Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The price-perceived quality relationship: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its determinants

Marketing Letters volume 18, pages 181–196 (2007)Cite this article

Abstract

The authors conducted a meta-analysis of study results on the price-perceived quality relationship published from 1989 to 2006. The findings show that the price effect on perceived quality has decreased. Furthermore, the price–quality relationship is stronger in studies that use a within-subjects design, investigate higher priced products, and use samples from European countries but weaker for services, durable goods, and respondents who are familiar with the product. A striking null result indicates that the number of cues does not affect the price-perceived quality relationship significantly.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. We inspected the following journals: International Journal of Research in Marketing, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Journal of Retailing, Management Science, Marketing Letters, and Marketing Science.

  2. Rao and Monroe (1989) use a total set of 54 price-perceived quality effects.

  3. Bijmolt and Pieters (2001) compared the single value and the complete set approaches on their ability to detect the true effect size in a Monte Carlo study.

  4. We convert t values to a point biserial correlation by using \( r_{{{\text{pbis}}}} = {\sqrt {\frac{{t^{2} }} {{t^{2} + df}}} } \), where t = t value and df = degrees of freedom (Cohen, 1988, p. 545). Glass et al. (1981) recommended a conversion of this point biserial correlation to a biserial correlation by using \( r_{{bis}} = r_{{pbis}} \cdot {\sqrt {\frac{{n_{1} \cdot n_{2} }} {{\nu \cdot n}}} } \), where ν = ordinate of unit normal distribution and n = total sample size. According to this formula, it is possible in practice to obtain values of r bis greater than 1.00 if the point biserial correlation is larger than approximately 0.8.

  5. Rao and Monroe (1989) used a reduced set of 33 price–perceived quality data points in their analyses.

References

  • Bijmolt, T. H. A., and Pieters, R. G. M. (2001). Meta-analysis in marketing when studies contain multiple measurements. Marketing Letters, 12(2), 157–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bijmolt, T. H. A., van Heerde, H. J., and Pieters, R. G. M. (2005). New empirical generalizations on the determinants of price elasticity. Journal of Marketing Research, 42, 141–156 (May).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee, S., and Hadi, A. S. (1986). Influential observations, high leverage points, and outliers in linear regression. Statistical Science, 1(3), 379–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, G. A. Jr., Ford, N. M., Hartley, S. W., and Walker, O. C. Jr. (1985). The determinants of salesperson performance: a meta-analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 103–118 (May).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd edn.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, G. M., and Johansson, J. K. (1985). The role of price in multi-attribute product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(2), 195–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farley, J. U., Lehmann, D. R., and Sawyer A. (1995). Empirical marketing generalization using meta-analysis. Marketing Science, 14(3, Part 2), G36–G46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, D. M. (1970). An experimental investigation of the price-quality relationship. Journal of Retailing, 46(Fall), 25–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gedenk, K., and Sattler, H. (2006). Range effects in measuring attribute importance. Research Papers on Marketing and Retailing. University of Hamburg.

  • Gijsbrechts, E. (1993). Prices and pricing research in consumer marketing: Some recent developments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 10(2), 115–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., and Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Tatham, R. L., Anderson, R. E., and Black, W. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th edn.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L. V., and Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (2003). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, and organizations across nations (2nd edn.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, J. E., and Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., and Maruyama, G. (1983). Interdependence and interpersonal attraction among heterogeneous and homogeneous individuals: A theoretical formulation and a meta-analysis of the research. Review of Educational Research, 53(1), 5–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. L., and Kellaris, J. J. (1988). An exploratory study of price/perceived–quality relationships among consumer services. Advances in Consumer Research, 15, 316–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kardes, F. R. (1996). In defense of experimental consumer psychology. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 5(3), 279–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirca, A. H., Jayachandran, S., and Bearden, W. O. (2005). Market orientation: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its antecedents and impact on performance. Journal of Marketing, 69, 24–41 (April).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kmenta, J. (1986). Elements of econometrics. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein, D. R., and Burton, S. (1989). The relationship between perceived and objective price quality. Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 429–443 (November).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein, D. R., Ridgway, N. M., and Netemeyer, R. G. (1993). Price perceptions and consumer shopping behavior: A field study. Journal of Marketing Research, 30, 234–245 (May).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey, M. W., and Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnusson, D. (1967). Test theory. Reading. MA: Addison and Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyazaki, A. D., Grewal, D., and Goodstein, R. C. (2005). The effect of multiple extrinsic cues in quality perceptions: A matter of consisteny. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 146–153 (June).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monroe, K. B. (2003). Pricing: Making profitable decisions (3rd edn.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monroe, K. B., and Dodds, W. B. (1988). A research program for establishing the validity of the price-quality relationship. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 151–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagle, T. (1984). Economic foundations for pricing. Journal of Business, 57(1), S3–S26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, R. A. (2001). On the use of college students in social science research: insights from a second-order meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 450–461 (December).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., and Cacioppo, J. T. (1996). Addressing disturbing and disturbed consumer behavior. Is it necessary to change the way we conduct behavioral science? Journal of Marketing Research, 33, 1–8 (February).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, A. R., and Monroe, K. B. (1988). The moderating effect of prior knowledge on cue utilization in product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research 15, 253–264 (September).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, A. R., and Monroe, K. B. (1989). The effect of price, brand name, and store name on buyers’ perceptions of product quality: An integrative review. Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 351–357 (August).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, S. (1974). Hedonic prices and implicit markets: Product differentiation in pure competition. Journal of Political Economy, 82(1), 34–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1993). Cumulating evidence. In G. Keren and C. Lewis (Eds.), A handbook for data analysis in the behavioral sciences: Methodological issues (pp. 519–559). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1994). Parametric measures of effect size. In H. Cooper and L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 231–244). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, A. G. (1975). Demand artifacts in laboratory experiments in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 1(4), 20–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sethuraman, R. (1995). A meta-analysis of national brand and store brand cross-promotional price elasticities. Marketing Letters, 6(4), 275–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silver, N. C, and Dunlap, W. P. (1987). Averaging correlation coefficients: Should Fisher’s z transformation be use? Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(1), 146–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. H., and Natesan, C. N. (1999). Consumer price-quality beliefs: Schema variables predicting individual differences. Advances in Consumer Research, 26, 562–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tellis, G. J. (1988). The price elasticity of selective demand: A meta-analysis of econometric models of sales. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(4), 331–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Völckner, F., and Sattler, H. (2005). Separating negative and positive effects of price with choice-based conjoint analyses. Marketing–Journal of Research and Management, 1(1), 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wherry, R. J. (1984). Contributions to correlational analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winer, R. S. (1999). Experimentation in the twenty-first century: The importance of external validity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27, 349–358 (Summer).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(2), 2–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The author would like to thank the editor and the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions. The comments of Henrik Sattler on previous drafts of this manuscript are also gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Marketing and Media, University of Hamburg, Von-Melle-Park 5, 20146, Hamburg, Germany

    Franziska Völckner & Julian Hofmann

Authors
  1. Franziska Völckner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julian Hofmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Franziska Völckner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Völckner, F., Hofmann, J. The price-perceived quality relationship: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its determinants. Market Lett 18, 181–196 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-007-9013-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-007-9013-2

Keywords

search

Navigation