Cognitive categorization of new hybrid products and implicit attitude formation: Empirical study of sensory stimulation
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/im.18(3).2022.18
-
Article InfoVolume 18 2022, Issue #3, pp. 207-217
- 397 Views
-
110 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
According to social psychology researchers, categorizing a new product may involve the formation of automatic judgments at the subconscious level. This study aimed to ascertain if attitudes might be formed unintentionally when categorizing a new hybrid product under the effect of associated sensory inputs. Data were collected using an explicit and implicit approach: an explicit categorization measure, an explicit attitude scale, and the “Single Category Implicit Association Test’’ (SC-IAT), from 280 Moroccan university students having a normal sense of smell and taste, under the effects of two types of sensory stimuli (smell and taste) and according to two learning conditions linked to two categories of existing products. The data were then computed and processed using the “Statistical Package for Social Sciences” and the “Inquisit Lab’’. The study’s findings revealed that the respondents were able to categorize the new product into one of the targeted categories (depending on the learning condition of each category) after exposure to sensory stimuli (olfactory and gustatory stimuli) related to this product and were also able to form an implicit and explicit attitude towards it. The occurrence of the categorization process and the formation of these two distinct types of attitudes can be explained by the olfactory and gustatory sensory stimulation during the experiment, which helped the participants recognize the basic domain of the new product and then transfer knowledge and affects to it.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M31, D13, D12
-
References58
-
Tables1
-
Figures0
-
- Table 1. Odorization procedure according to Gaillet-Torrent (2013)
-
- Ackermann, C. L., Teichert, T., & Truong, Y. (2018). ‘So, what is it? And do I like it?’ New product categorization and the formation of consumer implicit attitude. Journal of Marketing Management, 34(9-10), 796-818.
- Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition (314 p.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Anderson, J. R., & Bower, G. H. (1973). Human associative memory. V. H. Winston & Sons.
- Bargh, J. I. (2002). Losing Consciousness: Automatic Influences on Consumer Judgment, Behavior, and Motivation. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(2), 280-285.
- Brewer, M. B. (1988). A dual-process model of impression formation. In T. K. Srull & R. S. Wyer, Jr. (Eds.), A dual-process model of impression formation (pp. 1-36). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
- Bruner, J. S. (1957). On perceptual readiness. Psychological Review, 64(2), 123-152.
- Cardello, A. V. (1996). The Role of the Human Senses in Food Acceptance. In H. L. Meiselman & H. J. H. MacFie (Eds.), Food Choice, Acceptance and Consumption (pp. 1-82). London: Blackie Academic & Professional.
- De Luca, R., & Botelho, D. (2020). Olfactory priming on consumer categorization, recall, and choice. Psychology & Marketing, 37, 1101-1117.
- Dempsey, M. A., & Mitchell, A. A. (2010). The influence of implicit attitudes on choice when consumers are confronted with conflicting attribute information. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 614-625.
- Feiereisen, S., Wong, V., & Broderick, A. J. (2008). Analogies and mental simulations in learning for really new products: The role of visual attention. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25, 593-607.
- Feiereisen, S., Wong, V., & Broderick, A. J. (2013). Is a picture always worth a thousand words? The impact of presentation formats in consumers’ early evaluations of really new products (RNPs). Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30, 159-173.
- Fischer, P. M., Richards, J. W., Berman, E. J., & Krugman, D. M. (1989). Recall and eye-tracking study of adolescents viewing tobacco advertisements. Journal of the American Medical Association, 261, 84-89.
- Gaillet-Torrent, M. (2013). Quels apports des méthodologies issues de la psychologie cognitive pour comprendre le comportement alimentaire?: Impact d’un amorçage olfactif [What contributions of methodologies from cognitive psychology to understanding eating behavior?: Impact of olfactory priming] (Thèse de doctorat en Sciences de l’alimentation).
- Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 692-731.
- Gibbert, M., & Mazursky, D. (2009). How successful would a phone pillow be: Using dual-process theory to predict the success of hybrids involving dissimilar products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19, 652-660.
- Gill, T., & Dubé, L. (2007). What is a leather iron or a bird phone? Using conceptual combinations to generate and understand new product concepts. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17, 202-217.
- Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4-27.
- Gregan-Paxton, J., & Moreau, P. (2003). How do consumers transfer existing knowledge? A comparison of analogy and categorization effects. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13, 422-430.
