Joint Versus Separate Evaluation of Partitioned Information
Using a theoretical framework derived from Numerosity Heuristics and the Evaluability Hypothesis, we propose and find empirical evidence for our hypothesis that joint versus separate evaluations of partitioned information (with varying levels of partitions) lead to reversals in consumer probability judgments. Specifically, when evaluating partitioned information separately, consumers are likely to have higher probability judgments for information with a higher number of partitions. In contrast, when evaluating partitioned information jointly, consumers are likely to have lower probability judgments for information with a higher number of partitions.
Citation:
Dipayan Biswas and Subimal Chatterjee (2007) ,"Joint Versus Separate Evaluation of Partitioned Information", in E - European Advances in Consumer Research Volume 8, eds. Stefania Borghini, Mary Ann McGrath, and Cele Otnes, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research.
Authors
Dipayan Biswas, Bentley College, USA
Subimal Chatterjee, State University of New York (Binghamton), USA
Volume
E - European Advances in Consumer Research Volume 8 | 2007
Share Proceeding
Featured papers
See MoreFeatured
Guilt Undermines Consumer Willingness to Buy More Meaningful Time
Ashley V. Whillans, Harvard Business School, USA
Elizabeth W. Dunn, University of British Columbia, Canada
Featured
The Effect of Identity Conflict on Price Sensitivity
Huachao Gao, University of Victoria
Yinlong Zhang, University of Texas at San Antonio, USA
Vikas Mittal, Rice University, USA
Featured
A Conceptual Framework of Violation of Trust and Negative Emotional Responses during Brand Transgressions
Karthik Selvanayagam, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras
Varisha Rehman, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras