Skip to main content
Log in

Usage-Based versus Measure-Based Unit Pricing: Is there a Better Index of Value?

  • Published:
Journal of Consumer Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In many product categories, unit prices facilitate price comparisons across brands and package sizes; this enables consumers to identify those products that provide the greatest value. However in other product categories, unit prices may be confusing. This is because there are two types of unit pricing, measure-based and usage-based. Measure-based unit prices are what the name implies; price is expressed in cents or dollars per unit of measure (e.g., ounce). Usage-based unit prices, on the other hand, are expressed in terms of cents or dollars per use (e.g., wash load or serving). The results of this study show that in two different product categories (i.e., laundry detergent and dry breakfast cereal), measure-based unit prices reduced consumers’ ability to identify higher value products, but when a usage-based unit price was provided, their ability to identify product value was increased. When provided with both a measure-based and a usage-based unit price, respondents did not perform as well as when they were provided only a usage-based unit price, additional evidence that the measure-based unit price hindered consumers’ comparisons. Finally, the presence of two potential moderators, education about the meaning of the two measures and having to rank order the options in the choice set in terms of value before choosing, did not eliminate these effects.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • D. Aaker G. T. Ford (1983) ArticleTitleUnit pricing ten years later: A replication Journal of Marketing 47 IssueID4 118–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Appelbaum, C. (1991). Colgate readies new ads for fresh start. Adweek, March 11, 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • B. Bauer (1994) ArticleTitleDynamic detergents; the popularity of ultra concentrates is forcing most retailers to frequently reset the laundry aisle Supermarket News 44 IssueID15 39

    Google Scholar 

  • J. R. Bettman E. J. Johnson J. W. Payne (1991) Consumer decision making T. S. Robertson H. H. Kassarjian (Eds) Handbook of consumer behavior Prentice Hall Englewood Cliffs, NJ 50–84

    Google Scholar 

  • I. Breskin (1995) ArticleTitleConsumers resist increased liquid concentration Chemical Week 156 IssueID3 39

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Cohen P. Cohen (1983) Applied multiple regression: Correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences EditionNumber2 Lawrence Erlbaum Hillsdale, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • InstitutionalAuthorNameConsumers Union of the U.S. (1995) ArticleTitleLaundry detergents: Do good things come in small packages? Consumer Reports 60 IssueIDFebruary 92

    Google Scholar 

  • Consumer-friendly labels sought for liquid laundry soap (1995). Marketing News, 29(January 30), 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • E. H. Creyer W. T. Ross (1997) ArticleTitleTradeoffs between price and quality: How a value index affects preference formation Journal of Consumer Affairs 31 280–302

    Google Scholar 

  • P. R. Dickson A. G. Sawyer (1990) ArticleTitleThe price knowledge and search of supermarket shoppers Journal of Marketing 54 IssueID3 42–53

    Google Scholar 

  • E. T. Garman (1996) Consumer economic issues in America EditionNumber4 Dame Publications Houston, TX

    Google Scholar 

  • C. W. Granger A. Billson (1972) ArticleTitleConsumers’ attitudes toward package size and price Journal of Marketing Research 9 239–248

    Google Scholar 

  • W. D. Hoyer (1984) ArticleTitleAn examination of consumer decision making for a common repeat purchase product Journal of Consumer Research 11 822–829 Occurrence Handle10.1086/209017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • H. R. Isakson A. R. Maurizi (1973) ArticleTitleThe consumer economics of unit pricing Journal of Marketing Research 10 277–285

    Google Scholar 

  • E. J. Johnson J. W. Payne (1985) ArticleTitleEffort and accuracy in choice Management Science 31 395–414

    Google Scholar 

  • E. J. Johnson J. W. Payne J. R. Bettman (1988) ArticleTitleInformation displays and preference reversals Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 42 1–21 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0749-5978(88)90017-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • E. J. Johnson J. E. Russo (1984) ArticleTitleProduct familiarity and learning new information Journal of Consumer Research 11 542–550

    Google Scholar 

  • K. C. Manning D. E. Sprott A. D. Miyazaki (1998) ArticleTitleConsumer responses to quantity surcharges: Implications for retail price setters Journal of Retailing 74 373–399

    Google Scholar 

  • B. F. McElroy D. A. Aaker (1979) ArticleTitleUnit pricing six years after introduction Journal of Retailing 3 44–57

    Google Scholar 

  • V.-W. Mitchell D. Lennard P. McGoldrick (2003) ArticleTitleConsumer awareness, understanding and usage of unit pricing British Journal of Management 14 173–187 Occurrence Handle10.1111/1467-8551.00273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • A. D. Miyazaki D. E. Sprott K. Manning (2000) ArticleTitleUnit prices on retail shelf labels: An assessment of information prominence Journal of Retailing 76 93–112 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0022-4359(99)00022-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • K. B. Monroe A. Y. Lee (1999) ArticleTitleRemembering versus knowing: Issues in buyers’ processing of price information Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 27 207–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullin, R. (1992). Canada was lukewarm on concentrates in ’91, Chemical Week, January 29, 42–44.

  • Neff, J. (1999). Clorox joins bandwagon for ultra-strength brands. Advertising Age, November 29, 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • J. E. Russo (1977) ArticleTitleThe value of unit price information Journal of Marketing Research 14 193–201

    Google Scholar 

  • J. E. Russo G. Kreiser S. Miyashita (1975) ArticleTitleAn effective display of unit price information Journal of Marketing 39 IssueID2 11–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (1972). From Shakespeare to Simon: Speculations – and some evidence about mom’s ability to process information. Oregon Research Institute Research Monograph, 12(2).

  • Turcsik, R. (1994). A powerful formula: Liquid detergents, led by ultra concentrates, are showing strength in a lackluster category. Supermarket News, 44(November 7), 37–38, 42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, T., & Hume, C. (1999). Soaps and detergents – Sharing the risks and rewards. Chemical Week, 161(January 27), 25–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • T. Walsh C. Hume (2000) ArticleTitleSoaps and detergents – Rising costs burst soapers’ bubbles Chemical Week 162 IssueIDJanuary 26 27–29

    Google Scholar 

  • V. A. Zeithaml (1982) ArticleTitleConsumer response to in-store price environments Journal of Consumer Research 8 357–369 Occurrence Handle10.1086/208876

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert J. Kwortnik Jr..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kwortnik, R.J., Creyer, E.H. & Ross, W.T. Usage-Based versus Measure-Based Unit Pricing: Is there a Better Index of Value?. J Consum Policy 29, 37–66 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-005-6054-x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-005-6054-x

Keywords

Navigation