The Consumer Economics of Unit Pricing

Isakson, Hans R.; Maurizi, Alex

doi:10.1177/002224377301000308

Cited by 24 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Clarke (1992) views this low price customer segment as "downmarket" with an emphasis on dynamic price. Price is well acknowledged in various areas such as economics, finance and marketing (Allenby & Lenk, 1995;Isakson & Maurizi, 1973;McMullan, 2005;Srinivasan, Pauwels & Nijs, 2008;Starr & Rubinson, 1978;Webster, 1965;Wernerfelt, 1986Wernerfelt, , 1991. It is arguable that price subsists for the function of the exchange process (Kotler et al, 2009;Brassington & Pettitt, 2006).…”

Section: Pricementioning

confidence: 99%

Key determinants of passenger loyalty in the low-cost airline business

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Pricementioning

confidence: 99%

Key determinants of passenger loyalty in the low-cost airline business

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For purchase decisions, it has been assumed that consumers subconsciously focus on purchasing the package that has lowest unit cost (Isakson and Maurizi 1973). If they do not read package labels and unit price information, consumers may choose the package that appears largest if the set of brands has similar (or equal) prices.…”

Section: Managerial Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vital Dimensions in Volume Perception: Can the Eye Fool the Stomach?

Raghubir

Krishna

1999

Journal of Marketing Research

289

239

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the number of volume judgments made by consumers, for example, deciding which package is larger and by how much, it is surprising that little research pertaining to volume perceptions has been done in marketing. In this article, the authors examine the interplay of expectations based on perceptual inputs versus experiences based on sensory input in the context of volume perceptions. Specifically, they examine biases in the perception of volume due to container shape. The height of the container emerges as a vital dimension that consumers appear to use as a simplifying visual heuristic to make a volume judgment. However, perceived consumption, contrary to perceived volume, is related inversely to height. This lowered perceived consumption is hypothesized and shown to increase actual consumption. A series of seven laboratory experiments programmatically test model predictions. Results show that perceived volume, perceived consumption, and actual consumption are related sequentially. Furthermore, the authors show that container shape affects preference, choice, and postconsumption satisfaction. The authors discuss theoretical implications for contrast effects when expectancies are disconfirmed, specifically as they relate to biases in visual information processing, and provide managerial implications of the results for package design, communication, and pricing. Vital Dimensions in Volume Perception: Can the Eye Fool the Stomach?Mavis,' a psychology doctorate, went to the Beach Bar and had to keep getting refills of red wine. She got tired of the walk and asked for a larger glass, for which she paid a higher price. She was surprised when she realized she had paid a higher price for the same volume.[Examples are based on actual incidents. Names have been disguised to maintain anonymity.

show abstract

“…In addition, researchers who study consumer behaviors reveal that consumers exhibit cognitive limitations when processing information and that they become more sensitive to a product attribute when the measure of the attribute is explicitly calculated and presented. An example is the unit‐price legislation during the 1970s in the United States (Isakson & Maurizi, ). Granger and Billson () find that the posting of unit prices makes it easier for consumers to compare prices, and consumers switch to larger sizes when price‐per‐unit information is provided.…”

Section: Analytical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Information presentation and consumer choice: Evidence from Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Success Rate Reports

2019

Health Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How does the presentation of multidimensional quality information in public reporting affect consumer responsiveness? This paper addresses this question exploiting an exogenous change of reporting format in the Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) reports by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Compared with the first version of the ART report, the second version highlights the “singleton‐birth rate” measure, which is complementary to the “multiple‐birth rate” measure reported in the first version. We find that consumers are more likely to choose clinics with a lower multiple‐birth rate after the format change, indicating more sensitivity to the highlighted measure. This finding implies that information presentation plays an important role in affecting the effectiveness of public reporting.

show abstract

The Consumer Economics of Unit Pricing

Cited by 24 publications

References 5 publications

Key determinants of passenger loyalty in the low-cost airline business

Key determinants of passenger loyalty in the low-cost airline business

Vital Dimensions in Volume Perception: Can the Eye Fool the Stomach?

Information presentation and consumer choice: Evidence from Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Success Rate Reports

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About