User:Srs1016/sandbox

(all under "Marketing" heading)

Attribute Based Processing

In regards to consumer behavior, attribute based processing involves a substantial amount of inter-brand comparisons. Each product or brand is evaluated by their unique and most attractive attributes, and then are compared across alternative options. Attributed based processing thereby subjugates  the consumer to high levels of decision conflict and preference uncertainty.

(hyperlink, under marketing heading) Alternative Based Processing

Conversely, alternative based processing evaluates options more holistically through combining different product values across various attributes within an alternative. The advantages of each option are considered one at a time, and relies more on an impression rather than its relationship to alternatives.

(Before the attractiveness effect hyperlink under marketing heading) Compromise Effect

Moreover, when a consumer experiences the compromise effect, each option is weighed with its own positive and negative attributes, rendering all alternatives equally attractive. As such, consumers experience difficulty identifying the best option and end up choosing a product that does not satisfy their preferences, but rather solves the difficult decision making task they are faced with during the purchasing process.

(add to attractiveness effect hyperlink under marketing heading) Attractiveness Effect (continued)

More specifically, the attractiveness effect is perpetuated by a situation in which the alternatives’ defining attributes are significantly inferior to the target option in a choice set. Studies have shown that adding a “no choice” option, or an option that is extreme in terms of its dissimilarity and inferiority to the target option also enhances the attractiveness effect. The attractiveness effect of one particular product or choice set is also referred to as asymmetrical dominance.

(additional subheading under Marketing section) Studies Measuring the Context Effect on Consumer Behavior

In a study conducted on 55 undergraduate marketing students at a university in Korea, researchers set up a mixed design to test if a visual framing promoting a greater use of alternative-based processing would reduce the perceived attractiveness of compromise options. They also hypothesized that the decision process would have minimal influence on the choice of asymmetrically dominating options. Researchers split the participants into three conditions: attribute based processing treatment, alternative based processing treatment, and the control. In order to perpetuate attribute and alternative based processing in their participants, researchers used different visual tactics to present each product. In the attribute processing group, horizontal lines were drawn in between each attribute of a product option, highlighting the various attributes of the different products within the same choice set. Conversely, in the alternative treatment group, vertical lines were drawn in between individual product options to visually separate them from one another. The control group had no visual framing treatment. Further, researchers simultaneously assessed how the attractiveness and compromise effect impacts how likely a consumer is to choose a target brand by listing two attributes for each of the three products in the choice set. Depending on the extremity in differences between each product attribute, options were either placed in the compromise or asymmetrically dominant subgroup.

The findings of this study proved their hypothesis correct, as the frequency of how often the compromise option was chosen heavily depended on the difference in visual framing of the attribute and alternative based processing treatments. The study found that when the alternative treatment was not promoted, the compromise effect took precedence over the participants’ decision making. Further, the study showed that there was no significant difference between the attribute and control treatments, as the probability of choosing an asymmetrically dominant option was equally high across all three framing conditions.