The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Will Products Look More Attractive When Presented Separately Or Together?
Open accessAbstract
This research examines whether each of two different options of comparable overall quality will be perceived more positively when presented in isolation and evaluated separately(separate evaluation) or when juxtaposed and evaluated side by side (joint evaluation).Six studies, involving either judgment or choive as the dependent variable, reveal a general principle: If the focal options are already attractive(relative to their natural reference)in separate evaluation, then subjecting these options to joint evaluation will hurt their attractiveness If the focal options are unattractive (relative to their reference) in separate evaluation, subjecting them to joint evaluation will enhance their attractivenss.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Experimental methods: Between-subject and within-subject design
Charness, G., Gneezy, U., & Kuhn, M. A. (2012) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2011.08.009 · Cited by 1,469
Can There Ever Be Too Many Options? A Meta-Analytic Review of Choice Overload
Scheibehenne, B., Greifeneder, R., & Todd, P. M. (2010) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/651235 · Cited by 1,070
Principled moral sentiment and the flexibility of moral judgment and decision making
Bartels, D. M. (2008) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.03.001 · Cited by 435
Consumer Attitudes and Behavior
Ajzen, I. (2015) · Handbook of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.4324/9780203809570.ch20 · Cited by 236
Confused by too many choices? Choice overload in tourism
Park, J.-Y., & Jang, S. (. (2013) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2012.05.004 · Cited by 171
Does “Liking” Lead to Loving? The Impact of Joining a Brand's Social Network on Marketing Outcomes
John, L. K., Emrich, O., Gupta, S., & Norton, M. I. (2017) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmr.14.0237 · Cited by 170
Metadata
- Authors
- Hsee, C. K., & Leclerc, F.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1998-09
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 175-186
- ISSN
- 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5277
- OpenAlex
- W1981781755
- Cited by
- 286
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
