Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Measurement of the relative importance of product attribute information: A review of the information display approach

  • Abhandlungen
  • Published:
Zeitschrift für Verbraucherpolitik Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In determining whether or not to mandate disclosures of product information, policymakers may wish to first investigate the relative importance of different attribute-related information cues in influencing the purchase decision-making of consumers. This paper examines the applicability of the information display approach to this research task. In addition, unresolved problems associated with the approach are addressed for the benefit of researchers interested in applying the methodology.

Zusammenfassung

Die Messung der relativen Bedeutsamkeit von Informationen über einzelne Produktmerkmale: ein Überblick über den «information display»-Ansatz. Die Planung von Maßnahmen zur Verbraucherinformation erfordert bei den Verantwortlichen Kenntnis darüber, wie sich einzelne Produktmerkmale und die entsprechenden Einzelinformationen auf die Kaufentscheidungen von Verbrauchern auswirken. Der vorliegende Beitrag konzentriert sich auf deninformation display-Ansatz als eine der Möglichkeiten, die relative Bedeutung einzelner Produktmerkmale zu erfassen. Er bietet einen Überblick über die Leistungsfähigkeit dieses Ansatzes und über Anwendungen bei verbraucherpolitischen und unternehmerischen Problemen. Dabei werden vier mögliche Indikatoren der relativen Bedeutsamkeit diskutiert.

Anschließend werden methodische Fragen bei der Verbesserung von experimentellen Untersuchungen angesprochen. Sie beziehen sich auf das zu verwendende Material und auf die Aufgaben, die die Testpersonen erfüllen sollen, auf die Spezifizierung der Produktmerkmale und darauf, welche Marken mit einbezogen werden sollen, ferner auf die Frage, ob der Markenname als ein Produktmerkmal gelten soll, und auf die Möglichkeit, die Realitätsnähe zu erhöhen, sowie schließlich auf die Frage nach der geeigneten Entscheidungseinheit für die Datenanalyse.

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

References

  • Alpert, M. I. (1971). Identification of determinant attributes — A comparison of methods.Journal of Marketing Research, 8, 184–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arch, D. C., Bettman, J. R., & Kakkar, P. (1978). Subjects' information processing in information display board studies. In: H. K. Hunt (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 5), pp. 555–560. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckwith, N. E., & Lehmann, D. R. (1973). The importance of differential weights in multiple attribute models of consumer attitude.Journal of Marketing Research, 10, 141–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkowitz, E. N., Ginter, J. L., & Talarzyk, W. (1977). An investigation of alternative indicators of attribute saliency and their effects on the size of the attribute set in the multi-attribute model. In: R. A. Greenberg & D. N. Bellenger (Eds.),Contemporary marketing thought, pp. 90–94. Chicago: American Marketing Association. Proceedings of the 1977 Educators Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettman, J. R. (1977). Data collection and analysis approaches for studying consumer information processing. In: W. D. Perreault, Jr. (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 4), pp. 342–348. Atlanta: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettman, J. R. (1979). Memory factors in consumer choice: A review.Journal of Marketing, 43 (2), 37–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettman, J. R., & Jacoby, J. (1976). Patterns of Processing in consumer information acquisition. In: B. B. Anderson (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 3), pp. 315–320. Association for Consumer Research.

