Category-Based Screening in Choice of Complementary Products

Consumers often make complex choices involving complementary categories, such as cell phones and service plans. In the fast-growing high-tech and entertainment industries, products from complementary categories are often incompatible with one another. This research shows that when choosing a pair of such complementary products, a consumer is likely to use a two-stage decision strategy: screening by one category first to narrow down the number of pairs for further evaluation in the second stage. In the presence of incompatibility, screening by one category rather than by the other may lead to different choice outcomes. The authors develop a behavioral theory–driven choice model that accounts for both preference heterogeneity and structural heterogeneity of decision strategies to examine the extent to which consumers engage in category-based screening. Analysis of data from a 2 × 2 conjoint choice experiment reveals that consumers tend to screen a category that has higher intracategory differentiation and is congruent with their decision goals. The authors further suggest possible marketing actions a firm can take to promote the use of a specific decision strategy that leads consumers to choose its product.

[1]  D. McFadden Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .

[2]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Attention and Effort , 1973 .

[3]  P. Green,et al.  Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook , 1978 .

[4]  J. Bettman An information processing theory of consumer choice , 1979 .

[5]  Christopher P. Puto,et al.  Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity & the Similarity Hypothesis. , 1981 .

[6]  Joel Huber,et al.  Market Boundaries and Product Choice: Illustrating Attraction and Substitution Effects , 1983 .

[7]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Compensatory Choice Models of Noncompensatory Processes: The Effect of Varying Context , 1984 .

[8]  John G. Lynch,et al.  Choices from Sets Including Remembered Brands: Use of Recalled Attributes and Prior Overall Evaluations , 1988 .

[9]  Sanjoy Ghose,et al.  When Choice Models Fail: Compensatory Models in Negatively Correlated Environments , 1989 .

[10]  Steven J. Sherman,et al.  The influence of unique features and direction of comparison of preferences , 1989 .

[11]  B. Wernerfelt,et al.  An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets , 1990 .

[12]  Adrian F. M. Smith,et al.  Sampling-Based Approaches to Calculating Marginal Densities , 1990 .

[13]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  A componential analysis of cognitive effort in choice , 1990 .

[14]  Joel Huber,et al.  Adapting Cutoffs to the Choice Environment: The Effects of Attribute Correlation and Reliability , 1991 .

[15]  John Roberts,et al.  Development and Testing of a Model of Consideration Set Composition , 1991 .

[16]  Steven J. Sherman,et al.  Feature matching, unique features, and the dynamics of the choice process: Predecision conflict and postdecision satisfaction , 1991 .

[17]  M. Bradley,et al.  Remembering pictures: pleasure and arousal in memory. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[18]  A. Tversky,et al.  Context-dependent preferences , 1993 .

[19]  M. J. Houston,et al.  Goal-Oriented Experiences and the Development of Knowledge , 1993 .

[20]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Timid choices and bold forecasts: a cognitive perspective on risk taking , 1993 .

[21]  KahnemanDaniel,et al.  Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts , 1993 .

[22]  M. Newton Approximate Bayesian-inference With the Weighted Likelihood Bootstrap , 1994 .

[23]  Donald G. Morrison,et al.  Making the Cut: Modeling and Analyzing Choice Set Restriction in Scanner Panel Data , 1995 .

[24]  Rick L. Andrews,et al.  Studying Consideration Effects in Empirical Choice Models Using Scanner Panel Data , 1995 .

[25]  B. Wernerfelt,et al.  A Rational Reconstruction of the Compromise Effect: Using Market Data to Infer Utilities , 1995 .

[26]  Bart J. Bronnenberg,et al.  Limited Choice Sets, Local Price Response, and Implied Measures of Price Competition , 1996 .

[27]  Jack B. Soll,et al.  Mental Budgeting and Consumer Decisions , 1996 .

[28]  Joel Huber,et al.  A theory of cutoff formation under imperfect information , 1996 .

[29]  D. Prelec,et al.  The Role of Inference in Context Effects: Inferring What You Want from What Is Available , 1997 .

[30]  R. Thaler,et al.  Labor Supply of New York City Cabdrivers: One Day at a Time , 1997 .

[31]  Siddhartha Chib,et al.  Markov chain Monte Carlo and models of consideration set and parameter heterogeneity , 1998 .

[32]  Peter E. Rossi,et al.  Similarities in Choice Behavior Across Product Categories , 1998 .

[33]  Sunil Gupta,et al.  The Shopping Basket: A Model for Multicategory Purchase Incidence Decisions , 1999 .

[34]  Daniel Read,et al.  Choice Bracketing , 1999 .

[35]  Arthur B. Markman,et al.  The influence of goals on value and choice , 2000 .

[36]  Eric T. Bradlow,et al.  A Hierarchical Bayes Model for Assortment Choice , 2000 .

[37]  Sha Yang,et al.  A Model for Observation, Structural, and Household Heterogeneity in Panel Data , 2000 .

[38]  Douglas H. Wedell,et al.  Reference Price and Price Perceptions: A Comparison of Alternative Models , 2001 .

[39]  Joffre Swait,et al.  Choice set generation within the generalized extreme value family of discrete choice models , 2001 .

[40]  Siddhartha Chib,et al.  MARKOV CHAIN MONTE CARLO METHODS: COMPUTATION AND INFERENCE , 2001 .

[41]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  When Web Pages Influence Choice: Effects of Visual Primes on Experts and Novices , 2002 .

[42]  V. Rao,et al.  A General Choice Model for Bundles with Multiple-Category Products: Application to Market Segmentation and Optimal Pricing for Bundles , 2003 .

[43]  Suzanne Altobello Nasco,et al.  Stimulus Context and the Formation of Consumer Ideals , 2004 .

[44]  Greg M. Allenby,et al.  A Choice Model with Conjunctive, Disjunctive, and Compensatory Screening Rules , 2004 .

[45]  S. Chib,et al.  Models of Multi-Category Choice Behavior , 2005 .

[46]  Christopher K. Hsee,et al.  Narrow Focusing: Why the Relative Position of a Good in its Category Matters More than it Should , 2005 .

[47]  Investigating Endogeneity Bias in Marketing , 2006 .

[48]  Wendy W. Moe An Empirical Two-Stage Choice Model with Varying Decision Rules Applied to Internet Clickstream Data , 2006 .

[49]  Greg M. Allenby,et al.  Estimating Heterogeneous EBA and Economic Screening Rule Choice Models , 2006 .

[50]  T. Öberg,et al.  Conjoint analysis , 2008, Environmental science and pollution research international.