Existing research has shown that the “pennies-a-day” strategy of reframing a large aggregate expense as a small daily expense helps to reduce the perceived cost of a transaction (Nagle and Holden, 1995; Price, 1995; Gourville, 1998, 1999). This paper builds on this research and explores the robustness of the phenomenon across two dimensions – (1) the level of temporal aggregation and (2) the dollar magnitude of the transaction. First, we show that the effectiveness of a pennies-a-day strategy is not limited to per-day framing. Rather, we find a more general phenomenon in which a “less aggregate” expense is preferred to a “more aggregate” expense, such that if a per-day framing is preferred to a per-year framing, than a per-month framing also will be preferred to a per-year framing. Second, we show that this effectiveness reverses with the magnitude of the underlying expense, such that while a framing of “$1 per day” is preferred to one of “$365 per year,” a framing of “$4200 per year” is preferred to one of “$11.50 per day.”
[1]
Preferences Scientific.
Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky.
,
1982
.
[2]
A. Tversky,et al.
Contingent weighting in judgment and choice
,
1988
.
[3]
John T. Gourville.
The Effect of Implicit versus Explicit Comparisons on Temporal Pricing Claims
,
1999
.
[4]
R. Thaler.
Toward a positive theory of consumer choice
,
1980
.
[5]
G. Menon,et al.
When a day means more than a year: Effects of temporal framing on judgments of health risk
,
2004
.
[6]
John T. Gourville.
Pennies-a-Day: The Effect of Temporal Reframing on Transaction Evaluation
,
1998
.
[7]
Thomas T. Nagle,et al.
The Strategy and Tactics of Pricing
,
1988
.
[8]
A. Tversky,et al.
Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) :
,
2007
.