Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Space between products on display: the impact of interspace on consumer estimation of product size

  • Original Empirical Research
  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This research examines the effect that leaving space between products has on consumers’ estimation of product size. We theorize and empirically confirm that when space is left between products (i.e., the display is interspaced), consumers are better able to distinguish the product from the environment, which results in more attention being devoted to the product, and, in turn, larger estimation of the product’s size. Furthermore, we demonstrate downstream outcomes (i.e., consumer choices, purchase intentions) of the effect of interspatial product display on product size estimates; that is consumers react more favorably to products that are displayed in an interspatial product display when their product usage goals require large-sized products. Meanwhile, non-interspatial product displays are preferred when consumers holding a consumption goal geared to a small product size. Finally, we validate and solidify these novel interspace effects in both advertising and retailing contexts via a series of six studies including five different product types (e.g., shampoo, food, water bottle).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4a
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ailawadi, K. L., Ma, Y., & Grewal, D. (2018). The club store effect: Impact of shopping in warehouse club stores on consumers’ packaged food purchases. Journal of Marketing Research, 55(2), 193–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allïk, J., & Tuulmets, T. (1991). Occupancy model of perceived numerosity. Perception & Psychophysics, 49(4), 303–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacon, W. F., & Egeth, H. E. (1994). Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture. Perception & Psychophysics, 55(5), 485–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, N., & Areni, C. S. (2006). When a few minutes sound like a lifetime: Does atmospheric music expand or contract perceived time? Journal of Retailing, 82(3), 189–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F., & Payne, J. W. (1998). Constructive consumer choice processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(3), 187–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bevan, W., Maier, R. A., & Helson, H. (1963). The influence of context upon the estimation of number. The American Journal of Psychology, 76(3), 464–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, H. F. (1942). An evaluation of the attensity of isolation by means of ocular photography. The American Journal of Psychology, 55(2), 230–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castro, I. A., Morales, A. C., & Nowlis, S. M. (2013). The influence of disorganized shelf displays and limited product quantity on consumer purchase. Journal of Marketing, 77, 118–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandon, P., & Ordabayeva, N. (2009). Supersize in one dimension, downsize in three dimensions: Effects of spatial dimensionality on size perceptions and preferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(6), 739–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chartrand, T. L., Huber, J., Shiv, B., & Tanner, R. J. (2008). Nonconscious goals and consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(2), 189–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cutright, K. M. (2012). The beauty of boundaries: When and why we seek structure in consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(5), 775–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dreze, X., Hoch, S. J., & Purk, M. E. (1994). Shelf management and space elasticity. Journal of Retailing, 70(4), 301–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisend, M. (2014). Shelf space elasticity: A meta-analysis. Journal of Retailing, 90(2), 168–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eroglu, S. A., Machleit, K., & Barr, T. F. (2005). Perceived retail crowding and shopping satisfaction: The role of shopping values. Journal of Business Research, 58(8), 1146–1153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esmark, C. L., & Noble, S. M. (2018). Retail space invaders: When employees’ invasion of customer space increases purchase intentions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46(3), 477–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evers, C., Stok, F. M., Danner, U. N., Salmon, S. J., de Ridder, D. T. D., & Adriaanse, M. A. (2011). The shaping role of hunger on self-reported external eating status. Appetite, 57(2), 318–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finn, A. (1988). Print ad recognition readership scores: An information processing perspective. Journal of Marketing Research, 25, 168–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzsimons, G. M., Chartrand, T. L., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2008). Automatic effects of brand exposure on motivated behavior: How apple makes you “think different”. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(1), 21–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folkes, V., & Matta, S. (2004). The effect of package shape on consumers’ judgments of product volume: Attention as a mental contaminant. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 390–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Food, R. 2020. The best goldfish flavors. Retrieved from https://www.ranker.com/list/best-goldfish-flavors/ranker-food

  • Frith, C. D., & Frit, U. (1972). The solitaire illusion: An illusion of numerosity. Perception & Psychophysics, 11(6), 409–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginsburg, A. P. (1984). Visual form perception based on biological filtering. In L. Spillman & B. R. Wooten (Eds.), Sensory experiences, adaptation, and perception (pp. 53–72). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagtvedt, H., & Brasel, S. A. (2017). Color saturation increases perceived product size. Journal of Consumer Research, 44, 396–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, J. M., Raut, S., & Swami, S. (2010). Retail shelf allocation: A comparative analysis of heuristic and meta-heuristic approaches. Journal of Retailing, 86(1), 94–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (Vol. 2nd). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hock, S. J., & Bagchi, R. (2017). The impact of crowding on calorie consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(5), 1123–1140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, D. D., & Singh, M. (1997). Salience of visual parts. Cognition, 63(1), 29–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, J., Yoon, S., & Bendle, L. J. (2012). Desired privacy and the impact of crowding on customer emotions and approach-avoidance responses: Waiting in a virtual reality restaurant. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 24(2), 224–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krider, R. E., Raghubir, P., & Krishna, A. (2001). Pizzas: Π or square? Psychophysical biases in area comparisons. Marketing Science, 20(4), 405–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishna, A. (2006). Interaction of senses: The effect of vision versus touch on the elongation bias. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 557–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, L. E. (1972). Perceived numerosity. Perception & Psychophysics, 11(1), 5–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Machleit, K. A., Eroglu, S. A., & Mantel, S. P. (2000). Perceived retail crowding and shopping satisfaction: What modifies this relationship? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(1), 29–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maeng, A., Tanner, R. J., & Soman, D. (2013). Conservative when crowded: Social crowding and consumer choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 50(6), 739–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mckenzie, J. 2003. Food portion sizes have grown – a lot. Retrieved from https://abcnews.go.com/WN/food-portion-sizes-grown-lot/story?id=129685

