Why Is the Trivial Important? A Reasons‐Based Account For the Effects of Trivial Attributes on Choice

Brown, Christina L.; Carpenter, Gregory S.

doi:10.1086/209569

Cited by 159 publications

(167 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

158

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, Simonson, Carmon, and O' Curry (1994) have shown that consumers are less likely to choose a brand that offers a promotion or feature that has no value to them. Finally, Brown and Carpenter (2000) replicated the findings of Carpenter et al (1994) and Simonson et al (1994) and demonstrated that the direction of the influence of the irrelevant information partially depends on the size of the choice set.…”

Section: The Effect Of Irrelevant Product Informationsupporting

confidence: 65%

“…Similarly, although subjects in Carpenter et al (1994) could infer that the differentiating attribute was irrelevant, they still used it to make positive quality inferences (see also Broniarczyk and Gershoff 1997). Likewise, subjects in Simonson et al (1994) identified the irrelevant, unwanted feature as a reason for not choosing the target brand, and subjects in Brown and Carpenter (2000) referred to the trivial information to justify their choices.…”

Section: The Effect Of Irrelevant Product Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Consumers’ Beliefs about Product Benefits: The Effect of Obviously Irrelevant Product Information

Meyvis¹,

Janiszewski²

2002

J CONSUM RES

152

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When consumers try to assess the performance of a product on a key benefit, their information search often reveals both diagnostic information and irrelevant information. Although one would expect irrelevant information to have little impact on predictions of product performance, we present evidence that the irrelevant information systematically weakens consumers' beliefs that the product will provide the benefit. We show that this dilution effect persists after subjects have acknowledged the irrelevance of the additional information but that it does depend on whether the product information is processed with the desired benefit in mind. We conclude that consumers are selectively looking for information that suggests the product will deliver the desired benefit and that they categorize any additional evidence, be it irrelevant or disconfirming, as not confirming. As a consequence, irrelevant information weakens consumers' beliefs in the product's ability to deliver the benefit.

show abstract

Section: The Effect Of Irrelevant Product Informationsupporting

confidence: 65%

Section: The Effect Of Irrelevant Product Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumers’ Beliefs about Product Benefits: The Effect of Obviously Irrelevant Product Information

Meyvis¹,

Janiszewski²

2002

J CONSUM RES

152

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous research suggests that consumers evaluate offers on the basis of the perceived fit between the offer and their own resources and needs (Kivetz and Simonson 2003;Prelec et al 1997). For example, although consumers are typically attracted to products with more features (Brown and Carpenter 2000;Thompson, Hamilton, and Rust 2005), adding features that are believed to be targeted at other consumers (e.g., calculator functions only useful to biochemistry students) can actually make products less attractive (Simonson, Carmon, and O'Curry 1994). Consumers seem to actively look for cues to determine whether products are targeted to them.…”

Section: Using Frequency Cues To Infer Fitmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outpacing Others: When Consumers Value Products Based on Relative Usage Frequency

Hamilton¹,

Ratner²,

Thompson³

2011

J Consum Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. When considering the purchase of a new product, will consumers be more likely to make the purchase if they think about using it every day or if they think about using it every week? From an economic perspective, using a durable product more frequently should increase its perceived value. However, we show that perceived usage frequency relative to other consumers can influence product interest more than absolute usage frequency. In five studies, we use scale labels, advertisements, and customer reviews to invoke either a high-frequency or low-frequency norm. We show that high-frequency cues create less product interest and lower willingness to pay than low-frequency cues because consumers infer that their relative usage frequency will be lower, reducing the product's perceived fit. This effect is moderated by the consumer's perceived similarity to the standard of comparison and the consumer's own characteristics. The University of Chicago PressH ow do consumers decide whether to buy a durable good, and how much they are willing to pay for it? One factor they might consider during the decision process is how often they will use the product. In this article, we examine how cues suggesting that a product is expected to be used more or less frequently affect consumer interest in the product.

show abstract

“…Indeed, research on trivial attributes-features that do not add objective value to the product-has shown that adding such features can lead to an increase in choice share (Carpenter, Glazer, and Nakamoto 1994), while other times these features can reduce choice share (Simonson, Carmon, and O'Curry 1994) depending on the attribute's role in providing a reason for choosing or rejecting (Brown and Carpenter 2000). In the case of multifunctional products, the extra features on the many-feature product might be providing consumers a reason to choose the many-feature option, irrespective of the benefits of having or using the features.…”

Section: Study 2: Trivial Versus Non-trivial Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Having Versus Consuming: Failure to Estimate Usage Frequency Makes Consumers Prefer Multi-Feature Products

Goodman

Irmak

2012

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why Is the Trivial Important? A Reasons‐Based Account For the Effects of Trivial Attributes on Choice

Cited by 159 publications

References 34 publications

Consumers’ Beliefs about Product Benefits: The Effect of Obviously Irrelevant Product Information

Consumers’ Beliefs about Product Benefits: The Effect of Obviously Irrelevant Product Information

Outpacing Others: When Consumers Value Products Based on Relative Usage Frequency

Having Versus Consuming: Failure to Estimate Usage Frequency Makes Consumers Prefer Multi-Feature Products

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About