Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science

, Volume 27, Issue 4, pp 428–441 | Cite as

Point-of-purchase displays, product organization, and brand purchase likelihoods

  • Charles S. Areni
  • Dale F. Duhan
  • Pamela Kiecker


Can point-of-purchase (POP) displays cause a decrease in sales of the featured brand? In an actual test-market promotion, the use of special POP displays led to a decrease in sales of featured wines from a specific U.S. region. Moreover, sales of regularly shelved wines from competitive regions actually increased. The results of a laboratory experiment supported the explanation that the POP displays essentially reorganized the wines into region categories within the stores, making it easier for consumers to compare alternatives by region. As a result, sales of wines from preferred regions increased and sales of wines from disliked regions decreased relative to when the wines were displayed by variety categories on regular shelf space. Further evidence indicated that reorganizing products by levels of a given attribute influences purchase likelihoods mainly when the attribute is otherwise low rather than high in salience and when brands have normally high rather than low purchase likelihoods.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aaker, David A. 1991.Managing Brand Equity. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baron, Rueben M. and David A. Kenny. 1986. “The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations.”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51:1173–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bettman, James R. 1979.An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  4. — and C. Whan Park. 1980. “Effects of Prior Knowledge and Experience and Phase of the Choice Process on Consumer Decision Processes: A Protocol Analysis.”Journal of Consumer Research 7:234–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bronnenberg, Bart J. and Luc Wathieu. 1996. “Asymmetric Promotion Effects and Brand Positioning.”Marketing Science 15:379–394.Google Scholar
  6. Chevalier, Michel. 1975-76. “Substitution Patterns as a Result of Display in the Product Category.”Journal of Retailing 51:65–88.Google Scholar
  7. Christy, Richard and Joe Penn. 1994. “Marketing in the Face of Increasing Competition and Falling Demand: A Study of Responses of Wine Producers in Sainte-Foy, Bordeaux.”International Journal of Wine Marketing 6:20–34.Google Scholar
  8. Cook, Thomas D. and Donald T. Campbell. 1979.Quasi-Experimentation: Design & Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  9. Croft, Martin. 1995. “Top of the Pop.”Marketing Week, May, 12, 37–41.Google Scholar
  10. Curhan, Ronald C. 1974. “The Effects of Merchandising and Temporary Promotional Activities on the Sales of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables in Supermarkets.”Journal of Marketing Research 11:286–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dhar, Sanjay K. and Stephen J. Hoch. 1996. “Price Discrimination Using In-Store Merchandising.”Journal of Marketing 60:17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dodd, Tim H. and A. William Gustafson. 1997. “Product, Environmental, and Service Attributes that Influence Consumer Attitudes and Purchases at Wineries.”Journal of Food Products Marketing, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  13. —, Bruce E Pinkleton and A. William Gustafson. 1996. “External Information Sources of Product Enthusiasts: Differences Between Variety Seekers, Variety Neutrals, and Variety Avoiders.”Psychology & Marketing 13:291–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Folwell, Raymond J. 1980. “Marketing to the Wine Consumer—An Overview.” InAdvances in Consumer Research. Ed. Jerry C. Olson. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 89–94.Google Scholar
  15. Gagnon, Jean Paul and Jane T. Osterhaus. 1985. “Research Note: Effectiveness of Floor Displays on the Sales of Retail Products.”Journal of Retailing 61:104–116.Google Scholar
  16. Glass, Arnold Lewis and Keith James Holyoak. 1986.Cognition. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  17. Gluckman, Robert L. 1986. “A Consumer Approach to Branded Wines.”European Journal of Marketing 20:21–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gofton, Ken. 1997. “POP Moves Up the Charts.” Marketing, April 17 (POP & Field Marketing Supplement), XI.Google Scholar
  19. Green, Paul E. and Abba M. Krieger. 1995. “Attribute Importance Weights Modification in Assessing a Brand’s Competitive Potential.”Marketing Science 14:253–270.Google Scholar
  20. Grover, Rajiv and V. Srinivasan. 1992. “Evaluating the Multiple Effects of Retail Promotions on Brand Loyal and Brand Switching Segments.”Journal of Marketing Research 29:76–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Holbrook, Morris B., William L. Moore, Gary N. Dodgen, and William J. Havlena. 1985. “Nonisomorphism, Shadow Features, and Imputed Preferences.” Marketing Science 4:215–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Huber, Joel and Noreen M. Klein. 1991. “Adapting Cutoffs to the Choice Environment: The Effects of Attribute Correlation and Reliability.”Journal of Consumer Research 18:346–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hutchinson, J. Wesley and Joseph W. Alba. 1991. “Ignoring Irrelevant Information: Situational Determinants of Consumer Learning.”Journal of Consumer Research 18:325–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Inman, J. Jeffrey and Leigh McAlister. 1993. “A Retailer Promotion Policy Model Considering Promotional Signal Sensitivity.”Marketing Science 12:339–354.Google Scholar
