Type IV error in marketing research: The investigation of ANOVA interactions

Umesh, U. N.; Peterson, Robert A.; McCann-Nelson, Michelle; Vaidyanathan, Rajiv

doi:10.1007/bf02893934

Cited by 45 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The analysis revealed no significant main effect of task specificity (F < 1, p > .35). More importantly, and consistent with H2, a statistically significant task specificity × choice task interaction existed (F(1,96) further investigate the interaction, we performed a residual means analysis (Rosnow & Rosenthal, 1989;Ross Jr & Creyer, 1993;Umesh N, Peterson A, McCann-Nelson, & Vaidyanathan, 1996). The interaction, as depicted in Figure 1, shows that participants in the specific choice group observed a smaller number of AOIs during their first (specific) choice task than expected, whereas participants in the non-specific choice group observed a larger number of AOIs during their first (non-specific) choice task than expected.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 60%

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

Wästlund

Otterbring

Gustafsson

et al. 2015

Journal of Business Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Heuristics and resource depletion:Eye-tracking customers' in situ gaze behavior in the field AbstractWhen we visit a retail outlet, we go there to complete some type of shopping goal.These goals may be very specific and precisely planned prior to entering the store, or more abstract, and something we think of on the spur of the moment. The stores may display tens of thousands of different products, making it difficult to achieve the shopping goal in a rational manner. As a result, we use different types of heuristics to meet our shopping goals. In this study, we investigate how a customer's visual attention is influenced by their shopping goal, based on the results of three field experiments in three different contexts  a gas station, a sports store, and a grocery store. Firstly we establish that differences do exist in viewing behavior based on whether shopping goals are planned or unplanned. A more complex and unplanned shopping goal leads to increased observations of in-store stimulus. We then study whether or not the complexity of the first shopping goal also influences the viewing behavior of the next shopping goal, independently of the characteristics of the second goal. The findings confirm that complex decision heuristics deplete cognitive recourse. This finding results in diminished visual attention during subsequent choices. In turn, this has implications for a customer's shopping behavior.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 60%

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

Wästlund

Otterbring

Gustafsson

et al. 2015

Journal of Business Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rosnow & Rosenthal, 1991). When the interaction is central for the hypothesis, as is the case in the present study, a residual means analysis is necessary (Rosnow & Rosenthal, 1989;Ross & Creyer, 1993;Umesh et al, 1996). Therefore, we conducted such an analysis by following the guidelines described in Rosnow and Rosenthal (1989;1991;.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vision (im)possible? The effects of in-store signage on customers’ visual attention

Otterbring

Wästlund

Gustafsson

et al. 2014

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We used two eye-tracking field experiments to investigate the extent to which in-store signage is used during navigation and decision making, and how the viewing of signage influences customers' visual attention and choice behavior. One hundred and seventy-five customers at a grocery store were exposed to signage stimuli while carrying out predefined shopping tasks. Experiment 1 shows that attention toward signage is affected by customers' levels of store familiarity and in-store search stage (navigation vs. decision making).Experiment 2 demonstrates that signage has a considerable impact on the direction and magnitude of customers' visual attention during decision making.

show abstract

“…In order to test these differences in means, multiple pairwise comparison of differences in means (Scheffé test) was applied (cf. Umesh, Peterson, McCann-Nelson, & Vaidyanathan 1996). This procedure indicated that the hypothesized differences in H1 and H2 were significant (p Ͻ 0.001 in both comparisons).…”

Section: Hypothesis Testingmentioning

confidence: 92%

Customer familiarity and its effects on satisfaction and behavioral intentions

Söderlund

2002

Psychology and Marketing

190

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When customer familiarity increases, customer expertise is likely to increase. Although expertise is known to affect information processing in several ways, few studies have examined the effects of familiarity on customers' evaluations and behavioral intentions. In this study, it was found that a high level of prepurchase familiarity was associated with more extreme (i.e., more polarized) postpurchase responses in customer satisfaction, repurchase intentions, and word-of-mouth intentions compared to a low prepurchase level of familiarity. More specifically, when service performance was high, high-familiarity customers expressed a higher level of satisfaction and behavioral intentions than did less familiar customers. On the other hand, when performance was low, high-familiarity customers expressed lower levels of satisfaction and behavioral intentions than did low-familiarity customers. ᭧ 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.This article deals with the customer's postpurchase responses in terms of both an overall evaluation and behavioral intentions. Overall evaluations serve as a crucial topic in research on customer satisfaction (cf. Oliver, 1996) and perceived service quality (cf. Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1988), and the main rationale behind this interest is usually an assumed positive association between postpurchase evaluations and future behavior. For some reason, however, literature on satisfaction

show abstract

Type IV error in marketing research: The investigation of ANOVA interactions

Cited by 45 publications

References 26 publications

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

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

Vision (im)possible? The effects of in-store signage on customers’ visual attention

Customer familiarity and its effects on satisfaction and behavioral intentions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About