How Naive Theories Drive Opposing Inferences from the Same Information

Hélène Deval, Susan P. Mantel, Frank R. Kardes and Steven S. Posavac

Journal of Consumer Research, 2013, vol. 39, issue 6, 1185 - 1201

Abstract: 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.

Date: 2013
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (23)

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/668086 (application/pdf)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/668086 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:jconrs:doi:10.1086/668086

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Consumer Research is currently edited by Bernd Schmitt, June Cotte, Markus Giesler, Andrew Stephen and Stacy Wood

More articles in Journal of Consumer Research from Journal of Consumer Research Inc.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ().