Four studies investigate (1) whether a variety-seeking versus inertial environment activates a certain mind-set about risk propensity and (2) whether this mind-set influences preferences for immediate versus delayed promotions. Study 1 demonstrates that a variety-seeking environment activates a risk-taking mind-set, whereas an inertial environment activates a risk-averse mind-set and that such a difference in risk propensity makes a delayed (immediate) promotion relatively more appealing for consumers with a variety-seeking (inertial) tendency. Study 2 reveals that preferences for a brand offering a delayed promotion are stronger when consumers have a variety-seeking tendency and that preferences of consumers low (vs. high) in need for cognitive closure are more influenced by the difference in variety-seeking versus inertial tendency. Study 3 provides further insights by allowing participants to be variety seeking or inertial and by controlling for redemption effort and the hedonic/utilitarian aspects of categories. Finally, Study 4 highlights the impact of variety-seeking versus inertial tendency on real-world choices. The article concludes with a discussion of theoretical and managerial implications.
AikenLeona S., and StephenG. West (1991), Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions.Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
2.
BaumgartnerHans, and Jan-BenedictE.M. Steenkamp (1996), “Exploratory Consumer Buying Behavior: Conceptualization and Measurement,”International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13 (2), 121–37.
CampbellMargaret C., and RonaldC. Goodstein (2001), “The Moderating Effect of Perceived Risk on Consumers’ Evaluations of Product Incongruity: Preference for the Norm,”Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (3), 439–49.
6.
CheemaAmar, and VanessaM. Patrick (2008), “Anytime Versus Only: Mind-Sets Moderate the Effect of Expansive Versus Restrictive Frames on Promotion Evaluation,”Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (August), 462–72.
7.
ChernevAlexander (2004), “Goal Orientation and Consumer Preference for the Status Quo,”Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (3), 557–65.
8.
ChiuChi-yue, MichaelW. Morris, HongYing-yi, and MenonTanya (2000), “Motivated Cultural Cognition: The Impact of Implicit Cultural Theories on Dispositional Attribution Varies as a Function of Need for Closure,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78 (2), 247–59.
9.
ConcharMargy P., GeorgeM. Zinkhan, PetersCara, and OlavarrietaSergio (2004), “An Integrated Framework for the Conceptualization of Consumers’ Perceived Risk Processing,”Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 32 (4), 418–36.
10.
CooilBruce, TimothyL. Keiningham, AksoyLerzan, and HsuMichael (2007), “A Longitudinal Analysis of Customer Satisfaction and Share of Wallet: Investigating the Moderating Effect of Customer Characteristics,”Journal of Marketing, 71 (January), 67–83.
HanochYaniv, JosephG. Johnson, and WilkeAndreas (2006), “Domain Specificity in Experimental Measures and Participant Recruitment: An Application to Risk-Taking Behavior,”Psychological Science, 17 (4), 300–304.
18.
HeilmanCarrie M., BowmanDouglas, and GordonP. Wright (2000), “The Evolution of Brand Preferences and Choice Behaviors of Consumers New to a Market,”Journal of Marketing Research, 37 (May), 139–55.
19.
HigginsE. Tory, IdsonLorraine Chen, AntonioL. Freitas, SpiegelScott, and DanielC. Molden (2003), “Transfer of Value from Fit,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84 (6), 1140–53.
20.
InmanJ. Jeffrey (2001), “The Role of Sensory-Specific Satiety in Attribute-Level Variety Seeking,”Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (1), 105–20.
21.
InmanJ. Jeffrey, and McAlisterLeigh (1994), “Do Coupon Expiration Dates Affect Consumer Behavior?”Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (August), 423–28.
22.
IrwinJulie R., and GaryH. McClelland (2001), “Misleading Heuristics and Moderated Multiple Regression Models,”Journal of Marketing Research, 38 (February), 100–109.
23.
JainKapil, and SrinivasanNarasimhan (1990), “An Empirical Assessment of Multiple Operationalizations of Involvement,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 17, GoldbergMarvin, GornGerald, and PollayRichard, eds. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research,594–602.
24.
JohnsonMichael D., HerrmannAndreas, and HuberFrank (2006), “The Evolution of Loyalty Intentions,”Journal of Marketing, 70 (April), 122–32.
25.
KahnBarbara E. (1995), “Consumer Variety-Seeking Among Goods and Services: An Integrative Review,”Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2 (3), 139–48.
26.
KahnBarbara E., and AliceM. Isen (1993), “The Influence of Positive Affect on Variety-Seeking Among Safe, Enjoyable Products,”Journal of Consumer Research, 20 (September), 257–70.
27.
KahnBarbara E., and RebeccaK. Ratner (2005), “Variety for the Sake of Variety? Diversification Motives in Consumer Choice,” in Inside Consumption: Consumer Motives, Goals, and Desires, RatneshwarS., and MickDavid Glen, eds. New York: Routledge,102–121.
28.
KhanRomana, LewisMichael, and SinghVishal (2009), “Dynamic Customer Management and the Value of One-to-One Marketing,”Marketing Science, 28 (6), 1063–79.
29.
KhanUzma, and DharRavi (2010), “Price-Framing Effects on the Purchase of Hedonic and Utilitarian Bundles,”Journal of Marketing Research, 47 (December), 1090–99.
30.
KrishnaAradhna, and John ZhangZ. (1999), “Short- or Long-Duration Coupons: The Effect of the Expiration Date on the Profitability of Coupon Promotions,”Management Science, 45 (8), 1041–56.
31.
KruglanskiArie W. (2004), The Psychology of Closed Mindedness.New York: Psychology Press.
32.
KruglanskiArie W., and MayselessOfra (1988), “Contextual Effects in Hypothesis Testing: The Role of Competing Alternatives and Epistemic Motivations,”Social Cognition, 6 (1), 1–20.
33.
LeeAngela Y., and JenniferL. Aaker (2004), “Bringing the Frame into Focus: The Influence of Regulatory Fit on Processing Fluency and Persuasion,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86 (2), 205–218.
34.
LevavJonathan, and ZhuRui (Juliet) (2009), “Seeking Freedom Through Variety,”Journal of Consumer Research, 36 (4), 600–610.
35.
MaimaranMichal, and Christian WheelerS. (2008), “Circles, Squares, and Choice: The Effect of Shape Arrays on Uniqueness and Variety Seeking,”Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (December), 731–40.
36.
MalkocSelin A., ZaubermanGal, and JamesR. Bettman (2010), “Unstuck from the Concrete: Carryover Effects of Abstract Mindsets in Intertemporal Preferences,”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113 (2), 112–26.
37.
MandelNaomi (2003), “Shifting Selves and Decision Making: The Effects of Self-Construal Priming on Consumer Risk-Taking,”Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (1), 30–40.
38.
McAlisterLeigh, and PessemierEdgar (1982), “Variety-Seeking Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Review,”Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (3), 311–22.
39.
MeertensRee M., and LionRené (2008), “Measuring an Individual's Tendency to Take Risks: The Risk Propensity Scale,”Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38 (6), 1506–1520.
PatakMichele, and ReynoldsBrady (2007), “Question-Based Assessment of Delay Discounting: Do Respondents Spontaneously Incorporate Uncertainty into Their Valuation for Delayed Rewards?”Addictive Behaviors, 32 (2), 351–57.
42.
PreacherKristopher J., and AndrewF. Hayes (2008), “Asymptotic and Resampling Strategies for Assessing and Comparing Indirect Effects in Multiple Mediator Models,”Behavior Research Methods, 40 (3), 879–91.
PyoneJin Seok, and AliceM. Isen (2011), “Positive Affect, Intertemporal Choice, and Levels of Thinking: Increasing Consumers’ Willingness to Wait,”Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (June), 532–43.
45.
RamanathanSuresh, and SanjayK. Dhar (2010), “The Effect of Sales Promotions on the Size and Composition of the Shopping Basket: Regulatory Compatibility from Framing and Temporal Restrictions,”Journal of Marketing Research, 47 (June), 542–52.
46.
RatnerRebecca K., and BarbaraE. Kahn (2002), “The Impact of Private Versus Public Consumption on Variety-Seeking Behavior,”Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (2), 246–57.
47.
ReberRolf, SchwarzNorbert, and WinkielmanPiotr (2004), “Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver's Processing Experience?”Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8 (4), 364–82.
48.
RoetsArne, and HielAlain Van (2011), “Item Selection and Validation of a Brief, 15-Item Version of the Need for Closure Scale,”Personality and Individual Differences, 50 (1), 90–94.
49.
Santella & Associates (2011), “Coupon Trends,” Santella.com, (accessed June 29, 2011), [available at http://www.santella.com/Trends.htm].
50.
SeetharamanP.B., and CheHai (2009), “Price Competition in Markets with Consumer Variety Seeking,”Marketing Science, 29 (3), 516–25.
51.
SilkTimothy Guy (2004), “Why Do We Buy but Fail to Redeem? The Influence of Pre-Purchase, Post-Purchase, and Repeat-Purchase Factors on Consumers’ Subjective and Objective Probability of Redeeming Mail-In Rebates,” doctoral dissertation, Department of Marketing, Warrington College of Business Administration, University of Florida.
52.
SimonsonItamar (1990), “The Effect of Purchase Quantity and Timing on Variety-Seeking Behavior,”Journal of Marketing Research, 27 (May), 150–62.
53.
SomanDilip (1998), “The Illusion of Delayed Incentives: Evaluating Future Effort–Money Transactions,”Journal of Marketing Research, 35 (November), 427–37.
54.
SoongRoland (2001), “Variety-Seeking Behavior in Product Choice in TGI Colombia Study,” ZonaLatina.com, (September 8), (accessed December 2009), [available at http://www.zonalatina.com/Zldata195.htm].
55.
SteenkampJan-Benedict E.M., and GielensKatrijn (2003), “Consumer and Market Drivers of Trial Probability of New Consumer Packaged Goods,”Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (3), 368–84.
56.
StrahilevitzMichael, and JohnG. Myers (1998), “Donations to Charity as Purchase Incentives: How Well They Work May Depend on What You Are Trying to Sell,”Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (4), 434–46.
57.
ÜlkümenGülden, ChakravartiAmitav, and VickiG. Morwitz (2010), “Categories Create Mind-Sets: The Effect of Exposure to Broad Versus Narrow Categorizations on Subsequent, Unrelated Decisions,”Journal of Marketing Research, 47 (August), 659–71.
58.
Van TrijpHans C.M., WayneD. Hoyer, and Jeffrey InmanJ. (1996), “Why Switch? Product Category–Level Explanations for True Variety-Seeking Behavior,”Journal of Marketing Research, 33 (August), 281–92.
59.
VermeirIris, and KenhovePatrick Van (2005), “The Influence of Need for Closure and Perceived Time Pressure on Search Effort for Price and Promotional Information in a Grocery Shopping Context,”Psychology & Marketing, 22 (1), 71–95.
60.
VermeirIris, and KenhovePatrick Van, and HendrickxHendrik (2002), “The Influence of Need for Closure on Consumer's Choice Behavior,”Journal of Economic Psychology, 23 (6), 703–727.
61.
WeberElke U., BlaisAnn-Reneé, and NancyE. Betz (2002), “A Domain-Specific Risk-Attitude Scale: Measuring Risk Perceptions and Risk Behaviors,”Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15 (4), 262–90.
62.
WebsterDonna M., and ArieW. Kruglanski (1994), “Individual Differences in Need for Cognitive Closure,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67 (6), 1049–62.
63.
XuAlison Jing, and RobertS. WyerJr. (2012), “The Role of Bolstering and Counterarguing Mind-Sets in Persuasion,”Journal of Consumer Research, 38 (5), 920–32.
64.
ZhangZ. John, KrishnaAradhna, and SankayK. Dhar (2000), “The Optimal Choice of Promotional Vehicles: Front-Loaded or Rear-Loaded Incentives?”Management Science, 46 (3), 348–62.
65.
ZhouRongrong, and PhamMichel Tuan (2004), “Promotion and Prevention Across Mental Accounts: When Financial Products Dictate Consumers’ Investment Goals,”Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (1), 125–35.
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.
