Empirical study of the "what is beautiful is good" cognitive bias: A study on consumer purchasing decisions

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Professor, Division of Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, University of Tabriz

2 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Management & Economics, Sharif University of Technology

10.34785/J018.2021.266

Abstract

For more than a decade, researchers of Neuromarketing in the field of decision-making neuroscience have been studying the limitations, cognitive biases, and stereotypes of consumers.
The purpose of this study was to examine the cognitive bias of "what is beautiful is good" on consumer’s purchasing decisions. The appearance of the product is one of the most important factors in the consumer's decision to purchase a product, however, functional information might lead to a breach of expectation in the purchase decision.
In order to investigate this phenomenon, 40 female undergraduate students of Tabriz University were selected by convenience sampling method. In this study, 140 wearable gadgets in four categories of beautiful products and standard products, and congruent and incongruent functional information were presented, using eevoke software, in order to investigate the purchase decisions of the participants.
Repeated measurement analysis shows that when congruent information is provided, participants have a faster response time to a purchase decision task. The interactive effect of product appearance and information was also significant.
The results of this study show that information processing can be as effective as the appearance of the product. These results complement previous and recent findings on “what is beautiful is good” cognitive bias and suggest that functional information is important in interacting with product appearance in the purchasing decision process.

Keywords

References

References
Bairisal, S., & Kumar, J. (2020). Response time differences in the aesthetic judgment of individuals on beautiful and ugly images. International Journal of Arts Humanities and Social Sciences Studies, 5 (11), 19–29.
Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The Impact of Physical Surroundings on Customers and Employees. Journal of Marketing, 56 (2), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Bloch, p.H,. Brunel, F.F,. &Todd, A. J. (2013). Journal of Consumer Research, Inc. Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (4), 551–565.
Bloch, P. H. (1995). Seeking the Ideal Form: Product Design and Consumer Response. Journal of Marketing, 59 (3), 16–29.
Bloch, P. H., Brunel, F. F., & Arnold, T. J. (2002). Individual differences in the centrality of visual product aesthetics: Concept and measurement. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(4), 551–565. https://doi.org/10.1086/346250
Bogacz, R. (2009). Optimal decision-making theories. Handbook of Reward and Decision Making, 11 (3), 373–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374620-7.00018-2
Bossaerts, P., & Murawski, C. (2015). From behavioural economics to neuroeconomics to decision neuroscience: The ascent of biology in research on human decision making. In Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 5, 37–42. Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.07.001
Chang, C. (2017). Methodological Issues in Advertising Research: Current Status, Shifts, and Trends. Journal of Advertising, 46 (1), 2–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2016.1274924
Chitturi, R., & Chitturi, P. (2016). Aesthetics versus Function : Assessing Relative Customer Preference. NMIMS Management Review, XXIX(May 2016), 11–22.
Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24 (3), 285–290. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033731
Eagjy, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. (1991). What Is Beautiful Is Good , But . . .: A Meta-Anatytic Review of Research on the Physical Attractiveness Stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110 (1), 109–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.110.1.109
Gajewski, P. D., Drizinsky, J., Zülch, J., & Falkenstein, M. (2016). ERP correlates of simulated purchase decisions. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 10 (360), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2016.00360
Gehring, W. J. (2002). The Medial Frontal Cortex and the Rapid Processing of Monetary Gains and Losses. Science, 22 (295), 2279–2282. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1066893
Glimcher, P. W., & Fehr, E. (2014). Neuroeconimics: Decision making and the brain. In Nihon seirigaku zasshi. Journal of the Physiological Society of Japan, 66 (11). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-416008-8.00032-2
Han, W., Wang, J., & Gao, S. (2016). Influence of aesthetics on consumer decision. 2016 13th International Conference on Service Systems and Service Management, ICSSSM  2016. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSSSM.2016.7538493
Hoegg, J. A., Alba, J. W., & Dahl, D. W. (2010a). The good, the bad, and the ugly: Influence of aesthetics on product feature judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(4), 419–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2010.07.002
Hoyer, W. D., & Stokburger-Sauer, N. E. (2012). The role of aesthetic taste in consumer behavior. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40 (1), 167–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0269-y
Isavi, H., & Nazari, M. (2020). Providing a Price Perception Framework for Different Consumers of Iranian Ethnicity. Consumer Behavior Studies Journal, 7 (2), 105-133. (in Persian)
Jacoby, J., & Morrin, M. (2015). Consumer Psychology. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edi, Vol. 4). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.22004-7
