 Mental Accounting for Percentages Revisited: The Interplay of a Computational Error and Constituent Outcome CategorizationHaipeng (Allan) Chen () and Haoying Sun Journal of Marketing Behavior, 2018, vol. 3, issue 2, 153-165 Abstract: Drawing upon Kahneman and Tversky's (1979) prospect theory, Thaler (1985) proposed the mental accounting principles, which Heath et al. (1995) applied to outcomes expressed in the percentage format. Following the emerging literature on how consumers process percentages (Chen et al. 2012; Chen and Rao 2007), we identify the existence of a computational error and make predictions on how the error interacts with the categorization of a mixed percentage gain to affect hedonic framing. Our empirical evidence replicates the mental accounting principle among mathematically unsophisticated individuals who are misled by the computational error to perceive economically different but nominally equivalent options as the same when the constituent outcomes of a mixed percentage gain are categorized in different mental accounts. When they are categorized in the same mental account, however, unsophisticated individuals are indifferent between economically different but nominally equivalent options. We conclude by discussing how the computational error interacts with categorization of constituent outcomes to produce framing effects. Keywords: Behavioral Decision Making; Individual Decision Making; Consumer Behavior (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:now:jnljmb:107.00000049 Access Statistics for this article More articles in Journal of Marketing Behavior from now publishers |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.