Advertisement

Behavior Patterns: Fundamente unserer Entscheidungen

  • Philipp SpreerEmail author
Chapter

Zusammenfassung

Behavior Patterns sind standardisierte Verhaltensmuster, die der Mehrheit unserer Entscheidungen zugrunde liegen. Sie können in den Bereich der „persuasive communication“ eingeordnet werden, zählen also zu den kommunikativen Überzeugungsinstrumenten. Ihr Einsatz im E-Commerce bringt einerseits Verbesserungen der User Experience mit sich, steigert aber auch und insbesondere die Conversion-Rate (sowie andere relevante Erfolgsindikatoren). Voraussetzungen auf Unternehmensseite sind ein markt- und wettbewerbsfähiges Produkt sowie eine funktionierende technische Infrastruktur. Ist dies gegeben, können Behavior Patterns für die Neukonzeption oder die Optimierung von Digital-Projekten eingesetzt werden. Ihre Wirkung darf zugleich nicht überschätzt werden, den „Kauf-Knopf“ im Gehirn als E-Commerce-Mythos stellen sie sicherlich nicht dar. Die grundsätzliche Wirksamkeit ist zwar weitgehend universell, die Wirkungsstärke ist es aber nicht. Daraus folgt: Je besser ein Unternehmen seine Nutzer kennt und klassifizieren kann, desto passgenauer kann die Auswahl der Behavior Patterns sein. In diesem Zusammenhang bietet die Echtzeit-Dynamisierung bzw. Personalisierung der Website entlang der identifizierten Nutzergruppen weiteres Conversion-Potenzial. Zur Identifikation passender Patterns liefert das Buch mehrere Frameworks. Zudem empfiehlt sich in vielen Fällen der Einsatz sich gegenseitig verstärkender Patterns im Verbund.

Literatur

  1. Fogg BJ (2009) A behavior model for persuasive design. In: Proceedings of the 4th international Conference on Persuasive Technology, ACM, Art. 40Google Scholar
  2. Gruppe Nymphenburg (2018) Ihre Zielgruppe(n) neuropsychologisch segmentiert. https://www.nymphenburg.de/identitaetsorientierte-markenf%C3%BChrung-limbic.html. Zugegriffen: 27. März 2018
  3. Karimi S (2013) A purchase decision-making process model of online consumers and its influential factora cross sector analysis. https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/uk-ac-man-scw:189583. Zugegriffen: 30. Dez. 2017
  4. Krug S (2014) Don't make me think!: Web Usability: Das intuitive Web, mitp Business, FrechenGoogle Scholar
  5. Miller GR (1980) On being persuaded: Some basic distinctions. In: Roloff M, Miller GR (Hrsg) Persuasion: New directions in theory and research. Sage, Beverly Hills, S 11–28Google Scholar
  6. Nahai N (2017) Webs of influence: The Psychology of Online Persuasion. Pearson, HarlowGoogle Scholar
  7. Socaciu C (2017) Die Grenzen des Neuromarketings. https://www.springerprofessional.de/kommunikation/marketingkommunikation/die-grenzen-des-neuromarketings/12064946. Zugegriffen: 30. Dez. 2017
  8. Thaler RM, Sunstein CR (2009) Nudge: Wie man kluge Entscheidungen anstößt. Econ, BerlinGoogle Scholar

Weiterführende Literatur

  1. Ariely D (2016) Payoff: the hidden logic that shapes our motivations. Simon & Schuster, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Armstrong I (2015) What are some ways to make an eCommerce/online shop website addictive and fun for shoppers? https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-ways-to-make-an-eCommerce-online-shop-website-addictive-and-fun-for-shoppers. Zugegriffen: 22. Dez. 2017
  3. Asch SE (1946) Forming impressions of personality. J Abnorm Soc Psychol 41(3):258–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Atkinson RC, Shiffrin RM (1968) Human memory: a proposed system and its control processes. Psychol Learn Motiv 2:189–195Google Scholar
  5. Bader L, Weinland JD (1932) Do odd prices earn money? J Retail 8:102–114Google Scholar
  6. Bandura A (1977) Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev 84(2):191–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bar-Eli M, Azar OH, Ritov I, Keidar-Levin Y, Schein G (2007) Action bias among elite soccer goalkeepers: the case of penalty kicks. J Econ Psychol 28(5):606–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beck H (2014) Behavioral Economics: eine Einführung. Springer-Gabler, WiesbadenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bem DJ (1967) Self-perception. An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena. Psychol Rev 74:536–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Blattberg RC, Neslin SA (1990) Sales promotion: concepts, methods and strategies. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, S 349–350Google Scholar
  11. Brehm JW (1966) A theory of psychological reactance. Academic Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  12. Brewer MB (1979) In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: a cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychol Bull 86(2):307–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burger JM (1986) Increasing compliance by improving the deal: the that’s-not-all technique. J Pers Soc Psychol 51(2):277–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carmon Z, Kahneman D (1995) The experienced utility of queuing: experience profiles and retrospective evaluations of simulated queues. Duke University working paper, DurhamGoogle Scholar
  15. Carpenter CJ, Boster FJ (2009) A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of the disrupt-then-reframe compliance gaining technique. Commun Rep 22(2):55–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chapman GB, Johnson EJ (2002) Incorporating the irrelevant: anchors in judgments of belief and value. In: Gilovich T, Griffin DW, Kahneman D (Hrsg) The psychology of intuitive judgment: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Cherubini P, Mazzocco K, Rumiati R (2003) Rethinking the focusing effect in decision-making. Acta Psychol 113(1):67–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chitturi R (2015) Good aesthetics is great business: do we know why? In: Batra R, Seifert CM, Brei DE (Hrsg) The psychology of design: creating consumer appeal. Taylor & Francis Group, Routledge, S 252–262Google Scholar
  19. Cialdini R (2016) Pre-Suasion: a revolutionary way to influence and persuade. Simon & Schuster, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Cialdini RB (1984) Influence: the psychology of persuasion. Harper Collins, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Cialdini RB, Vincent JE, Lewis SK, Catalan J, Wheeler D, Darby BL (1975) Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: the door-in-the-face technique. J Pers Soc Psychol 31(2):206–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cialdini RB, Cacioppo JT, Bassett R, Miller JA (1978) Low-ball procedure for producing compliance: commitment then cost. J Pers Soc Psychol 36(5):463–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cohen JB, Goldberg ME (1970) The dissonance model in post-decision product evaluation. J Mark Res 7(3):315–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Coulter KS, Choi P, Monroe KB (2012) Comma N’cents in pricing: the effects of auditory representation encoding on price magnitude perceptions. J Consum Psychol 22(3):395–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dahlén M, Rosengren S, Törn F, Öhman N (2008) Could placing ads wrong be right? Advertising effects of thematic incongruence. J Advert 37(3):57–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Darley JM, Latane B (1968) Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility. J Pers Soc Psychol 8(4, Pt. 1):377–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Deci EL, Koestner R, Ryan RM (1999) A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychol Bull 125(6):627–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. DeSteno D, Petty RE, Rucker DD, Wegener DT, Braverman J (2004) Discrete emotions and persuasion: the role of emotion-induced expectancies. J Pers Soc Psychol 86(1):43–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Dobelli R (2011) Die Kunst des klaren Denkens: 52 Denkfehler, die Sie besser anderen überlassen. Hanser, MünchenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Dolinski D (2011) A rock or a hard place: the foot-in-the-face technique for inducing compliance without pressure. J Appl Soc Psychol 41(6):1514–1537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Dolinski D, Nawrat M, Rudak I (2001) Dialogue involvement as a social influence technique. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 27(11):1395–1406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ellsberg D (1961) Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms. Q J Econ 75(4):643–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Fehr E, Schmidt KM (1999) A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Q J Econ 114(3):817–868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Festinger L (1957) A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  35. Festinger L (1962) A theory of cognitive dissonance (Vol. 2). Stanford university press, Palo AltoGoogle Scholar
  36. Fico F, Richardson JD, Edwards SM (2004) Influence of story structure on perceived story bias and news organization credibility. Mass Commun Soc 7(3):301–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Filkuková P, Klempe SH (2013) Rhyme as reason in commercial and social advertising. Scand J Psychol 54(5):423–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Finucane ML, Alhakami A, Slovic P, Johnson SM (2000) The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. J Behav Decis Making 13(1):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Lichtenstein S (1977) Knowing with certainty: the appropriateness of extreme confidence. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 3(4):552–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Forer BR (1949) The fallacy of personal validation: a classroom demonstration of gullibility. J Abnorm Soc Psychol 44:118–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Freedman JL, Fraser SC (1966) Compliance without pressure: the foot-in-the-door technique. J Pers Soc Psychol 4(2):195–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Friesen CK, Kingstone A (1998) The eyes have it! Reflexive orienting is triggered by nonpredictive gaze. Psychon Bull Rev 5(3):490–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Frischen A, Bayliss AP, Tipper SP (2007) Gaze cueing of attention: visual attention, social cognition, and individual differences. Psychol Bull 133(4):694–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Gamer R (2005) What’s in a name? Persuasion perhaps. J Consum Psychol 15(2):108–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. GfK (2013) Was ist Preis-Wert? http://www.gfk-verein.org/compact/fokusthemen/was-ist-preis-wert. Zugegriffen: 22. Dez. 2017
  46. Gilovich T, Griffin DW, Kahneman D (Hrsg) (2002) Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge University Press, New York, S 120–138Google Scholar
  47. Godden D, Baddeley A (1975) Context dependent memory in two natural environments. Br J Psychol 66(3):325–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Goodman JK, Irmak C (2013) Having versus consuming: failure to estimate usage frequency makes consumers prefer multifeature products. J Mark Res 50(1):44–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Goodwin DW, Powell B, Bremer D, Hoine H, Stern J (1969) Alcohol and recall: state-dependent effects in man. Science 163(3873):1358–1360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Gouldner AW (1960) The norm of reciprocity: a preliminary statement. Am Sociol Rev 25:161–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Gueguen N, Pascual A (2000) Evocation of freedom and compliance: the ‚but you are free of…‘ technique. Curr Res Soc Psychol 5(18):264–270Google Scholar
  52. Guéguen N, Joule RV, Halimi-Falkowicz S, Pascual A, Fischer-Lokou J, Dufourcq-Brana M (2013) I’m free but I’ll comply with your request: generalization and multidimensional effects of the “evoking freedom” technique. J Appl Soc Psychol 43(1):116–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Helson H (1964) Adaptation-level theory: an experimental and systematic approach to behavior. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  54. Hertwig R, Gigerenzer G, Hoffrage U (1997) The reiteration effect in hindsight bias. Psychol Rev 104(1):194–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Heyman J, Ariely D (2004) Effort for payment: a tale of two markets. Psychol Sci 15(11):787–793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Hick WE (1952) On the rate of gain of information. Q J Exp Psychol 4(1):11–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Huber J, Payne JW, Puto C (1982) Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. J Consum Res 9(1):90–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ishizu T, Zeki S (2011) Toward a brain-based theory of beauty. PLoS ONE 6(7):e21852. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Jenni K, Loewenstein G (1997) Explaining the identifiable victim effect. J Risk Uncertainty 14(3):235–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kahneman D (2011) Schnelles Denken, Langsames Denken. Siedler, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  61. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Kahneman D, Knetsch JL, Thaler RH (1990) Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem. J Polit Econ 98(6):1325–1348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Kantar Media (2017) Super bowl in-game advertising generated $2.59 Billion in network ad sales over past 10 years. https://www.kantarmedia.com/us/newsroom/press-releases/super-bowl-in-game-advertising-generated-2-59-billion-in-network-ad-sales-over-past-10-years. Zugegriffen: 30. Nov. 2017
  64. Katz R, Allen TJ (1982) Investigating the Not Invented Here (NIH) syndrome: a look at the performance, tenure, and communication patterns of 50 R & D Project Groups. R&D Manage 12(1):7–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Kelley B (2009) Making the change to “Proudly Found Elsewhere”. http://www.business-strategy-innovation.com/2009/08/making-change-to-proudly-found.html. Zugegriffen: 30. Nov. 2017
  66. Kent M (1998) Wörterbuch der Sportwissenschaft und Sportmedizin. UTB & Limpert, WiebelsheimGoogle Scholar
