Knowledge that Transforms

Interpersonal expectancy effects research focuses on how one individual's expectations influence another individual's behavior. Also known as self‐fulfilling prophecies, interpersonal expectancy effects have been shown to be a significant phenomenon in human interaction. Unfortunately, interpersonal expectancy effects have been virtually neglected in the context of the marketing‐exchange process. Hence, two laboratory experiments were conducted to test the effects of experimentally‐induced expectations in simulated buyer–seller interactions. Study 1 was run to verify the existence of expectancy effects between buyers and sellers. In an effort to replicate and extend Study 1, Study 2 included authentic buyers, who, prior to actually interacting with a student seller, were given fictitious information regarding their partner. The information corresponded to either a positive or negative norm in exchange (role integrity and opportunism, respectively). Assessments of participants’ behavior during the interaction (e.g., time spent talking) and perceptions (e.g., self‐report items reflecting participants’ liking for each other) revealed that prior expectations affected buyer–seller interactions.

This article investigates inferences between elements in brand categories using an argument strength research paradigm. In 3 laboratory studies of brand categories, we found that consumers often generalize possession of an attribute from a specific category (e.g., Sony televisions) to a more general category (e.g., all Sony products) more readily than they generalize the attribute from the specific category (e.g., Sony televisions) to another specific category (e.g., Sony bicycles)—a counternormative phenomenon called the inclusion effect . Consistent with the category induction model of Osherson, Smith, Wilkie, Lopez, and Shafir (1990), the similarity between the premise and conclusion categories (e.g., televisions and bicycles) was a strong predictor of argument strength judgments. We also found that the inclusion effect was attenuated when the specific conclusion category increased in its typicality to the general category (e.g., Sony cameras vs. Sony bicycles). Presenting the general conclusion argument immediately followed by the specific conclusion argument (as opposed to presenting each argument alone) seemed to accentuate the inclusion effect, despite our expectation that increased salience of the judgmental inconsistencies (that lead to the counternormative reasoning) would reduce the effect. Although several rival explanations of the inclusion effect (including a conversational norms explanation) were ruled out, a conclusion plausibility explanation also appeared to account for some of the results.

This article integrates attitude and memory perspectives by examining how brand attitudes and attitude confidence decline over time. A review of the literature identifies 2 independent variables that may cause a decline in attitudes: (a) source of information (exposure to advertising or product trial) and (b) time of measurement (immediate or 1‐week delay). Hypotheses are developed that (a) attitude confidence will decline over time for participants exposed to advertising but not trial, (b) brand attitudes will decline over time for trial‐based attitudes but not those based on advertising, (c) a consequence of confidence decline is lowered attitude‐behavior consistency, and (d) reactivating attitudes will prevent declines in attitude and attitude confidence. Results generally confirm the hypotheses but also reveal some interesting and unexpected findings. Implications for current attitude and advertising models and future consumer research are discussed.

Seemingly equivalent preference assessment procedures (e.g., choose between a 40¢ Safeway brand cola and a 55¢ Coke) and matching (e.g., a Safeway brand cola costs 40¢; at what price would a Coke be equally attractive to you?) generate systematically different estimates of consumers’ price–quality trade‐offs. This result appears consistent with the prominence effect, whereby choices tend to weigh the prominent attribute more heavily than matching answers. Whereas prior accounts of prominence effect phenomena focused on characteristics of the choice task, we propose that the manner in which respondents match options is a major determinant of the choice–matching discrepancy. We suggest that matching answers tend to rely on proportional matching , superficial matching of attribute value intervals, rather than the attribute value at which the considered options are equally attractive. We also identify the attribute and alternative to which matching is applied, as moderators of its difference from choice. Based on our analysis we demonstrate how the large choice–matching preference discrepancy can be significantly reduced and even reversed. We discuss implications of this research for our understanding of task effects on consumer price–quality trade‐offs and mechanisms that underlie the prominence effect.

Research on brand extensions has mainly focused on the similarity between the extension and the core brand as a determinant of assimilation of the extension to the core brand. The studies reported here (a) investigate how the evaluation of an extension can be influenced by means other than actual product similarity and (b) emphasize the role of contrast effects in the evaluation of brand extensions. Two experiments illustrate that the use of brand information in evaluations of a brand extension can be influenced by superficial characteristics of the extension that are under marketers’ control, such as its name. In Experiment 1, a compact car manufactured by a sports car company received a more sports‐car‐typical evaluation when its name reflected the continuation rather than discontinuation of previous models. Experiment 2 suggests that name discontinuation elicits contrast to previous models. This contrast effect was more pronounced for nonexperts than for experts.

In 3 studies we demonstrate that the direction of context or information accessibility effects on consumer judgments is dependent on the comparison relevance and distinctness of the activated information. Accessible information yields contrastive judgment effects (that occur in both judgments of “new” and “familiar” stimuli) when the activated information is sufficiently distinct and comparison relevant to be used as a scale anchor, whereas it yields assimilative interpretation effects (that only occur in judgments of new stimuli of which the meaning is ambiguous) when the activated information is relatively indistinct and comparison irrelevant. Theoretical implications and practical recommendations are discussed.

This article examines how others’ opinions can influence a consumer's evaluation of a product. This influence is said to be informational when the consumer accepts it as evidence of the product's true nature. An anchoring and adjustment process is proposed to explain how information from others is combined with direct experience when consumers form a global evaluation of a product. Two experiments are conducted to test this explanation. Findings from the two experiments suggest that when others offer their opinions about the quality of a product, the opinions have the most potential to influence a consumer who has tried the product when the opinions are considered before the consumer considers the evaluative implications of his or her own product experience. Findings from a third experiment suggest that others’ opinions about product quality have limited potential to influence a consumer who has had an unambiguous experience with the product, even when conditions are most favorable for an influence to occur. The 3 experiments suggest that informational social influence obeys information processing principles associated with other kinds of private judgments.

Three experiments investigated the effects of syntactic complexity on the persuasiveness of advertising. Experiment 1 showed that, in a broadcast advertising context, syntactic complexity affects recall and recognition but not the persuasiveness of the advertising. However, Experiment 2 indicated that, in a print context, persuasiveness of an advertisement is affected by syntactic complexity. Finally, Experiment 3 demonstrated that motivation to process information interacts with syntactic complexity to determine the persuasiveness of print advertising. These results imply that the impact of syntactic complexity on advertising effectiveness is more complicated than previously thought.

Past research suggests that store atmosphere affects merchandise quality inferences, in turn affecting store image. Yet, lighting, music, and other atmospheric features also serve a social identity function (i.e., a social role). According to the functional theory of attitudes, appeals are most persuasive when they address the motives underlying the attitude targeted for change. If store atmosphere acts as a social identity appeal, then an aesthetically pleasing atmosphere should positively influence quality perceptions of social identity products (i.e., socially communicative products) but not utilitarian products (i.e., intrinsically rewarding products). To test this, two experiments were conducted that differed in the type of social and utilitarian products under evaluation and the degree of store information provided. The results of both studies indicated that store atmosphere influenced perceptions of social identity products but had little effect on perceptions of utilitarian products. Furthermore, store atmosphere elicited different shopping motives and purchasing intentions. In addition to contributing to the understanding of how store atmosphere affects store inferences, this article extends previous research and theory on attitude functions by suggesting that situations can elicit motives as well as serve as subtle, product‐nonspecific appeals, selectively affecting judgments of products that are consistent (rather than inconsistent) with the situational appeal's function.