Mktg 3208 Exam 2

Front 1

what is true about elimination by aspects (EBA)

Back 1

EBA is alternative based model

Front 2

what is an example of cognitive heuristics?

I bought this brand because...

Back 2

It is the most reliable

Front 3

what is true about heuristics

Back 3

brand loyalty may be considered as a heuristic

Front 4

consider the following rental options assuming all other attributes identical

1: 10 miles to school 1800
2: 20 miles to school 2200
3: 10 miles to school 2000

what is true about option 3

Back 4

option three is neither a decoy nor a compromise

Front 5

____ refers to the phenomenon that options perceived as extreme on a particular attribute will seem less attractive than those perceived as intermediate. This leads to the preference for middle options also known as the _____

Back 5

Extremeness aversion/ compromise effect

Front 6

If brand A is 50% more expensive than brand B than how much cheaper is B than brand A

Back 6

brand B is 33% cheaper than brand A

Front 7

With which industry do the American consumers tend to have a higher level of dissatisfaction

Back 7

cable TV

Front 8

Satisfaction depends on...

Back 8

performance
expectation
attribution
equity

Front 9

what is true about complainers?

Back 9

younger
higher income
less brand loyal
cultural differences

Front 10

positive disconfirmation occurs when

Back 10

performance>expectations

Front 11

which choice strategy is a compensatory strategy

Back 11

information integration theory

Front 12

buying the first brand that is satisfactory on all attributes is an example of which choice heuristic

Back 12

conjunctive heuristic

Front 13

Consumers are more likely to buy ground beef that is described as 75% lean as opposed to 25% fat. this is an example of which phenomenon?

Back 13

framing effect

Front 14

rogaine hair restoration is using the framing effect when it states that 26% of men who use the product get excellent results. True/False

Back 14

true

Front 15

the attraction effect suggests that adding a similar but inferior product to a product line hurts the overall image of the product line
True/False

Back 15

false

Front 16

the compromise effect suggests that adding a similar but inferior product to a product line makes other products seem more attractive
True/False

Back 16

false

Front 17

sitting at home trying to decide which restaurant to go to for dinner is an example of memory-based choice.
True/False

Back 17

true

Front 18

consumers usually prefer a memory brand over a stimulus brand when both are equally favorable
True/False

Back 18

False

Front 19

The lexicographic heuristic involves setting a minimum acceptable cutoff level for each attribute and selecting the first alternative that meets the minimum standard for all attributes
True/False

Back 19

false

Front 20

the lexicographic heuristic involves choosing the best brand on the basis of its most important attribute
True/False

Back 20

true

Front 21

The Elimination by Aspects heuristic involves comparing alternatives on an attribute selected probablistically and eliminating or rejecting alternatives that do not meet a minimum cutoff point on this attribute
True/False

Back 21

true

Front 22

Weighted average
compensatory decision making
multi attribute

Back 22

importance*attribute for all attributes, then find total compare for each alternative

Front 23

conjunctive rule

Back 23

find first option where all attributes meet minimum cut off

Front 24

lexicographic

Back 24

find most important attribute and alternative with highest is chosen

if there's a tie for the first one go to the next important attribute and only compare for the alternatives that were tied

Front 25

elimination by aspect

Back 25

compare alternatives based upon most important attribute, eliminate those that do not meet minimum cutoff, continue this from most to least important attribute until only one alternative is left standing

Front 26

sources of consumer's problem recognition

Back 26

out of stock
dissatisfaction
new needs/wants
related product purchase
market-induced recognition
new products

Front 27

decision stage and psychological process involved

Back 27

-problem recognition: motivation
-information search: perception
-alternative evaluation: attitude formation
-purchase decision: integration
-post purchase evaluation: learning

Front 28

kinds of info recalled from memory

Back 28

brands
attributes
evaluations
experiences

Front 29

consideration set for brand recall

Back 29

depends on:
-how can you cue brands (brand name)
-mood
-accuracy of info recalled
-other biases

Front 30

evoked set of brands

Back 30

brands that you can remember, out of these you pick one that you purchase

Front 31

brand recall

Back 31

-prototypicality
-familiarity
-goals/usage situation
-preference
-retrieval cues

Front 32

attribute recall

Back 32

-accessibility/availablity
-diagnosticity (usefulness)
----negative information
-salience
-vividness
-goals

Front 33

motivation to process info

Back 33

-involvement and perceived risk
-perceived costs and benefits
-consideration set
-relative uncertainty
-attitude towards search
discrepancy of info

Front 34

ability to process information

Back 34

consumer knowledge
cognitive abilities
demographics

Front 35

opportunity to process information

Back 35

-amount of info available
-information format
-time availability
-number of items being chosen

Front 36

types of solutions to problems

Back 36

functional:
-it will cut grass

psychological
-i want to impress my neighbors

Front 37

types of solutions to problems

Back 37

functional:
-it will cut grass

psychological
-i want to impress my neighbors

Front 38

stimulus vs memory choice

Back 38

stimulus: all brands present
memory: no brands present
mixed: some present others not

stimulus is more effective because theres less uncertainty

Front 39

stimulus vs memory choice

Back 39

stimulus: all brands present
memory: no brands present
mixed: some present others not

stimulus is more effective because theres less uncertainty

Front 40

information integration theory

Back 40

more applicable for high involvement choices...trade offs

Front 41

information integration theory

Back 41

more applicable for high involvement choices...trade offs

Front 42

compensatory model

Back 42

involving a weighted average
one attribute can compensate for another

Front 43

compensatory model

Back 43

involving a weighted average
one attribute can compensate for another

Front 44

using heuristics

Back 44

lack of MAO leads to using heuristics

help balance trade offs
most famous trade off: accuracy/effort tradeoff

examples: attitude based, brand, frequency, price, familiarity, physical features, stereotypes

Front 45

using heuristics

Back 45

lack of MAO leads to using heuristics

help balance trade offs
most famous trade off: accuracy/effort tradeoff

examples: attitude based, brand, frequency, price, familiarity, physical features, stereotypes

Front 46

non compensatory decision rules

Back 46

a bad value on an important cue cannot be compensated for by a combination of less important cues

doesn't look at all cues

Front 47

non compensatory decision rules

Back 47

a bad value on an important cue cannot be compensated for by a combination of less important cues

doesn't look at all cues

Front 48

attribute based non compensatory rules

Back 48

-attribute based processing
-lexicographic
-elimination by aspects

Front 49

attribute based non compensatory rules

Back 49

-attribute based processing
-lexicographic
-elimination by aspects

Front 50

other heuristic strategies

Back 50

-brand loyalty
-habitual heuristic
-representative heuristic
-rely on norms
-rely on affective response

Front 51

other heuristic strategies

Back 51

-brand loyalty
-habitual heuristic
-representative heuristic
-rely on norms
-rely on affective response

Front 52

compensatory heuristics

Back 52

all recalled cues considered

Front 53

non-compensatory heuristics

Back 53

the most valid discriminating cues will determine the choice without possible revision based on less valid cues

Front 54

combination heuristics

Back 54

typically we first eliminate some options using heuristics then start calculating for perfection

Front 55

self-positivity bias

Back 55

consumers believe that they are less susceptible to a risk than others, e.g. AIDS, car crashes

Front 56

negativity bias

Back 56

consumers weight negative info more than positive info when making a judgement

Front 57

confirmation/consistency bias

Back 57

we normally weigh consistent information more

Front 58

availability heuristic

Back 58

when more descriptive info is available you are more likely to pick that

Front 59

representative heuristic

Back 59

ex: stereotypes to judge people

Front 60

anchoring and adjustment

Back 60

when you are given a base number and then told to choose a number you will pick a number close to the one you were given

Front 61

fundamental attribution error

Back 61

you tend to blame people's actions on their personality and blame your actions on your situation

aka correspondence bias

Front 62

simulation heuristic

Back 62

you predict extreme circumstances and negative info more

Front 63

framing effect

Back 63

providing negative vs positive info

-gains: likely to be risk averse
-losses: likely to be risk seeking

ground beef: 25%fat vs 75%lean

Front 64

extremeness aversion and compromise effect

Back 64

options perceived as extreme on a particular attribute will seem less attractive than those perceived as intermediate

middle options are viewed as compromises

adding more lower priced options will make the middle options seem more middle cost

pick the item in the middle, must be better than each alternative on one attribute

Front 65

attractiveness effect/ asymmetric dominance/decoys

Back 65

providing extra of one attribute for the same price to make it look like a better deal

ex: print 100, online 150, online and print 150 so you obviously pick online and print

the print only option is a decoy

Front 66

expectational biases

Back 66

transactional utilty: perceptions about the quality of the deal is evaluated in reference to what the item should cost in the context

acquisition utility: how much the item is really worth to you

we adapt our expectations based on the set of products available for comparison

Front 67

marketing practices

Back 67

free shipping&handling, free stuff

life time warranty less s&h

free CD

1c hershey kiss vs 15c lindt

Front 68

inferential biases
missing information and inferences

Back 68

there will always be missing info

do you make inferences?
do you prefer alternatives with complete info?

Front 69

post-decision dissonance

Back 69

anxiety, loss of confidence in decision and self

Front 70

post-decision regret

Back 70

unfavorable comparison
consumer anticipation

Front 71

strategies to reduce dissonance

Back 71

sweet lemons
sour grapes
leveling the playing field
revoking the choice

Front 72

sweet lemons

Back 72

attempts to raise positive qualities of the chosen alternatives

you buy something you dont really want and try to convince yourself you like it

Front 73

sour grapes

Back 73

disparaging the qualities of forgone alternatives

you buy something and try to tell yourself what you didnt buy is not that good anyways

Front 74

leveling the field

Back 74

increasing perceived similarity among alternatives

all insurance companies will give you the same trouble anyways

Front 75

revoking the choice

Back 75

returns, exchanges

Front 76

performance

satisfaction

Back 76

everything else equal the better it works the more you are satisfied

you want standard services from utility companies

Front 77

disconfirmation/expectation

satisfaction

Back 77

disconfirmation=performance-expectation

better than expected: positive
worse than expected: negative

Front 78

attribution theory

satisfaction

Back 78

finding explanations
factors: locus of causality, stability (variablility), controlability

Front 79

equity theory

satisfaction

Back 79

inputs versus outputs
input to output should be equal to that of partner for it to be a fair deal

Front 80

things affecting satisfaction

Back 80

perception/difficulty
promises (dominos)
normative issues
confidence/source
courses/services
equality
switch or not
uncertainty
risks and costs
habits, distance

Front 81

omission vs commission

Back 81

you regret not doing something more than doing something

Front 82

what matters most to people in determining satisfaction

Back 82

performance and disconfirmation

different for everyone

Front 83

types of complainers

Back 83

-passives: dont complain but spread word
-voicers: complain too much
-irates: high maintenance customers, complain about everything and expect more
-activists: actively go against company, make websites, etc

Front 84

how important is satisfaction

Back 84

people will stick with a company even if unsatisfied, people will switch even if satisfied

have to compare ROI to increased satisfaction to see if worth it

Front 85

customer retention tactics

Back 85

care
contact btw sales
expertise, reliability, concern
service and repair
beyond call of duty