Liz Friedman, PhD Candidate in Behavioral Marketing at Yale School of Management, sits down with Americus to discuss her latest piece, published in JCR (Journal of Consumer Research) called “Apples, Oranges, and Erasers: The Effect of Considering Similar versus Dissimilar Alternatives on Purchase Decisions.” The paper focuses on consumer behavior when deciding whether to buy an item, considering alternative ways to spend their money, and purchasing goals.
Liz and Americus discuss a scenario in which a consumer wants to purchase a toaster. The research that Liz has completed digs into the consumer thought process as they ponder their toaster purchase, considering which attributes of the toaster are more or less important than other attributes. Also considered is the awareness that there are other ways to spend their money. For example, a consumer may ponder to buy the toaster or buy a shirt, or pay a bill, or go to the movies. Liz then notes that people buy things in order to achieve goals. The toaster may satisfy a goal of having warm, toasty food, but the consumer may also have other goals in mind, such as looking good or watching the latest superhero movie.
Liz directs us to her hypothesis centered around this goal achieving premise. If you present a dissimilar alternative, such as movie tickets, there is a possibility that attention toward the first item, the toaster, could decrease. But if you show a similar item, such as a different model of toaster or a panini press, they are more than likely to maintain their toaster goals.
This information can be of great insight to marketers, who can work to understand consumer purchase preferences and goals much better, and to also understand at what time in the purchase funnel to offer similar or even alternative suggestions.
In addition, Liz and Americus discuss some additional insights into the goal achieving premise. If a consumer is offered items from two different product categories that serve the same goal, Liz predicts that the second product will not dilute the original goal. They also discuss situations where a primary goal may be strong enough to not be swayed by alternative goals. If a goal is strong enough, say if you really like toast and your toaster is broken, you are more than likely to protect your toaster goal.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
