Advanced

Material distortion of economic behavior and everyday decision making

Gidlöf, Kerstin LU ; Wallin, Annika LU ; Peter, Mögelvang-Hansen and Holmqvist, Kenneth LU (2013) In Journal of Consumer Policy 36(4). p.389-402
Abstract
Misleading information and unfair commercial practices have to be viewed against the background of what consumers otherwise do, i.e., what their purchase decisions look like when no misleading information or no unfair commercial practices are in place.

This article provides some of this background by studying how consumers sample information when making an in-store purchase decision. This was done by an eye-tracking study which reveals to what extent consumers succeed in purchasing the products that best meet their purchase intentions when only a representative amount of misleading information is present. The study shows that decisions were suboptimal in relation to what the consumers claimed they wanted to purchase. Only in one... (More)
Misleading information and unfair commercial practices have to be viewed against the background of what consumers otherwise do, i.e., what their purchase decisions look like when no misleading information or no unfair commercial practices are in place.

This article provides some of this background by studying how consumers sample information when making an in-store purchase decision. This was done by an eye-tracking study which reveals to what extent consumers succeed in purchasing the products that best meet their purchase intentions when only a representative amount of misleading information is present. The study shows that decisions were suboptimal in relation to what the consumers claimed they wanted to purchase. Only in one product category did consumers in this study actually look at products that were slightly better than average, and as a result, they mainly selected products that were just as often poor as good. If the proportion of bad purchase decisions based on misleading information is small enough, perhaps it might be better to direct the authors’ attention to other ways of improving the decision environments that consumers encounter. In addition, the eye-tracking study provides some insight into how consumers sample information when making an in-store purchase decision. The present data show that consumers invested on average of less than 1 s to look at products. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Consumer behaviour: Consumer decision making, Unfair commercial practices directive, Information search, Decision quality
in
Journal of Consumer Policy
volume
36
issue
4
pages
389 - 402
publisher
Luchterhand
external identifiers
  • scopus:84887619699
ISSN
0168-7034
DOI
10.1007/s10603-013-9228-y
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
ae9adbec-df17-41ff-860e-5acd154ad62d (old id 4991864)
alternative location
http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/462/art%253A10.1007%252Fs10603-013-9228-y.pdf?auth66=1422452637_c550dcba9b77c7cad56a599cc791d52e&ext=.pdf
date added to LUP
2015-01-28 14:45:35
date last changed
2017-05-28 03:06:42
@article{ae9adbec-df17-41ff-860e-5acd154ad62d,
  abstract     = {Misleading information and unfair commercial practices have to be viewed against the background of what consumers otherwise do, i.e., what their purchase decisions look like when no misleading information or no unfair commercial practices are in place.<br/><br>
This article provides some of this background by studying how consumers sample information when making an in-store purchase decision. This was done by an eye-tracking study which reveals to what extent consumers succeed in purchasing the products that best meet their purchase intentions when only a representative amount of misleading information is present. The study shows that decisions were suboptimal in relation to what the consumers claimed they wanted to purchase. Only in one product category did consumers in this study actually look at products that were slightly better than average, and as a result, they mainly selected products that were just as often poor as good. If the proportion of bad purchase decisions based on misleading information is small enough, perhaps it might be better to direct the authors’ attention to other ways of improving the decision environments that consumers encounter. In addition, the eye-tracking study provides some insight into how consumers sample information when making an in-store purchase decision. The present data show that consumers invested on average of less than 1 s to look at products.},
  author       = {Gidlöf, Kerstin and Wallin, Annika and Peter, Mögelvang-Hansen and Holmqvist, Kenneth},
  issn         = {0168-7034},
  keyword      = {Consumer behaviour: Consumer decision making,Unfair commercial practices directive,Information search,Decision quality},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {4},
  pages        = {389--402},
  publisher    = {Luchterhand},
  series       = {Journal of Consumer Policy},
  title        = {Material distortion of economic behavior and everyday decision making},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10603-013-9228-y},
  volume       = {36},
  year         = {2013},
}