Effects of mental simulation, new product attribute benefits and typicality on consumer attitudes

Abstract

PurposeThis research paper aims to illustrate that the new product communication effects of mental simulation (process-vs. outcome-focused) might depend on product attributes (typicality and benefits). Communication effects include ad attitudes and product attitudes in this study.Design/methodology/approachOne 2 (mental simulation: process-focused vs. outcome-focused) x 2 (attribute typicality: high vs. low) x 2 (attribute benefits: hedonic vs. utilitarian) between-subjects experiment design was conducted. SPSS was used to do data analysis.FindingsThis article reveals that high (low) typicality of new attributes causes a process-focused (outcome-focused) simulation to lead to better consumer attitudes (i.e. ad attitude and product attitude). In addition, for a new hedonic attribute, a low typical attribute induces better consumer attitudes. Furthermore, there are interaction among mental simulation, product attribute typicality and benefits. These findings have important implications for academic developments and marketing management.Originality/valueCompared with previous studies, this study is unique in several ways. First, enterprises often develop new products by introducing new product attributes (i.e. new features). Product attribute typicality is an interesting issue for new product design and communication. This research illustrates that the marketing communication effects of attribute typicality depends on attribute benefits and mental simulation. Second, the current research finds the new product attribute benefit (i.e. hedonic/utilitarian) play an important role and moderates the effects of mental simulation on consumer attitudes.

“Target” versus “Non-target”: how free gift influences surplus food purchase intention

“…As an external cue for free gifts, Study 3 validated that mental simulation moderated the effect of free gifts on perceived quality uncertainty, thereby validating hypotheses H3a and H3b. Given that various types of mental simulation trigger different consumer responses (Chou et al, 2023). This study further established that, relative to outcome simulation, processed simulation could minimize the influence of the non-target product as a free gift on perceived quality uncertainty.…”

“…In particular, process simulation triggers consumers to envision their emotional experiences with the product. Conversely, outcome simulation motivates consumers to contemplate the practical benefits or objectives related to the ultimate usage of the product (Chou et al, 2023). Meanwhile, cue consistency theory advocates that matching information will improve both the processing fluency of consumers and consumer attitudes (Fiske and Taylor, 1991).…”

“…In particular, process simulation triggers consumers to envision their emotional experiences with the product. Conversely, outcome simulation motivates consumers to contemplate the practical benefits or objectives related to the ultimate usage of the product (Chou et al. , 2023).…”

“…Consistent with this, the blind-box design entails products being concealed within a box, unobserved, with consumers only exploring the contents upon unwrapping (Sun et al, 2024). In promotional messages, the mental simulation acts as a strategy used to articulate the imitation of certain events, including process simulation used in the simulation process and outcome simulation involving an end goal or interest (Chou et al, 2023). Nonetheless, it is of vital significance to ascertain whether the blind-box design and mental simulation will increase the influence of free gifts on the surplus food purchase intention.…”

“…, 2024). In promotional messages, the mental simulation acts as a strategy used to articulate the imitation of certain events, including process simulation used in the simulation process and outcome simulation involving an end goal or interest (Chou et al. , 2023).…”