Marketing Letters

, Volume 27, Issue 2, pp 309–322 | Cite as

Consumer reactions to round numbers in brand names

  • Kunter GunastiEmail author
  • Timucin Ozcan


This research shows that round numbers (e.g., 10, 50, 100) are strongly associated with completeness perceptions and consumers view them as thresholds for reaching certain completeness levels. In nine empirical studies, we demonstrate that round numbers in brand names, i.e., Round Alphanumeric Brand names (RABs) are overrepresented due to their strong association with product completeness. We find that RABs lead to favorable product evaluations and increased preferences. We examine alternative explanations based on other number properties including magnitude, divisibility, popularity, and familiarity and show that the effects of RABs on consumer responses are only mediated by the perception of product completeness.


Round numbers Brand names Alphanumeric Complete products Numerical processing 



The authors would like to express their sincere appreciation to William T. Ross Jr. for his valuable insights. The authors would also like to thank Robin Coulter, Keith Coulter, Hans Baumgartner, Rajesh Bagchi, and Adam Brasel for their comments on earlier versions of the manuscript. This research was partially funded by the University of Connecticut Summer Research Grant provided to the first author.


  1. Boyd, C. (1985). Point of view: alphanumeric brand names. Journal of Advertising Research, 25(5), 48–52.Google Scholar
  2. Coupland, N. (2011). How frequent are numbers? Language and Communication, 31(1), 27–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dehaene, S. (1997). The number sense. NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Dehaene, S., & Mehler, J. (1992). Cross-linguistic regularities in frequency of number words. Cognition, 43, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. (2014), [].Google Scholar
  6. Dutta-Bergman, M. (2004). The impact of roundness and web use motivation on the credibility of e-health information. Journal of Communication, 54(2), 253–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gunasti, K., & Ross, W. (2009). How inferences about missing attributes decrease the tendency to defer choice and increase purchase probability. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(February), 823–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gunasti, K., & Ross, W. (2010). How and when alphanumeric brand names affect consumer preferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(December), 1177–1192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  10. Jansen, C., & Pollmann, M. (2001). On round numbers: pragmatic aspects of numerical expressions. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 8(3), 187–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. King, D., & Janiszewski, C. (2011). The sources and consequences of the fluent processing of numbers. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(April), 327–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lotz, J. (1955). On language and culture. International Journal of American Linguistics, 21(2), 187–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Maheswaran, D., Mackie, D., & Chaiken, S. (1992). Brand name as a heuristic cue: the effects of task importance and expectancy confirmation on consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(4), 317–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mitchell, J. (2001). Clustering and psychological barriers: the importance of numbers. The Journal of Futures Markets, 21(5), 395–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Osler, C. (2003). Currency orders and exchange rate dynamics: an explanation for the predictive success of technical analysis. Journal of Finance, 58(5), 1791–1819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ozcan, T., & Sheinin, D. (2012). Effects of complete products on consumer judgments. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 21(4), 246–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ozcan, T., & Sheinin, D. (2013). Understanding common attribute devaluation in multifunctional products. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 21(4), 389–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pope, D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). Round numbers as goals: evidence from baseball, SAT takers. Psychological Science, 22(1), 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Schindler, R., & Kirby, P. (1997). Patterns of rightmost digits used in advertising prices: implications for nine-ending effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(Sep), 192–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schindler, R., & Wiman, A. (1989). Effects of odd pricing on price recall. Journal of Business Research, 19(November), 165–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sigurd, B. (1988). Round numbers. Language in Society, 17(2), 243–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wyckoff, P. (1963). Psychology of stock market timing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of BusinessUniversity of ConnecticutStorrsUSA
  2. 2.School of BusinessSouthern Illinois University EdwardsvilleEdwardsvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations