The Influence of Price Discount versus Bonus Pack on the Preference for Virtue and Vice Foods

Abstract

The authors find that consumers prefer a bonus pack to a price discount for virtue foods but they prefer a price discount to a bonus pack for vice foods. Prior research has shown that, all else being equal, consumers prefer bonus packs to price discounts. The authors propose that this preference does not hold for vice food, because consumers cannot generate good justifications for buying such food when a bonus pack is offered because this would mean consuming more of the vice. However, a price discount on a vice food can be justified because it acts as a guilt-mitigating mechanism. For virtue foods, the absence of both anticipated postconsumption guilt and the resultant need to justify leads consumers to prefer a bonus pack to a price discount. The authors demonstrate the proposed effect and test its underlying process across five experiments. (print), 1547-7193 (electronic) 1961. Price discount: control (M = 4.10)

Can fat taxes and package size restrictions stimulate healthy food choices?

“…

AbstractConsumers prefer bonus packs, as opposed to price discounts, for healthy foods, but they want a price discount rather than a bonus pack for indulgent foods (Mishra & Mishra, 2011).This study conceptually replicates and extends this finding to show that consumers are more responsive to changes in price than to changes in package size for indulgent food options, whereas they are more responsive to changes in package size than to changes in price for healthy food options.

…”

“…We extend research by Mishra and Mishra (2011), who study consumers' preferences for price discounts or bonus packs for indulgent and healthy options (see Table 1 for an overview of the studies). Consumers generally prefer a bonus pack to a price discount, because bonus packs offer gains, whereas price discounts represent reduced losses (Diamond & Sanyal, 1990).…”

“…Consumers prefer bonus packs, as opposed to price discounts, for healthy foods, but they want a price discount rather than a bonus pack for indulgent foods (Mishra & Mishra, 2011).…”

Can Bonus Packs Mislead Consumers? A Demonstration of How Behavioural Consumer Research Can Inform Unfair Commercial Practices Law on the Example of the ECJ’s Mars Judgement

“…This stream of literature has indicated a preference of consumers for bonus packs over price discounts for virtue products (Mishra and Mishra 2011) and for smaller-sized promotions (Diamond 1992). More relevant to the current investigation, consumers have been shown to have difficulties in processing numeric information such as percentages (Chen and Rao 2007), which leads them to neglect base values, and prefer bonus packs over economically equivalent price promotions (Chen et al 2012).…”

Consumer Ironic Consumption: Luxury Apparel Purchase Rebounds in a Dismal Economy

“…As luxury involves frivolous purchases of expensive clothing, jewelry and technological products, people sometimes link indulgent acts to negative outcomes (Dahl, Honea, & Manchanda, 2003); such acts are viewed as impulsive and wasteful and meet with social disapproval (Keinan & Kivetz, 2008). In contrast to luxury buying, righteous consumption is associated with virtues such as frugality and thriftiness, and it is perceived to provide long-term benefits (Mishra & Mishra, 2011). Virtuous behavior, such as frugality or thriftiness, is commonly practiced during expenditure cutbacks; this type of behavior is highly concentrated on restraining resource usage and possession acquisition (Lastovicka et al, 1999).…”