Does In-Store Marketing Work? Effects of the Number and Position of Shelf Facings on Brand Attention and Evaluation at the Point of Purchase

Abstract

Recent trends in marketing have demonstrated an increased focus on in-store expenditures with the hope of "grabbing consumers" at the point of purchase, but does this make sense? To help answer this question, the authors examine the interplay between in-store and out-of-store factors on consumer attention to and evaluation of brands displayed on supermarket shelves. Using an eye-tracking experiment, they find that the number of facings has a strong impact on evaluation that is entirely mediated by its effect on visual attention and works particularly well for frequent users of the brand, for low-market-share brands, and for young and highly educated consumers who are willing to trade off brand and price. They also find that gaining in-store attention is not always sufficient to drive sales. For example, top-and middle-shelf positions gain more attention than low-shelf positions; however, only topshelf positions carry through to brand evaluation. The results underscore the importance of combining eye-tracking and purchase data to obtain a full picture of the effects of in-store and out-of-store marketing at the point of purchase.

Eye Tracking in Neuromarketing: A Research Agenda for Marketing Studies

“…Some studies have used ET to investigate the role of various stimuli on the shelves (Chandon, Hutchinson, Bradlow, & Young, 2009). The ET technology assesses exactly what consumers see and what they miss when they are looking at different categories .…”

Heuristics and resource depletion: eye-tracking customers’ in situ gaze behavior in the field

“…Other studies have explored such findings. The research of (Chandon, Hutchinson, Bradlow, & Young, 2009) shows that any given product has an approximately 70 percent likelihood of being noted. In relation to the research topic, including more options leads to a more demanding decision effort, and a customer will have to work harder to come up with a solution.…”

“…Although visual attention does not always drive choice behavior (Chandon et al, 2009), a reasonable assumption to make is that, if resource depletion has an actual effect on choice, it will also influence a customer's visual attention.…”

Preferring the One in the Middle: Further Evidence for the Centre‐stage Effect

“…As Casasanto (2009) proposes, in vertical arrays, top positions are universally associated with positive attributes and bottom positions with negative attributes. If this association influences location-based preferences, there should be a significant linear trend to prefer items in higher positions when the items are arranged vertically (see also Chandon, Hutchinson, Bradlow, & Young, 2009). However, if the centre-stage heuristic continues to determine the effects of location on preference in vertical arrangements, then there should still be a preference for items in the centre.…”