IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jcopol/v39y2016i3d10.1007_s10603-016-9325-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the Credibility Determinants of a Quality Label: a Quasi-Natural Experiment Using the Example of Stiftung Warentest

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Hildenbrand

    (Justus Liebig University Giessen)

  • Rainer Kühl

    (Justus Liebig University Giessen)

  • Anne Piper

    (Justus Liebig University Giessen)

Abstract

In 2013, Stiftung Warentest, which is one of the most important consumer organizations in Germany, tested hazelnut chocolate for their leading magazine called test. The hazelnut chocolate of Ritter Sport, which is a high-quality producer of chocolate in Germany, failed the test and received the grade “unsatisfactory.” Stiftung Warentest accused Ritter Sport of labelling an artificial flavouring as a natural flavouring. Ritter Sport rejected the accusation, went to court, and won the trial. Stiftung Warentest had to withdraw the issue in question of test magazine. The affair received broad media coverage from December 2013 to September 2014. Using the case Ritter Sport versus Stiftung Warentest, it is analysed whether negative headlines really undermine the credibility of a quality label by examining Stiftung Warentest and their quality label called test. In addition, it is examined what can be done to restore or, more generally, increase the credibility of a quality label. Based on a quasi-natural experiment, it is found that the negative headlines regarding Stiftung Warentest have undermined the credibility of the test label. It is also found that the credibility of the test label can be increased by providing reference values to the tests, strengthening the independence of Stiftung Warentest, and using laboratory methods for the tests. For the most part, the same holds true for any quality label. High-quality producers, quality-conscious consumers, and the awarding organization of the quality label can benefit from an increased credibility of a quality label.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Hildenbrand & Rainer Kühl & Anne Piper, 2016. "On the Credibility Determinants of a Quality Label: a Quasi-Natural Experiment Using the Example of Stiftung Warentest," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 307-325, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jcopol:v:39:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s10603-016-9325-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s10603-016-9325-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10603-016-9325-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10603-016-9325-9?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robin Cubitt, 2005. "Experiments and the domain of economic theory," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 197-210.
    2. Grossman, Sanford J, 1981. "The Informational Role of Warranties and Private Disclosure about Product Quality," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(3), pages 461-483, December.
    3. Patzer, Gordon L., 1983. "Source credibility as a function of communicator physical attractiveness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 229-241, June.
    4. Nelson, Phillip, 1970. "Information and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(2), pages 311-329, March-Apr.
    5. Darby, Michael R & Karni, Edi, 1973. "Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 67-88, April.
    6. De Maeyer, Peter & Estelami, Hooman, 2011. "Consumer perceptions of third party product quality ratings," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(10), pages 1067-1073, October.
    7. Charles F. Manski, 1996. "Learning about Treatment Effects from Experiments with Random Assignment of Treatments," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 31(4), pages 709-733.
    8. Nelson, Philip, 1974. "Advertising as Information," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(4), pages 729-754, July/Aug..
    9. Silberer, Gunter, 1982. "Marketing of noncommercial test institutions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 59-73, March.
    10. George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500.
    11. Andreas Hildenbrand & Rainer Kühl, 2014. "Ritter Sport und Stiftung Warentest: Informationsdefizite überwinden," Wirtschaftsdienst, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 94(3), pages 217-220, March.
    12. Volker Gadenne, 2013. "External Validity and the New Inductivism in Experimental Economics," Rationality, Markets and Morals, Frankfurt School Verlag, Frankfurt School of Finance & Management, vol. 4(63), March.
    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. Andreas Hildenbrand & Rainer Kühl & Anne Piper, 2015. "Do Negative Headlines Really Undermine the Credibility of a Quality Label? A Quasi-Natural Experiment," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201514, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    2. Hildenbrand, A. & Kühl, R. & Piper, A., 2016. "How Fragile Is The Credibility of a Quality Label? A Quasi-Natural Experiment Using the Example of Stiftung Warentest," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 51, March.
    3. Julie A. Caswell & Eliza M. Mojduszka, 1996. "Using Informational Labeling to Influence the Market for Quality in Food Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1248-1253.
    4. Marco Costanigro & Yuko Onozaka, 2020. "A Belief‐Preference Model of Choice for Experience and Credence Goods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 70-95, February.
    5. Breeda Comyns & Frank Figge & Tobias Hahn & Ralf Barkemeyer, 2013. "Sustainability reporting: The role of “Search”, “Experience” and “Credence” information," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(3), pages 231-243, September.
    6. Eric Schmidbauer, 2016. "New and Improved?," Working Papers 2016-02, University of Central Florida, Department of Economics.
    7. McCluskey, Jill J., 2000. "A Game Theoretic Approach To Organic Foods: An Analysis Of Asymmetric Information And Policy," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 29(1), pages 1-9, April.
    8. Sporleder, Eva M. & Kayser, Maike & Friedrich, Nina & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2014. "Consumer Preferences for Sustainably Produced Bananas: A Discrete Choice Experiment," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 17(1), pages 1-24, February.
    9. Ernst, Holger & Wickede, Anje, 1999. "Einflußfaktoren auf die Glaubwürdigkeit kundenorientierter Produkt-Vorankündigungen: Ein signaltheoretischer Ansatz," Manuskripte aus den Instituten für Betriebswirtschaftslehre der Universität Kiel 515, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre.
    10. Robert B. Ekelund & Richard Higgins & John D. Jackson, 2020. "ART as meta-credence: authentication and the role of experts," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 44(1), pages 155-171, March.
    11. Karsten Mause, 2009. "Too Much Competition in Higher Education? Some Conceptual Remarks on the Excessive‐Signaling Hypothesis," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(5), pages 1107-1133, November.
    12. Animesh Animesh & Vandana Ramachandran & Siva Viswanathan, 2005. "Quality Uncertainty And Adverse Selection In Sponsored Search Markets," Working Papers 05-27, NET Institute, revised Oct 2005.
    13. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    14. Schmidbauer, Eric & Lubensky, Dmitry, 2018. "New and improved?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 26-48.
    15. Stone, Michael P. & Miceli, Thomas J., 2012. "Optimal attorney advertising," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 329-338.
    16. Karsten Mause, 2008. "Rethinking governmental licensing of higher education institutions," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 57-78, February.
    17. Bartke, Stephan, 2015. "The economic role of valuers in real property markets," UFZ Discussion Papers 13/2015, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    18. repec:gbl:wpaper:2013-01 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Karsten Mause, 2010. "Considering Market-Based Instruments for Consumer Protection in Higher Education," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 29-53, March.
    20. Gonzalo Ruiz, 2014. "Understanding the Pro-plaintiff Bias in Consumer Protection Legal Processes," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 113-141, March.
    21. Charity, Nabwire Ephamia Juma, 2016. "Economic Analysis Of Consumers’ Awareness And Willingness To Pay For Geographical Indicators And Other Quality Attributes Of Honey In Kenya," Research Theses 265574, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied 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:kap:jcopol:v:39:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s10603-016-9325-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.