The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Moderating Effect of Perceived Risk on Consumers' Evaluations of Product Incongruity: Preference for the Norm: Table 1
Abstract
Research supports the existence of a “moderate incongruity effect” such that an option that is moderately inconsistent with an evoked product category schema is sometimes preferred to a congruent option. We propose that perceived risk is an important situational factor that moderates the impact of congruity on evaluations. Three studies show that the positive evaluation of moderately incongruent products, relative to congruent ones, does not appear when there is risk associated with product selection. When consumers perceive high risk associated with a purchase, the moderate incongruity effect is reversed such that the congruent is preferred to the moderately incongruent product. Only in conditions where subjects perceived no real risk did the positive effect of moderate incongruity appear. The limiting effect of perceived risk appears to be due to consumers’ “preferences for the norm” under high‐risk conditions. The set of findings are discussed as they relate to and extend current thinking about the eff...
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
Cites
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173933 · Cited by 3,487
Perceived risk: The concept and its measurement
Dowling, G. R. (1986) · Psychology & Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.4220030307 · Cited by 551
Cited by
E-Commerce Product Recommendation Agents: Use, Characteristics, and Impact1
Xiao, B., & Benbasat, I. (2007) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148784 · Cited by 1,081
Risk, uncertainty and the theory of planned behavior: A tourism example
Quintal, V. A., Lee, J. A., & Soutar, G. N. (2010) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2009.08.006 · Cited by 855
The effects of perceived risk and technology type on users’ acceptance of technologies
Im, I., Kim, Y., & Han, H.-J. (2008) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2007.03.005 · Cited by 538
Mao, Z., & Lyu, J. (2017) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-08-2016-0439 · Cited by 325
Marriott, H. R., & Williams, M. D. (2018) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.01.017 · Cited by 270
Metadata
- Authors
- Campbell, M. C., & Goodstein, R. C.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-12
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 439-449
- ISSN
- 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5277
- OpenAlex
- W2127240198
- Cited by
- 633
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 5.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Moderating Effect of Perceived Risk on Consumers' Evaluations of Product Incongruity: Preference for the Norm: Table 1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/323731
- The paper
- Campbell, M. C., & Goodstein, R. C. (2001). The Moderating Effect of Perceived Risk on Consumers' Evaluations of Product Incongruity: Preference for the Norm: Table 1. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.org/10.1086/323731
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.