Skip to main content

Abstract

Recently, there has been a considerable amount discussion concerning the role of affect in shaping consumer behavior. This discussion has resulted in a second look at some multiattribute attitude models. This paper investigates the theoretical aspects of a model which suggested consumer affect for a product attribute may vary depending on the amount of the attribute being evaluated.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Anderson, Norman H. 1970. “Functional Measurement and Psycholophysical Judgement." Psychological Review 77 May: 153–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahtola, Olli T. 1975. “The Vector Model of Preferences: An Alternative to the Fishbein Model." Journa1 of Marketing Research 12 February : 52–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breckler. Steven J. 1984. “Empirical Validation of Affect, Behavior, and Cognition as Distinnt Components of Attitude." Journal of pronalit y and Social Psychology 47 : 1191–1205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brock, Richard K. 1973. “A Tripart Vector Multi-Attribute Model of Consumer Brand Preferences." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calder, Bobby, Lynn Phillips, and Alice Tybout. 1981. “Designing Research for Application." Journal of Consumer Research 8 September: 197–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaffee, Steven H., and Jack M. McLeod. 1973. “Consumer Decisions and Information Use." In Consumer Behavior: Theoretical Sources, Scott Ward and Thomas Robertson (eds.). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Incorporated.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, Martin. 1963. “An Investigation of the Relationships Between Beliefs About and Object and the Attutide Toward the Object." Human Relations 16: 233–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, Martin—, and leek Ajzen. 1975. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forst, W. A. K., and R. L. Braine. 1967. “The Application of the Repertory Grid Technique to Problems in Market Research." Commentary 9 July: 161–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, Paul E., and Yoram Wind. 1973. Multi-attribute Decisions in Marketing: A Measurement Approach. Hinsdale, Illinois: The Dryden Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazarus, Richard S. 1984. “In the Primacy of Cognition," American Psychologist 39 February: 124–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1982. “Thoughts on the Relation Between Emotion and Cognition," American Psychologist 37 September: 1019–1024. Lehmann, Donald R. 1971. “Television Show Preference: Application of a Choice Model." Journal of Marketing Research 8 February: 4 7–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazis, Michael B., Olli T. Ahtola, and Eugene R. Klippel. 1975. “A Comparison of Four Multi-Attribute Models in the Prediction of Consumer Attitudes." Journal of Consumer Research 2 July: 38–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mittelstaedt, Robert A. 1971. “Sematic Proper ties of Selected Evaluative Adjectives; Other Evidence." Journal of Marketing Research 8 May: 236–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, James H., and Gregory W. Warner. 1968. “Semantic Properties of Selective Evaluation Adjectives." Journal of Marketing Research 5 May: 409–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, M. L. 1956. “Cognitive Structure and Attitudinal Effect." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 53: 367–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsal, Yehoshua. 1985. “On the Relationship Between Cognitive and Affective Processes: A Critique of Zajonc and Markus." Journal of Consumer Research 12 December: 358–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zajonc, Robert B. 1980. “Feeling and Thinking: Preferences Need No Inferences." American Psychologist 35 February: 151–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zajonc, Robert B. 1984. “On the Primacy of Affect," American Psychologist 39 January: 117–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zajonc, Robert B., and Hazel Marcus. 1985. “Must All Affect Be Mediated by Cognition?" Journal of Consumer Research 12 December: 363–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zajonc, Robert B., and —. 1982. “Affective and Cognitive Factors in Preferences." Journal of Consumer Research 9 September: 123–131.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Academy of Marketing Science

About this paper

Cite this paper

Brock, R.K., Kelley, C.A. (2015). An Exploratory Investigation into Varying Patterns of Affect. In: Hawes, J.M., Glisan, G.B. (eds) Proceedings of the 1987 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference. Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17052-7_22

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics