The Effect of Common and Unique Features in Consumer Choice

Consumer choice often involves a comparison among the available alternatives. Recent research finds that features shared by alternatives are canceled and greater weight is placed on the unique features in choosing among the alternatives provided. Building on this research, the authors propose that the attractiveness of the choice set can be enhanced or reduced by altering which features appear unique. In the first study, this proposition is tested for choice problems in which subjects choose or delay choice between pairs of alternatives that have either shared bad features and unique good features (unique good pairs) or unique bad features and shared good features (unique bad pairs). As predicted, a greater percentage of subjects chose an alternative when there were unique good pairs than when there were unique bad pairs. A second study allowed subjects to switch from their initial choice to a new alternative with both unique good and unique bad features. The likelihood of switching to a new alternative was greater for subjects who made the initial choice from unique bad pairs. A third study used the choice context to increase the attractiveness of a specific alternative by making its good features appear unique. Finally, another study used think-aloud protocols to gain insights into the underlying mechanism.

[1]  A. Tversky Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. , 1972 .

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

[3]  A. Tversky,et al.  Choice under Conflict: The Dynamics of Deferred Decision , 1992 .

[4]  A. Tversky Features of Similarity , 1977 .

[5]  R. Dhar Consumer Preference for a No-Choice Option , 1997 .

[6]  Steven J. Sherman,et al.  Cancellation and focus: the role of shared and unique features in the choice process , 1995 .

[7]  Robert J. Meyer,et al.  Context-Induced Parameter Instability in a Disaggregate-Stochastic Model of Store Choice , 1982 .

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

[9]  H. Helson Adaptation-level theory : an experimental and systematic approach to behavior , 1964 .

[10]  O. John,et al.  Automatic vigilance: the attention-grabbing power of negative social information. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[11]  William Samuelson,et al.  Status quo bias in decision making , 1988 .

[12]  S. Jain Positive versus negative comparative advertising , 1993 .

[13]  A. Tversky,et al.  Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion , 1992 .

[14]  Gregory S. Carpenter,et al.  Meaningful Brands from Meaningless Differentiation: The Dependence on Irrelevant Attributes , 1994 .

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