Four experiments supported by six supplemental studies show that premium but higher-priced products (e.g., direct flights, larger-capacity data storage devices) are more popular when the additional cost is made explicit using differential price framing (DPF; e.g., “for $20 more”) rather than being left implicit, as in standard inclusive price framing (IPF; e.g., “for $60 total”). The DPF effect is driven by pricing focalism: relative to IPF, DPF creates a focus on the price difference, which, because it is smaller than the total price, leads to lower perceived expensiveness and thus greater choice share for the premium option. This price framing effect is robust to displaying the total cost of the purchase, bad deals, and easy-to-compute price differences, and it appears to be uniquely effective in pricing contexts. However, DPF effects are reduced among consumers who adopt a slow and effortful decision process. These findings have implications for research on price partitioning, the design of effective pricing strategy, the sources of expensiveness perceptions in the marketplace, and consumer welfare.
AbrahamAjay T.HamiltonRebecca (2019), “When Do Partitioned Prices Increase Demand? Meta-Analytic and Experimental Evidence,” Journal of Marketing Research, 55 (5), 686–703.
2.
AdavalRashmiMonroeKent B. (2002), “Automatic Construction and Use of Contextual Information for Product and Price Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (4), 572–88.
3.
AllardThomasGriffinDale (2017), “Comparative Price and the Design of Effective Product Communications,” Journal of Marketing, 81 (5), 16–29.
4.
BagchiRajeshDavisDerick F. (2012), “$29 for 70 Items or 70 Items for $29? How Presentation Order Affects Package Perceptions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (1), 62–73.
5.
BartYakovShankarVenkateshSultanFareenaUrbanGlen L. (2005), “Are the Drivers and Role of Online Trust the Same for All Web Sites and Consumers? A Large-Scale Exploratory Empirical Study,” Journal of Marketing, 69 (4), 133–52.
6.
BertiniMarcoWathieuLuc (2005), “Price Format and the Evaluation of Multicomponent Goods,” working paper.
BettmanJames R.LuceMary FrancesPayneJohn W. (1998), “Constructive Consumer Choice Processes,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (3), 187–217.
9.
BodenhausenGalen V.WyerRobert S. (1985), “Effects of Stereotypes in Decision Making and Information-Processing Strategies,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48 (2), 267–82.
10.
BurmanBidishaBiswasAbhijit (2007), “Partitioned Pricing: Can We Always Divide and Prosper?” Journal of Retailing, 83 (4), 423–36.
11.
CacioppoJohn T.PettyRichard E.FeinsteinJeffrey A.JarvisW. Blair G. (1996), “Dispositional Differences in Cognitive Motivation: The Life and Times of Individuals Varying in Need for Cognition,” Psychological Bulletin, 119 (2), 197–253.
12.
ChaikenShelly (1980), “Heuristic Versus Systematic Information Processing and the Use of Source Versus Message Cues in Persuasion,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39 (5), 752–66.
13.
ChaikenShellyMaheswaranDurairaj (1994), “Heuristic Processing Can Bias Systematic Processing: Effects of Source Credibility, Argument Ambiguity, and Task Importance on Attitude Judgment,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66 (3), 460–73.
14.
CheemaAmar (2008), “Surcharges and Seller Reputation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (1), 167–77.
15.
CronleyMaria L.PosavacSteven S.MeyerTracyKardesFrank R.KellarisJames J. (2005), “A Selective Hypothesis Testing Perspective on Price-Quality Inference and Inference-Based Choice,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15 (2), 159–69.
16.
DharRavi (1997), “Consumer Preference for a No-Choice Option,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (2), 215–31.
17.
EllisonGlenEllisonSara Fisher (2009), “Search, Obfuscation, and Price Elasticity on the Internet,” Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 77 (2), 427–52.
18.
EricksonGary M.JohanssonJohny K. (1985), “The Role of Price in Multi-Attribute Product Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (2), 195–99.
19.
EstelamiHooman (1999), “The Computational Effect of Price Endings in Multi-Dimensional Price Advertising,” Journal of Product & Brand Management, 8 (3), 244–56.
20.
FriestadMarianWrightPeter (1994), “The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts,” Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (1), 1–31.
21.
GabaixXavierLaibsonDavid (2006), “Shrouded Attributes, Consumer Myopia, and Information Suppression in Competitive Markets,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121 (2), 505–40.
22.
GourvilleJohn T. (1998), “Pennies-a-Day: The Effect of Temporal Reframing on Transaction Evaluation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (4), 395–408.
