IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Influence of Product Variety on Brand Perception and Choice


  • Berger, Jonah

    (Stanford U)

  • Draganska, Michaela
  • Simonson, Itamar


We propose that the variety a brand offers can influence brand quality perceptions, and consequently, affect brand choice, even when the available option set is held constant. Specifically, brands that offer greater variety of compatible (i.e., focused and internally consistent) options are expected to be perceived as having greater commitment and expertise in the category, which, in turn, enhances their perceived quality and purchase likelihood. The results of six studies support this proposition and demonstrate that (a) brands offering increased compatible variety were perceived as having higher quality; (b) this effect was mediated by product variety's impact on perceived expertise-commitment; (c) the higher perceived quality led to a higher choice share of brands offering greater product variety, even amongst options identical options offered by multiple brands; and (d) product variety also impacted post-experience perceptions of taste.

Suggested Citation

  • Berger, Jonah & Draganska, Michaela & Simonson, Itamar, 2006. "The Influence of Product Variety on Brand Perception and Choice," Research Papers 1938, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecl:stabus:1938

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Schmalensee, Richard, 1978. "A Model of Advertising and Product Quality," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 86(3), pages 485-503, June.
    2. Kelvin Lancaster, 1990. "The Economics of Product Variety: A Survey," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 189-206.
    3. Alexander Chernev, 2005. "Feature Complementarity and Assortment in Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 748-759, March.
    4. Kahn, Barbara E & Wansink, Brian, 2004. " The Influence of Assortment Structure on Perceived Variety and Consumption Quantities," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 519-533, March.
    5. Dhar, Ravi, 1997. " Consumer Preference for a No-Choice Option," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(2), pages 215-231, September.
    6. John T. Gourville & Dilip Soman, 2005. "Overchoice and Assortment Type: When and Why Variety Backfires," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 382-395, July.
    7. Nelson, Philip, 1974. "Advertising as Information," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(4), pages 729-754, July/Aug..
    8. Levin, Irwin P & Gaeth, Gary J, 1988. " How Consumers Are Affected by the Framing of Attribute Information before and after Consuming the Product," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 374-378, December.
    9. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. " Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    10. Sharad Borle & Peter Boatwright & Joseph B. Kadane & Joseph C. Nunes & Shmueli Galit, 2005. "The Effect of Product Assortment Changes on Customer Retention," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 616-622, July.
    11. Sunder Kekre & Kannan Srinivasan, 1990. "Broader Product Line: A Necessity to Achieve Success?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(10), pages 1216-1232, October.
    12. Greenleaf, Eric A & Lehmann, Donald R, 1995. " Reasons for Substantial Delay in Consumer Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 186-199, September.
    13. Klein, Benjamin & Leffler, Keith B, 1981. "The Role of Market Forces in Assuring Contractual Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(4), pages 615-641, August.
    14. Michaela Draganska & Dipak C. Jain, 2005. "Product-Line Length as a Competitive Tool," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 1-28, March.
    15. Alexander Chernev, 2006. "Decision Focus and Consumer Choice among Assortments," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 50-59, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Barbara Kahn & Alexander Chernev & Ulf Böckenholt & Kate Bundorf & Michaela Draganska & Ryan Hamilton & Robert Meyer & Klaus Wertenbroch, 2014. "Consumer and managerial goals in assortment choice and design," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 293-303, September.
    2. Guodong (Gordon) Gao & Lorin M. Hitt, 2012. "Information Technology and Trademarks: Implications for Product Variety," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1211-1226, June.
    3. repec:oup:jconrs:v:43:y:2016:i:2:p:210-229. is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Jha, Ashish K. & Bose, Indranil & Ngai, Eric W.T., 2016. "Platform based innovation: The case of Bosch India," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(P2), pages 250-265.
    5. 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.
    6. Aaker, Jennifer & Vohs, Kathleen D. & Mogilner, Cassie, 2010. "Non-profits Are Seen as Warm and For-Profits as Competent: Firm Stereotypes Matter," Research Papers 2047, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    7. Um, Juneho & Lyons, Andrew & Lam, Hugo K.S. & Cheng, T.C.E. & Dominguez-Pery, Carine, 2017. "Product variety management and supply chain performance: A capability perspective on their relationships and competitiveness implications," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 15-26.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:ecl:stabus:1938. 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: (). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.