Consumers often compare brands on specific product attributes using numerical and verbal information. We report three experiments that examined comparisons of pairs of numerical and verbal labels describing product attributes. Past psychological findings on the speed of comparisons, the effect of distances between pairs of labels being compared, and the effect of task instructions were assessed in a product attribute context. Consistent with earlier work, numerical label pairs were judged faster than either verbal pairs or numerical/verbal pairs. Evidence of the effects of distance and task instructions was found for numerical/verbal label pairs. However, contrary to past findings, these effects did not occur consistently with either purely verbal or purely numerical pairs. In addition, consumer preference for higher or lower values on an attribute was hypothesized and found to influence comparisons. The findings are interpreted in terms of a psychological model of comparative judgment. Explanations offered for inconsistent findings include the possibility of surface‐level (vs. meaning‐level) processing of the product attribute labels, particularly for numerical label pairs.

Numerical magnitude information, such as 32 mpg , is often specified as a number in the context of a unit of measurement for a specific attribute, whereas verbal magnitude information such as high mileage , is usually a generic descriptor that may apply to several attributes. Because of its specificity, numerical information may be easier to distinguish from other information and hence, easier to encode and retrieve than is verbal information. However, numerical labels often lack inherent meaning, whereas verbal information conveys meaning more readily. Based on this reasoning, we generate and test hypotheses about how numerical and verbal information is processed and remembered following learning, judgment, and choice tasks. Across several studies, numerical information was found to require less processing time, recognized faster and more accurately, and recalled more exactly, than verbal information for a learning task. However, some of these advantages for numerical over verbal information were found to persist following a judgment task or a choice task. Additional studies demonstrate that these processing and memory differences between numerical and verbal information can be reduced or eliminated by (a) presenting all information along an attribute either verbally or numerically so that both verbal and numerical information are equated on attribute specificity, and (b) presenting numerical information in the form of numbers on a rating scale so that it is similar to verbal information in terms of conveying meaning. The findings suggest that the key to processing and memory differences between different types of magnitude information may lie in how specifically the magnitude information is linked to an attribute and also how readily it conveys meaning in an information processing context.

This research examines the relationship between literacy and consumer memory. The effects of a variety of stimuli at exposure (i.e., brand names, brand signatures, and products in usage) on memory (i.e., recognition, stem‐completion tasks) were examined for a range of literacy. In a series of experiments, we find that the use of pictorial representations of brands (i.e., brand signatures) results in superior brand memory for individuals with lower literacy levels when compared to those at higher literacy levels. This effect is shown to occur not due to pictorial elements per se, but due to pictorial elements with a 1‐to‐1 correspondence with reality, i.e., which match the form in which they were originally encoded in memory. Moreover, this effect does not persist with stimulus‐rich pictures of brands in usage, pointing to boundary conditions with the use of pictorial information.