No abstract

In this paper, we investigate whether and how the presence of remanufactured products and the identity of the remanufacturer influence the perceived value of new products through a series of behavioral experiments. Our results demonstrate that the presence of products remanufactured and sold by the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) can reduce the perceived value of new products by up to 8%. However, the presence of third-party remanufactured products can increase the perceived value of new products by up to 7%. These results suggest that deterring third-party competition via preemptive remanufacturing may reduce profits, while the presence of third-party competition may actually be beneficial for an OEM.

Although the effects of shapes on area perceptions have been widely investigated, we replicate, extend, and generalize one of the few studies to relate the effects of shapes to consumption volumes (Raghubir and Krishna 1999). While Raghubir and Krishna demonstrate the effect of the elongation of prepoured drinks on consumption volume, we have people pour their own drinks in a series of controlled field experiments. Two experiments in cafeterias show that both children and adults pour and consume more juice when given a short, wide glass compared to those given a tall, slender glass, but they perceive the opposite to be true. We conclude that the elongation of glasses negatively influences consumption volume in a singleserving context. A third potentially policy-relevant field experiment conducted with Philadelphia bartenders and liquor shows that the effect of elongation is moderated-but not eliminated-with pouring experience. T he effects of shapes on area perceptions have been widely investigated. For instance, it has been shown that triangles are perceived to be larger than squares (Anastasi 1936; Fisher and Foster 1968), squares larger than circles (Pfeiffer 1932), and elongated objects larger than less elongated objects (

Despite the challenged contention that consumers serve more onto larger dinnerware, it remains unclear what would cause this and who might be most at risk. The results of five studies suggest that the neglected Delboeuf illusion may explain how the size of dinnerware creates two opposing biases that lead people to overserve on larger plates and bowls and underserve on smaller ones. A countercyclical sinus-shaped relationship is shown to exist between these serving biases and the relative gap between the edge of the food and the edge of the dinnerware. Although these serving biases are difficult to eliminate with attention and education, changing the color of one’s dinnerware or tablecloth may help attenuate them. By showing that the Delboeuf illusion offers a mechanistic explanation for how dinnerware size can bias serving and intake, we open new theoretical opportunities for linking illusions to eating behavior and suggest how simple changes in design can improve consumer welfare.

No abstract

No abstract

Research on the self-serving of food has empirically ignored the role that visual consumption norms play in determining how much food we serve on different sized dinnerware. We contend that dinnerware provides a visual anchor of an appropriate fill-level, which in turn, serves as a consumption norm (Study 1). The trouble with these dinnerware-suggested consumption norms is that they vary directly with dinnerware size--Study 2 shows Chinese buffet diners with large plates served 52% more, ate 45% more, and wasted 135% more food than those with smaller plates. Moreover, education does not appear effective in reducing such biases. Even a 60-min, interactive, multimedia warning on the dangers of using large plates had seemingly no impact on 209 health conference attendees, who subsequently served nearly twice as much food when given a large buffet plate 2 hr later (Study 3). These findings suggest that people may have a visual plate-fill level--perhaps 70% full--that they anchor on when determining the appropriate consumption norm and serving themselves. Study 4 suggests that the Delboeuf illusion offers an explanation why people do not fully adjust away from this fill-level anchor and continue to be biased across a large range of dishware sizes. These findings have surprisingly wide-ranging win-win implications for the welfare of consumers as well as for food service managers, restaurateurs, packaged goods managers, and public policy officials.

Objective To determine whether people pour different amounts into short, wide glasses than into tall, slender ones. Design College students practised pouring alcohol into a standard glass before pouring into larger glasses; bartenders poured alcohol for four mixed drinks either with no instructions or after being told to take their time. Setting University town and large city, United States. Participants 198 college students and 86 bartenders. Main outcome measures Volume of alcohol poured into short, wide and tall, slender glasses. Results Aiming to pour a "shot" of alcohol (1.5 ounces, 44.3 ml), both students and bartenders poured more into short, wide glasses than into tall slender glasses (46.1 ml v 44.7 ml and 54.6 ml v 46.4 ml, respectively). Practice reduced the tendency to overpour, but not for short, wide glasses. Despite an average of six years of experience, bartenders poured 20.5% more into short, wide glasses than tall, slender ones; paying careful attention reduced but did not eliminate the effect. Conclusions To avoid overpouring, use tall, narrow glasses or ones on which the alcohol level is premarked. To avoid underestimating the amount of alcohol consumed, studies using self reports of standard drinks should ask about the shape of the glass.