市场中错误的消费者评价:消费者评价如何受到原始性能分数的影响

Julian Givi, Daniel M. Grossman, Frank R. Kardes
{"title":"市场中错误的消费者评价:消费者评价如何受到原始性能分数的影响","authors":"Julian Givi, Daniel M. Grossman, Frank R. Kardes","doi":"10.1002/mar.21944","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A consumer's evaluation of an entity in the marketplace, such as a product or service provider, is one of the most important factors in determining whether or not they consume it. Indeed, the relationship between perceived quality and likelihood of purchase is a central finding in marketing. Oftentimes, consumers make these evaluations after learning information regarding the entity's performance according to some metric (i.e., its “raw score”) and how the entity's performance compares to the performances of other entities (i.e., its accompanying percentile). In these cases, consumers should discount the raw score and exclusively use the percentile, to adjust for differences in the “friendliness” of the metric. In the present work, we demonstrate that consumers fail to evaluate entities in this way, incorporating raw scores into their assessments when they should not. We also show that this effect is the result of an anchoring and insufficient adjustment process. Consumers anchor on the notion that a good (vs. bad) raw score equates to a favorable (vs. unfavorable) performance and fail to adjust from this anchor when considering the percentile information about how the entity's raw score fits into the greater distribution. Moreover, we demonstrate that how a consumer evaluates an entity, indeed, influences their likelihood of consuming it, highlighting the marketing implications of this phenomenon. We conclude by discussing how this work adds to the literatures on consumer psychology, anchoring and adjustment, biases, judgment, and processing.","PeriodicalId":501349,"journal":{"name":"Psychology and Marketing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Erroneous consumer evaluations in the marketplace: How consumer evaluations are biased by raw performance scores\",\"authors\":\"Julian Givi, Daniel M. Grossman, Frank R. Kardes\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/mar.21944\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A consumer's evaluation of an entity in the marketplace, such as a product or service provider, is one of the most important factors in determining whether or not they consume it. Indeed, the relationship between perceived quality and likelihood of purchase is a central finding in marketing. Oftentimes, consumers make these evaluations after learning information regarding the entity's performance according to some metric (i.e., its “raw score”) and how the entity's performance compares to the performances of other entities (i.e., its accompanying percentile). In these cases, consumers should discount the raw score and exclusively use the percentile, to adjust for differences in the “friendliness” of the metric. In the present work, we demonstrate that consumers fail to evaluate entities in this way, incorporating raw scores into their assessments when they should not. We also show that this effect is the result of an anchoring and insufficient adjustment process. Consumers anchor on the notion that a good (vs. bad) raw score equates to a favorable (vs. unfavorable) performance and fail to adjust from this anchor when considering the percentile information about how the entity's raw score fits into the greater distribution. Moreover, we demonstrate that how a consumer evaluates an entity, indeed, influences their likelihood of consuming it, highlighting the marketing implications of this phenomenon. We conclude by discussing how this work adds to the literatures on consumer psychology, anchoring and adjustment, biases, judgment, and processing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501349,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology and Marketing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology and Marketing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21944\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology and Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21944","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

消费者对市场实体(如产品或服务提供商)的评价是决定他们是否消费的最重要因素之一。事实上,感知质量和购买可能性之间的关系是市场营销的一个重要发现。通常情况下,消费者在根据某些指标(即其“原始分数”)了解有关实体性能的信息以及实体性能与其他实体性能的比较(即其伴随的百分位数)之后做出这些评估。在这种情况下,消费者应该不考虑原始分数,而只使用百分位数,以调整指标的“友好性”差异。在目前的工作中,我们证明了消费者没有以这种方式评估实体,在他们不应该的时候将原始分数纳入他们的评估。我们还表明,这种效应是锚定和调整不足过程的结果。消费者锚定的观念是,一个好的(vs.坏的)原始分数等于一个有利的(vs.不利的)表现,并且在考虑有关实体的原始分数如何适应更大分布的百分位数信息时,无法从这个锚进行调整。此外,我们证明了消费者如何评估一个实体,确实会影响他们消费它的可能性,突出了这一现象的营销含义。最后,我们讨论了这项工作如何增加了关于消费者心理学、锚定和调整、偏见、判断和加工的文献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Erroneous consumer evaluations in the marketplace: How consumer evaluations are biased by raw performance scores
A consumer's evaluation of an entity in the marketplace, such as a product or service provider, is one of the most important factors in determining whether or not they consume it. Indeed, the relationship between perceived quality and likelihood of purchase is a central finding in marketing. Oftentimes, consumers make these evaluations after learning information regarding the entity's performance according to some metric (i.e., its “raw score”) and how the entity's performance compares to the performances of other entities (i.e., its accompanying percentile). In these cases, consumers should discount the raw score and exclusively use the percentile, to adjust for differences in the “friendliness” of the metric. In the present work, we demonstrate that consumers fail to evaluate entities in this way, incorporating raw scores into their assessments when they should not. We also show that this effect is the result of an anchoring and insufficient adjustment process. Consumers anchor on the notion that a good (vs. bad) raw score equates to a favorable (vs. unfavorable) performance and fail to adjust from this anchor when considering the percentile information about how the entity's raw score fits into the greater distribution. Moreover, we demonstrate that how a consumer evaluates an entity, indeed, influences their likelihood of consuming it, highlighting the marketing implications of this phenomenon. We conclude by discussing how this work adds to the literatures on consumer psychology, anchoring and adjustment, biases, judgment, and processing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信