IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v42y2023i1p87-109.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Importance of Selling Formats: When Integrating Purchase and Quantity Decisions Increases Sales

Author

Listed:
  • Kristen E. Duke

    (Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3E6, Canada)

  • On Amir

    (Rady School of Management, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093)

Abstract

Customers must often decide on the quantity to purchase in addition to whether to purchase. The current research introduces and compares the quantity-sequential selling format, in which shoppers resolve the purchase and quantity decisions separately, with the quantity-integrated selling format, where shoppers simultaneously consider whether and how many to buy. Although retailers often use the sequential format, we demonstrate that the integrated format can increase purchase rates. A field experiment conducted with a large technology firm found that quantity integration yielded considerably higher sales, amounting to an increase of more than $1 million in annual revenue. To demonstrate robustness and explore various contributing mechanisms, a series of laboratory experiments test and control for different elements of the selling formats. The results suggest that quantity integration can change the psychology of making a purchase: the integrated format anchors customers later in the decision-making funnel than the sequential format and additional implementation elements (e.g., the specific call-to-action used) may contribute to an increased effect. More broadly, this work sheds light on mechanisms underlying the influence of selling formats and the importance of how everyday choices are structured.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristen E. Duke & On Amir, 2023. "The Importance of Selling Formats: When Integrating Purchase and Quantity Decisions Increases Sales," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 87-109, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:42:y:2023:i:1:p:87-109
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.2022.1364
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2022.1364
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.2022.1364?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Puto, Christopher P, 1987. "The Framing of Buying Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 14(3), pages 301-315, December.
    2. Clee, Mona A & Wicklund, Robert A, 1980. "Consumer Behavior and Psychological Reactance," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 6(4), pages 389-405, March.
    3. Prelec, Drazen & Wernerfelt, Birger & Zettelmeyer, Florian, 1997. "The Role of Inference in Context Effects: Inferring What You Want from What Is Available," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(1), pages 118-125, June.
    4. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    5. Birger Wernerfelt, 1994. "Selling Formats for Search Goods," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 298-309.
    6. Lieberman, Alicea & Duke, Kristen E. & Amir, On, 2019. "How incentive framing can harness the power of social norms," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 118-131.
    7. Emir Kamenica, 2008. "Contextual Inference in Markets: On the Informational Content of Product Lines," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 2127-2149, December.
    8. Shugan, Steven M, 1980. "The Cost of Thinking," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 7(2), pages 99-111, Se.
    9. Dhar, Ravi, 1997. "Consumer Preference for a No-Choice Option," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(2), pages 215-231, September.
    10. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Tingley, Dustin & Yamamoto, Teppei & Hirose, Kentaro & Keele, Luke & Imai, Kosuke, 2014. "mediation: R Package for Causal Mediation Analysis," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 59(i05).
    12. Sucharita Chandran & Vicki G. Morwitz, 2005. "Effects of Participative Pricing on Consumers' Cognitions and Actions: A Goal Theoretic Perspective," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 32(2), pages 249-259, September.
    13. Rom Y Schrift & Jeffrey R Parker & Gal Zauberman & Shalena Srna & Vicki MorwitzEditor & Stijn van OsselaerAssociate Editor, 2018. "Multistage Decision Processes: The Impact of Attribute Order on How Consumers Mentally Represent Their Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(6), pages 1307-1324.
    14. Inman, J Jeffrey & Peter, Anil C & Raghubir, Priya, 1997. "Framing the Deal: The Role of Restrictions in Accentuating Deal Value," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(1), pages 68-79, June.
    15. Greenleaf, Eric A & Lehmann, Donald R, 1995. "Reasons for Substantial Delay in Consumer Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 22(2), pages 186-199, September.
    16. Johnson, Eric J & Hershey, John & Meszaros, Jacqueline & Kunreuther, Howard, 1993. "Framing, Probability Distortions, and Insurance Decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 35-51, August.
    17. Gavan J. Fitzsimons & Donald R. Lehmann, 2004. "Reactance to Recommendations: When Unsolicited Advice Yields Contrary Responses," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 82-94, September.
    18. Raphael Thomadsen & Robert P. Rooderkerk & On Amir & Neeraj Arora & Bryan Bollinger & Karsten Hansen & Leslie John & Wendy Liu & Aner Sela & Vishal Singh & K. Sudhir & Wendy Wood, 2018. "How Context Affects Choice," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 3-14, March.
    19. Jonathan Levav & Nicholas Reinholtz & Claire Lin, 2012. "The Effect of Ordering Decisions by Choice-Set Size on Consumer Search," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 39(3), pages 585-599.
    20. Karen M. Stilley & J. Jeffrey Inman & Kirk L. Wakefield, 2010. "Planning to Make Unplanned Purchases? The Role of In-Store Slack in Budget Deviation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(2), pages 264-278, August.
    21. Alison Jing Xu & Robert S. Wyer Jr., 2007. "The Effect of Mind-Sets on Consumer Decision Strategies," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(4), pages 556-566, June.
    22. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i::p:396-403 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. William M. Hedgcock & Raghunath Singh Rao & Haipeng (Allan) Chen, 2016. "Choosing to Choose: The Effects of Decoys and Prior Choice on Deferral," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2952-2976, October.
    2. Cheng, Yin-Hui & Chuang, Shih-Chieh & Pei-I Yu, Annie & Lai, Wan-Ting, 2019. "Change in your wallet, change your choice: The effect of the change-matching heuristic on choice," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 67-76.
    3. Yan, Huan & Chang, En-Chung & Chou, Ting-Jui & Tang, Xiaofei, 2015. "The over-categorization effect: How the number of categorizations influences shoppers' perceptions of variety and satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 631-638.
    4. Liang Guo, 2016. "Contextual Deliberation and Preference Construction," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2977-2993, October.
    5. A. Ye(scedilla)im Orhun, 2009. "Optimal Product Line Design When Consumers Exhibit Choice Set-Dependent Preferences," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 868-886, 09-10.
    6. Liang Guo, 2022. "Testing the Role of Contextual Deliberation in the Compromise Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 4326-4355, June.
    7. Tian, Jing & Chen, Rong & Xu, Xiaobing, 2022. "A good way to boost sales? Effects of the proportion of sold-out options on purchase behavior," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 156-169.
    8. Kim, Jungkeun & Kim, Jae-Eun & Marshall, Roger, 2020. "Choose Quickly! The Influence of Cognitive Resource Availability on the Preference between the Intuitive and Externally Recommended Options," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 263-272.
    9. Scholten, Marc, 2002. "Conflict-mediated choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 683-718, July.
    10. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Salience and Consumer Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(5), pages 803-843.
    11. Nasim Mousavi & Panagiotis Adamopoulos & Jesse Bockstedt, 2023. "The Decoy Effect and Recommendation Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1533-1553, December.
    12. Hristina Nikolova & Cait Lamberton, 2016. "Men and the Middle: Gender Differences in Dyadic Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 43(3), pages 355-371.
    13. Mark Heitmann & Andreas Herrmann, 2007. "Die Zufriedenheit mit dem Entscheidungsprozess als Determinante der Kundenbindung," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 59(5), pages 530-566, August.
    14. Kuhberger, Anton, 1998. "The Influence of Framing on Risky Decisions: A Meta-analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 23-55, July.
    15. Seidl, C. & Traub, S., 1996. "Rational Choice and the Relevance of Irrelevant Alternatives," Other publications TiSEM 26452450-9ecd-45b4-bc45-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    16. Bertini, Marco & Aydinli, Aylin, 2020. "Consumer Reactance to Promotional Favors," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 96(4), pages 578-589.
    17. Georgios Gerasimou, 2016. "Asymmetric dominance, deferral, and status quo bias in a behavioral model of choice," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(2), pages 295-312, February.
    18. Jonathan P. Beauchamp & Daniel J. Benjamin & Christopher F. Chabris & David I. Laibson, 2015. "Controlling for the Compromise Effect Debiases Estimates of Risk Preference Parameters," NBER Working Papers 21792, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Tarnanidis, Theodore & Owusu-Frimpong, Nana & Nwankwo, Sonny & Omar, Maktoba, 2015. "Why we buy? Modeling consumer selection of referents," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 24-36.
    20. Ronayne, David & Brown, Gordon D.A., 2016. "Multi-attribute decision by sampling: An account of the attraction, comprimise and similarity effects," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1124, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:42:y:2023:i:1:p:87-109. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.