  67. Key MS, Edlund JE, Sagarin BJ, Bizer GY (2009) Individual differences in susceptibility to mindlessness. Pers Individ Differ 46(3):261–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Kouchaki M, Smith-Crowe K, Brief AP, Sousa C (2013) Seeing green: mere exposure to money triggers a business decision frame and unethical outcomes. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 121(1):53–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Laibson D (1997) Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. Q J Econ 112(2):443–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Langer EJ (1975) The illusion of control. J Pers Soc Psychol 32(2):311–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Langer EJ, Blank A, Chanowitz B (1978) The mindlessness of ostensibly thoughtful action: the role of “placebic” information in interpersonal interaction. J Pers Soc Psychol 36(6):635–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Langlois JH, Roggman LA (1990) Attractive faces are only average. Psychol Sci 1(2):115–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Leibenstein H (1950) Bandwagon, snob, and veblen effects in the theory of Consumers’ Demand. Q J Econ 64(2):183–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Lewis IM, Watson B, White KM (2010) Response efficacy: the key to minimizing rejection and maximizing acceptance of emotion-based anti-speeding messages. Accid Anal Prev 42(2):459–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Liu C, Arnett KP (2000) Exploring the factors associated with Web site success in the context of electronic commerce. Inf Manage 38(1):23–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Loewenstein G (1994) The psychology of curiosity: a review and reinterpretation. Psychol Bull 116(1):75–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. McCornack SA, Parks MR (1986) Deception detection and relationship development: the other side of trust. Ann Int Commun Ass 9(1):377–389Google Scholar
  78. McCracken F (1988) Diderot unities and the Diderot effect. In: McCracken G (Hrsg) Culture and consumption: new approaches to the symbolic character of consumer goods and activities. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, S 118–129Google Scholar
  79. McGlone MS, Tofighbakhsh J (2000) Birds of a feather flock conjointly (?): rhyme as reason in aphorisms. Psychol Sci 11(5):424–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Meehl PE (1956) Wanted–a good cook-book. Am Psychol 11(6):263–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Milgram S (1963) Behavioral study of obedience. J Abnorm Soc Psychol 67(4):371–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Mischel W, Ebbesen EB, Zeiss AR (1972) Cognitive and attentional mechanisms in delay of gratification. J Pers Soc Psychol 21(2):204–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Mogilner C, Aaker J (2009) The time vs. money effect: shifting product attitudes and decisions through personal connection. J Consum Res 36(2):277–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Moon JW, Kim YG (2001) Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Inf Manage 38(4):217–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Murdock BB Jr (1962) The serial position effect of free recall. J Exp Psychol 64(5):482–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Norton MI, Mochon D, Ariely D (2011) The ‚IKEA Effect‘: when labor leads to love. Harvard Business School Marketing Unit (Working Paper No. 11–091). dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1777100
  87. Nunes JC, Drèze X (2006) The endowed progress effect: how artificial advancement increases effort. J Consum Res 32(4):504–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Oppenheimer DM, LeBoeuf RA, Brewer NT (2008) Anchors aweigh: a demonstration of cross-modality anchoring and magnitude priming. Cognition 106(1):13–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Oskamp S (1965) Overconfidence in case-study judgments. J consult psychol 29(3):261–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Paivio A (1990) Mental representations: a dual coding approach. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Pandelaere M, Briers B, Dewitte S, Warlop L (2010) Better think before agreeing twice: mere agreement: a similarity-based persuasion mechanism. Int J Res Mark 27(2):133–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Pfrang T (2015) Das Potenzial von Eigennutzen und sozialen Normen nutzen. Mark Rev St. Gallen 32(5):77–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Plassmann H, O’Doherty J, Shiv B, Rangel A (2008) Marketing actions can modulate neural representations of experienced pleasantness. Proc Nat Acad Sci 105(3):1050–1054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Pohl RF (2004) Hindsight bias. In: Pohl RF (Hrsg) Cognitive illusions: a handbook on fallacies and biases in thinking, judgement and memory. Psychology Press, Hove, S 363–378Google Scholar
  95. Prelec D, Loewenstein G (1998) The red and the black: mental accounting of savings and debt. Mark Sci 17(1):4–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Reiss S (2004) Multifaceted nature of intrinsic motivation: the theory of 16 basic desires. Rev Gen Psychol 8(3):179–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Rosburg T, Mecklinger A, Frings C (2011) When the brain decides: a familiarity-based approach to the recognition heuristic as evidenced by event-related brain potentials. Psychol Sci 22(12):1527–1534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Ross L, Greene D, House P (1977) The “false consensus effect”: an egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. J Exp Soc Psychol 13(3):279–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Rothhaar M, Schulz M, Froschmeier J (2017) Shopsiegel Monitor 2017/2018. Gütesiegel in deutschen Online-Shops. https://www.shopsiegel-studie.de/. Zugegriffen: 3. Dez. 2017
  100. Samuelson W, Zeckhauser R (1988) Status quo bias in decision making. J Risk Uncertainty 1(1):7–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Schkade DA, Kahneman D (1998) Does living in California make people happy? A focusing illusion in judgments of life satisfaction. Psychol Sci 9(5):340–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Schulz von Thun F (1998) Miteinander reden 3 – Das ‚innere Team‘ und situationsgerechte Kommunikation. Rowohlt, ReinbekGoogle Scholar
