How Biased Household Inventory Estimates Distort Shopping and Storage Decisions

The authors develop a model of how consumers estimate the level of product inventory in their households. Two laboratory experiments and two field studies involving 29 product categories show that (1) consumers anchor their estimates on their average inventory and fail to adjust sufficiently; (2) adjustments follow an inelastic psychophysical power function, leading to overestimations of low levels of inventory and underestimations of high levels; and (3) adjustments are more elastic and, thus, more accurate when inventory is salient. Contrary to the assumptions of practitioners and academic modelers, these inventory estimates, not actual inventory levels, drive subsequent purchase incidence. Simulation results further show that biased estimates increase overstocking and spoilage among stockout-averse consumers but increase stockouts and unmet demand among overstocking-averse consumers. By predicting the magnitude, not just the direction, of estimation biases, the model and the results offer new insights into accelerating the consumption of healthy foods and improving the targeting of stockpiling-inducing sales promotions.

[1]  S. Neslin,et al.  Promotional Elasticities and Category Characteristics , 1996 .

[2]  Pierre Chandon,et al.  When Are Stockpiled Products Consumed Faster? A Convenience–Salience Framework of Postpurchase Consumption Incidence and Quantity , 2002 .

[3]  M. Teghtsoonian THE JUDGMENT OF SIZE. , 1965, The American journal of psychology.

[4]  W. E. Dawson,et al.  The effect of object shape and mode of presentation on judgments of apparent volume , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[5]  Pierre Chandon,et al.  The Biasing Health Halos of Fast Food Restaurant Health Claims: Lower Calorie Estimates and Higher Side-Dish Consumption Intentions , 2007 .

[6]  B. Wansink,et al.  Portion Size Me: Downsizing Our Consumption Norms , 2007, Journal of the American Dietetic Association.

[7]  N. Epley,et al.  Putting Adjustment Back in the Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic: Differential Processing of Self-Generated and Experimenter-Provided Anchors , 2001, Psychological science.

[8]  L. Myaskovsky,et al.  The Easy Path From Many To Much: the Numerosity Heuristic , 1994, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  L. E. Krueger,et al.  Single judgments of numerosity , 1982, Perception & psychophysics.

[10]  P. Raghubir,et al.  Vital Dimensions in Volume Perception: Can the Eye Fool the Stomach? , 1999 .

[11]  Priya Raghubir,et al.  Ratios in Proportion: What Should the Shape of the Package Be? , 2006 .

[12]  B. Wansink,et al.  Can “Low-Fat” Nutrition Labels Lead to Obesity? , 2006 .

[13]  Brian Wansink,et al.  Mindless Eating: Why We Eat More Than We Think , 2001 .

[14]  Pierre Chandon,et al.  Is Obesity Caused by Calorie Underestimation? A Psychophysical Model of Meal Size Estimation , 2007 .

[15]  Priya Raghubir,et al.  Vital Dimensions in Volume Perception: Can the Eye Fool the Stomach? , 1999 .

[16]  C. Mckenzie,et al.  Underestimating the duration of future events: memory incorrectly used or memory bias? , 2005, Psychological bulletin.

[17]  P. Raghubir,et al.  The effect of line configuration on perceived numerosity of dotted lines , 1997, Memory & cognition.

[18]  Michael Y. Hu,et al.  Are Consumer Survey Results Distorted? Systematic Impact of Behavioral Frequency and Duration on Survey Response Errors , 2000 .

[19]  Leonard M. Lodish,et al.  An Implemented System for Improving Promotion Productivity Using Store Scanner Data , 1993 .

[20]  N. Schwarz,et al.  BEHAVIORAL FREQUENCY JUDGMENTS - AN ACCESSIBILITY DIAGNOSTICITY FRAMEWORK , 1995 .

[21]  Thomas Mussweiler,et al.  Overcoming the Inevitable Anchoring Effect: Considering the Opposite Compensates for Selective Accessibility , 2000 .

[22]  Robert J. Meyer,et al.  The Optimality of Consumer Stockpiling Strategies , 1990 .

[23]  Robert J. Kent,et al.  An Anchoring and Adjustment Model of Purchase Quantity Decisions , 1998 .

[24]  Robert E. Krider,et al.  Pizzas: p or Square? Psychophysical Biases in Area Comparisons , 2001 .

[25]  B. Wansink,et al.  “Out of sight, out of mind”: Pantry stockpiling and brand-usage frequency , 1994 .

[26]  Thomas Gilovich,et al.  Are Adjustments Insufficient? , 2004, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[27]  Stephen J. Hoch,et al.  An Anchoring and Adjustment Model of Purchase Quantity Decisions , 1998 .

[28]  Baohong Sun Promotion Effect on Endogenous Consumption , 2005 .

[29]  Scott A. Neslin,et al.  The Effect of Promotion on Consumption: Buying More and Consuming it Faster , 1998 .

[30]  N. Epley,et al.  Putting adjustment back in the anchoring and adjustment heuristic. , 2002 .

[31]  V. Padmanabhan,et al.  The Decomposition of Promotional Response: An Empirical Generalization , 1999 .

[32]  E. Robert Pizzas: or Square? Psychophysical Biases in Area Comparisons , 2001 .

[33]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[34]  B. Wansink,et al.  'Bottoms Up!' The Influence of Elongation on Pouring and Consumption Volume , 2003 .