The authors attempted to replicate and extend Huber and McCann's findings about the spontaneous occurrence of inferences between attributes in studies of product evaluations. Those findings provided support for the conclusion that inferential processes can distort the validity of the traditional additive model and results based on commonly used estimation procedures such as conjoint analysis. Using conflicting as well as supportive pairs of product attributes, the authors found no evidence of inferencing between attributes unless inferences were explicitly induced.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
FishbeinMartin, and AjzenIcek (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
2.
HuberJoel, and McCannJohn (1982), “The Impact of Inferential Beliefs on Product Evaluations,”Journal of Marketing Research, 19(August), 324–33.
3.
JohnsonRichard D., and LevinIrwin P. (1985), “More Than Meets the Eye: The Effect of Missing Information on Purchase Intentions,”Journal of Consumer Research, 12(September), 169–77.
4.
MeyerRobert J. (1981), “A Model of Multiattribute Judgments Under Uncertainty and Informational Constraints,”Journal of Marketing Research, 18(November), 428–41.
5.
MonroeKent B., and ChapmanJoseph D. (1987), “Framing Effects on Buyers’ Subjective Product Evaluations,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 14, AndersonPaul, and WallendorfMelanie, eds. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 193–7.
6.
NagleThomas (1984), “Economic Foundations of Pricing,”Journal of Business, 57(January), S3–S26.
7.
OlshavskyRichard W. (1985a), “Perceived Quality in Consumer Decision Making; An Integrated Theoretical Perspective,” in Consumer Perception of Merchandise and Store Quality, JacobyJacob, and OlsonJerry, eds. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath and Company, 3–30.
8.
OlshavskyRichard W. (1985b), “Toward a More Comprehensive Theory of Choice,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 12, HirschmanElizabeth, and HolbrookMorris, eds. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 465–470.
9.
OlsonJerry C. (1978), “Inferential Beliefs in the Cue Utilization Process,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 5, Keith HuntH., ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 703–13.
10.
OlsonJerry C., and JacobyJacob (1972), “Cue Utilization in the Quality Perception Process,” in Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference, VenkatesanM., ed. Association for Consumer Research, 167–79.
11.
RaoVithala R. (1984), “Pricing Research in Marketing: The State of the Art,”Journal of Business, 57(January), S39–S61.
