The effect of a no-pain, no-gain lay theory on product efficacy perceptions

Krämer, Thomas; Irmak, Caglar; Block, Lauren; Ilyuk, Veronika

doi:10.1007/s11002-012-9165-6

Cited by 38 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consumers also actively choose more effortful experiences when energy levels are high versus low (Gibbs and Drolet 2003), when they believe a decision process has been too easy (Schrift, Netzer, and Kivetz 2011), when they believe they have a competitive advantage over others (Kivetz and Simonson 2003), or when pain and effort suggest greater meaning in an activity (Olivola and Shafir 2013) or efficacy of a product (Kramer et al 2012). In addition, customers' increasingly active roles in the production and customization of goods and services suggest that effortful processes often provide a meaningful sense of value and competence (e.g., Bendapudi and Leone 2003;Mochon, Norton, and Ariely 2012).…”

Section: Why Is Hard Work Important?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Doing It the Hard Way: How Low Control Drives Preferences for High-Effort Products and Services

Cutright¹,

Samper²

2014

J Consum Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Why Is Hard Work Important?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Doing It the Hard Way: How Low Control Drives Preferences for High-Effort Products and Services

Cutright¹,

Samper²

2014

J Consum Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…An intervention that draws attention to the lack of government regulation and testing of supplements should generate more thoughts about risks and potential side effects, thereby motivating consumers to behave more cautiously when making supplement decisions. At the same time and as noted above, NPNG naïve beliefs enhance acceptance of product risks (e.g., Kramer et al, ). For example, one past study shows that government‐mandated disclaimers did not impact beliefs about dietary supplement efficacy or safety (Mason & Scammon, ).…”

Section: S2: “No‐pain No‐gain” With Interventionmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…As described above, S2 primes an NPNG lay theory deemed appropriate in this health context (cf. Catlin et al, ; Kramer et al, ). In addition, S2 tests the impact of an intervention (i.e., FDA disclaimer) designed to enhance the salience of supplement‐related risks.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The NPNG lay belief is deemed to be a key factor influencing medicinal consumption decisions (Kramer et al, 2012), and we extend this work to examine its influence in supplement usage decisions. Unlike LIM beliefs, NPNG beliefs are potentially more dangerous from a healthcare and well-being perspective as they suggest that consumers should tolerate risks in hopes of attaining goals.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The lack of strict governmental regulation and oversight accompanied by consumers' relatively limited knowledge and inability to objectively evaluate supplements on their own may motivate consumers to rely on ordinary lay beliefs/theories or "rules of thumb" when making supplement-based decisions. An expanding stream of research across social science disciplines demonstrates that people often rely on simple heuristics, commonly referred to as lay theories or naïve beliefs (e.g., Beruchashvili, Moisio, & Heisley, 2014;Johar & Mukhopadhyay, 2004;Kramer, Irmak, Block, & Illyuk, 2012;Rozin, Ashmore, & Markwith, 1996). More specifically, empirical evidence supports that consumers often adopt such naïve/lay beliefs about products and services, including health-related product decisions (e.g., Catlin, Pechmann, & Brass, 2015;Deval, Mantel, Kardes, & Posavac, 2013;Frosch, Kimmel, & Volpp, 2008;Hughner & Kleine, 2008;McFerran & Mukhopadhyay, 2013;Rozin et al, 1996).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Lay theories and consumer perceptions of dietary supplements

Homer

Mukherjee

2019

J of Consumer Behaviour

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Consumers lack awareness and concern of potential adverse reactions, interactions, and inappropriate usage associated with dietary supplements. The lack of strict governmental regulation of supplements accompanied by consumers' lack of knowledge often results in them relying on ordinary lay (naïve) beliefs and theories when making supplement‐based decisions. We use an accessibility–diagnosticity framework to explore the impact of lay theories/beliefs on consumers' perceptions and judgments of dietary supplements. Two experiments prime two lay theories relevant to dietary supplement decision making: “less is more” (LIM: Study 1) and “no‐pain no‐gain” (NPNG: Study 2). Supplement form (single‐ vs. multi‐ingredient) is also manipulated in both studies, and Study 2 includes a Food and Drug Administration disclaimer intervention. Findings show that when a LIM lay theory is primed (Study 1), supplement form is a diagnostic cue. Specifically, consumers perceive that multi‐ingredient supplements possess more severe adverse side effects compared with single‐ingredient supplements. In the presence of an NPNG mindset (Study 2), supplement form was not diagnostic in the decision process, and a disclaimer intervention that draws attention to the lack of government regulation and testing of supplements was ineffective at influencing perceived side effect severity and attitude. The data confirm that lay theories impact dietary supplement decision making and that the observed effects are consistent with an accessibility–diagnosticity framework. Implications for public policy are also discussed.

show abstract

How product aesthetics cues efficacy beliefs of product performance

Sundar

Cao

Machleit

2020

Psychology and Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aesthetics of package design is an important consideration when consumers make purchase decisions. We argue that this is particularly the case for purchase decision of products in the beauty category. This paper advances current understanding of the role of packaging in product purchase behavior by identifying heuristic cues exhibited in packaging (i.e., that beautiful packaging is more effective at making the consumer more beautiful). Across a pilot field study and four lab studies, we demonstrate that package aesthetics informs inferences of how well the product can perform, which, in turn, drives purchase decisions. Importantly, we show that in the presence of a diagnostic cue such as a brand name, or an explicit promise (e.g. tagline of an advertisement), this effect is attenuated and rendered irrelevant. Further, we show that this effect is rendered ineffective to a category to which beauty is irrelevant. Hence, by signaling product efficacy, the beauty‐in‐a‐bottle heuristic appears to inform purchase decisions.

show abstract

The effect of a no-pain, no-gain lay theory on product efficacy perceptions

Cited by 38 publications

References 32 publications

Doing It the Hard Way: How Low Control Drives Preferences for High-Effort Products and Services

Doing It the Hard Way: How Low Control Drives Preferences for High-Effort Products and Services

Lay theories and consumer perceptions of dietary supplements

How product aesthetics cues efficacy beliefs of product performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About