Because products are rarely described completely, consumers often form inferences that go beyond the information given. We review research on the processes, bases, and the judgment contexts in which inferences are formed. The most basic processes are induction (inferences from specific instances to general principles) versus deduction (inferences from general principles to specific instances). Stimulus‐based inferences are formed on‐line (as information is encountered) using situationally available information, whereas memory‐based (or theory‐based) inferences are formed using prior knowledge and experience. Inferences can pertain to a single product judged in isolation (a singular judgment context) or to multiple products considered in relation to one another (a comparative judgment context). This 2x2x2 (Induction vs. Deduction x Stimulus‐Based vs. Memory‐Based x Singular vs. Comparative Judgment) theoretical framework suggests that there are 8 different types of inferences that consumers may form. Based on this framework, we identify gaps in the literature and suggest directions for future research.

This article explores how consumers' self regulation affects the likelihood of purchase of new and really new products. In a mall intercept field study we show that consumers with a chronic disposition to be promotion focused own more new high-technology goods, and newly launched repeat purchase items, compared with prevention focused consumers. There was no difference in ownership of products that have been available for many years. We further investigated these findings in two laboratory experiments. In study 2, we manipulated regulatory focus and found that when the risks associated with a really new product are not specified to consumers, promotion focused consumers state higher purchase intentions than those in prevention focus. However, when the judgmental context makes the risks salient, participants in prevention and promotion focus were equally unlikely to purchase the product. In the third study we find that consumers' self regulation is unrelated to purchase intentions for products that are not portrayed as new. Mediation analysis in both laboratory studies show that the effect of regulatory focus on purchase intentions for new products is due to the concerns with the performance of the new technology, which are experienced by prevention focused consumers. Finally, important managerial implications are discussed.

Some behavioral researchers occasionally wish to conduct a median split on a continuous variable and use the result in subsequent modeling to facilitate analytic ease and communication clarity. Traditionally, this practice of dichotomization has been criticized for the resulting loss of information and reduction in power. More recently, this practice has been criticized for sometimes producing Type I errors for effects regarding other terms in a model, resulting in a recommendation of the unconditional avoidance of median splits. In this paper, we use simulation studies to demonstrate more thoroughly than has been shown in the literature to date when median splits should not be used, and conversely, to provide nuance and balance to the extant literature regarding when median splits may be used with complete analytical integrity. For the scenario we explicate, the use of a median split is as good as a continuous variable. Accordingly, there is no reason to outright reject median splits, and oftentimes the median split may be preferred as more parsimonious.

This research investigates the effects of the amount of information presented, information organization, and concern about closure on selective information processing and on the degree to which consumers use price as a basis for inferring quality. Consumers are found to be less likely to neglect belief-inconsistent information and their quality inferences less influenced by price when concern about closure is low (vs. high) and information is presented randomly (vs. ordered) or a small amount of information is presented. Results provide a picture of a resourceconstrained consumer decision maker who processes belief-inconsistent information only when there is motivation and opportunity. C onsumers frequently assume that price and quality are highly correlated, and that as the price of a product increases, its quality increases commensurately ("you get what you pay for"). This assumption exerts a powerful influence on the degree to which consumers use price to infer quality (

No abstract