  • Bettman, J. R., & Kakkar, P. (1977). Effects of information presentation format on consumer information acquisition strategies.Journal of Consumer Research, 3, 233–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capon, N., & Burke, M. (1977). Information seeking behavior in consumer durable purchases. In: B. A. Greenberg & D. N. Bellenger (Eds.),Contemporary marketing thought, pp. 110–115. Chicago: American Marketing Association. Proceedings of the 1977 Educators Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardozo, R. N., Ross, I., & Rudelius, W. (1972). New product decisions by marketing executives: A computer controlled experiment.Journal of Marketing, 36 (1), 10–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chestnut, R. W., & Jacoby, J. (1977). Consumer information processing: Emerging theory and findings. In: A. G. Woodside, J. N. Sheth, & P. D. Bennett (Eds.)Consumer and industrial buying behavior, pp. 119–133. New York: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M. (1971). Some comments on the use of models in advertising research. In:Seminar on translating advanced advertising theories into research reality (Proceedings), pp. 297–318. Amsterdam: European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, P. E., & Rao, V. R. (1972).Applied multidimensional scaling: A comparison of approaches and algorithms. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, P. E., & Wind, Y. (1973).Multiattribute decisions in marketing: A measurement approach. Hinsdale, Ill.: Dryden Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haines, G. H., Jr. (1974). Process models of consumer decision making. In: G. D. Hughes & M. L. Ray (Eds.),Buyer/consumer information processing, pp. 89–107. Chapel Hill, N. C.: University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heeler, R., & Okechuku, C. (1978). Brand selection for gift giving versus personal use. In: R. Savitt (Ed.),Proceedings: Marketing 1978, pp. 129–138. Edmonton, Alberta: Administrative Sciences Association of Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holbrook, M. B., & Maier, K. A. (1978). A study of the interface between attitude structure and information acquisition using a questionnaire-based information display sheet. In: H. K. Hunt (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 5), pp. 93–97. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, G. D., Verkeuil, P., & Williams, C. (1978). The mounting costs of public policy in marketing.Marketing Science Institute Working Paper (Report No. 78-103).

  • Hutton, R. B., McNeill, D. L., & Wilkie, W. L. (1978). Some issues in designing consumer information studies in public policy. In: H. K. Hunt (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 5), pp. 131–137. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, J. (1975). Perspectives on a consumer information processing research program.Communication Research, 2, 203–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, J. (1977). The emerging behavioral process technology in consumer decision making research. In: W. D. Perreault, Jr. (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 4), pp. 263–265. Atlanta: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, J., & Chestnut, R. W. (1977).Amount, type, and order of package information acquisition in purchasing decisions. Final report submitted to the National Science Foundation, RANN (GI-43687).

  • Jacoby, J., Chestnut, R. W., Hoyer, W. D., Sheluga, D. A., & Donahue, M. J. (1978). Psychometric characteristics of behavioral process data: Preliminary findings on validity and reliability. In: H. K. Hunt (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 5), pp. 546–554. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, J., Chestnut, R. W., & Silberman, W. (1977). Consumer use and comprehension of nutrition information.Journal of Consumer Research, 4, 119–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, J., Chestnut, R. W., Weigl, K. C., & Fisher, W. A. (1976). Pre-purchase information acquisition: Description of a process methodology, research paradigm, and pilot investigation. In: B. B. Anderson (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 3), pp. 306–314. Association for Consumer Research.

  • Jacoby, J., Speller, D. E., & Kohn, C. A. (1974). Brand choice behavior as a function of information load.Journal of Marketing Research, 11, 63–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, J., Szybillo, G. J., & Busato-Schach, J. (1977). Information acquisition behavior in brand choice situations.Journal of Consumer Research, 3, 209–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, J., Reibstein, D. T., & Wittink, D. R. (1975).Market segments via derived importance weights. West Lafayette, Ind.: Purdue University, Krannert Graduate School of Industrial Administration, Institute for Research in the Behavioral, Economic, and Management Sciences (Paper No. 518).

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, D. L., & Wilkie, W. L. (1978). Public policy and consumer information: Impacts of the new energy labels.Journal of Consumer Research, 6, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, J. H., Alpert, M. I. (1968). Determinant buying attitudes: Meaning and measurement.Journal of Marketing, 32 (4), 13–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, J. H., & Alpert, M. I. (1977). Semantic confusion in attitude research: Salience vs. importance vs. determinance. In: W. D. Perreault, Jr. (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 4), pp. 106–110. Atlanta: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, J. W. (1976 a). Heuristic search processes in decision making. In: B. B. Anderson (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 3), pp. 321–327. Association for Consumer Research.

