Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Multi-stage information processing behavior: An experimental investigation

  • 89 Accesses

  • 8 Citations

Abstract

This paper presents an operationalization of Srinivasan's model for examining multi-stage information processing behavior. Based on theoretical considerations, specific hypotheses regarding multi-stage information processing behavior are posited. An experimental investigation undertaken to test these hypotheses is described.

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

References

  1. Addleman, S. 1962. “Orthogonal Main-effect Plans for asymmetrical factorial experi ments.”Technometrics 4, 21–46.

  2. Bettman, James R. 1974. “Decision Net Models of Buyer Information Processing and Choice: Findings, Problems, and Prospects,” in G. D. Hughes and M. L. Ray, eds.,Buyer/Consumer Information Processing. Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press.

  3. — 1979.An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice. Reading, Massachusetts; Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

  4. —, and Jacoby, J. 1976. “Patterns of Processing in Consumer Information Acquisition. In Beverlee B. Anderson, ed.,Advances in Consumer Research, Volume 3. Chicago: Association for Consumer Research, 315–320.

  5. —, and Kakkar, P. 1977. “Effects of Information Presentation Format on Consumer Information Acquisition Strategy.”Journal of Consumer Research, 3, 233–40.

  6. —, and Zins, M.A. 1979. “Information Format and Choice Task Effects in Decision Making.”Journal of Consumer Research, 6, 141–153.

  7. Bieri, J. 1955. “Cognitive Complexity-Simplicity and Predictive Behavior,”Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51, 263–268.

  8. — 1961. “Cognitive Simplicity as a Personality Variable in Cognitive and Preferential Behavior,” in D. W. Fiske and S. R. Maddi, eds.,Functions of Varied Experience. Homewood, Illinois: The Dorsey Press, 355–379.

  9. — 1971. “Cognitive Structures in Personality,” in H. M. Schroder and P. Suedfeld, eds.,Personality Theory and Information Processing. New York: The Ronald Press Co., 178–308.

  10. Broadbent, Donald E. 1971.Decision and Stress. London: Academic Press.

  11. Cox, D.R. 1975.Analysis of Binary Data. London: Chapman and Hall, second edition.

  12. Day, G.S. and Shocker, A. D. 1976. “Analytical Approaches to Identifying Competitive Product-Market Boundaries.” Working Paper 76-112, Cambridge, Mass.: Marketing Science Institute.

  13. Driver, M.J. and Streufert, S. 1969. “Integrative Complexity: An Approach to Individuals and Groups as Information Processing Systems.”Administrative Science Quarterly 14 (June) 272–285.

  14. Einhorn, H.J. 1971. “Use of nonlinear, Noncompensatory Models as a Function of Task and Amount of Information.”Organization Behavior and Human Performance, 6, 1–27.

  15. Goldstien, K.M. and Blackman, S. 1978.Cognitive Style: Five Approaches and Relevant Research. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

  16. Hansen, F. 1972.Consumer Choice Behavior: A Cognitive Theory. New York: The Free Press, 1972.

  17. — 1976. “Psychological Theories of Consumer Choice.”Journal of Consumer Research 3 (December) 117–142.

  18. Jacoby, J., Chestnut, R.W. and Fisher, W.A. 1978. “A Behavioral Process Approach to Information Acquisition in Nondurable Purchasing.”Journal of Marketing Research 15 (November) 532–544.

  19. —, Speller D.E. and Kohn, C.A. 1974. “Brand Choice Behavior as a Function of Information Load.”Journal of Marketing Research 11 (February) 63–69.

  20. — and— 1974b. “Brand Choice Behavior as a Function of Information Load: Replication and Extension.”Journal of Consumer Research 1 (June) 33–42.

  21. Lussier, D. and Olshavsky, Richard. 1974. “An Information Processing Approach to Individual Brand Choice Behavior” paper TP4.1 presented at the Joint Meeting of the Operations Research Society of America and the Institute of Management Sciences. San Juan, Puerto Rico.

  22. — and —, 1979. “Task Complexity and Contingent Processing In Brand Choice,”Journal of Consumer Research, 6, 2 (September) 154–165.

  23. Malhotra, Naresh K. 1982. “Information Load and Consumer Decision Making.”Journal of Consumer Research, 8, 4 (March).

  24. Malhotra, Naresh K., Jain A.K., and Lagakos, S.W. 1982. “The Information Load Controversy: An Alternative Viewpoint.”Journal of Marketing, 46, 2 (Spring).

  25. Mendenhall, W. and Scheafer, R.L. 1973.Mathematical Statistics with Applications. North Scituate, Mass.: Durbury Press.

  26. Miller, G.A. 1956. “The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information.”Psychological Review, 68, 81–97.

  27. Newman, J.W. 1977. “Consumer External Search: Amounts and Determinants.” In A. G. Woodside, J. N. Sheth and P. D. Bennett, eds.Consumer and Industrial Buying Behavior. New York: North Holland, 79–94.

  28. Olshavsky, R.W. 1979. “Task Complexity and Contingent Processing in Decision Making: A Replication and Extension,”Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 24, 300–316.

  29. Park, C.W. 1976. “The Effect of Individual and Situation-related Factors on Consumer's Selection of Judgemental Models.”Journal of Marketing Research, 13, 144–151.

  30. —, 1978. “A Seven-Point Scale and a Decision-Maker's Simplifying Choice Strategy: An Operationalized Satisficing-Plus Model.”Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 21, 252–271.

  31. Payne, J.W. 1976. “Task Complexity and Contingent Processing in Decision Making: An Information Search and Protocol Analysis.”Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 366–87.

  32. Pinson, C. 1975. “A Consumer Cognitive Differentiation Test.” Working Paper, INSEAD. Fontainebleau, France.

  33. Pras, Bernard and Summers, J.O. 1975. “A Comparison of Linear and Non-Linear Evaluation Process Models.”Journal of Marketing Research, 15 (August) 429–37.

  34. Rappoport, A. and Wallsten, T.S. 1972. “Individual Decision Behavior.” Annual Review of Psychology, 23, 131–179.

  35. Russ, F.A. 1971. “Evaluation Process Models and the Prediction of Preference.” In D. M. Gardner, ed.,Proceeding, Second Annual Conference. Chicago: Association for Consumer Research, 278–80.

  36. Sawyer, A.G. 1975. “Demand Artifacts in Laboratory Experiments in Consumer Research.”Journal of Consumer Research, 1 (March) 20.

  37. Schroder, H.M., Driver, M.J. and Streufert, S. 1967.Human Information Processing. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

  38. Shocker, A.D. and Srinivasan, V. 1977. “LINMAP (Version II): A FORTRAN IV Computer Program for Analyzing Ordinal Preference (Dominance) Judgements Via Linear Programming. Techniques for Conjoint Measurement.”Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 101–103.

  39. Srinivasan V. 1977. “An Approach to the Modeling and Estimation of Consumer Multi-stage Decision Process.” Paper presented at theAMA/MSI/PIT Conference on Analytical Approaches to Product and Marketing Planning. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

  40. Wilkie, W.L. and E.A. Pessemier. 1973. “Issues in Marketing's use of Multi-Attribute Attitude Models.”Journal of Marketing Research, 10 (November) 428–441.

  41. Wright, P.L. 1973. “Research Orientations for Analyzing Consumer Judgement Processes.” In S. Ward and P. Wright, eds,Advances in Consumer Research, Volume 3. Urbana, Illinois: Association for consumner Research, 268–279.

  42. Wright, P.L. 1974. “The Use of Phased, Noncompensatory Strategies in Decisions Between Multi Attribute Products.” Research paper 223. Graduate School of Business, Stanford University.

  43. — 1975. “Consumer Choice Strategies: Simplifying vs. Optimizing.”Journal of Marketing Research, 11 (February) 60–67.

  44. — and Barbour, F. 1977. “Phased Decision Strategies: Sequels to an Initial Screening.” In M. K. Starr and M. Zelleny, eds.,North Holland/TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences, Volume 6: Multiple Criteria Decision Making. Amsterdam: North Holland, 91–109.

  45. —, and Weitz, B. 1977. “Time Horizon Effects on Product Evaluation Strategies.”Journal of Marketing Research, 14 (November), 429–443.

Download references

Author information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Malhotra, N.K. Multi-stage information processing behavior: An experimental investigation. JAMS 10, 54–71 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02721899

Download citation

Keywords

  • Consumer Research
  • Cognitive Complexity
  • Information Processing Strategy
  • Cognitive Differentiation
  • Consumer Decision Process