How Naive Theories Drive Opposing Inferences from the Same Information
Susan P. Mantel,
Frank R. Kardes and
Steven S. Posavac
Journal of Consumer Research, 2013, vol. 39, issue 6, 1185 - 1201
Consumers often make inferences to fill in gaps in knowledge when they do not have complete information regarding products. Eight experiments show that consumers often have contradictory naive theories about the implications of common market phenomena and that they draw different conclusions as a function of which naive theory is primed, even when available information is held constant. Results indicate that conflicting naive theories about pricing, sales promotion, product popularity versus scarcity, and technical language drive product evaluation. Consumers who have expertise in a given product category are less susceptible to the priming of a naive theory. This research contributes to more precise understanding of how consumers will respond to different levels of key marketing variables and how marketing tactics can backfire.
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (10) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:jconrs:doi:10.1086/668086
Access Statistics for this article
More articles in Journal of Consumer Research from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().