, March.
    12. Mukherjee, Ashesh & Hoyer, Wayne D, 2001. "The Effect of Novel Attributes on Product Evaluation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(3), pages 462-472, December.
    13. Robert J. Meyer & Shenghui Zhao & Jin K. Han, 2008. "Biases in Valuation vs. Usage of Innovative Product Features," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(6), pages 1083-1096, 11-12.
    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. Sören Köcher & Hartmut H. Holzmüller, 2014. "Zu viel des Guten? Eine Analyse der Wirkung von Verbraucherschutzinformation," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 66(4), pages 306-343, June.
    2. Boukis, Achilleas & Christodoulides, George & Semaan, Rania W. & Stathopoulou, Anastasia, 2024. "What drives consumers towards shared luxury services? A comparison of sequential versus simultaneous sharing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    3. Gebauer, Judith & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2013. "Joining Supply and Demand Conditions of IT Enabled Change: Toward an Economic Theory of Inter-firm Modulation," Working Papers 13-0100, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    4. Song Lin & Juanjuan Zhang & John R. Hauser, 2015. "Learning from Experience, Simply," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 1-19, January.
    5. Samir Mamadehussene & Francesco Sguera, 2023. "On the Reliability of the BDM Mechanism," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(2), pages 1166-1179, February.
    6. Hauser, John R., 2014. "Consideration-set heuristics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1688-1699.
    7. Henkens, Bieke & Verleye, Katrien & Larivière, Bart, 2021. "The smarter, the better?! Customer well-being, engagement, and perceptions in smart service systems," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 425-447.
    8. Lior Fink & Daniele Papismedov, 2023. "On the Same Page? What Users Benefit from a Desktop View on Mobile Devices," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 423-441, June.
    9. Wedel, Michel & Bigné, Enrique & Zhang, Jie, 2020. "Virtual and augmented reality: Advancing research in consumer marketing," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 443-465.
    10. Yan, Huan & Chang, En-Chung & Chou, Ting-Jui & Tang, Xiaofei, 2015. "The over-categorization effect: How the number of categorizations influences shoppers' perceptions of variety and satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 631-638.
    11. Park, Jinkyun, 2014. "Investigating the TACOM measure as a general tool for quantifying the complexity of procedure guided tasks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 66-75.
    12. Aloysius, John A. & Davis, Fred D. & Wilson, Darryl D. & Ross Taylor, A. & Kottemann, Jeffrey E., 2006. "User acceptance of multi-criteria decision support systems: The impact of preference elicitation techniques," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 273-285, February.
    13. Kartik Hosanagar, 2011. "Usercentric Operational Decision Making in Distributed Information Retrieval," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 739-755, December.
    14. S. Iglesias-Parro & A. Ortega & E. De la Fuente & I. Martín, 2001. "Context Variables as Cognitive Effort Modulators in Decision Making Using an Alternative-Based Processing Strategy," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 311-323, August.
    15. Donoho, Casey L. & Swenson, Michael J., 1996. "Top-down versus bottom-up sales tactics effects on the presentation of a product line," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 51-61, September.
    16. Mencarelli, Rémi & Rivière, Arnaud & Lombart, Cindy, 2021. "Do myriad e-channels always create value for customers? A dynamic analysis of the perceived value of a digital information product during the usage phase," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    17. Rust, Roland T., 2020. "The future of marketing," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 15-26.
    18. Adam Sanjurjo, 2015. "Search, Memory, and Choice Error: An Experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, June.
    19. Park, Jinkyun & Jung, Wondea, 2007. "A study on the development of a task complexity measure for emergency operating procedures of nuclear power plants," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 92(8), pages 1102-1116.
    20. 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.

    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:spr:joamsc:v:52:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s11747-023-00933-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.