Sales Promotions and the Choice Context as Competing Influences on Consumer Decision Making

Although brand switching is one of the most researched topics in marketing, we still know very little about the moderators of switching between brands in different price-quality tiers (e.g., from Haagen–Dazs ice cream to Breyers or to a store brand). Building on the notion that buyers have a (category-specific) consideration set of price–quality tiers, we propose that sales promotions and the choice set composition (or the choice context) have compensatory effects on brand switching between price–quality tiers. Specifically, if one of these factors causes buyers to switch to a higher price–quality tier within their brand-tier consideration set, then the other factor is less likely to induce switching in the same direction (to an even higher tier) and more likely to induce switching in the opposite direction. This general proposition leads to several specific hypotheses, including (a) the likelihood of switching between particular brand tiers due to price promotions can be predicted based on the choice set composition; (b) asymmetric switching, whereby consumers are more likely to switch up from a low-tier to a promoted high-tier brand than from a high-tier to a promoted low-tier brand, is reduced or eliminated if consumers consider three price–quality tiers; and (c) the compromise effect is reduced when the lowest tier brand offers a price promotion. These hypotheses were supported in a series of studies, which also examined rival explanations. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

[1]  Robert C. Blattberg,et al.  How Promotions Work , 1995 .

[2]  Eldar Shafir,et al.  Reason-based choice , 1993, Cognition.

[3]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Reasoning and the weighting of attributes in attitude judgments , 1996 .

[4]  G. Kalyanaram,et al.  Brand Retrieval, Consideration Set Composition, Consumer Choice, and the Pioneering Advantage , 1993 .

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

[6]  Donald R. Lehmann,et al.  The Influence of New Brand Entry on Subjective Brand Judgments , 1993 .

[7]  I. Simonson,et al.  Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects , 1989 .

[8]  Alan D. J. Cooke,et al.  Trade-offs depend on attribute range. , 1994 .

[9]  Bruce G. S. Hardie,et al.  Modeling Loss Aversion and Reference Dependence Effects on Brand Choice , 1993 .

[10]  Kenneth R. Lord,et al.  Switching Behavior in Automobile Markets: A Consideration-Sets Model , 1995 .

[11]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[12]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[13]  Gilles Laurent,et al.  Consideration sets of size one: An empirical investigation of automobile purchases , 1995 .

[14]  A. Parducci Category judgment: a range-frequency model. , 1965, Psychological review.

[15]  Robert C. Blattberg,et al.  Price-Induced Patterns of Competition , 1989 .

[16]  Bart J. Bronnenberg,et al.  Asymmetric Promotion Effects and Brand Positioning , 1996 .

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

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

[19]  Allan D. Shocker,et al.  Consideration set influences on consumer decision-making and choice: Issues, models, and suggestions , 1991 .

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

[21]  D. Soman The Illusion of Delayed Incentives: Evaluating Future Effort–Money Transactions , 1998 .

[22]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Comparison and Choice: Relations between Similarity Processes and Decision Processes , 1995 .

[23]  Katherine N. Lemon,et al.  The Effect of Local Consideration Sets on Global Choice Between Lower Price and Higher Quality , 1993 .

[24]  Philip N. Johnson-Laird,et al.  The interaction between reasoning and decision making: an introduction , 1993, Cognition.

[25]  Akihiro Inoue,et al.  Building Market Structures from Consumer Preferences , 1996 .

[26]  G. Urban,et al.  Pre-Test-Market Evaluation of New Packaged Goods: A Model and Measurement Methodology , 1978 .

[27]  D. Lehmann,et al.  Context Effects, New Brand Entry, and Consideration Sets , 1994 .

[28]  R. Sethuraman A Model of how Discounting High-Priced Brands Affects the Sales of Low-Priced Brands , 1996 .

[29]  Sankar Sen Knowledge, Information Mode, and the Attraction Effect , 1998 .

[30]  David M. Sanbonmatsu,et al.  Considering the best choice: effects of the salience and accessibility of alternatives on attitude--decision consistency. , 1997, Journal of personality and social psychology.

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

[32]  I. Simonson,et al.  Attribute–Task Compatibility as a Determinant of Consumer Preference Reversals: , 1997 .

[33]  Raj Sethuraman,et al.  A meta-analysis of national brand and store brand cross-promotional price elasticities , 1995 .

[34]  C. L. Narayana,et al.  Consumer Behavior and Product Performance: An Alternative Conceptualization , 1975 .

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

[36]  J. Little,et al.  Can Advertising Copy Make FSI Coupons More Effective? , 1997 .

[37]  Gary J. Russell,et al.  A Probabilistic Choice Model for Market Segmentation and Elasticity Structure , 1989 .

[38]  J. Muellbauer,et al.  Economics and consumer behavior , 1980 .