Liu, Yonglan (2016) The Effects of Measurement Unit Price. Masters thesis, Concordia University.
Preview |
Text (application/pdf)
3MBLiu_MSc_S2017.pdf - Accepted Version Available under License Spectrum Terms of Access. |
Abstract
Past research has found that judgement of quantitative information is subject to various biases. Among these biases are the numerosity effect and the unit salience effect, whereby people are sensitive to the numerical magnitude but rely on other information (i.e., unit of measurement) when that information is salient. We investigate these effects in the real-world context of retail pricing, and investigate the extent to which consumers rely on the numerical magnitude of the price (e.g., 3.99) under conditions when a familiar measurement unit (lb/kg) varies in salience. Findings of five studies supported our hypotheses, and revealed that participants perceived prices with small numerical magnitudes, corresponding to a smaller unit of measurement, as less expensive than equivalent prices with large numerical magnitudes and larger units of measurement (e.g., 3.99/lb vs. 8.8/kg). We also found an interaction effect between numerical magnitude and unit salience such that by increasing the salience of the measurement unit, the differences between the equivalent measurement unit prices decreased. This study contributes to the literature on price perceptions and provides practical implications for retailers and regulators.
| Divisions: | Concordia University > John Molson School of Business > Marketing |
|---|---|
| Item Type: | Thesis (Masters) |
| Authors: | Liu, Yonglan |
| Institution: | Concordia University |
| Degree Name: | M. Sc. |
| Program: | Administration (Marketing option) |
| Date: | 23 December 2016 |
| Thesis Supervisor(s): | Thakor, Mrugank |
| Keywords: | Price Presentation, Measurement Unit, Numerosity, Unit Salience |
| ID Code: | 982127 |
| Deposited By: | YONGLAN LIU |
| Deposited On: | 09 Jun 2017 15:43 |
| Last Modified: | 16 Jan 2019 01:00 |
References:
Adaval, R., & Monroe, K. B. (2002). Automatic construction and use of contextual information for product and price evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(4), 572-588.Ashcraft, M. H., & Moore, A. M. (2009). Mathematics anxiety and the affective drop in performance. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27(3), 197-205.
Bagchi, R., & Cheema, A. (2013). The effect of red background color on willingness-to-pay: The moderating role of selling mechanism. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(5), 947-960.
Bagchi, R., & Davis, D. F. (2012). $29 for 70 items or 70 items for $29? How presentation order affects package perceptions. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(1), 62-73.
Bagchi, R., & Davis, D. F. (2016). The role of numerosity in judgments and decision-making. Current Opinion in Psychology, 10, 89-93.
Bagchi, R., & Li, X. (2011). Illusionary progress in loyalty programs: Magnitudes, reward distances, and step-size ambiguity. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(5), 888-901.
Bhattacharya, U., Holden, C. W., & Jacobsen, S. E. (2010). Penny wise, dollar foolish: The left-digit effect in security trading. Available at SSRN 1303700.
Bizer, G. Y., & Schindler, R. M. (2005). Direct evidence of ending‐digit drop‐off in price information processing. Psychology & Marketing, 22(10), 771-783.
Burson, K. A., Larrick, R. P., & Lynch, J. G. (2009). Six of one, half dozen of the other expanding and contracting numerical dimensions produces preference reversals. Psychological Science, 20(9), 1074-1078.
Burton, S., & Lichtenstein, D. R. (1988). The effect of ad claims and ad context on attitude toward the advertisement. Journal of Advertising, 17(1), 3-11.
Chen, H. A., & Rao, A. R. (2007). When two plus two is not equal to four: Errors in processing multiple percentage changes. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(3), 327-340.
Chen, H., Marmorstein, H., Tsiros, M., & Rao, A. R. (2012). When more is less: The impact of base value neglect on consumer preferences for bonus packs over price discounts. Journal of Marketing, 76(4), 64-77.
Coulter, K. S., & Coulter, R. A. (2005). Size does matter: the effects of magnitude representation congruency on price perceptions and purchase likelihood. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15(1), 64-76.
Dehaene, S. (1997). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. Oxford University Press.
Dehaene, S. (2011). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. OUP USA.
Garbarino, E., & Slonim, R. (2003). Interrelationships and distinct effects of internal reference prices on perceived expensiveness and demand.Psychology & Marketing, 20(3), 227-248.
Gourville, J. T. (1998). Pennies-a-day: The effect of temporal reframing on transaction evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 395-403.Inman, J. J., McAlister, L., & Hoyer, W. D. (1990). Promotion signal: proxy for a price cut?. Journal of consumer research, 74-81.
Hamilton, R., & Chernev, A. (2013). Low prices are just the beginning: Price image in retail management. Journal of Marketing, 77(6), 1-20.
Heitjan, D. F., & Rubin, D. B. (1991). Ignorability and coarse data. The annals of statistics, 2244-2253.
Hinrichs, J. V., Yurko, D. S., & Hu, J. M. (1981). Two-digit number comparison: Use of place information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7(4), 890.
Krishna, A., Briesch, R., Lehmann, D. R., & Yuan, H. (2002). A meta-analysis of the impact of price presentation on perceived savings. Journal of Retailing, 78(2), 101-118.
