The authors propose a method and metric to quantify the consumer confusion between leading brands and copycat brands that results from the visual similarity of their packaging designs. The method has three components. First, image processing techniques establish the objective similarity of the packages of leading and copycat brands on the basis of their colors and textures. Second, a perceptual decision task (triangle test) assesses the accuracy and speed with which consumers can identify differences between brands from rapidly (300 milliseconds) flashed images of their packages. Third, a competing accumulator model describes the buildup of evidence on each of the alternative brands during consumers’ perceptual decisions and predicts the accuracy and response time of brand identification. Jointly, these components establish the impact of copycat packaging's visual features on consumer confusion. The method is applied in a test of experimentally designed copycats and market copycats in 15 product categories. A three-tiered metric (“copy alert,” “copy watch,” and “copy safe”) establishes the extent to which copycat brands imitate the package designs of target brands and identifies which visual features are responsible.

A choice model based on direct utility maximization subject to an arbitrary number of constraints is developed and applied to conjoint data. The model can accommodate both corner and interior solutions, and it provides insights into the proportion of respondents bound by each constraint. Application to volumetric choice data reveals that the majority of respondents make choices consistent with price and quantity restrictions. Estimates based on a single monetary-constraint choice model are shown to lead to biased estimates of the monetary value of attribute levels.multiple constraints, choice model, corner and interior solutions, quantity restriction

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose This paper aims to investigate the underlying process by which a brand’s unit pricing for multiple package sizes influences consumer evaluations by incorporating several mediators and moderators. Two-unit pricing tactics were examined: quantity discounts and surcharges. Design/methodology/approach Two online experiments were conducted to test the hypotheses. Study 1 examined the mediating role of consumers’ inferred motive for sellers in setting quantity discounts or surcharges in the relationship between the pricing tactics and consumer evaluations. Study 2 incorporated affect as a mediator, and price consciousness and unit price usage as moderators in this relationship. Findings The mediating role of inferred motive is supported. Motive is related to the sales volume. Furthermore, this mediation effect is more potent when consumers have stronger quantity discount belief. Further, the mediating role of affect is supported. It is more salient when consumers are frequent users of unit prices. Research limitations/implications This study compared two pricing tactics and did not include a control condition. The first digit of the unit price for the small package size was different between the pricing tactics. Practical implications When applying quantity surcharges to products, it is essential to provide additional information to consumers to preclude the possibility of negative evaluations. Originality/value This study makes a significant contribution by offering a deeper understanding of consumer responses to the pricing tactics. In particular, it reveals that pricing tactics trigger both cognitive and affective responses, which then influence evaluations of the pricing tactics. This elicited cognition is associated with deduction about sellers’ brand-size pricing behavior.