The Importance of Selling Formats: When Integrating Purchase and Quantity Decisions Increases Sales

References

• Armel KC, Beaumel A, Rangel A (2008) Biasing simple choices by manipulating relative visual attention. Judgment Decision Making 3(5):396–403.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barton K (2020) MuMIn: Multi-model inference [R package]. Version 1.43.17. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MuMIn.Google Scholar
• Brenner L, Rottenstreich Y, Sood S (1999) Comparison, grouping, and preference. Psych. Sci. 10(3):225–229.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chandran S, Morwitz VG (2005) Effects of participative pricing on consumers’ cognitions and actions: A goal theoretic perspective. J. Consumer Res. 32(September):249–259.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clee MA, Wicklund RA (1980) Consumer behavior and psychological reactance. J. Consumer Res. 6(4):389–405.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clifford T (2021) Domino’s Pizza CEO says phone ordering is near obsolete as digital sales continue to climb. Accessed November 2, 2021, https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/29/dominos-ceo-says-digital-sales-continue-to-climb-pandemic.html.Google Scholar
• Dewey J (1910) How We Think (DC Heath, Lexington, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dhar R (1997) Consumer preference for a no-choice option. J. Consumer Res. 24(2):215–231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dhar R, Nowlis SM (2004) To buy or not to buy: Response mode effects on consumer choice. J. Marketing Res. 41(4):423–432.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dhar R, Huber J, Khan U (2007) The shopping momentum effect. J. Marketing Res. 44(3):370–378.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fitzsimons GJ, Lehmann DR (2004) Reactance to recommendations: When unsolicited advice yields contrary responses. Marketing Sci. 23(1):82–94.Link, Google Scholar
• Fox CR, Rottenstreich Y (2003) Partition priming in judgment under uncertainty. Psych. Sci. 14(3):195–200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gartner (2019) Gartner says worldwide PC shipments declined 4.3 percent in 4w18 and 1.3 percent for the year. Accessed July 7, 2019, https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2019-01-10-gartner-says-worldwide-pc-shipments-declined-4-3-perc.Google Scholar
• Gollwitzer PM (1990) Action phases and mind-sets. Higgins ET, Sorrentino RM, eds. Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior (Guilford Press, New York), 53–92.Google Scholar
• Goodrich B, Gabry J, Ali I, Brilleman S (2020) RStanArm: Bayesian applied regression modeling via Stan [R package]. Version 2.19.2. https://mc-stan.org/rstanarm.Google Scholar
• Greenleaf EA, Lehmann DR (1995) Reasons for substantial delay in consumer decision making. J. Consumer Res. 22(2):186–199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grice HP (1975) Logic and conversation. Cole P, Morgan JL, eds. Syntax and Semantics, Volume 3: Speech Acts (Academic Press, New York), 41–58.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hayes A (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. (Guilford Publications, New York).Google Scholar
• Howard JA, Sheth JN (1969) The Theory of Buyer Behavior (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Inman JJ, Peter AC, Raghubir P (1997) Framing the deal: The role of restrictions in accentuating deal value. J. Consumer Res. 24(1):68–79.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson EJ, Hershey J, Meszaros J, Kunreuther H (1993) Framing, probability distortions, and insurance decisions. J. Risk Uncertainty 7(1):35–51.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Frederick S (2002) Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. Gilovich T, Griffin D, Kahneman D, eds. Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 49–81.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kamenica E (2008) Contextual inference in markets: On the informational content of product lines. Amer. Econom. Rev. 5:2127–2149.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kollat DT, Willett RP (1967) Customer impulse purchasing behavior. J. Marketing Res. 4(1):21–31.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kotler P, Keller K (2014) Marketing Management, 15th ed. (Pearson, New York).Google Scholar
• Lemon KN, Verhoef PC (2016) Understanding customer experience throughout the customer journey. J. Marketing 80(6):69–96.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lessne GJ, Notarantonio EM (1988) The effect of limits in retail advertisements: A reactance theory perspective. Psych. Marketing 5(1):33–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levav J, Reinholtz N, Lin C (2012) The effect of ordering decisions by choice-set size on consumer search. J. Consumer Res. 39(3):585–599.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lieberman A, Duke K, Amir O (2019) How incentive framing can harness the power of social norms. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processing 151:118–131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Litman L (2021) Comparing data quality on CloudResearch to Prolific: A reply to Prolific’s recent false claims. Accessed February 10, 2022, https://www.cloudresearch.com/resources/blog/comparing-data-quality-on-cloudresearch-to-prolific-reply/.Google Scholar
