000			01847nam a22002777a 4500
003			ZW-GwMSU
005			20241217073938.0
008			241217b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
022			_a00935301
040			_aMSU _bEnglish _cMSU _erda
050	0	0	_aHF5415.3 JOU
100	1		_aDeval, Hélène _eauthor
245	1	0	_aHow naive theories drive opposing inferences from the same information/ _ccreated by Hélène Deval; Susan P. Mantel; Frank R. Kardes; Steven S. Posavac
264	1		_aOxford : _bOxford University Press, _c2013.
336			_2rdacontent _atext _btxt
337			_2rdamedia _aunmediated _bn
338			_2rdacarrier _avolume _bnc
440			_aJournal of consumer research _vVolume 39, number 6,
520	3		_aConsumers often make inferences to fill in gaps in knowledge when they do not have complete information regarding products. Eight experiments show that consumers often have contradictory naive theories about the implications of common market phenomena and that they draw different conclusions as a function of which naive theory is primed, even when available information is held constant. Results indicate that conflicting naive theories about pricing, sales promotion, product popularity versus scarcity, and technical language drive product evaluation. Consumers who have expertise in a given product category are less susceptible to the priming of a naive theory. This research contributes to more precise understanding of how consumers will respond to different levels of key marketing variables and how marketing tactics can backfire.
650			_aProduct information _vBrand image _xConsumer behaviour _zCanada
700	1		_aPowell Mantel, Susan _eco author
700	1		_aKardes, Frank R. _eco author
700	1		_aPosavac, Steven S. _eco author
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1086/668086
942			_2lcc _cJA
999			_c168920 _d168920