  25. ——, and Wayne D. Hoyer. 1990. “Promotion Signal: Proxy for a Price Cut?”Journal of Consumer Research 17:74–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jenkins, Owain P. 1992. “Developing a Marketing Strategy for English Wine in Relation to European Regulations.”International Journal of Wine Marketing 4:26–34.Google Scholar
  27. Keller, Kevin Lane. 1993. “Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity.”Journal of Marketing 57:1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kumar, V. and Robert P. Leone. 1988. “Measuring the Effect of Retail Store Promotions on Brand and Store Substitution.”Journal of Marketing Research 25:178–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lipstein, Benjamin. 1981. “A Review of Retail Store Experiments.” InTheory in Retailing: Traditional and Nontraditional Sources. Eds. Ronald W. Stampfl and Elizabeth C. Hirschman. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 95–107.Google Scholar
  30. MacKenzie, Scott B. 1986. “The Role of Attention in Mediating the Effect of Advertising on Attribute Importance.”Journal of Consumer Research 13:174–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McKinnon, Gary F., J. Patrick Kelly, and E. Doyle Robison. 1981. “Sales Effects of Point-of-Purchase In-Store Signing.”Journal of Retailing 57:49–63.Google Scholar
  32. Mills, Kenneth H., Judith E. Paul, and Kay B. Moorman. 1995.Applied Visual Merchandising. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  33. Penn, Joe and Richard Christy. 1994. “Marketing by Smaller Wine Producers and the Penetration of New Distribution Channels.”International Journal of Wine Marketing 6:20–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Phillips, Ben. 1992. “A Regional Approach to Wine Marketing: A Case Study.”International Journal of Wine Marketing 4:4–9.Google Scholar
  35. Rao, Akshay R. and Kent B. Monroe. 1988. “The Moderating Effect of Prior Knowledge on Cue Utilization in Product Evaluation.”Journal of Consumer Research 15:253–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. ——. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Richardson, Paul S., Alan S. Dick, and Arun K. Jain. 1994. “Extrinsic and Intrinsic Cue Effects on Perceptions of Store Brand Quality.”Journal of Marketing 58:28–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Russo, J Edward. 1977. “The Value of Unit Price Information.”Journal of Marketing Research 14:193–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sethuraman, Raj, Catherine Cole, and Dipak Jain. 1994. “Analyzing the Effect of Information Format and Task on Cutoff Search Strategies.”Journal of Consumer Psychology 3:103–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Simonson, Itamar, Stephen Nowlis, and Katherine Lemon. 1993. “The Effect of Local Consideration Sets on Global Choice Between Lower Price and Higher Quality.”Marketing Science 12:357–377.Google Scholar
  41. — and Russell S. Winer. 1992. “The Influence of Purchase Quantity and Display Format on Consumer Preference for Variety.”Journal of Consumer Research 19:133–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sommelier Executive Council 1992.Vintage Wine Book: A Practical Guide to the History of Wine, Winemaking, Classification, and Selection. New York: Food Products Press.Google Scholar
  43. Tonkin, Ed. 1997. “Appearances Count.”Discount Merchandiser 37:104.Google Scholar
  44. Tversky, Amos. 1969. “Intransitivity of Preferences.”Psychological Review 76:31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. —. 1972. “Elimination by Aspects: A Theory of Choice.”Psychological Review 79:281–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vilcassim, Naufel J. and Dipak C. Jain. 1991. “Modeling Purchase-Timing and Brand-Switching Behavior Incorporating Explanatory Variables and Unobserved Heterogeneity.”Journal of Marketing Research 28:29–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Voight, Joan. 1995. “Vintners Eye Campaign to Stimulate Imbibing.”Adweek (Western Edition), September 25, 3.Google Scholar
  48. Wilkinson, J. B., J. Barry Mason, and Christie H. Paksoy. 1982. “Assessing the Impact of Short-Term Supermarket Strategy Variables.”Journal of Marketing Research 19:72–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. —, Christie H. Paksoy, and J. Barry Mason. 1982. “A Demand Analysis of Newspaper Advertising and Changes in Space Allocation.”Journal of Retailing 57:30–48.Google Scholar
  50. Wilson, Richenda. 1995. “Display and Demand.”Marketing Week 18:43–45.Google Scholar
  51. Woodside, Arch G. and Gerald L. Waddle. 1975. “Sales Effects of In-Store Advertising.”Journal of Advertising Research 15:29–34.Google Scholar
  52. Wright, Peter. 1975. “Consumer Choice Strategies: Simplifying vs. Optimizing.”Journal of Marketing Research 12:60–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. — and Fredrick Barbour. 1977. “Phased Decision Strategies: Sequels to an Initial Screening.”TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences 6:91–109.Google Scholar
  54. Zaichkowsky, Judith L. 1988. “Involvement and the Price Cue.” InAdvances in Consumer Research, Vol. 15 Ed. Michael J. Houston. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 323–327.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Marketing Science 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles S. Areni
    • 1
  • Dale F. Duhan
    • 2
  • Pamela Kiecker
    • 3
  1. 1.University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Texas Tech UniversityUSA
  3. 3.Virginia Commonwealth UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations