Matching Items (5)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Consumer Behavior
- All Subjects: Brand Portfolio
- All Subjects: Marketing channels
- Creators: Richards, Timothy J.
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
Description
I compare the effect of anonymous social network ratings (Yelp.com) and peer group recommendations on restaurant demand. I conduct a two-stage choice experiment in which restaurant visits in the first stage are informed by online social network reviews from Yelp.com, and visits in the second stage by peer network reviews. I find that anonymous reviewers have a stronger effect on restaurant preference than peers. I also compare the power of negative reviews with that of positive reviews. I found that negative reviews are more powerful compared to the positive reviews on restaurant preference. More generally, I find that in an environment of high attribute uncertainty, information gained from anonymous experts through social media is likely to be more influential than information obtained from peers.
ContributorsTiwari, Ashutosh (Author) / Richards, Timothy J. (Thesis advisor) / Qiu, Yueming (Committee member) / Grebitus, Carola (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
It is well understood that decisions made under uncertainty differ from those made without risk in important and significant ways. Yet, there is very little research into how uncertainty manifests itself in the most ubiquitous of decision-making environments: Consumers' day-to-day decisions over where to shop, and what to buy for their daily grocery needs. Facing a choice between stores that either offer relatively stable "everyday low prices" (EDLP) or variable prices that reflect aggressive promotion strategies (HILO), consumers have to choose stores under price-uncertainty. I find that consumers' attitudes toward risk are critically important in determining store-choice, and that heterogeneity in risk attitudes explains the co-existence of EDLP and HILO stores - an equilibrium that was previously explained in somewhat unsatisfying ways. After choosing a store, consumers face another source of risk. While knowing the quality or taste of established brands, consumers have very little information about new products. Consequently, consumers tend to choose smaller package sizes for new products, which limits their exposure to the risk that the product does not meet their prior expectations. While the observation that consumers purchase small amounts of new products is not new, I show how this practice is fully consistent with optimal purchase decision-making by utility-maximizing consumers. I then use this insight to explain how manufacturers of consumer packaged goods (CPGs) respond to higher production costs. Because consumers base their purchase decisions in part on package size, manufacturers can use package size as a competitive tool in order to raise margins in the face of higher production costs. While others have argued that manufacturers reduce package sizes as a means of raising unit-prices (prices per unit of volume) in a hidden way, I show that the more important effect is a competitive one: Changes in package size can soften price competition, so manufacturers need not rely on fooling consumers in order to pass-through cost increases through changes in package size. The broader implications of consumer behavior under risk are dramatic. First, risk perceptions affect consumers' store choice and product choice patterns in ways that can be exploited by both retailers and manufacturers. Second, strategic considerations prevent manufacturers from manipulating package size in ways that seem designed to trick consumers. Third, many services are also offered as packages, and also involve uncertainty, so the effects identified here are likely to be pervasive throughout the consumer economy.
ContributorsYonezawa, Koichi (Author) / Richards, Timothy J. (Thesis advisor) / Grebitus, Carola (Committee member) / Park, Sungho (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
Private labels command a growing share of food retailers' shelf space. In this dissertation, I explain this phenomenon as resulting from "umbrella branding," or the ability of a single brand to reach across categories. Conceptually, I define umbrella branding as a behavioral attribute that describes a shopper's tendency to ascribe a performance bond to a brand, or to associate certain performance characteristics to a private label brand, across multiple categories. In the second chapter, I describe the performance bond theory in detail, and then test this theory using scanner data in the chapter that follows. Because secondary data has limitations for testing behavioral theories, however, I test the performance bond theory of umbrella branding using a laboratory experiment in the fourth chapter. In this chapter, I find that households tend to transfer their perception of private label performance across categories, or that a manifestation of umbrella branding behavior can indeed explain private labels' success. In the fifth chapter, I extend this theory to compare umbrella branding in international markets, and find that performance transference takes its roots in consumers' cultural backgrounds. Taken together, my results suggest that umbrella branding is an important behavioral mechanism, and one that can be further exploited by retailers across any consumer good category with strong credence attributes.
ContributorsTheron, Sophie (Author) / Richards, Timothy J. (Thesis advisor) / Grebitus, Carola (Committee member) / Hughner, Renee (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
Consumers can purchase local food through intermediated marketing channels, such as grocery stores, or through direct-to-consumer marketing channels, for instance, farmers markets. While the number of farms that utilize direct-to-consumer outlets keeps increasing, the direct-to-consumer sales remain lower than intermediated sales. If consumers prefer to purchase local food through intermediated channels, then policies designed to support direct channels may be misguided. Using a variety of experiments, this dissertation investigates consumer preferences for local food and their demand differentiated by marketing channel. In the first essay, I examine the existing literature on consumer preferences for local food by applying meta-regression analysis to a set of eligible research papers. My analysis provides evidence of statistically significant willingness to pay for local food products. Moreover, I find that a methodological approach and study-specific characteristics have a significant influence on the reported estimates for local attribute. By separating the demand for local from the demand for a particular channel, the second essay attempts to disentangle consumers’ preferences for marketing channels and the local-attribute in their food purchases. Using an online choice experiment, I find that consumers are willing to pay a premium for local food. However, they are not willing to pay premiums for local food that is sold at farmers markets relative to supermarkets. Therefore, in the third essay I seek to explain the rise in intermediated local by investigating local food shopping behavior. I develop a model of channel-selection in a nested context and apply it to the primary data gathered through an online food diary. I find that, while some consumers enjoy shopping at farmers markets to meet their objectives, such as socialization with farmers, the majority of consumers buy local food from supermarkets because they offer convenient settings where a variety of products can be bought as one basket. My overall results suggest that, if the goal is to increase the sales of local food, regardless of the channel, then existing supply-chain relationships in the local food channel appear to be performing well.
ContributorsPrintezis, Iryna (Author) / Richards, Timothy J. (Thesis advisor) / Grebitus, Carola (Committee member) / Schmitz, Troy (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
Private label growth in emerging markets has not kept pace with the growth in private labels elsewhere. For instance, in Europe and North America, private labels now constitute an average of 35% of total retail market share, compared to emerging markets, where market shares vary between 1% and 8 %. This dissertation examines the possibility that differences in private-label performance between developed and emerging economies is not driven by one mechanism, but arises from a variety of sources, both structural, and behavioral. Specifically, I focus on manufacturers’ market power, retailers’ private label portfolio strategies, and consumers’ perceptions of private labels. In most emerging economies, national brand manufacturers tend to be the sole producers of private labels. As a result, manufacturers have inherent market power and can deter retailers from pursuing aggressive private label strategies, which results in low private label market shares. Moreover, some retailers in emerging economies now carry their private labels as part of a multi-tiered portfolio. However, a small price-gap between the quality tiers results in high intraportfolio competition leading to cannibalization and lower private label market shares. Last, private label market shares in emerging economies may be smaller than in developed economies because low-income households prefer higher priced national brands. This counterintuitive phenomenon is driven by two interrelated factors. First, social influence implies that low-income households are upward-comparing, they contrast themselves with high-income households whom they believe are better-off. Because higher-income households purchase national brands, upward-comparisons lead to a preference for national brands. Second, low income households are unknowledgeable about private label advancements hence they prefer national brands.
ContributorsPasirayi, Simbarashe (Author) / Richards, Timothy J. (Thesis advisor) / Morales, Andrea (Committee member) / Grebitus, Carola (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016