Upload
lydia-beasley
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
TM 5-TM 5-11Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Consumer Choice
The consideration set Stimulus-based versus memory-based choice Attitude-based versus attribute-based choice Choice Heuristics Determinants of choice strategy
TM 5-TM 5-22Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
The Consideration Set...Consumers rarely consider more than nine brands before choosing!
Brands available in the marketplace Consideration Set Choice (>20 brands) (7 + 2 brands) (1 brand)
TM 5-TM 5-33Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
TM 5-TM 5-44Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
The Consideration Set
Part-List Cuing Attraction Effect
–Williams-Sonoma Home Bread Bakery $275Later offered a more expensive model and sales of the original model almost doubled–Cross Pen or $6 - 36% chose the Cross PenCross Pen or decoy pen or $6 - 46 % chose the Cross Pen
Tradeoff Contrast Effect–$1,000 PC with 640K or $1,200 PC with 960K(Tradeoff of $200 for an additional 320K)
Compromise Effect
TM 5-TM 5-55Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Part-List Cuing
.64 .59 .60 .47 .56 .43
Proportion of Brands Recalled
0 5 15
Females
Males
1
0
TM 5-TM 5-66Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Exp. 1 Homogeneous Brands
0 5 15M .59 .47 .43F .64 .60 .56
Exp. 2 Heterogeneous Brands
0 5 15M .59 .47 .43F .64 .60 .56
Exp. 3 Prop. of subjects Prop. of subjectsrecalling at least 1 recalling at least 1item from nasal item from multisymptomspray category formula category
no cue mutisymp. cue no cue spray cue 1.00 .78 .78 .33
TM 5-TM 5-77Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Part-List Cuing Effect - Why?
1. P(retrieving itemi) = Strength of Assoc. Between i and Category Strength of Assoc. Between Each Item
& Category
2. Sampling with Replacement
Sampling an item increases strength of association between that item and the category
TM 5-TM 5-88Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
How Choices and Comparisons Are Made
Stimulus-Based Choice Memory-Based Choice Mixed Choice
(Alba et. al. (1993) - Consumers prefer the stimulus brand overa memory brand, even when the memory brand is better. However, memory brand is preferred more over time when positive features are made more memorable by frequency (many positives) or by puffery .)
Attitude-Based vs. Attribute-Based Choice - Accessibility-Diagnosticity Model
TM 5-TM 5-99Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
TM 5-TM 5-1010Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Sanyo attribute recall4.73 2.08 3.92 4.97 3.57
Gro
up
1:
Lo
wIn
terf
ere
nc
e p
lus
ch
oic
e t
as
k
Gro
up
2:
Hig
hIn
terf
ere
nc
e p
lus
c
ho
ice
ta
sk
Gro
up
3:
Lo
wIn
terf
ere
nc
e p
lus
re
ca
ll a
ttri
bu
tes
Gro
up
4:
Lo
wIn
terf
ere
nc
e p
lus
re
ca
ll e
va
lua
tio
n
Gro
up
5:
Lo
wC
on
tro
l G
rou
p
TM 5-TM 5-1111Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Sanyo evaluation recall1.58 1.19 1.81 1.25 1.11
Gro
up
1:
Lo
wIn
terf
ere
nc
e p
lus
ch
oic
e t
as
k
Gro
up
2:
Hig
hIn
terf
ere
nc
e p
lus
c
ho
ice
ta
sk
Gro
up
3:
Lo
wIn
terf
ere
nc
e p
lus
re
ca
ll a
ttri
bu
tes
Gro
up
4:
Lo
wIn
terf
ere
nc
e p
lus
re
ca
ll e
va
lua
tio
n
Gro
up
5:
Lo
wC
on
tro
l G
rou
p
TM 5-TM 5-1212Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
TM 5-TM 5-1313Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
TM 5-TM 5-1414Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Evaluation recall4.03 3.28 4.12 4.12 3.48 3.40
Choice Recall Control
Consistent Inconsistent
TM 5-TM 5-1515Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Choice Heuristics
Attitude-Based Strategies–The Theory of Reasoned Action–Information Integration Theory–Attitude Heuristic–Frequency of Good and Bad Features Heuristic
TM 5-TM 5-1616Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Frequency of good/bad features is one way to choose...
TM 5-TM 5-1717Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Choice Heuristics
Attribute-Based Strategies–Between Alternative Processing
Lexicographic HeuristicLexicographic Semiorder Heuristic Mr. Coffee Accel PR12A $27 90 Mr. Coffee Accel PR16 $25 85 Mr Coffee BL110 $22 80Elimination-By-Aspects HeuristicAdditive-Difference HeuristicMajority of Confirming Dimensions Heuristic
–Within Alternative ProcessingConjunctive HeuristicDisjunctive Heuristic
–Phased Strategies
TM 5-TM 5-1818Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
The lexiographic heuristic involves choosing the best brand on the basis of its most important attribute.
TM 5-TM 5-1919Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Determinants of Choice Strategy
Processing Goals (Involvement, Accountability, Perceived Risk)
Processing Load- Decision Difficulty (# of brands, # of attributes, time pressure)
Context- Brand-based vs. Attribute-based format- Framing Effect (75% lean/ 25% fat ground beef)
- Unwanted Premium Effect (Pillsbury Brownie Cake Mix or Pillsbury Brownie Cake Mix Plus)(Collector’s Plate Offer - reduced price with POF)
TM 5-TM 5-2020Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Copyright © 1999 Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Processing goals are influenced by importance of a decision, accountability, and perceived risk...