The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Consumer Rankings of Risk Reduction Methods
Abstract
When a buyer perceives risk in a purchase he can pursue different strategies of risk resolution. This article presents research findings which indicate that consumers have preferences for different methods of risk reduction associated with various types of loss.
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
Predicting e-services adoption: A perceived risk facets perspective
Featherman, M. S., & Pavlou, P. A. (2003) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/s1071-5819(03)00111-3 · Cited by 3,351
The role of perceived risk in the quality-value relationship: A study in a retail environment
Sweeney, J. C., Soutar, G. N., & Johnson, L. W. (1999) · Journal of Retailing · doi:10.1016/s0022-4359(99)80005-0 · Cited by 1,675
Consumer perceived risk: conceptualisations and models
Mitchell, V. (1999) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/03090569910249229 · Cited by 1,582
Consumer patronage and risk perceptions in Internet shopping
Forsythe, S. M., & Shi, B. (2003) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/s0148-2963(01)00273-9 · Cited by 1,433
Babić Rosario, A., Sotgiu, F., De Valck, K., & Bijmolt, T. H. A. (2016) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmr.14.0380 · Cited by 1,073
Metadata
- Authors
- Roselius, T.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1971-01
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 56-61
- ISSN
- 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7185
- OpenAlex
- W2023977558
- Cited by
- 1,404
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.93
- 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: Consumer Rankings of Risk Reduction Methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/002224297103500110
- The paper
- Roselius, T. (1971). Consumer Rankings of Risk Reduction Methods. Journal of Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224297103500110
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.