  103. Schwartz B (2004a) The paradox of choice: why less is more. Ecco, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  104. Schwartz B (2004b) The tyranny of choice. Sci Am 290(4):70–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Seyama JI, Nagayama RS (2007) The uncanny valley: effect of realism on the impression of artificial human faces. Pres Teleop Virtual Environ 16(4):337–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Shafir E, Diamond P, Tversky A (1997) Money illusion. Q J Econ 112(2):341–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Shen L, Fishbach A, Hsee CK (2014) The motivating-uncertainty effect: uncertainty increases resource investment in the process of reward pursuit. J Consum Res 41(5):1301–1315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Sherif M (1935) The psychology of social norms. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  109. Simon HA (1986) Rationality in psychology and economics. J Bus 59(4):209–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Simons DJ, Chabris CF (1999) Gorillas in our midst: sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception 28(9):1059–1074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Simons DJ, Levin DT (1997) Change blindness. Trends Cogn Sci 1(7):261–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Simonson I, Tversky A (1992) Choice in context: tradeoff contrast and extremeness aversion. J Mark Res 29(3):281–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Solove DJ (2011) Nothing to hide: the false tradeoff between privacy and security. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  114. Tajfel H, Turner JC (1979) An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: Austin WG, Worchel S (Hrsg) The social psychology of intergroup relations, Brooks/Cole, Monterrey, S 33–47Google Scholar
  115. Taylor C (1992) The ethics of authenticity. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  116. Thaler R (1981) Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency. Econ Lett 8(3):201–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Thaler RH (1980) Toward a positive theory of consumer choice. J Econ Behav Organ 1(1):39–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Thaler RH (1985) Mental accounting and consumer choice. Mark Sci 4(3):199–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Thaler RH (1999) Mental accounting matters. J Behav decis making 12(3):183–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Thaler RH, Johnson EJ (1990) Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: the effects of prior outcomes on risky choice. Manage Sci 36(6):643–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Thomas M, Morwitz V (2005) Penny wise and pound foolish: the left-digit effect in price cognition. J Consum Res 32(1):54–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cogn Psychol 5(2):207–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157):1124–1131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1982) Evidential impact of base rates. In: Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (Hrsg) Judgment under uncertainty. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, S 153–160Google Scholar
  125. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1983) Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychol Rev 90(4):293–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1986) Rational choice and the framing of decisions. J Bus 59(4):251–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Ueberweg F (1868) System der Logik und Geschichte der logischen Lehren (3. Aufl.). Adolph Marcus, BonnGoogle Scholar
  128. Van der Heijden H (2004) User acceptance of hedonic information systems. MIS Q 28(4):695–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Veix J (2016) Ling’s cars has one of the best websites on the internet. http://www.newsweek.com/2016/12/23/lings-cars-website-532332.html. Zugegriffen: 23. Dez. 2014
  130. Versteege D (2017) Die Psychologie der Customer Journey. http://www.ibusiness.de/members/aktuell/db/705855sh.html. Zugegriffen: 30. Nov. 2017
  131. Veryzer RW Jr, Hutchinson JW (1998) The influence of unity and prototypicality on aesthetic responses to new product designs. J Consum Res 24(4):374–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Vohs KD, Mead NL, Goode MR (2006) The psychological consequences of money. Science 314(5802):1154–1156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Volland R, Meyer P (2018) Robotics in retail. https://www.robotics-in-retail.de/. Zugegriffen: 4. Jan. 2018
  134. Von Restorff H (1933) Über die Wirkung von Bereichsbildungen im Spurenfeld. Psychol Forsch 18:299–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Wadhwa M, Zhang K (2015) This number just feels right: the impact of roundedness of price numbers on product evaluations. J Consum Res 41(5):1172–1185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Walker D, Vul E (2014) Hierarchical encoding makes individuals in a group seem more attractive. Psychol Sci 25(1):230–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Wertenbroch K, Soman D, Chattopadhyay A (2007) On the perceived value of money: the reference dependence of currency numerosity effects. J Consum Res 34(1):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Wilkins MC (1928) The effect of changed material on ability to do formal syllogistic reasoning. Arch Psychol 16(102):83 (J. Winawer [Hrsg])Google Scholar
  139. Worchel S, Lee J, Adewole A (1975) Effects of supply and demand on ratings of object value. J Pers Soc Psychol 32(5):906–914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Zajonc RB (1968) Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. J Pers Soc Psychol 9(2, Pt.2):1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Zeigarnik B (1938) On finished and unfinished tasks. Source B Gestalt Psychol 1:300–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.elaboratum GmbHMünchenDeutschland

Personalised recommendations