The authors investigate how horizontal versus vertical displays of alternatives affect assortment processing, perceived variety, and subsequent choice. Horizontal (vs. vertical) displays are easier to process due to a match between the human binocular vision field (which is horizontal in direction) and the dominant direction of eye movements required for processing horizontal displays. It is demonstrated that this processing fluency allows people to browse information more efficiently, which increases perceived assortment variety and ultimately leads to more variety being chosen, and if the number of options chosen is allowed to vary, it leads to more options chosen. It is shown that because people see more variety in a horizontal (vs. vertical) display, they process a horizontal assortment more extensively. When more variety is positive, they find the choice task easier and have a higher level of satisfaction and confidence about their choices. When more variety is not necessarily positive, for example, in a choice of a single most-preferred option, these effects disappear. Two field studies, an eye-tracking study, and two lab studies support these conclusions.
Academic Medicine (1960), “Review of Medical Physiology and Biophysics, edited by Theodore C. Ruch and John F. Fulton,”Academic Medicine, 35 (11), 1067.
BroniarczykSusan M. and HoyerWayne D. (2010), “Retail Assortment: More ≠ Better,” in Retailing in the 21st Century, KrafftManfred and MantralaMurali K., eds. Berlin: Springer, 271–84.
4.
BroniarczykSusan M.HoyerWayne D., and McAlisterLeigh (1998), “Consumers’ Perceptions of the Assortment Offered in a Grocery Category: The Impact of Item Reduction,”Journal of Marketing Research, 35 (May), 166–76.
5.
CampoKatia and GijsbrechtsEls (2005), “Retail Assortment, Shelf, and Stockout Management: Issues, Interplay, and Future Challenges,”Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry, 21 (4/5), 383–92.
6.
ChandonPierre, HutchinsonJ. Wesley, BradlowEric T., and YoungScott T. (2009), “Does In-Store Marketing Work? Effects of the Number and Position of Shelf Facings on Brand Attention and Evaluation at the Point of Purchase,”Journal of Marketing, 73 (November), 1–17.
7.
CoganDavid G. (1956), Neurology of the Ocular Muscles. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
8.
CollewijnH., ErkelensCasper J., and SteinmanR.M. (1988), “Binocular Co-ordination of Human Vertical Saccadic Eye Movements,”Journal of Physiology, 404 (1), 183–97.
9.
DicksonPeter R. and SawyerAlan G. (1990), “The Price Knowledge and Search of Supermarket Shoppers,”Journal of Marketing, 54 (July), 42–53.
10.
DrèzeXavier, HochStephen J., and PurkMary E. (1994), “Shelf Management and Space Elasticity,”Journal of Retailing, 70 (4), 301–26.
11.
DuPuisSteven and SilvaJohn (2008), Package Design Workbook: The Art and Science of Successful Packaging. Beverly, MA: Rockport.
12.
GilchristIain D. and HarveyMonika (2006), “Evidence for a Systematic Component Within Scan Paths in Visual Search,”Visual Cognition, 14 (4/5/6/7/8), 704–15.
13.
Griegel-MorrisPatricia, LarsonKeith, Mueller-KlausKrissann, and OatisCarol A. (1992), “Incidence of Common Postural Abnormalities in the Cervical, Shoulder, and Thoracic Regions and Their Association with Pain in Two Age Groups of Healthy Subjects,”Physical Therapy, 72 (6), 425–31.
14.
HochStephen, BradlowEric T., and WansinkBrian (1999), “The Variety of an Assortment,”Marketing Science, 18 (4), 527–46.
15.
HoyerWayne D. (1984), “An Examination of Consumer Decision Making for a Common Repeat Purchase Product,”Journal of Consumer Research, 11 (3), 822–29.
16.
InmanJ. Jeffrey and McAlisterLeigh (1993), “A Retailer Promotion Policy Model Considering Promotion Signal Sensitivity,”Marketing Science, 12 (4), 339–56.
17.
IyengarSheena S. and LepperMark R. (2000), “When Choice Is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing?”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (December), 995–1006.
18.
KahnBarbara E. and WansinkBrian (2004), “The Influence of Assortment Structure on Perceived Variety and Consumption Quantities,”Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (March), 519–33.
19.
KardesFrank. R. (1986), “Effects of Initial Product Judgments on Subsequent Memory-Based Judgments,”Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (June), 1–11.
20.
KröseBen J.A. and JuleszBela (1989), “The Control and Speed of Shifts of Attention,”Vision Research, 29 (11), 1607–19.
21.
