Abstract
There are two general assumptions underlying the average consumer benchmark as applied by the CJEU. Firstly, the CJEU has a tendency towards viewing the average consumer as a rational decision-maker. This assumption is highly problematic from a behavioural perspective, as many studies have shown that consumers often do not act rationally. People have difficulty dealing with complex or large amounts of information and consumer decision-making is often flawed because of so-called biases. Secondly, the average consumer benchmark has as a basis the assumption that consumers behave similarly, and that the average consumer benchmark, therefore, more-or-less accurately represents ‘standard consumer behaviour’. Similar to the rationality assumption, this assumption is problematic from the point of view of consumer behaviour. Consumers in many ways differ from one another in their decision-making, making it difficult to work with the concept of an average consumer. For example, consumers significantly differ in terms of pre-existing knowledge and the degree of involvement consumers have with specific products. Also differences in personality and culture create significant differences in behaviour between consumers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Large parts of this chapter have been published earlier as a contribution to a book on private law and behaviour (in Dutch). See B Duivenvoorde, ‘De gemiddelde consument als standard bij misleiding: een kritische blik vanuit de gedragswetenschappen’, in W van Boom, I Giesen and A Verheij (eds), Capita civilologie: handboek empirie en privaatrecht (Den Haag, Boom, 2013) 147–168.
- 2.
CJEU 16 July 1998, Case C-210/96, ECR 1998, p. I-4657 (Gut Springenheide).
- 3.
See also R Incardona and C Poncibò, ‘The average consumer, the unfair commercial practices directive, and the cognitive revolution’ (2007) Journal of consumer policy 30 and J Trzaskowski, ‘The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and vulnerable consumers’ (Paper for the Conference of the International association of consumer law in Sydney, 2013) 19.
- 4.
Paragraph 25 of the Opinion of Advocate General Fennely in CJEU 16 September 1999, Case C-220/98, ECR 2000, p. I-117 ( Lifting).
- 5.
See also J Trzaskowski, ‘The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and vulnerable consumers’ (Paper for the Conference of the International association of consumer law in Sydney, 2013) 9.
- 6.
Paragraph 103 of the Opinion of Advocate General Trstenjak in CJEU 9 November 2010, Case C-540/08, ECR 2010, p. I-10909 ( Mediaprint).
- 7.
See also R Incardona and C Poncibò, ‘The average consumer, the unfair commercial practices directive, and the cognitive revolution’ (2007) Journal of consumer policy 30 and, similarly, J Trzaskowski, ‘The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and vulnerable consumers’ (Paper for the Conference of the International association of consumer law in Sydney, 2013) 9. See also the discussion in Chap. 4 of this book.
- 8.
See also paragraph 4.3 of this book.
- 9.
See also paragraph 4.2 of this book.
- 10.
See also paragraphs 1.3 and 1.4.3 of this book.
- 11.
See in the context of the average consumer also J Trzaskowski, ‘The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and vulnerable consumers’ (Paper for the Conference of the International association of consumer law in Sydney, 2013) 17 and onwards.
- 12.
J Jacoby, ‘Is it rational to assume consumer rationality?’ (2000) Roger Williams University Law Review 103.
- 13.
See also J Jacoby, ‘Is it rational to assume consumer rationality?’ (2000) Roger Williams University Law Review 119–122. He argues that ‘if one assumes that, for consumers to engage in rational decision-making and choice behavior, one only need provide them with the requisite information, one will be operating with an untenable assumption.’
- 14.
See for individual differences in motivation also the discussion on involvement below.
- 15.
R Wyer Jr., ‘The role of knowledge accessibility in cognition and behaviour—implications for consumer information processing’, in C Haugtvedt, P Herr and F Kardes (eds), Handbook of consumer psychology (New York/London, Routledge, 2008) 32.
- 16.
See on the issue of financial literacy, e.g., V Mak, ‘The myth of the ‘empowered consumer’: lessons from financial literacy studies’ (2012) Zeitschrift für Europäisches Unternehmens- und Verbraucherrecht/ Journal of European consumer and market law 254.
