Attraction and superiority effects in the Chilean marketplace: Do they exist with real brands?

Journal of Business Research

Volumn 66, Issue 10, 2013, Pages 1780-1786

  Celedon, Paulina ^a   Milberg, Sandra ^b   Sinn, Francisca ^b  

^a Matrix Consulting   (Chile)

^b UNIVERSIDAD ADOLFO IBÁÑEZ   (Chile)

Author keywords

Attraction effect; Brand; Consumer choice

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878649346     PISSN: 01482963     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.01.010     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Bristow D.N., Schneider K.C., Schuler D.K. The brand dependence scale: Measuring consumers' use of brand name to differentiate among product alternatives. The Journal of Product and Brand Management 2002, 11:343-356.
2. Broniarczyk S.M., Alba J.W. The importance of brand in brand extension. Journal of Marketing Research 1994, 31:214-228.
3. Chernev A. Decision focus and consumer choice among assortments. Journal of Consumer Research 2006, 33:50-59.
4. Dawar N., Parker P. Marketing universals: Consumers' use of brand name, price, physical appearance, and retailer reputation as signals of product quality. Journal of Marketing 1994, 58:81-95.
5. Dhar R., Nowlis S.M., Sherman S.J. Trying hard or hardly trying: An analysis of context effects in choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2000, 9:189-200.
6. Dhar R., Simonson I. The effect of forced choice on choice. Journal of Marketing Research 2003, 15:146-160.
7. Erdem T., Swait J. Brand equity as a signaling phenomenon. Journal of Consumer Psychology 1998, 7:131-157.
8. Erdem T., Swait J. Brand credibility, brand consideration, and choice. Journal of Consumer Research 2004, 31:191-198.
9. Erdem T., Swait J., Valenzuela A. Brands as signal: A cross-country validation study. Journal of Marketing 2006, 70:34-49.
10. Ha Y.W., Park S., Ahn H.K. The influence of categorical attributes on choice context effects. Journal of Consumer Research 2009, 36:463-477.
11. Heath T.B., Chatterjee S. How entrants affect multiple brands: A dual attraction mechanism. Advances in Consumer Research 1991, 18:768-772.
12. Heath T.B., Chatterjee S. Asymmetric decoy effects on lower-quality versus higher-quality brands: Meta-analytic and experimental evidence. Journal of Consumer Research 1995, 22:268-282.
13. Heilman C.M., Bowman D., Wright G.P. The evolution of brand preferences and choice behaviors of consumers new to a market. Journal of Marketing Research 2000, 37:139-155.
14. Houghton D.C., Kardes F.R., Mathieu A., Simonson I. Correction processes in consumer choice. Marketing Letters 1999, 10:107-112.
15. Hoyer W.D., Brown S.P. Effects of brand awareness on choice for a common, repeat-purchase product. Journal of Consumer Research 1990, 17:141-148.
16. Huber J., Payne J.W., Puto C. Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research 1982, 9:90-98.
17. Huber J., Puto C. Market boundaries and product choice: Illustrating attraction and substitution effects. Journal of Consumer Research 1983, 10:31-44.
18. Keller K.L. Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer based brand equity. Journal of Marketing 1993, 57:1-22.
19. Klink R., Smith D.C. Threats to the external validity of brand extension research. Journal of Marketing Research 2001, 38:326-335.
20. Lehmann D.R., Pan Y. Context effects, new brand entry, and consideration sets. Journal of Marketing Research 1994, 31:364-374.
21. Lynch J.G. On the external validity of experiments in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research 1982, 9:225-239.
22. Malaviya P., Sivakumar K. The moderating effect of product category knowledge and attribute importance on the attraction effect. Marketing Letters 1998, 9:93-106.
23. Milberg S.J., Sinn F. Vulnerability of global brands to negative feedback effects. Journal of Business Research 2008, 61:684-690.
24. Milberg S.J., Sinn F., Goodstein R.C. Consumer reactions to brand extensions in a competitive context: Does fit still matter?. Journal of Consumer Research 2010, 37:543-553.
25. Mishra S., Umesh U.N., Stem D.E. Antecedents of the attraction effect: An information-processing approach. Journal of Marketing Research 1993, 30:331-349.
26. Miyazaki A., Grewal D., Goodstein R.C. The effect of multiple extrinsic cues on quality perceptions: A matter of consistency. Journal of Consumer Research 2005, 32:146-153.
27. Pan Y., Lehmann D.R. The influence of new brand entry on subjective brand judgments. Journal of Consumer Research 1993, 20:76-86.
28. Park C.W., Lessig V.P. Familiarity and its impact on consumer decision biases and heuristics. Journal of Consumer Research 1981, 8:223-231.
29. Park C.W., Milberg S.J., Lawson R. Evaluation of brand extensions: The role of feature similarity and brand concept consistency. Journal of Consumer Research 1991, 18:185-193.
30. Purohit D., Srivastava J. Effects of manufacturer reputation, retailer reputation, and product warranty on consumer judgments of product quality: A cue diagnosticity framework. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2001, 10:123-134.
31. Ratneshwar S., Shocker A.D., Stewart D.W. Toward understanding the attraction effect: The implications of product stimulus meaningfulness and familiarity. Journal of Consumer Research 1987, 13:520-533.
32. Reibstein D.J., Day G., Wind J. Guest Editorial: Is marketing academia losing its way?. Journal of Marketing 2009, 74:1-3.
33. Sen S. Knowledge, information mode, and the attraction effect. Journal of Consumer Research 1998, 16:158-174.
34. Simonson I. Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects. Journal of Consumer Research 1989, 16:158-175.
35. Simonson I., Tversky A. Choice in context: Trade-off contrast and extremeness aversion. Journal of Marketing Research 1992, 29:281-295.
36. Sinn F., Milberg S.J., Epstein L.D., Goodstein R.C. Compromising the compromise effect: Brands matter. Marketing Letters 2007, 18:223-236.
37. Smith D.C., Park C.W. The effects of brand extensions on market share and advertising efficiency. Journal of Marketing Research 1992, 29:296-313.
38. Winer R.S. Experimentation in the 21st century: The importance of external validity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1999, 27:349-358.