Choice under incomplete information on incumbents: Why consumers with stronger preferences are more likely to abandon their prior choices

Journal of Consumer Psychology - Tập 27 - Trang 264-269 - 2017
Caglar Irmak1, Thomas Kramer2, Sankar Sen3
1School of Business Administration, University of Miami, United States
2School of Business Administration, University of California, Riverside, United States
3Department of Marketing and International Business, Zicklin School of Business, Baruch College, CUNY, United States

Tóm tắt

AbstractConsumers often encounter information about new brands that is not available for their preliminary or prior choices. For example, continued browsing might expose consumers to information that is unknown for an option they already placed in their shopping cart. How might preference strength affect their reactions to such missing information on their prior choices? Much research suggests that consumers with strong prior preferences are likely to employ motivated reasoning to bolster and retain the preliminary choice. However, we document a heretofore unexamined condition under which those with relatively stronger prior preferences for an incumbent are more likely to abandon it than those with weaker prior preferences. We argue that this occurs because those with relatively stronger (vs. weaker) prior preferences experience more cognitive dissonance when information on new attributes is missing on just the incumbent but not on its competitors.

Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00290.x Chen M.K., 2008, Rationalization and cognitive dissonance: Do choices affect or reflect preferences? (Cowles Foundation Discussion Paper No. 1669) 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.08.026 10.1086/319622 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60121-5 10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.53 10.1515/9781503620766 10.1207/s15324834basp2702_5 10.1016/S1057-7408(08)80016-2 10.1037/10318-000 A.F.Hayes.PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation moderation and conditional process modeling [white paper].2012 Retrieved fromhttp://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01940.x 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.01.016 10.1509/jmkr.37.4.427.18796 10.1177/0146167201276009 Kunda Z., 1990, The case for motivated reasoning, Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480, 10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480 10.1006/jesp.1998.1357 10.1111/pops.12164 10.1177/0272989X07311754 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(200004)17:4<281::AID-MAR2>3.0.CO;2-5 10.1002/mar.4220060206 Montgomery H., 1983, Analyzing and aiding decision processes (pp. 343–69) Murtagh J., 2005, The myth of marketing for customer loyalty, 20 10.1086/209438 Oliver R.L., 1997, Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer O'Neil C.E., 2011, Association of candy consumption with body weight measures, other health risk factors for cardiovascular disease, and diet quality in US children and adolescents: NHANES 1999–2004, Food & Nutrition Research, 55, 1 10.1086/322896 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60417-7 10.2307/3152094 10.1006/obhd.1999.2838 10.1006/obhd.1996.0041 10.2307/3152163 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.08.024 10.1006/obhd.1997.2686 Schwarz N., 1983, Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well‐being: Informative and directive functions of affective states, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 513, 10.1037/0022-3514.45.3.513 10.1177/0956797610379235 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(200005)17:5<369::AID-MAR1>3.0.CO;2-G 10.1002/mar.10057 Wilson T.D., 1992, Review of personality and social psychology: Emotion and social behavior, 1 10.1037/0003-066X.35.2.151 10.1086/208905 10.1086/378617
Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Journal of Consumer Psychology

Tập 27

264-269

Thông tin tác giả