- 17.
J Jacoby, ‘Is it rational to assume consumer rationality?’ (2000) Roger Williams University Law Review 120–121.
- 18.
- 19.
J Bettman, E Johnson and J Payne, ‘Consumer decision making’ in T Robertson and H Kassarjian (eds.), Handbook of consumer behaviour 57.
- 20.
J Conlisk, ‘Why bounded rationality?’ (1996) Journal of economic literature 671.
- 21.
- 22.
For heuristics and biases in general, see J Conlisk, ‘Why bounded rationality?’ (1996) Journal of economic literature 670.
- 23.
See, for example, R Korobkin and T Ulen, ‘Law and behavioral science: removing the rationality assumption from law and economics’ (2000) California law review 1104–1107.
- 24.
A Tversky and D Kahneman, ‘The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice’ (1981) Science 453.
- 25.
D Ariely, Predictably irrational (London, Harper, 2009) 1–6.
- 26.
This is also known as the overconfidence bias, see R Korobkin and T Ulen, ‘Law and behavioral science: removing the rationality assumption from law and economics’ (2000) California law review 1091.
- 27.
See also R Incardona and C Poncibò, ‘The average consumer, the unfair commercial practices directive, and the cognitive revolution’ (2007) Journal of consumer policy 21 and J Trzaskowski, ‘The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and vulnerable consumers’ (Paper for the Conference of the International association of consumer law in Sydney, 2013).
- 28.
See also O Bar-Gill, Seduction by contract: law, economics and psychology in consumer markets (Oxford University Press, 2012) 2. See for an extensive overview of deceptive marketing strategies also D Boush, M Friestad and P Wright, Deception in the marketplace: the psychology of deceptive persuasion and consumer self protection (New York/London, Routledge, 2009).
- 29.
For an overview, see J Hutchinson and E Eisenstein, ‘Consumer learning and expertise’, in C Haugtvedt, P Herr and F Kardes (eds), Handbook of consumer psychology (New York/London, Routledge, 2008) 103.
- 30.
J Alba and J Hutchinson, ‘Dimensions of consumer expertise’ (1987) Journal of consumer research 1987 411, J Hutchinson and E Eisenstein, ‘Consumer learning and expertise’, in C Haugtvedt, P Herr and F Kardes (eds), Handbook of consumer psychology (New York/London, Routledge, 2008) 103–104.
- 31.
D Maheswaran and B Sternthal, ‘The effects of knowledge, motivation, and type of message on ad processing and product judgments’ (1990) Journal of consumer research 66.
- 32.
J Hutchinson and E Eisenstein, ‘Consumer learning and expertise’, in C Haugtvedt, P Herr and F Kardes (eds), Handbook of consumer psychology (New York/London, Routledge, 2008) 106–107.
- 33.
- 34.
Note in this context that there are no indications in the CJEUs case law—expect for generally high expectations towards the average consumer—that the average consumer is seen as particularly knowledgeable. See also paragraph 4.3 of this book.
- 35.
J Peter and J Olson, Consumer behavior & marketing strategy (9th international edition) (Boston, McGraw-Hill, 2010) 84.
- 36.
- 37.
See, for example, K Faddegon, ‘Psychologische verschillen in keuzegedrag’, in W Tiemeijer, C Thomas and H Prast (eds), De menselijke beslisser: over de psychologie van keuze en gedrag (WRR Verkenningen 22) (Amsterdam University Press, 2009) 116–119.
- 38.
Also other personality variables are relevant for the decision making of consumers. See K Faddegon, ‘Psychologische verschillen in keuzegedrag’, in W Tiemeijer, C Thomas and H Prast (eds), De menselijke beslisser: over de psychologie van keuze en gedrag (WRR Verkenningen 22) (Amsterdam University Press, 2009) and C Haugtvedt, K Liu and K Sam Min, ‘Individual differences, tools for theory testing and understanding in consumer psychology research’, in C Haugtvedt, P Herr and F Kardes (eds), Handbook of consumer psychology (New York/London, Routledge, 2008) 1161. In this chapter the discussion of personality variables is limited to the example of need for cognition.
- 39.
K Faddegon, ‘Psychologische verschillen in keuzegedrag’, in W Tiemeijer, C Thomas and H Prast (eds), De menselijke beslisser: over de psychologie van keuze en gedrag (WRR Verkenningen 22) (Amsterdam University Press, 2009) 116. See also C Haugtvedt, K Liu and K Sam Min, ‘Individual differences, tools for theory testing and understanding in consumer psychology research’, in C Haugtvedt, P Herr and F Kardes (eds), Handbook of consumer psychology (New York/London, Routledge, 2008) 1162–1163. For the original research on the topic of need for cognition, see, amongst others, J Cacioppo, R Petty and K Morris, ‘Effects of need for cognition on a message evaluation, recall, and persuasion’ (1983) Journal of personality and social psychology 805, S Epstein and R Pacini, ‘Some basic issues regarding dual-process theories from the perspective of cognitive-experiential self-theory’, in S Chaiken and Y Trope (eds), Dual-process theories in social psychology (New York, Guildford Press, 1999) 462 and C Haugtvedt, R Petty and J Cacioppo, ‘Need for cognition and advertising: understanding the role of personality variables in consumer behavior’ (1992) Personality and social psychology review 303.
- 40.
K Faddegon, ‘Psychologische verschillen in keuzegedrag’, in W Tiemeijer, C Thomas and H Prast (eds), De menselijke beslisser: over de psychologie van keuze en gedrag (WRR Verkenningen 22) (Amsterdam University Press, 2009) 118 and J Levin, M. Huneke and J Jasper, ‘Information processing at successive stages of decision making: Need for cognition and inclusion-exclusion-effects’ (2000) Organizational behavior and human decision processes 171.
- 41.
See e.g., S Epstein et al. ‘Individual differences in intuitive–experiential and analytical–rational thinking styles’ (1996) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 390.
- 42.
See e.g., P Bromiley and S Curley, ‘Individual differences in risk taking’ in: F Yates (ed), Risk Taking Behaviour (Chichester, Wiley 1992).
- 43.
T Wilhelmsson, ‘The average European consumer: a legal fiction?’, in T Wilhelmsson, E Paunio and A Pohjolainen (eds), Private law and the many cultures of Europe (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2007) 243.
- 44.
S Shavitt, A Lee and T Johnson, ‘Cross-cultural consumer psychology’, in C. Haugtvedt, P Herr and F Kardes (eds), Handbook of consumer psychology (New York, Psychology press, 2008) 1103.
- 45.
M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 2. The studies by De Mooij build on the famous work on cultural differences by Hofstede, using his value system. See G Hofstede, Culture’s consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2001).
- 46.
J Peter and J Olson, Consumer behavior & marketing strategy (9th international edition) (Boston, McGraw-Hill, 2010) 280.
- 47.
J Peter and J Olson, Consumer behavior & marketing strategy (9th international edition) (Boston, McGraw-Hill, 2010) 301–302.
- 48.
In 1983, Levitt predicted that consumers were becoming more homogenised and that global marketing was on the rise, but this view has been heavily opposed by consumer behaviour studies. See T Levitt, ‘The globalization of markets’ (1983) Harvard business review 92. See also J Peter and J Olson, Consumer behavior & marketing strategy (9th international edition) (Boston, McGraw-Hill, 2010) 301 and M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 5–6.
- 49.
M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 17–18.
- 50.
J Peter and J Olson, Consumer behavior & marketing strategy (9th international edition) (Boston, McGraw-Hill, 2010) 302.
- 51.
M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 184.
- 52.
M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 222.
- 53.
M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 205. Related to this, there are differences as to the extent to which consumers rely on different sources such as friends, salespeople and experts. See M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 222.
- 54.
See also T Wilhelmsson, ‘The average European consumer: a legal fiction?’, in T Wilhelmsson, E Paunio and A Pohjolainen (eds), Private law and the many cultures of Europe (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2007) 260–261 and, more generally, S Shavitt, A Lee and T Johnson, ‘Cross-cultural consumer psychology’, in C. Haugtvedt, P Herr and F Kardes (eds), Handbook of consumer psychology (New York, Psychology press, 2008) 1113–1114.
- 55.
M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 206.
- 56.
M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 212.
- 57.
This also implies different needs as to regulation. See T Wilhelmsson, ‘The average European consumer: a legal fiction?’, in T Wilhelmsson, E Paunio and A Pohjolainen (eds), Private law and the many cultures of Europe (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2007) 261.
- 58.
T Wilhelmsson, ‘The average European consumer: a legal fiction?’, in T Wilhelmsson, E Paunio and A Pohjolainen (eds), Private law and the many cultures of Europe (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2007) 264 and M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 256.
- 59.
M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 221–222. Locus of control concerns the extent to which people believe that they can control events that affect them. See for the overview of the locus of control in different countries: M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 205.
- 60.
See also T Wilhelmsson, ‘The average European consumer: a legal fiction?’, in T Wilhelmsson, E Paunio and A Pohjolainen (eds), Private law and the many cultures of Europe (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2007) 265.
- 61.
See in relation to the rationality assumption also M de Mooij, Consumer behavior and culture: consequences for global marketing and advertising (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2004) 5.
- 62.
See also T Wilhelmsson, ‘The average European consumer: a legal fiction?’, in T Wilhelmsson, E Paunio and A Pohjolainen (eds), Private law and the many cultures of Europe (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2007) 268.
- 63.
See similarly R Incardona and C Poncibò, ‘The average consumer, the unfair commercial practices directive, and the cognitive revolution’ (2007) Journal of consumer policy 21 and J Trzaskowski, ‘The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and vulnerable consumers’ (Paper for the Conference of the International association of consumer law in Sydney, 2013).
- 64.
See also European Consumer Consultative Group 2013, p. 8.
- 65.
See more elaborately Chap. 11 of this book.
References
Alba, J and Hutchinson, J, ‘Dimensions of consumer expertise’ (1987) Journal of consumer research 1987 411.
Ariely, D, Predictably irrational (London, Harper, 2009).
Bar-Gill, O, Seduction by contract: law, economics and psychology in consumer markets (Oxford University Press, 2012).
Bettman, J, Johnson, E and Payne, J, ‘Consumer decision making’ in T Robertson and H Kassarjian (eds.), Handbook of consumer behaviour 50.
Bloch, P, ‘An exploration into the scaling of consumers’ involvement with a product class’ (1981) Advances in consumer research 61.
Boush, D, Friestad, M and Wright, P, Deception in the marketplace: the psychology of deceptive persuasion and consumer self protection (New York/London, Routledge, 2009).
Bromiley P and Curley S, ‘Individual differences in risk taking’ in: F Yates (ed), Risk Taking Behaviour (Chichester, Wiley 1992) 87–132.
Cacioppo, J, Petty, R and Morris, K, ‘Effects of need for cognition on a message evaluation, recall, and persuasion’ (1983) Journal of personality and social psychology 805.
Conlisk, J, ‘Why bounded rationality?’ (1996) Journal of economic literature 669.
Duivenvoorde, B, ‘De gemiddelde consument als standard bij misleiding: een kritische blik vanuit de gedragswetenschappen’, in W van Boom, I Giesen and A Verheij (eds), Capita civilologie: handboek empirie en privaatrecht (Den Haag, Boom, 2013) 147.
Epstein, S and Pacini, R, ‘Some basic issues regarding dual-process theories from the perspective of cognitive-experiential self-theory’, in S Chaiken and Y Trope (eds), Dual-process theories in social psychology (New York, Guildford Press, 1999) 462–482.
Epstein S et al. ‘Individual differences in intuitive–experiential and analytical–rational thinking styles’ (1996) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 390.
Faddegon, K, ‘Psychologische verschillen in keuzegedrag’, in W Tiemeijer, C Thomas and H Prast (eds), De menselijke beslisser: over de psychologie van keuze en gedrag (WRR Verkenningen 22) (Amsterdam University Press, 2009) 115–135.
Haugtvedt, C, Petty, R and Cacioppo, J, ‘Need for cognition and advertising: understanding the role of personality variables in consumer behavior’ (1992) Personality and social psychology review, 303–327.
Haugtvedt, C, Liu, K and Sam Min, K, ‘Individual differences, tools for theory testing and understanding in consumer psychology research’, in C Haugtvedt, P Herr and F Kardes (eds), Handbook of consumer psychology (New York/London, Routledge, 2008) 1161–1176.
Hofstede, G, Culture’s consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (Thousand Oaks, Sage, 2001).
Hutchinson, J, and Eisenstein, E, ‘Consumer learning and expertise’, in C Haugtvedt, P Herr and F Kardes (eds), Handbook of consumer psychology (New York/London, Routledge, 2008) 103–131.
Incardona, R and Poncibò, C, ‘The average consumer, the unfair commercial practices directive, and the cognitive revolution’ (2007) Journal of consumer policy 21.
Jacoby, J, ‘Perspectives on information overload’ (1984) Journal of consumer research 432.
Jacoby, J, ‘Is it rational to assume consumer rationality?’ (2000) Roger Williams University Law Review 81.
Korobkin, R and Ulen, T, ‘Law and behavioral science: removing the rationality assumption from law and economics’ (2000) California law review 1051.
Levin, J, Huneke, M and Jasper, J, ‘Information processing at successive stages of decision making: Need for cognition and inclusion-exclusion-effects’ (2000) Organizational behavior and human decision processes 171.
Levitt, T, ‘The globalization of markets’ (1983) Harvard business review, 92–102.
Maheswaran, D and Sternthal, B, ‘The effects of knowledge, motivation, and type of message on ad processing and product judgments’ (1990) Journal of consumer research 66.
Maheswaran, D, Sternthal, B and Gürhan, Z, ‘Acquisition and impact of consumer expertise’ (1996) Journal of consumer psychology 115.
Mak, V, ‘The myth of the ‘empowered consumer’: lessons from financial literacy studies’ (2012) Zeitschrift für Europäisches Unternehmens- und Verbraucherrecht/Journal of European consumer and market law 254.
Malhotra, N, ‘Information load and consumer decision making’ (1992) Journal of consumer research 419.
Michaelidou, N and Dibb, S, ‘Consumer involvement: a new perspective’ (2008) Marketing review 83.
Peter, J and Olson, J, Consumer behavior & marketing strategy (9th international edition) (Boston, McGraw-Hill, 2010).
Shavitt, S, Lee, A, and Johnson, T, ‘Cross-cultural consumer psychology’, in C. Haugtvedt, P Herr and F Kardes (eds), Handbook of consumer psychology (New York, Psychology press, 2008) 1103–1131.
Trzaskowski, J, ‘The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and vulnerable consumers’ (Paper for the Conference of the International association of consumer law in Sydney, 2013).
Tversky, A and Kahneman, D, ‘The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice’ (1981) Science 453.
Wilhelmsson, T, ‘The average European consumer: a legal fiction?’, in T Wilhemsson, E Paunio and A Pohjolainen (eds), Private law and the many cultures of Europe (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2007) 243.
Wyer Jr., R, ‘The role of knowledge accessibility in cognition and behaviour—implications for consumer information processing’, in C Haugtvedt, P Herr and F Kardes (eds), Handbook of consumer psychology (New York/London, Routledge, 2008) 31–76.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Duivenvoorde, B. (2015). The Average Consumer Benchmark From a Behavioural Perspective. In: The Consumer Benchmarks in the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. Studies in European Economic Law and Regulation, vol 5. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13924-1_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13924-1_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-13923-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-13924-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)