Marketing Letters

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 91–100 | Cite as

“Out of sight, out of mind”: Pantry stockpiling and brand-usage frequency

  • Brian Wansink
  • Rohit Deshpande


Both researchers and brand managers have suggested that price promotion induced stockpiling can increase a household's usage frequency of a product. Empirical findings, however, contradict this relationship. In reconciling this inconsistency, laboratory results reported in this paper suggest that stockpiling may have the greatest effect on a product's usage frequency when usage-related thoughts about the product are highly salient. These results also suggest that when stockpiling stimulates usage frequency, it can do so by increasing perceptions of a product's versatility. These findings have implications for the advertising versus promotion debate. They suggest that consumer promotions and advertising might play a joint and complementary role in increasing product usage: promotions by encouraging stockpiling, and advertising by building the usage-related salience needed to deplete the stockpiled inventory.

Key words

stockpiling usage frequency salience versatility 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Assuncao, Joao, and Robert J. Meyer. (1993). “The Rational Effect of Price Expectations on Sales-Price Relationships,”Marketing Science, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  2. Blattberg, Robert C., and Scott A. Neslin. (1990).Sales Promotion: Concepts, Methods, and Strategies. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  3. Blattberg, Robert C., Peter Peacock, and Subrata K. Sen. (1976). “Identifying the Deal Prone Segment,”Journal of Marketing Research 15 (December), 143–154.Google Scholar
  4. Dickson, Peter R., and Alan G. Sawyer. (1990). “The Price Knowledge and Search of Supermarket Shoppers,”Journal of Marketing 54 (July), 42–53.Google Scholar
  5. Fazio, Russell H., and Mark P. Zanna. (1981). “Direct Experience and Attitude-Behavior Consistency,” In L. Berkowitz (ed.),Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (vol. 14). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  6. Helsen, Kristiaan, and David C. Schmittlein. (1992). “Some Characterizations of Stockpiling Behavior Under Uncertainty,”Marketing Letters 3(1), 5–17.Google Scholar
  7. Meyer, Robert J., and Joao Assuncao. (1990). “The Optimality of Consumer Stockpiling Strategies,”Marketing Science 9 (Winter), 18–41.Google Scholar
  8. Moore, William L., and Russell S. Winer. (1978). “An Experiment to Determine the Effects of Package Size on Consumption.” Working paper, Graduate School of Business, Columbia University, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Shocker, Allan D., Moshe Ben-Akiva, Bruno Boccara, Prakash Nedungadi. (1991). “Consideration Set Influences on Consumer Decision-Making and Choice: Issues, Models, and Suggestions,”Marketing Letters 2(3), 181–197.Google Scholar
  10. Tesser, Abraham, and M.C. Conlee. (1975). “Some Effects of Time and Thought on Attitude Polarization,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31 (June), 262–270.Google Scholar
  11. Wansink, Brian and Scott A. Neslin. (1994). “Risk Aversion and the Underestimation of Household Inventory.” Working paper, Amos Tuck School of Business Administration, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH.Google Scholar
  12. Wansink, Brian, and Michael L. Ray. (1992). “Estimating an Ad's Impact on One's Consumption of a Brand,”Journal of Advertising Research 32 (May–June), 9–16.Google Scholar
  13. Ward, Ronald W., and James E. Davis. (1978). “A Pooled Cross-Section Time Series Model of Coupon Promotions,”American Journal of Agricultural Economics 60 (November), 393–401.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian Wansink
    • 1
  • Rohit Deshpande
    • 1
  1. 1.Tuck SchoolDartmouth CollegeHanover

Personalised recommendations