Cited by 945Consumer Market Behavior and PricingCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification

The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.

Perceptions of Price Unfairness: Antecedents and Consequences

Campbell, Margaret C.·1999·Journal of Marketing Research

Abstract

Using two studies, the author examines the influence of the inferred motive for a firm's price increase on perceptions of price unfairness. Prior to the research presented here, the only established causal antecedent of perceived price unfairness was increased relative profit. In Study 1, the author extends the existing research by demonstrating that the inferred motive, as well as inferred relative profit, provides causal explanation of perceived price unfairness. When participants inferred that the firm had a negative motive for a price increase, the increase was perceived as significantly less fair than the same increase when participants inferred that the firm had a positive motive. In addition, the author shows in Study 2 that the firm's reputation can influence the inferred motive, thereby altering perceptions of price unfairness. Specifically, participants sometimes gave a firm with a good reputation the benefit of the doubt when inferring motive. If the “good” firm did not profit from the price increase, participants inferred significantly more positive motives than if it did profit. The firm with a poor reputation did not receive this benefit; inferred motive was equally negative regardless of whether the firm profited from the price increase. Together, these studies provide evidence that consumer inferences of the motive for a price increase influence the perceived fairness of the increase. Furthermore, reputation is shown to moderate the effect of inferred relative…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3152092

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 37 · Cited by 945

Metadata

Authors
Campbell, M. C.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Campbell, Margaret C.
Venue
Journal of Marketing Research
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1999-05
Volume
36
Issue
2
Pages
187
ISSN
0022-2437 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2093960187
Cited by
945
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 54 · 2015: 48 · 2014: 56 · 2013: 48 · 2012: 43
FWCI
17.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Marketing Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Market Behavior and Pricing
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Keywords
price increases, relative profit, corporate reputation, consumer inference, shopping intention, perceived fairness, relative prices

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