In an attempt to organize the research findings that pertain to the various phenomena which have been termed "variety seeking" we offer a taxonomy of varied behavior. Within that framework the literature is reviewed. A TAXONOMY OF VARIED BEHAVIORThe phenonema of interest in this paper are those mechanisms which lead individuals to engage in varied behaviors. We include switching among product variants, switching among service alternatives, switching among various activities, etc., under the umbrella of "varied behaviors." A taxonomy of 2 explanations for such varied behavior is presented in Figure 1.- Figure 1 About HereThe taxonomy suggests that there are two basic schools of thought concerning varied behavior. One school considers such behavior to be either inherently inexplicable or, if explicable, to be so complex as to render it operationally inexplicable. This school focuses research on the probabilities with which different behaviors will be enacted.The other school of thought tackles the chore of explanation. We divide the explanations into two classes: those which view varied behavior as the result of some other motivation (DERIVED), and those which view variation as a -2 motivation in and of Itself (DIRECT). Motivations from which varied behavior

No abstract

The simplistic form of linear compensatory attitude modeling includes a number of significant research questions involving concepts, measurement, and analysis. Results and conclusions of marketing research on the model are summarized for each issue and directions for further development are suggested.

This paper examines the effectiveness of models of preference and choice based on specific product attributes. An experiment with soft drink brands produced data that reflect preference rankings, choice, and evaluation of specific attributes at different points in time. Deterministic and stochastic choice models are examined. 0+3N THIS St~Udy \VC extelld the SCqUCIlCC Of I studies (Bass CE Talarzyk, 1972; Bass, l'essmiier, Teach, ~f i Talarzyk, 1969; Lelimann, 1971) in which we have been cngagcd where rclat,ioriships between prcfercnce for similar alternativcs and attitude measures based 011 specific attributes of thc altcmat,ivev are explored. We rcplicatc certain fcatm-cs of our previous studies and introduce the new olements of dynamirs and act,ual choice. The basic proposition which motivates this research is tlie idea that choice behavior is influenced by pcrceptioris of and values for specific attribut,cs of t.he choice objects. The theoretical foundation for the basic propositmion lies in tJhc :i,ttitjudo theories of social psychologists. Lancastcbr (1966) in the context of economic theory has suggested similar ideas t'o those which stcm from social psychology in indicating that thc utility of a good is bascd on tlie utility of thc propertics which the good dd' 1 ivers. lrishbein (1967) has suggested :I gclner:il theoretical (and operational) model for attitude measurement that scrves as the point of departurc for our studies Fishbein's iiiodel, consistent with the att,itude theory tradition from which it derives, \\-as not formulitted with the measurement of relative at,titudes toward similar objccts in mind, but with the view toward the measurement of an attitude toward a given object. Houwcr, it swms quite natural to extend the theory. Since an attitudc is defined as ":I prcdisposition to respond in a particular wag to.l\-ard a spccfied class of objects" the argument presented subsequently seems coiisisterit with this definition. If one's attitude t,o\vard object A is more favorablc than his attitude toward object R, then object A is prefcrred to object B, arid if object A is preferred to object R, then, other things being equal, it is more likely that object 9 will be chosen than object R.The central underlying proposition in attitude theory is that attitudes are composed of beliefs about the attributes of objects and the evaluative aspect of thosc beliefs. Thus, for cxamplc, if we were measuring attitudes toward diff went brands of t'oothpaste we would determine the beliefs which consumers have about the extent t'o which each of scveral brands possess properties such as decay prevention, teet'h whitening, taste, and br&h control and tlie importance which consumers attach to each of these properties. The measurements, then, are specific to the choice object rnthcr t,han general measurements such as personality or generalized attitudes and intentions. The cognitive and affective components of att.it,udc are included in the measurement,^.

No abstract