  • Michael, G. A., & Gálvez-García, G. (2011). Salience-based progression of visual attention. Behavioural Brain Research, 224(1), 87–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, A. (2009). Influence of contagious versus noncontagious product groupings on consumer preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(1), 73–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, A., Mishra, H., & Nayakankuppam, D. (2009). The group-contagion effect: The influence of spatial groupings on perceived contagion and preferences. Psychological Science, 20(7), 867–870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mizzi, R., & Michael, G. A. (2014). The role of the collicular pathway in the salience-based progression of visual attention. Behavioural Brain Research, 270, 330–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R. S., Stammerjohan, C. A., & Coulter, R. A. (2005). Banner advertiser-web site context congruity and color effects on attention and attitudes. Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 71–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nothdurft, H.-C. (2000). Salience from feature contrast: Additivity across dimensions. Vision Research, 40(10–12), 1183–1201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Guinn, T. C., Tanner, R. J., & Maeng, A. (2015). Turning to space: Social density, social class, and the value of things in stores. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(2), 196–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, J. R., & Lehmann, D. R. (2011). When shelf-based scarcity impacts consumer preferences. Journal of Retailing, 87(2), 142–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parkhurst, D., Law, K., & Niebur, E. (2002). Modeling the role of salience in the allocation of overt visual attention. Vision Research, 42(1), 107–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pieters, R., & Wedel, M. (2004). Attention capture and transfer in advertising: Brand, pictorial, and text-size effects. Journal of Marketing, 68(2), 36–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pracejus, J. W., Olsen, G. D., & O’Guinn, T. C. (2006). How nothing became something: White space, rhetoric, history, and meaning. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(1), 82–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qiu, F. T., Sugihara, T., & von der Heydt, R. (2007). Figure-ground mechanisms provide structure for selective attention. Nature Neuroscience, 10(11), 1492–1499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raghubir, P., & Krishna, A. (1999). Vital dimensions in volume perception: Can the eye fool the stomach? Journal of Marketing Research, 36(3), 313–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, A. D. (2011). Space cannot be cut—why self-identity naturally includes neighbourhood. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 45(2), 161–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redden, J. P., & Hoch, S. J. (2009). The presence of variety reduces perceived quantity. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(3), 406–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rolls, B. J., Rowe, E. A., Rolls, E. T., Kingston, B., Megson, A., & Gunary, R. (1981). Variety in a meal enhances food intake in man. Physiology & Behavior, 26(2), 215–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savage, M. (2019). Spotify reveals the decade’s most-streamed songs, from Ariana Grande to Drake.

  • Sevilla, J., & Kahn, B. E. (2014). The completeness heuristic: Product shape completeness influences size perceptions, preference, and consumption. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(1), 57–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sevilla, J., & Townsend, C. (2016). The space-to-product ratio effect: How interstitial space influences product aesthetic appeal, store perceptions, and product preference. Journal of Marketing Research, 53(5), 665–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strong, E. K. (1926). Value of white space in advertising. Journal of Applied Psychology, 10(1), 107–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suher, J., Raghunathan, R., & Hoyer, W. D. (2016). Eating healthy or feeling empty? How the “healthy= less filling” intuition influences satiety. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 1(1), 26–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treisman, A. M., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12(1), 97–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Herpen, E., Pieters, R., & Zeelenberg, M. (2009). When demand accelerates demand: Trailing the bandwagon. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(3), 302–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Osselaer, S. M. J., & Janiszewski, C. (2011). A goal-based model of product evaluation and choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(2), 260–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanbergen, N., Irmak, C., & Sevilla, J. (2020). Product entitativity: How the presence of product replicates increases perceived and actual product efficacy. Journal of Consumer Research, 1–23.

  • Vos, P. G., Van Oeffelen, M. P., Tibosch, H. J., & Allik, J. (1988). Interactions between area and numerosity. Psychological Research, 50(3), 148–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waller, M. A., Williams, B. D., Tangari, A. H., & Burton, S. (2010). Marketing at the retail shelf: An examination of moderating effects of logistics on sku market share. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(1), 105–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wansink, B., & van Ittersum, K. (2003). Bottoms up! The influence of elongation on pouring and consumption volume. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), 455–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, G. C., Grow, V. M., Freedman, Z. R., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (1996). Motivational predictors of weight loss and weight-loss maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(1), 115–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, J., Shen, H., & Wyer, R. S. (2012). Does the distance between us matter? Influences of physical proximity to others on consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 418–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zlatevska, N., Dubelaar, C., & Holden, S. S. (2014). Sizing up the effect of portion size on consumption: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Marketing, 78(3), 140–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business, Stockton University, 101 Vera King Farris Dr, Galloway, NJ, 08205, USA

    Yuli Zhang

  2. Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380015, India

    Hyokjin Kwak

  3. Department of Marketing College of Business and Economics, Lehigh University, 621 Taylor Street, Bethlehem, PA, 18015, USA

    Marina Puzakova

  4. Department of Marketing School of Business, Villanova University, 800 E. Lancaster Ave., Villanova, PA, 19085, USA

    Charles R. Taylor

Authors
  1. Yuli Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hyokjin Kwak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marina Puzakova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Charles R. Taylor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hyokjin Kwak.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Maura Scott served as Area Editor for this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, Y., Kwak, H., Puzakova, M. et al. Space between products on display: the impact of interspace on consumer estimation of product size. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 49, 1109–1131 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-021-00772-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-021-00772-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation