Search results

Return policies are major risk-allaying cues for customers, yet they are a critical cost/lost-sales for retailers. Despite their importance in the retailing industry, few studies have examined the interplay of return policies with other cues that customers use to make a purchase decision. Toward this end, this study aims to investigate the interaction effects certain salient high-scope and low-scope cues, such as consumer ratings and brand image, and retailers’ return policies have on consumer purchase decisions.

Building on literature from signaling theory and cue scope literature (high-scope and low-scope cues), the authors develop a research model that hypothesizes the interrelationships between return policies, price discounts, customer product ratings and brand image. Three experimental studies investigate the potential interplay between return policies (lenient vs stringent), price discounts (low vs high), customer product ratings (low vs high) and brand image (high vs low) on quality certainty perceptions and purchase intentions. The mediating effect of quality certainty perceptions on the interplay of various factors (return policy, price promotions, consumer ratings and brand image) and customer purchase intentions is also investigated.

Results indicate that a lenient return policy will have a positive effect when consumers encounter high scope cues that signal undesirable aspects of the product (i.e. low consumer ratings, low brand image). In contrast, when high scope cues signal desirable aspects of the product (i.e. high consumer ratings, high brand image), it attenuates the effects of return policy. The findings suggest that quality certainty acts as a psychological process.

Service researchers should seek to examine the role of return policies in a more comprehensive manner.

Return policies are important cues for consumers while making purchase decision. Thus, retailers need to realize that these policies may need to be more dynamic or tiered, rather than one-size-fits-all.

This study provides a more comprehensive view of how consumers consider multiple cues simultaneously in decision-making. Literature has mainly examined the interactions between different high-scope and low-scope cues, but there has been limited research directed toward the interplay between multiple high-scope cues.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an empirical approach to the understanding of the potential interplay between influencer opinions and consumer-generated information on consumer decision-making. Given the growth of influencer marketing and the pervasive nature of consumer star-ratings, it becomes critical to understand how and why these information sources influence consumers’ shopping decisions.

Drawing from the literature on source credibility, this paper proposes that influencer opinion interacts with the influencer’s reach on influencer credibility, skepticism towards the product and purchase intentions. Boundary conditions of consumer-generated information are also tested.

Convergent results across three studies indicate that the effect of influencer opinion is contingent upon both valence of the opinion and reach of the influencer. Consumer-generated information (i.e. star-ratings and the volume of ratings) moderates the effect of influencer opinion on purchase intentions. These effects are mediated by the credibility of the influencer and skepticism towards the product.

Understanding the relative impact of influencer opinions in the presence of other consumer-generated information provides managers with a framework to effectively manage online communications.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper provides a theoretically grounded first look at the potential interplay between two extremely powerful factors, influencer opinion and consumer-generated information. This paper provides a better understanding of the psychological mechanism behind the intricate workings of consumer-generated information.

Food waste is a big problem where millions of pounds of produce are discarded every year because they are imperfect or unattractive. Despite the societal implications of selling unattractive produce, limited research has been directed toward understanding the effect of imperfect produce on consumers’ evaluations of the produce and retailer outcomes. This paper aims to investigate why consumers tend to discard imperfect produce and how retailer interventions (i.e. anthropomorphized signage and packaging) can alleviate these negative effects.

Three experiments were conducted to examine the postulations. Study 1 highlights the role of consumers’ embarrassment in the purchase decision of imperfect produce and retailer patronage intention. Studies 2 and 3 provide managerially relevant boundary conditions of anthropomorphic signage and opaque packaging.

Convergent results across three studies (n = 882) indicate that imperfect produce increases purchase embarrassment and reduces purchase intention and retailer patronage intention. Retailer interventions (i.e. anthropomorphic signage and opaque packaging) can allay this feeling of embarrassment and lead to an increased retailer patronage intention and higher service satisfaction.

This research provides guidance to retailers for effectively promoting imperfect produce.

Retailers’ actions can benefit the well-being of farmers, suppliers, customers and the overall environment.

This research adds to the literature on unattractive produce by identifying new moderators, namely, anthropomorphic signages and opaque packaging. The research also shows that purchase embarrassment is a key process mechanism.