Consumer Choice Seem 'Obvious' to a Naive

¶ … consumer choice seem 'obvious' to a naive observer, namely that consumers will inevitably prefer cheaper products over more expensive ones, and more products rather than fewer items. However, psychological research suggests that 'common sense' does not always hold true when it comes to market research, hence the need for companies to spend money on obtaining such findings to improve the use of scarce money and time when seeking to reach the public.

This paper will present a review of three peer-reviewed articles in the field of consumer research on human subjects which provide further nuance to the study of consumption habits. According to Dai & Fishbach (2014), although the presence of products can stimulate the desire to consume, so can the absence of such products. If 'absence makes the heart grow fonder' in the case of romance, the same can be said to be true of buying consumer goods.

One of the central questions asked in their research was: "When a product becomes temporarily unavailable, does desire for it increase or decrease over time?" (Xianchi & Fishbach 2014: 938). A survey of one hundred and five undergraduate students at the Chinese University of Hong Kong studying abroad who completed an online study on food consumption yielded the finding that the length of time spent away from favorite foods coupled with a lack of acceptable substitutes increased the saliency of the absent items (Xianchi & Fishbach 2014: 939).

A study of Jewish people keeping kosher over Passover yielded the finding that the desire for substitutes increased markedly with the duration of the absence of the forbidden food and the presence of salient substitutes decreased the desire for forbidden foods overall (Xianchi & Fishbach 2014: 941). However, another study which required participants to abstain from Facebook for its duration determined that desire increased in the face of the absence of acceptable substitutes.

Ultimately, the researchers concluded that duration of nonconsumption and the presence of substitutes were the critical factors in influencing desire: "In the absence of substitutes, longer nonconsumption increases desire (including, missing, liking, and consumption intention), whereas in the presence of salient substitutes, longer nonconsumption decreases desire" (Xianchi & Fishbach 2014: 948). These findings have critical implications for marketers. For products without substitutes of comparable value, artificially induced scarcity could boost consumption (such as seasonal 'rationing' of products).

For products with many substitutes, however, a shortage could result in permanently decreased demand, due to a shift to substitute goods. In another study involving human subjects, Mittleman (et al. 2014) found that the presentation of goods in a bundle had a material impact upon the items chosen by the consumers.

Overall, "variety seeking actually increases as choices move from broader brackets (bundled offerings) to narrower brackets (single offerings)…The offer framing effect suggests that the bare arrangement of products, and consequently, whether consumers have to perform one or multiple choice acts when choosing multiple items, impacts the decisions they make" (Mittleman 2014: 958). In a study of 289 participants given a choice between single and bundled soft drinks, participants were much more likely to seek variety when offered a single choice vs.

when they were presented with the option of choosing a combination of two soft drinks in a bundle (Mittleman 2014:957). A similar experiment with candy bars yielded the same result: participants were more likely to choose different candy bars when offered the bars singly, versus bundled. The researchers also conducted an experiment to see if items consumed as a whole vs. sequentially had the same influence upon consumer choice. Flowers, versus candy were used and the researchers found once again that presentation had a distinct effect on consumption patterns.

"Participants preferred a greater variety of flowers when they composed a bouquet than when they chose a preassembled bouquet" (Mittleman 2014:959). This suggests that when presenting 'bundled' products to consumers marketers should focus less upon variety vs. when presenting single offers and variety is more important when consumers are offered autonomy over choices (such as selecting offerings at a salad or ice cream bar vs. single items). A final study involving unexpected aspects of consumer choice was conducted by Ward & Dahl (2014).

In their study, they determined that rejection by salespersons of luxury brand items such as Gucci, Louis Vuitton, and Burberry actually increased their positive perceptions of a brand vs. rejection by a mass market (American Eagle, Gap, H&M) salesperson. Despite protests that.