Refine
Year of publication
- 2021 (4) (remove)
Document type
- Bachelor Thesis (4)
Language
- English (4)
Has full text
- No (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- No (4)
Keywords
- Extremeness aversion (4) (remove)
Course of studies
The objective of this paper is to build on well-established theories like extremeness aversion and extend those to a spatial context. Extremeness aversion occurs as disadvantages loom larger than advantages. Therefore decision-makers tend to avoid the extremes and choose the middle alternative, implying that a product that becomes the intermediate alternative becomes more attractive. However, a vast majority of literature seems to neglect spatial aspects. Therefore, we propose that positioning a product in the middle of a choice architecture will lead to a relative increase in likelihood of its being chosen. In a six-week field experiment in a retail market, we displayed three choice sets of different categories. Results are inconsistent with previous research, as there was no increase in choice for the product positioned in the middle of the choice architecture.
Important prior studies regarding customers purchasing behaviour proved that customers tend to avoid products showing extreme deflections in attributes and feel more comfortable purchasing articles with a balance in attributes (compromise option). Hence, for marketers, supermarket chains etc., it can be of an advantage knowing whether this effect can also be measured or even be amplified in where the spatial middle of a shelf is occupied with the compromise option. We hypothesized that the tendency towards the compromise option, eventually even higher in the spatial middle position, can also be observed in an in-store experiment with real-life circumstances. In order to fulfil our study, we worked with a hardware store in southern Germany. In total, we sold 610 items consisting of 5 different products with each 3 alternatives. The result corroborated our hypothesis partly as it showed in some cases, the compromise option was indeed preferred when in the middle of a choice set. Nevertheless, in many cases, products on extreme position with “extreme” attributes were preferred. Leading to the conclusion that other factors like the brand may have higher importance in purchasing decisions.
Understanding how consumers choose between alternatives and how they use the context in doing so is the aim of numerous consumer behaviour studies. The effect of extremeness aversion has been found to be a replicable phenomenon in this field. According to this context effect, alternatives with extreme numerical attributes are less likely to be chosen than the alternative with intermediate attributes in a choice set. A new research direction regarding extremeness aversion considers not only these numerical attributes of a choice set but also the implications of the spatial dimension. Therefore, it has been hypothesized that there could also be a preference for the spatial middle in a choice set. As the phenomenon of extremeness aversion corresponds with decision uncertainty, this research aimed to investigate numerical and spatial extremeness aversion in a product class of high uncertainty and complexity. Thus, consumer preferences regarding the product class of wine were analysed in different choice architectures. Interviews in a wine specialist store and an online survey were conducted with a total number of 924 participants. The study’s results are not consistent over both data collection methods. However, independently of each other, they support the notion that consumer choices may be partly influenced by a preference for the numerical middle option, as well as by a preference for the spatial middle option.
Prior research agrees that consumer choice is heavily influenced by the choice context.
According to the compromise effect, the middle alternative in attribute space is preferred over more extreme options. However, the role of the spatial order of alternatives seems to be neglected by most compromise effect studies. Usually, alternatives are ordered by attributes, meaning that the compromise option is placed in the spatial middle of the choice set, despite the fact that research indicates a consumer preference for the spatial middle of a choice set. To investigate this issue, we hypothesized that an alternative would be chosen more frequently when positioned in the spatial middle of a choice set versus at the edge of a choice set. We assumed that this effect would be stronger when consumers are unfamiliar with a product category. Therefore, we expected to observe a negative correlation between decision-makers’ familiarity with a product category and their tendency to choose an alternative more frequently when positioned in the spatial middle of a choice. To find out, we conducted an online survey targeting 907 university students. The results support our hypothesis and the notion that the compromise effect might be partly driven by a preference for the spatial middle position of a choice set rather than only by a preference for the compromise option.