LeeAngela Y. and AakerJennifer L. (2004), “Bringing the Frame into Focus: The Influence of Regulatory Fit on Processing Fluency and Persuasion,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86 (February), 205–18.
22.
LuceMary Frances (1998), “Choosing to Avoid: Coping with Negatively Emotion-Laden Consumer Decisions,”Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (March), 409–33.
23.
MantralaMurali K., LevyMichael, KahnBarbara E., FoxEdward J., GaidarevPeter, DankworthBill, (2009), “Why Is Assortment Planning So Difficult for Retailers? A Framework and Research Agenda,”Journal of Retailing, 85 (1), 71–83.
24.
MetallinosNikos (1996), Television Aesthetics: Perceptual, Cognitive, and Compositional Bases. New York: Routledge.
25.
MogilnerCassie, RudnickTamar, and IyengarSheena S. (2008), “The Mere Categorization Effect: How the Mere Presence of Categories Increases Consumers’ Perceptions of Assortment Variety and Outcome Satisfaction,”Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (August), 202–15.
26.
MoralesAndrea, KahnBarbara E., McAlisterLeigh, and BroniarczykSusan M. (2005), “Perception of Assortment Variety: The Effects of Congruency Between Consumers’ Internal and Retailers’ External Organization,”Journal of Retailing, 81 (2), 159–69.
27.
NazirTatjana A. (1992), “Effects of Lateral Masking and Spatial Precueing on Gap-Resolution in Central and Peripheral Vision,”Vision Research, 32 (4), 771–77.
28.
OjanpääHelena, NäsänenRisto, and KojoIlpo (2002), “Eye Movements in the Visual Search of Word Lists,”Vision Research, 42 (12), 1499–512.
29.
PreacherKristopher J. and HayesAndrew F. (2004), “SPSS and SAS Procedures for Estimating Indirect Effects in Simple Mediation Models,”Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36 (4), 717–31.
30.
RaynerKeith (1975), “The Perceptual Span and Peripheral Cues in Reading,”Cognitive Psychology, 7 (1), 65–81.
31.
RaynerKeith (1998), “Eye Movement in Reading and Information Processing: 20 Years of Research,”Psychological Bulletin, 124 (3), 372–422.
32.
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.
33.
ReberRolf, WurtzPascal, and ZimmermannThomas D. (2004), “Exploring ‘Fringe’ Consciousness: The Subjective Experience of Perceptual Fluency and Its Objective Bases,”Consciousness and Cognition, 13 (1), 47–60.
34.
RussoJ. Edward, CarlsonKurt A., MeloyMargaret G., and YongKevyn (2008), “The Goal of Consistency as a Cause of Information Distortion,”Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137 (3), 456–70.
35.
ShiSavannah Wei, WedelMichel, and PietersF.G.M. (2013), “Information Acquisition During Online Decision Making: A Model-Based Exploration Using Eye-Tracking Data,”Management Science, 59 (5), 1009–26.
36.
SimmonsJoseph P., NelsonLeif D., and SimonsohnUri (2011), “False-Positive Psychology: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as Significant,”Psychological Science, 22 (11), 1359–66.
37.
TatlerBenjamin W. and VincentBenjamin T. (2008), “Systematic Tendencies in Scene Viewing,”Journal of Eye Movement Research, 2 (2), 1–18.
38.
TownsendClaudia and KahnBarbara E. (2014), “The ‘Visual Preference Heuristic’: The Influence of Visual Versus Verbal Depiction on Assortment Processing, Perceived Variety, and Choice Overload,”Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (5), 993–1015.
39.
TverskyAmos and KahnemanDaniel (1974), “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases,”Science, 185 (4157), 1124–31.
40.
ValenzuelaAna and RaghubirPriya (2009), “Position-Based Beliefs: The Center-Stage Effect,”Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19 (2), 185–96.
41.
ValenzuelaAna, RaghubirPriya, and MitakakisChrissy (2013), “Shelf Space Schemas: Myth or Reality?”Journal of Business Research, 66 (7), 881–88.
42.
Van der LansRalf, PietersRik, and WedelMichel (2008), “Eye Movement Analysis of Search Effectiveness,”Journal of the American Statistical Association, 103 (482), 452–61.
43.
YeshurunYaffa and CarrascoMarisa (1999), “Spatial Attention Improves Performance in Spatial Resolution Tasks,”Vision Research, 39 (2), 293–306.
44.
ZhaoXinshu, LynchJohn G.Jr., and ChenQimei (2010), “Myths and Truths About Mediation Analysis,”Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (August), 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.