Landy, D., & Sigall, H. (1974). Beauty is talent: Task evaluation as a function of the performer’s physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29 (3), 299–304. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036018
Luan, J., Yao, Z., & Bai, Y. (2017). How Social Ties Influence Consumer: Evidence from Event-Related Potentials. PloS One, 12 (1), e0169508. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169508
Madzharov, A. V., & Block, L. G. (2010). Effects of product unit image on consumption of snack foods. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20 (4), 398–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2010.06.007
Moshagen, M., & Thielsch, M. T. (2010). Facets of visual aesthetics. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 68 (10), 689–709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2010.05.006
Ngo, D. C. L., Teo, L. S., & Byrne, J. G. (2003). Modelling interface aesthetics. Information Sciences, 152(3), 25–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-0255(02)00404-8
Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional Design - Why we love (or hate) everyday things. In Basic Books (Issue 1). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1537-4726.2004.133_10.x
Plassmann, H., Ramsøy, T. Z., & Milosavljevic, M. (2012). Branding the brain : A critical review and outlook. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22 (1), 18–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.11.010
Raghubir, P., & Greenleaf, E. a. (2006). Ratios in Proportion: What Should the Shape of the Package Be? Journal of Marketing, 70 (2), 95–107. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.70.2.95
Rangel, A., & Hare, T. (2010). Neural computations associated with goal-directed choice. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 20 (2), 262–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2010.03.001
Reimann, M., Schilke, O., & Thomas, J. S. (2010). Toward an understanding of industry commoditization: Its nature and role in evolving marketing competition. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27 (2), 188–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2009.10.001
Reimann, M., Zaichkowsky, J., Neuhaus, C., Bender, T., & Weber, B. (2010). Aesthetic package design: A behavioral, neural, and psychological investigation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20 (4), 431–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2010.06.009
Sanaee, A. (2021). Editor-in-Chief Lecture. Consumer Behavior Studies Journal, 8 (1). (in Persian)
Seva, R. R., Gosiaco, K. G. T., Santos, M. C. E. D., & Pangilinan, D. M. L. (2011). Product design enhancement using apparent usability and affective quality. Applied Ergonomics, 42 (3), 511–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2010.09.009
Solnais, C., Andreu-perez, J., Sánchez-fernández, J., & Andréu-abela, J. (2013). The contribution of neuroscience to consumer research: A conceptual framework and empirical review. Journal of Economic Psychology, 36, 68–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2013.02.011
Solomon, M. R. (2017). Consumer Behavior Buying, Having, and Being (8th ed). Pearson education, Inc.
Sonderegger, A., & Sauer, J. (2010). The influence of design aesthetics in usability testing: Effects on user performance and perceived usability. Applied Ergonomics, 41 (3), 403–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2009.09.002
Sundar, A., Cao, E. S., & Machleit, K. A. (2020). How product aesthetics cues efficacy beliefs of product performance. Psychology and Marketing, 37 (9), 1246–1262. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21355
Townsend, C., & Shu, S. B. (2010). When and how aesthetics influences financial decisions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20 (4), 452–458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2010.06.013
Tractinsky, N. (1997). Aesthetics and apparent usability: Empirically assessing cultural and methodological issues. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 115–122. https://doi.org/10.1145/258549.258626
Turner, W. F., Johnston, P., de Boer, K., Morawetz, C., & Bode, S. (2017). Multivariate pattern analysis of event-related potentials predicts the subjective relevance of everyday objects. Consciousness and Cognition, 55(8), 46–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2017.07.006
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185 (4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
Wang, Q., Meng, L., Liu, M., Wang, Q., & Ma, Q. (2016). How do social-based cues influence consumers’ online purchase decisions? An event-related potential study. Electronic Commerce Research, 16 (1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-015-9209-0
Wen Wan, E., Chen, R. P., & Jin, L. (2017). Judging a book by its cover? The effect of anthropomorphism on product attribute processing and consumer preference. Journal of Consumer Research, 43 (6), 1008–1030.
Yamamoto, M., & Lambert, D. R. (1994). The impact of product aesthetics on the evaluation of industrial products. The Journal of Product Innovation Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/0737-6782(94)90086-8
Zhao, M., Wang, J., & Han, W. (2015). The impact of emotional involvement on online service buying decisions. NeuroReport, 26 (17), 995–1002. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNR.0000000000000457
Zhao, M., Wang, J., Han, W., & To, C. (2015). The impact of emotional involvement on online service buying decisions: an event-related potentials perspective. NeuroReport, 2(17), 995–1002. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNR.0000000000000457
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Consumer Behavior Studies Journal
Volume 8, Issue 3
November 2021
Pages 17-32

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics