This work introduces a novel cue that consumption advisers, like stylists and interior designers, can use to signal expertise: combinatory recommendations. In a combinatory recommendation, a person offers an opinion about compatibility among multiple products intended for joint usage. Across nine studies conducted in the lab and field, the authors find that offering a combinatory recommendation signals greater expertise (Study 1a, Study 2a) and, specifically, greater depth of knowledge (Study 1b), compared with other types of recommendations involving the same number of products. This effect does not depend on the helpfulness of the adviser (Study 2b) but is qualified by features of the recommendation itself (Study 3a) as well as the type of combination recommended (Study 3b). Importantly, the authors find this effect to have important downstream consequences, as the increased perceptions of expertise that follow a combinatory recommendation improve consumers’ attitudes both toward products included in the recommendation and toward subsequent recommendations made by the adviser (Study 4, Study 5). The real-world persuasive value of combinatory recommendations is also tested in a field study (Study 6) that explores the effect of combinatory recommendations on click-through rates of Instagram advertisements.
AlbaJoseph W.HutchinsonJ. Wesley (1987), “Dimensions of Consumer Expertise,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (4), 411–54.
2.
AribargAnochaFoutzNatasha Zhang (2009), “Category-Based Screening in Choice of Complementary Products,” Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (4), 518–30.
3.
BabinJessicaHullandJohn (2019), “Exploring Online Consumer Curation as User-Generated Content,” Spanish Journal of Marketing–ESIC, 23 (3), 325–37.
4.
BellezzaSilviaGinoFrancescaKeinanAnat (2014), “The Red Sneakers Effect: Inferring Status and Competence from Signals of Nonconformity,” Journal of Consumer Research, 41 (1), 35–54.
ChandlerJesse J.PaolacciGabriele (2017), “Lie for a Dime: When Most Prescreening Responses Are Honest but Most Study Participants Are Impostors,” Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8 (5), 500–508.
7.
ClarksonJoshua J.JaniszewskiChrisCinelliMelissa D. (2013), “The Desire for Consumption Knowledge,” Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (6), 1313–29.
D’AngeloJennifer K.DiehlKristinCavanaughLisa A. (2019), “Lead by Example? Custom-Made Examples Created by Close Others Lead Consumers to Make Dissimilar Choices,” Journal of Consumer Research, 46 (4), 750–73.
10.
DavenportThomasGuhaAbhijitGrewalDhruvBressgottTimna (2020), “How Artificial Intelligence Will Change the Future of Marketing,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48 (1), 24–42.
11.
DengXiaoyanHuiSam K.Wesley HutchinsonJ. (2010), “Consumer Preferences for Color Combinations: An Empirical Analysis of Similarity-Based Color Relationships,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20 (4), 476–84.
12.
DiehlKristinVan HerpenEricaLambertonCait (2015), “Organizing Products with Complements Versus Substitutes: Effects on Store Preferences as a Function of Effort and Assortment Perceptions,” Journal of Retailing, 91 (1), 1–18.
FornellClaesLarckerDavid F. (1981), “Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics,” Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (3), 382–88.
16.
FriestadMarianWrightPeter (1994), “The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts,” Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (1), 1–31.
17.
GershoffAndrew D.BroniarczykSusan M.WestPatricia M. (2001), “Recommendation or Evaluation? Task Sensitivity in Information Source Selection,” Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (3), 418–38.
GuiltinanJoseph P. (1987), “The Price Bundling of Services: A Normative Framework,” Journal of Marketing, 51 (2), 74–85.
21.
HardestyDavid M.BeardenWilliam O.CarlsonJay P. (2007), “Persuasion Knowledge and Consumer Reactions to Pricing Tactics,” Journal of Retailing, 83 (2), 199–210.
22.
HardistyDavid J.WeberElke U. (2020), “Impatience and Savoring vs. Dread: Asymmetries in Anticipation Explain Consumer Time Preferences for Positive vs. Negative Events,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 30 (4), 598–613.
23.
HayesAndrew F. (2017), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York: Guilford Press.
24.
HildebrandChristianHäublGeraldHerrmannAndreas (2014), “Product Customization via Starting Solutions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (6), 707–25.
HuhYoung EunVosgerauJoachimMorewedgeCarey K. (2016), “Selective Sensitization: Consuming a Food Activates a Goal to Consume Its Complements,” Journal of Marketing Research, 53 (6), 1034–49.
27.
KallioEeva (2011), “Integrative Thinking Is the Key: An Evaluation of Current Research into the Development of Adult Thinking,” Theory & Psychology, 21 (6), 785–801.
28.
KarataşMustafaGürhan-CanliZeynep (2020), “When Consumers Prefer Bundles with Noncomplementary Items to Bundles with Complementary Items: The Role of Mindset Abstraction,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 30 (1), 24–39.
29.
LibaiBarakMullerEitanPeresRenana (2013), “Decomposing the Value of Word-of-Mouth Seeding Programs: Acceleration Versus Expansion,” Journal of Marketing Research, 50 (2), 161–76.
30.
MannucciPier VittorioYongKevyn (2018), “The Differential Impact of Knowledge Depth and Knowledge Breadth on Creativity over Individual Careers,” Academy of Management Journal, 61 (5), 1741–63.
31.
MillerBanksCurryBrett (2013), “Experts Judging Experts: The Role of Expertise in Reviewing Agency Decision Making,” Law & Social Inquiry, 38 (1), 55–71.
32.
MitchellAndrew A.DacinPeter A. (1996), “The Assessment of Alternative Measures of Consumer Expertise,” Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (3), 219–239.
33.
PackardGrantWootenDavid B. (2013), “Compensatory Knowledge Signaling in Consumer Word-of-Mouth,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23 (4), 434–50.
34.
PahariaNeeru (2020), “Who Receives Credit or Blame? The Effects of Made-to-Order Production on Responses to Unethical and Ethical Company Production Practices,” Journal of Marketing, 84 (1), 88–104.
35.
PalmeiraMauricio (2020), “Advice in the Presence of External Cues: The Impact of Conflicting Judgments on Perceptions of Expertise,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 156 (January), 82–96.
36.
PetreMarianSharpHelenJohnsonJeffrey (2006), “Complexity Through Combination: An Account of Knitwear Design,” Design Studies, 27 (2), 183–222.
37.
PettyRichard E.CacioppoJohn T. (1986), “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion,” in Communication and Persuasion. New York: Springer, 1–24.
38.
Popkowski LeszczycPeter T.L.HäublGerald (2010), “To Bundle or Not to Bundle: Determinants of the Profitability of Multi-Item Auctions,” Journal of Marketing, 74 (4), 110–24.
39.
PricePaul C.StoneEric R. (2004), “Intuitive Evaluation of Likelihood Judgment Producers: Evidence for a Confidence Heuristic,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17 (1), 39–57.
40.
RahinelRyanReddenJoseph P. (2013), “Brands as Product Coordinators: Matching Brands Make Joint Consumption Experiences More Enjoyable,” Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (6), 1290–99.
41.
SelaAnerHadarLiatMorganSianMaimaranMichal (2019), “Variety-Seeking and Perceived Expertise,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 29 (4), 671–79.
42.
ShockerAllan D.BayusBarryKimNamwoon (2004), “Product Complements and Substitutes in the Real World: The Relevance of Other Products,” Journal of Marketing, 68 (1), 28–40.
43.
SlovicPaulLichtensteinSarah (1971), “Comparison of Bayesian and Regression Approaches to the Study of Information Processing in Judgment,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 6 (6), 649–744.
44.
SmithRobert W.ReddenJoseph P. (2020), “The Role of Holistic Processing in Simultaneous Consumption,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 91, 104023.
45.
SniezekJanet A.BuckleyTimothy (1995), “Cueing and Cognitive Conflict in Judge-Advisor Decision Making,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62 (2), 159–74.
46.
SpenceCharles (2020a), “Food and Beverage Flavour Pairing: A Critical Review of the Literature,” Food Research International, 133 (July), 109124.
47.
SpenceCharles (2020b), “Multisensory Flavour Perceptions: Blending, Mixing, Fusion, and Pairing Within and Between the Senses,” Foods, 9 (4), 447–29.
48.
SpillerStephen A.FitzsimonsGavan J.Lynch Jr.John G.McClellandGary H. (2013), “Spotlights, Floodlights, and the Magic Number Zero: Simple Effects Tests in Moderated Regression,” Journal of Marketing Research, 50 (2), 277–88.
49.
TellisGerard J. (1986), “Beyond the Many Faces of Price: An Integration of Pricing Strategies,” Journal of Marketing, 50 (4), 146–60.
50.
ValsesiaFrancescaProserpioDavideNunesJoseph C. (2020), “The Positive Effect of Not Following Others on Social Media,” Journal of Marketing Research, 57 (6), 1152–68.
YangDefengJinLuShengShibin (2017), “The Effect of Knowledge Breadth and Depth on New Product Performance,” International Journal of Market Research, 59 (4), 517–36.
53.
ZhaoMinXiaLan (2020), “Joint or Separate? The Effect of Visual Presentation on Imagery and Product Evaluation,” International Journal of Research in Marketing, 38 (4), 935–52.
54.
ZhaoXinshuLynch Jr.John G.ChenQimei (2010), “Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths About Mediation Analysis,” Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (2), 197–206.
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.
