Refine
Document type
- Bachelor Thesis (3)
Language
- English (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- No (3)
Keywords
- Context effect (3) (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.
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.
Prior research on choice in context demonstrated extremeness aversion to be very effective on consumers’ purchasing behaviour. However, it seems that previous studies have neglected to investigate the impact of the spatial arrangements of choice architectures on consumers purchasing behaviour. Based on indications of prior research, we pursued to demonstrate in this study that consumers who are uncertain regarding their
preferences tend to search for alternatives in the middle of a choice architecture. Therefore, we hypothesized that an alternative, positioned in the middle of a choice architecture, will present a relatively higher choice share. To research this hypothesis we conducted an online survey mainly in Central Europe, which involved a total number of
901 respondents at the age between 15 and 95. The study’s results demonstrate that the decision making of the majority of the participants is heavily influenced by a choice architecture’s spatial arrangement. It became evident that the choice share of one
alternative was higher when presented in the middle of a choice architecture than when presented in the periphery.