• Litman L, Robinson J, Abberbock T (2017) TurkPrime.com: A versatile crowdsourcing data acquisition platform for the behavioral sciences. Behav. Res. Methods 49(2):433–442.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Market Research Future (2019) Laser printer market research report. Accessed July 7, 2019, https://www.marketresearchfuture.com/reports/laser-printer-market-4334.Google Scholar
• McFadden D (1973) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Zarembka P, ed. Frontiers in Econometrics (Academic Press, New York), 105–142.Google Scholar
• McKenzie CRM, Nelson JD (2003) What a speaker’s choice of frame reveals: Reference points, frame selection, and framing effects. Psych. Bull. Rev. 10(3):596–602.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McShane BB, Böckenholt U (2017) Single-paper meta-analysis: Benefits for study summary, theory testing, and replicability. J. Consumer Res. 43(6):1048–1063.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moon A, VanEpps E (2021) Giving suggestions: Using quantity requests to increase donations. Working paper, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
• Nowlis SM, Dhar R, Simonson I (2010) The effect of decision order on purchase quantity decisions. J. Marketing Res. 47(4):725–737.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park CW, Jun SY, MacInnis DJ (2000) Choosing what I want vs. rejecting what I do not want: An application of decision framing to product option choice decisions. J. Marketing Res. 37(2):187–202.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parker JR, Schrift RY (2011) Rejectable choice sets: How seemingly irrelevant no-choice options affect consumer decision processes. J. Marketing Res. 48(5):840–854.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Payne JW (1976) Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 16(2):366–387.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Prelec D, Wernerfelt B, Zettelmeyer F (1997) The role of inference in context effects: Inferring what you want from what is available. J. Consumer Res. 24(1):118–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puto CP (1987) The framing of buying decisions. J. Consumer Res. 14(3):301–315.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schrift RY, Parker JR, Zauberman G, Srna S (2018) Multi-stage decision processes: The impact of attribute order on how consumers mentally represent their choice. J. Consumer Res. 44(6):1307–1324.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwarz N (1999) Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers. Amer. Psych. 54(2):93–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shugan SM (1980) The cost of thinking. J. Consumer Res. 7(2):99–111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simmons J, Nelson L (2020) Data Replicada #7. Accessed February 10, 2022, http://datacolada.org/90.Google Scholar
• Simonson I (1989) Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects. J. Consumer Res. 16(September):158–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stilley KM, Inman JJ, Wakefield KL (2010) Planning to make unplanned purchases? The role of in-store slack in budget deviation. J. Consumer Res. 37(2):264–278.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tannenbaum D, Fox CR, Goldstein NJ (2021) Partitioning menu options to nudge single-item choice. Working paper, David Eccles School of Business, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
• Thomadsen R, Rooderkerk RP, Amir O, Arora N, Bollinger B, Hansen K, John L (2018) How context affects choice. Customer Needs Solutions 5(1):3–14.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tingley D, Yamamoto T, Hirose K, Keele L, Imai K (2014) mediation: R package for causal mediation analysis. J. Statist. Software 59(5):1–38.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trope Y, Liberman N (2010) Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psych. Rev. 117(2):440–463.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481):453–458.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Shafir E (1992) Choice under conflict: The dynamics of deferred decision. Psych. Sci. 3(6):358–361.Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1947) Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, 2nd ed. (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Wansink B, Kent RJ, Hoch SJ (1998) An anchoring and adjustment model of purchase quantity decisions. J. Marketing Res. 35(1):71–81.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wei E (2018) Invisible asymptotes: Shipping fees. Remains of the Day (May 22), Accessed March 30, 2019, https://www.eugenewei.com/blog/2018/5/21/invisible-asymptotes.Google Scholar
• Wernerfelt B (1994) Selling formats for search goods. Marketing Sci. 13(3):298–309.Link, Google Scholar
• Xu AJ, Wyer RS Jr (2007) The effect of mind-sets on consumer decision strategies. J. Consumer Res. 34(4):556–566.Crossref, Google Scholar