Labelling Requirements for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables. (2014). Retrieved November 30, 2016, from http://www.inspection.gc.ca/food/labelling/food-labelling-for-industry/fresh-fruits-and-vegetables/eng/1393800946775/1393801047506
Leisen, B., & Prosser, E. (2004). Customers' perception of expensiveness and its impact on loyalty behaviors. Services Marketing Quarterly, 25(3), 35-52.
Leyens, J. P., Yzerbyt, V., & Corneille, O. (1996). The role of applicability in the emergence of the overattribution bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(2), 219.
Lowe, B., Barnes, B. R., & Rugimbana, R. (2012). Discounting in International Markets and the Face Value Effect: A Double‐Edged Sword?.Psychology & Marketing, 29(3), 144-156.
Lynn, M., & Wang, S. (2013). The indirect effects of tipping policies on patronage intentions through perceived expensiveness, fairness, and quality.Journal of Economic Psychology, 39, 62-71.
Manning, K. C., & Sprott, D. E. (2007). Multiple unit price promotions and their effects on quantity purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing, 83(4), 411-421.
Manning, K. C., & Sprott, D. E. (2009). Price endings, left-digit effects, and choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(2), 328-335.
Marques, J. F., & Dehaene, S. (2004). Developing intuition for prices in euros: rescaling or relearning prices?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10(3), 148.
Mason, J. D., Healy, A. F., & Marmie, W. R. (1996). The effects of rounding on memory for numbers in addition problems. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale,50(3), 320.
Miyazaki, A. D., Sprott, D. E., & Manning, K. C. (2000). Unit prices on retail shelf labels: An assessment of information prominence. Journal of retailing,76(1), 93-112.
Monga, A., & Bagchi, R. (2012). Years, months, and days versus 1, 12, and 365: the influence of units versus numbers. Journal of Consumer Research,39(1), 185-198.
Nunes, J. C., & Boatwright, P. (2004). Incidental prices and their effect on willingness to pay. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(4), 457-466.
Pandelaere, M., Briers, B., & Lembregts, C. (2011). How to make a 29% increase look bigger: The unit effect in option comparisons. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(2), 308-322.
Pelham, B. W., Sumarta, T. T., & Myaskovsky, L. (1994). The easy path from many to much: The numerosity heuristic. Cognitive Psychology, 26(2), 103-133.
Quattrone, G. A. (1982). Overattribution and unit formation: When behavior engulfs the person. Journal of personality and social psychology, 42(4), 593.
Raghubir, P., & Srivastava, J. (2002). Effect of face value on product valuation in foreign currencies. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(3), 335-347.
Richardson, F. C., & Suinn, R. M. (1972). The mathematics anxiety rating scale: psychometric imestudy. Experimental Economics, 17(3), 391-413.
Shafir, E., Diamond, P., & Tversky, A. (1997). Money illusion. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 341-374.
Shah, A. K., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2007). Easy does it: The role of fluency in cue weighting. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(6), 371.
Shen, L., & Urminsky, O. (2013). Making Sense of Nonsense The Visual Salience of Units Determines Sensitivity to Magnitude. Psychological science, 24(3), 297-304.
Smith, C. A., & Kirby, L. D. (2009). Putting appraisal in context: Toward a relational model of appraisal and emotion. Cognition and Emotion, 23(7), 1352-1372.
Suri, R., Monroe, K. B., & Koc, U. (2013). Math anxiety and its effects on consumers’ preference for price promotion formats. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41(3), 271-282.
Thaler, R. (1985). Mental accounting and consumer choice. Marketing science, 4(3), 199-214.
Thomas, M., & Morwitz, V. (2005). Penny wise and pound foolish: the left-digit effect in price cognition. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(1), 54-64.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. science, 185(4157), 1124-1131.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453-458.
Van Dijk, E., & Zeelenberg, M. (2003). The discounting of ambiguous information in economic decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16(5), 341-352.
Wang, S., & Lynn, M. (2007). The Effects on Perceived Restaurant Expensiveness of Tipping and Its Alternatives.
Wertenbroch, K., Soman, D., & Chattopadhyay, A. (2007). On the perceived value of money: The reference dependence of currency numerosity effects.Journal of Consumer Research, 34(1), 1-10.
Wilson, T. D., Houston, C. E., Etling, K. M., & Brekke, N. (1996). A new look at anchoring effects: basic anchoring and its antecedents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125(4), 387.
Wong, K. F. E., & Kwong, J. Y. Y. (2000). Is 7300 m equal to 7.3 km? Same semantics but different anchoring effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(2), 314-333.
Yadav, M. S. (1994). How buyers evaluate product bundles: A model of anchoring and adjustment. Journal of Consumer Research, 342-353.
Yamagishi, K. (1997). When a 12.86% mortality is more dangerous than 24.14%: Implications for risk communication. Applied Cognitive Psychology,11(6), 495-506.
All items in Spectrum are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved. The use of items is governed by Spectrum's terms of access.
Repository Staff Only: item control page
Download Statistics
Download Statistics