Präferenzkonstruktion

Chapter
First Online:

Zusammenfassung

Immer mehr Unternehmen überlassen es dem Kunden, ein Produkt nach seinen Wünschen und Vorstellungen zu gestalten. Hierzu dienen Konfiguratoren oder auch „toolkits“, die inzwischen in nahezu allen Industrien verbreitet sind. Mit Konfiguratoren lassen sich nicht mehr nur Computer (http://www.dell.com), sondern auch Autos (http://www.audi.de), Uhren (www.factory1to1.com), Sportschuhe (www.nike.com), Hemden (www.dolzershop.de) oder Sonnenbrillen (www.ic-berlin.de) gestalten (Urban und Hauser 2004) (Abb. 2.1).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Literatur

  1. Adaval, R. (2001): Sometimes It Just Feels Right: The Differential Weighting of Affect-Consistent and Affect Inconsistent Product Information, Journal of Consumer Research 28 (1), 1–17.Google Scholar
  2. Bettman, J. R./Luce, M. F./Payne, J. W. (1998): Constructive Consumer Choice Processes, Journal of Consumer Research 25 (3) 187–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carpenter, G./Glazer, R./Nakamoto, K. (1994): Meaningful Brands From Meaningless Differentiation: The Dependence on Irrelevant Attributes, Journal of Marketing Research 31 (3) 339–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chernev, A. (2004): Extremeness Aversion and Attribute-Balance Effects in Choice, Journal of Consumer Research 31 (2), 249–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dhar, R./Sherman, S. J. (1996): The Effect of Common and Unique Features in Consumer Choice, Journal of Consumer Research 23 (3), 193–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dhar, R./Simonson, I. (2003): The Effect of Forced Choice on Choice, Journal of Marketing Research 39 (2), 146–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Huber, J./Payne, J. W./Puto, C. (1982): Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis, Journal of Consumer Research 9 (1), 90–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huber, F./Puto, C. (1983): Market Boundaries and Product Choice: Illustrating Attraction and Substitution Effects, Journal of Consumer Research 10 (1), 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Iyengar, S. S./Lepper, M. R. (2000): When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 (6), 995–1006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Johnson, E. J./Bellmann, S./Lohse, G. L. (2002): Defaults, Framing and Privacy: Way Opting in – Opting Out, Marketing Letters 13 (1), 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Levav, J./Heitmann, M./Herrmann, A./Iyengar, S. S. (2005): The Effect of Attribute Order and Variety on Choice Demotivation: A Field Experiment on German Car Buyers, Annual Meeting of the Society for Judgment and Decision Making, Toronto.Google Scholar
  12. Lurie, N. H. (2004): Decision Making in Information-Rich Environments: The Role of Information Structure, Journal of Consumer Research 30 (4), 473–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mandel, N./Johnson, E. J. (2002): When Web Pages Influece Choice: Effects of Visual Primes on Experts and Novices, Journal of Consumer Research 29 (2), 235–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Meloy, M. G. (2000): Mood-Driven Distortion of Product Information, Journal of Consumer Research 27 (3), 345–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Park, C. W./Jun, S. Y./MacInnis, D. J. (2000): Choosing What I Want versus Rejecting What I do not Want: An Application of Decision Framing to Product Option Choice Decisions, Journal of Marketing Research 37 (2), 187–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Payne, J. W./Bettman, J. R./Johnson, E. J. (1993): The Adaptive Decision Maker. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pham, M. T. (1998): Representatives, Relevance, and the use of Feelings in Decision Making, Journal of Consumer Research 25 (2), 144–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Prelec, D./Wernerfelt, B./Zettelmeyer, F. (1997): The Role of Inference in Context Effects: Inferring What you Want from What is Available, Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (1), 118–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ratner, R. K./Kahn, B. E./Kahneman, D. (1999): Choosing Less-Preferred Experiences for the Sake of Variety, Journal of Consumer Research 26 (2), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Roedinger, H. L./Guynn, M. J. (1996): Retrieval Processes. In E. L. Bjork/R. A. Bjork (Hrsg.), Memory (S. 197–236). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  21. Urban, G. L./Hauser, J. R. (2004): “Listening In” to Find and Explore New Combinations of Customer Needs, Journal of Marketing 68 (2), 72–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Simonson, I. (1989): Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects, Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (2), 158–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Simonson, I. (2005): Determinants of Customers’ Responses to Customized Offers: Conceptual Framework and Research Propositions, Journal of Marketing 69 (1), 32–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Yeung, C. M./Wyer, R. S. (2004): Affect, Appraisal, and Consumer Judgment, Journal of Consumer Research 31 (2), 412–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universität St. GallenSt. GallenSchweiz
  2. 2.Johannes Gutenberg-Universität MainzMainzDeutschland

Personalised recommendations