The DOI matches its Crossref record; 170 of the 170 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Consumer Inference: A Review of Processes, Bases, and Judgment Contexts
Open accessAbstract
Because products are rarely described completely, consumers often form inferences that go beyond the information given. We review research on the processes, bases, and the judgment contexts in which inferences are formed. The most basic processes are induction (inferences from specific instances to general principles) versus deduction (inferences from general principles to specific instances). Stimulus‐based inferences are formed on‐line (as information is encountered) using situationally available information, whereas memory‐based (or theory‐based) inferences are formed using prior knowledge and experience. Inferences can pertain to a single product judged in isolation (a singular judgment context) or to multiple products considered in relation to one another (a comparative judgment context). This 2x2x2 (Induction vs. Deduction x Stimulus‐Based vs. Memory‐Based x Singular vs. Comparative Judgment) theoretical framework suggests that there are 8 different types of inferences that consumers may form. Based on this framework, we identify gaps in the literature and suggest directions for future research.
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
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity
Keller, K. L. (1993) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299305700101 · Cited by 14,686
(2025) · doi:10.53555/acr.v2i2 · Cited by 13,264
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
(1982) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809477 · Cited by 8,240
Anderson, J. R. (2013) · doi:10.4324/9781315799438 · Cited by 6,761
(1999) · Cited by 6,104
Effects of Price, Brand, and Store Information on Buyers’ Product Evaluations
Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224379102800305 · Cited by 5,853
Social psychology: handbook of basic principles
(2008) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.45-3496 · Cited by 5,473
(1983) · Cited by 5,041
Cited by
De Veirman, M., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2017) · International Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/02650487.2017.1348035 · Cited by 2,548
The Means and End of Greenwash
Lyon, T. P., & Montgomery, A. W. (2015) · Organization & Environment · doi:10.1177/1086026615575332 · Cited by 1,636
Chen, Y., & Chang, C. (2012) · Management Decision · doi:10.1108/00251741211216250 · Cited by 1,370
A review of European research on consumer response to nutrition information on food labels
Grunert, K. G., & Wills, J. M. (2007) · Journal of Public Health · doi:10.1007/s10389-007-0101-9 · Cited by 1,233
Chandon, P., & Wansink, B. (2007) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/519499 · Cited by 771
Metadata
- Authors
- Kardes, F. R., Posavac, S. S., & Cronley, M. L.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-01
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 230-256
- ISSN
- 1057-7408 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7663
- OpenAlex
- W2064927577
- Cited by
- 530
- References
- 170
- FWCI
- 28.62
- 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
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 Inference: A Review of Processes, Bases, and Judgment Contexts. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327663jcp1403_6
- The paper
- Kardes, F. R., Posavac, S. S., & Cronley, M. L. (2004). Consumer Inference: A Review of Processes, Bases, and Judgment Contexts. Journal of Consumer Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1403_6
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.