  • Payne, J. W. (1976b). Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 366–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, J. W., & Ragsdale, E. K. E. (1978). Verbal protocols and direct observation of supermarket shopping behavior: Some findings and a discussion of methods. In: H. K. Hunt (Ed.),Advances in consumer behavior (Vol. 5), pp. 571–577. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quelch, J. A. (1977 a).Explaining and predicting brand choice behavior: An application of information display research. London, Ont.: University of Western Ontario, School of Business Administration (Working paper No. 181).

    Google Scholar 

  • Quelch, J. A. (1977 b).Measurement and implications of the relative importance of product attributes: The nutrition factor in breakfast cereal brand choice behavior. Boston: Harvard University. Doctoral dissertation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quelch, J. A. (1979). Behavioral measurement of the relative importance of attribute-related information cues. In: W. L. Wilkie (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 6), pp. 263–268. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reibstein, D. J., Youngblood, S. A., & Fromkin, H. L. (1975). Number of choices and perceived decision freedom as a determinant of satisfaction and consumer behavior.Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 434–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reilly, M., Holman, R., & Evered, R. (1976). Individual differences in information processing: An exploratory report. In: H. C. Schneider (Ed.),Proceedings, 8th Annual Conference, pp. 423–425. Atlanta American Institute of Decision Sciences.

  • Russ, F. A. (1971). Evaluation process models and the prediction of preference. In: D. M. Gardner (Ed.),Proceedings, Second Annual Conference, Association for Consumer Research, pp. 664–668.

  • Russo, J. E. (1978). Eye fixations can save the world: A critical evaluation and a comparison between eye fixations and other information processing methodologies. In: H. K. Hunt (Ed.),Advances in consumer research, pp. 561–570. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, J. E., & Rosen, L. D. (1975). An eye fixation analysis of multi-alternative choice.Memory and Cognition, 3, 267–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, M. J., & Etzel, M. J. (1976). The nature of salient outcomes and referents in the extended model. In: B. B. Anderson (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 5), pp. 485–490. Association for Consumer Research.

  • Scammon, D. L. (1977). Information load and consumers.Joural of Consumer Research, 4, 148–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schendel, D. E., Wilkie, W. L., & McCann, J. M. (1971). An experimental investigation of attribute importance. In: D. M. Gardner (Ed.),Proceedings, Second Annual Conference, Association for Consumer Research, pp. 404–416.

  • Semon, T. T. (1969). On the perception of appliance attributes.Journal of Marketing Research, 6, 101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1974). How big is a chunk?Science, 183, 482–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, I. D. (1970). Perceived freedom. In: L. Berkowitz (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 5), pp. 187–248.

  • Tversky, A. (1969). Intransitivity of preferences.Psychological Review, 76, 31–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. (1972). Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice.Psychological Review, 79, 281–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Raaij, W. F. (1977). Consumer information processing for different information structures and formats. In: W. D. Perreault, Jr. (Ed.),Advances in consumer research (Vol. 4), pp. 176–184.

  • Wilkie, W. L., & Gardner, D. M. (1974). The role of marketing research in public policy decision making.Journal of Marketing, 38 (1), 38–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkie, W. L., & Pessemier, E. A. (1973). Issues in marketing's use of multi-attribute attitude models.Journal of Marketing Research, 10, 428–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkie, W. L., & Weinreich, R. P. (1972). Effects of the number and types of attributes included in an attitude model: More isnot better. In: M. Venkatesan (Ed.),Proceedings, Third Annual Conference, Association for Consumer Research, pp. 325–340.

  • Wright, P. L. (1972). Consumer judgment strategies — Beyond the compensatory assumption. In: M. Venkatesan (Ed.),Proceedings, Third Annual Conference, Association for Consumer Research, pp. 316–324.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, Soldiers Field, 02163, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    John A. Quelch

Authors
  1. John A. Quelch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

A preliminary version of this paper was presented at the annual conference of the European Academy for Advanced Research in Marketing, Stockholm, May 25, 1978. The author thanks the Editors and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive criticisms and comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Quelch, J.A. Measurement of the relative importance of product attribute information: A review of the information display approach. J Consum Policy 3, 232–245 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02386016

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02386016

Keywords

Search

Navigation