23.
GourvilleJohn T. (1999), “The Effect of Implicit Versus Explicit Comparisons on Temporal Pricing Claims,” Marketing Letters, 10 (2), 113–24.
24.
GreenleafEric A.JohnsonEric J.MorwitzVicki G.ShalevEdith (2016), “The Price Does Not Include Additional Taxes, Fees, and Surcharges: A Review of Research on Partitioned Pricing,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26 (1), 105–24.
25.
GrewalDhruvMarmorsteinHoward (1994), “Market Price Variation, Perceived Price Variation, and Consumers’ Price Search Decisions for Durable Goods,” Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (3), 453–60.
26.
GuhaAbhijitBiswasAbhijitGrewalDhruvVermaSwatiBanerjeeSomakNordfältJens (2018), “Reframing the Discount with a Comparison to the Sale Price: Does It Make the Discount More Attractive?” Journal of Marketing Research, 55 (3), 339–51.
27.
HamiltonRebecca W.SrivastavaJoydeep (2008), “When 2 + 2 Is Not the Same as 1 + 3: Variations in Price Sensitivity Across Components of Partitioned Prices,” Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (4), 450–61.
28.
HardistyDavid J.JohnsonEric J.WeberElke U. (2010), “A Dirty Word or a Dirty World? Attribute Framing, Political Affiliation, and Query Theory,” Psychological Science, 21 (1), 86–92.
29.
HayesAndrew F.PreacherKristopher J. (2013), “Statistical Mediation Analysis with a Multicategorical Independent Variable,” British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 67, 451–70.
HomburgChristianTotzekDirkKrämerMelanie (2014), “How Price Complexity Takes Its Toll: The Neglected Role of a Simplicity Bias and Fairness in Price Evaluations,” Journal of Business Research, 67 (6), 1114–22.
32.
HseeChristopher K. (1998), “Less Is Better: When Low-Value Options Are Valued More Highly Than High-Value Options,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 11 (2), 107–21.
33.
InbarYoelBottiSimonaHankoKarlene (2011), “Decision Speed and Choice Regret: When Haste Feels Like Waste,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47 (3), 533–40.
34.
JaniszewskiChrisLichtensteinDonald R. (1999), “A Range Theory Account of Price Perception,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (4), 353–68.
35.
KahnemanDanielTverskyAmos (1979), “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk,” Econometrica, 47 (2), 263–91.
36.
KanChristinaLichtensteinDonald R.GrantSusan JungJaniszewskiChris (2013), “Strengthening the Influence of Advertised Reference Prices Through Information Priming,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (6), 1078–96.
37.
KardesFrank R.PosavacSteven S.CronleyMaria L. (2004), “Consumer Inference: A Review of Processes, Bases, and Judgment Contexts,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14 (3), 230–56.
38.
KimJungkeunRaoRaghunath SinghKimKyeongheuiRaoAkshay R. (2011), “More or Less: A Model and Empirical Evidence on Preferences for Under- and Overpayment in Trade-in Transactions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (1), 157–71.
39.
KrishnaAradhnaBrieschRichardLehmannDonald R.YuanHong (2002), “A Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Price Presentation on Perceived Savings,” Journal of Retailing, 78 (2), 101–18.
40.
KyungEllie J.ThomasManojKrishnaAradhna (2017), “When Bigger Is Better (and When It Is Not): Implicit Bias in Numeric Judgments,” Journal of Consumer Research, 44 (1), 62–79.
41.
LevavJonathanHeitmannMarkHerrmannAndreasIyengarSheena S. (2010), “Order in Product Customization Decisions: Evidence from Field Experiments,” Journal of Political Economy, 118 (2), 274–99.
42.
MacInnisDeborah J.Whan ParkC. (1991), “The Differential Role of Characteristics of Music on High-and Low-Involvement Consumers’ Processing of Ads,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (2), 161–73.
43.
ManningKenneth C.SprottDavid E. (2009), “Price Endings, Left-Digit Effects, and Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, 36 (2), 328–35.
44.
MorwitzVickiGreenleafEricJohnsonEric J. (1998), “Divide and Prosper: Consumers’ Reaction to Partitioned Prices,” Journal of Marketing Research, 35 (4), 453–63.
45.
NovemskyNathanDharRaviSchwarzNorbertSimonsonItamar (2007), “Preference Fluency in Choice,” Journal of Marketing Research, 44 (3), 347–56.
46.
ParkC. WhanJunSung YoulMacInnisDeborah J. (2000), “Choosing What I Want Versus Rejecting What I Do Not Want: An Application of Decision Framing to Product Option Choice Decisions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 37 (2), 187–202.
47.
PayneJohn W.BettmanJames R.JohnsonEric J. (1988), “Adaptive Strategy Selection in Decision Making,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14 (3), 534–52.
PettyRichard E.CacioppoJohn T. (1984), “The Effects of Involvement on Responses to Argument Quantity and Quality: Central and Peripheral Routes to Persuasion,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46 (1), 69–81.
50.
RaghubirPriyaSrivastavaJoydeep (2002), “Effect of Face Value on Product Valuation in Foreign Currencies,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (3), 335–47.
51.
RobbertThomasRothStefan (2014), “The Flip Side of Drip Pricing,” Journal of Product & Brand Management, 23 (6), 413–19.
52.
SchindlerRobert M.KirbyPatrick N. (1997), “Patterns of Rightmost Digits Used in Advertised Prices: Implications for Nine-Ending Effects,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (2), 192–201.
53.
SchkadeDavid A.KahnemanDaniel (1998), “Does Living in California Make People Happy? A Focusing Illusion in Judgments of Life Satisfaction,” Psychological Science, 9 (5), 340–46.
54.
SchwarzNorbert (1998), “Accessible Content and Accessibility Experiences: The Interplay of Declarative and Experiential Information in Judgment,” Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2 (2), 87–99.
55.
SlovicPaul (1972), “From Shakespeare to Simon: Speculations—and Some Evidence—About Man’s Ability to Process Information,” Oregon Research Institute Bulletin, 12 (12), 1–19.
56.
SrivastavaJoydeepChakravartiDipankar (2011), “Price Presentation Effects in Purchases Involving Trade-Ins,” Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (5), 910–19.
57.
SukKwanhoLeeJiheonLichtensteinDonald R. (2012), “The Influence of Price Presentation Order on Consumer Choice,” Journal of Marketing Research, 49 (5), 708–17.
58.
SuriRajneeshMonroeKent B. (2003), “The Effects of Time Constraints on Consumers’ Judgments of Prices and Products,” Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (1), 92–104.
59.
ThalerRichard H. (1985), “Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice,” Marketing Science, 4 (3), 199–214.
60.
ThalerRichard H.JohnsonEric J. (1990), “Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice,” Management Science, 36 (6), 643–60.
61.
ThomasManojMorwitzVicki (2005), “Penny Wise and Pound Foolish: The Left-Digit Effect in Price Cognition,” Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (1), 54–64.
62.
ThomasManojMorwitzVicki G. (2009), “The Ease-of-Computation Effect: The Interplay of Metacognitive Experiences and Naive Theories in Judgments of Price Differences,” Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (1), 81–91.
63.
TverskyAmosKahnemanDaniel (1974), “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases,” Science, 185 (4157), 1124–31.
64.
TverskyAmosKahnemanDaniel (1981), “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice,” Science, 211 (4481), 453–58.
65.
TverskyAmosKahnemanDaniel (1986), “Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions,” Journal of Business, 59 (4), S251–78.
66.
VölcknerFranziskaRühleAlexanderSpannMartin (2012), “To Divide or Not to Divide? The Impact of Partitioned Pricing on the Informational and Sacrifice Effects of Price,” Marketing Letters, 23 (3), 719–30.
67.
WadhwaMonicaZhangKuangjie (2014), “This Number Just Feels Right: The Impact of Roundedness of Price Numbers on Product Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 41 (5), 1172–85.
68.
WesleyHutchinson J.AlbaJoseph W. (1991), “Ignoring Irrelevant Information: Situational Determinants of Consumer Learning,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (3), 325–45.
69.
WertenbrochKlausSomanDilipChattopadhyayAmitava (2007), “On the Perceived Value of Money: The Reference Dependence of Currency Numerosity Effects,” Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (1), 1–10.
70.
WilsonTimothy D.WheatleyThaliaMeyersJonathan M.GilbertDaniel T.AxsomDanny (2000), “Focalism: A Source of Durability Bias in Affective Forecasting,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78 (5), 821–36.
71.
YanDengfengPena-MarinJorge (2017), “Round Off the Bargaining: The Effects of Offer Roundness on Willingness to Accept,” Journal of Consumer Research, 44 (2), 381–95.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