- Gregan-Paxton, J., Hibbard, J. D., Brunel, F. F., & Azar, P. (2002). “So that’s what this is”: Examining the impact of analogy on consumers’ knowledge development for really new products. Psychology & Marketing, 19, 533-550.
- Gregan-Paxton, J., Hoeffler, S., & Zhao, M. (2005). When categorization is ambiguous: Factors that facilitate the use of a multiple category inference strategy. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15, 127-140.
- Gregg, A. P., Seibt, B., & Banaji, M. R. (2006). Easier done than undone: Asymmetry in the malleability of implicit preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 1-20.
- Grunert K. G. (2003). Purchase and consumption: the interdisciplinary nature of analyzing food choice. Food Quality and Preference, 14, 39-40.
- Hawkins, S. A., Hoch, S. J., & Meyers-Levy, J. (2001). Low-involvement learning: Repetition and coherence in familiarity and belief. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 11, 1-11.
- Heidenreich, S., Kraemer, T., & Handrich, M. (2016). Satisfied and unwilling: Exploring cognitive and situational resistance to innovations. Journal of Business Research, 69, 2440-2447.
- Ingarao, A. (2006). La théorie de la categorisation: un concept de psychologie cognitive en marketing [The theory of categorization: a concept of cognitive psychology in marketing]. Cahiers du Cermat, 19, 129-145.
- Jacquier, C., Bonthoux, F., Baciu, M., & Ruffieux, B. (2012). Improving the effectiveness of nutritional information policies: assessment of unconscious pleasure mechanisms involved in food-choice decisions. Nutrition Reviews, 70(2), 118-131.
- Kaeppler, K., & Mueller, F. (2013). Odor classification: a review of factors influencing perception-based odor arrangements. Chemical Senses, 38, 189-209.
- Karpinski, A., & Steinman, R. B. (2006). The single category implicit association test as a measure of implicit social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 16-32.
- Karpinski, A., & Steinman, R. B. (2008). The single category implicit association test (SCIAT) as a measure of implicit consumer attitudes. European Journal of Social Sciences, 7, 32-42.
- Kim, S., & Rehder, B. (2011). How prior knowledge affects selective attention during category learning: An eyetracking study. Memory & Cognition, 39, 649-665.
- Krishna, A., Lwin, M. O., & Morrin, M. (2010). Product Scent and Memory. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(1), 57-67.
- Kum, D., Bergkvist, L., Lee, Y. H., & Leong, S. M. (2012). Brand personality inference: The moderating role of product meaning. Journal of Marketing Management, 28, 1291-1304.
- Lajos, J., Katona, Z., Chattopadhyay, A., & Sarvary, M. (2008). CAM: A Spreading Activation Network Model of Subcategory Positioning when Categorization Uncertainty is High (INSEAD Business School Research Paper No. 2008/56/MKT/ISSRC).
- Lenglet, F. (2007). Comprendre le goût pour les aliments: l’impact modérateur des tendances exploratoires [Understanding taste for food: the moderating impact of exploratory trends]. Actes du 23e Congrès international de l’Association Française de Marketing.
- Lewin, M., & Morrin, M. (2012). Scenting movie theatre commercials: The impact of scent and pictures on brand evaluations and ad recall. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 264-272.
- Maison, D., Greenwald, A. G., & Bruin, R. H. (2004). Predictive Validity of the Implicit Association Test in Studies of Brands, Consumer Attitudes, and Behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14, 405-415.
- Mervis, C. B., & Rosch, E. (1981). Categorization of natural objects. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 89-115.
- Mitchell, V. W., & Boutani P. (1992). Consumers Risk Perceptions in the Breakfast Cereal Market. British Food Journal, 94(4), 17-26.
- Moreau, C. P., Lehmann, D. R., & Markman, A. B. (2001a). Entrenched knowledge structures and consumer response to new products. Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 14-29.
- Moreau, C. P., Markman, A. B., & Lehmann, D. R. (2001b). “What is it?” Categorization flexibility and consumers’ responses to really new products. Journal of Consumer Research, 27, 489-498.
- Morrin, M., & Ratneshwar, S. (2000). The Impact of Ambient Scent on Evaluation, Attention, and Memory for Familiar and Unfamiliar Brands. Journal of Business Research, 49(2), 157-165.
- Morrin, M., & Ratneshwar, S. (2003). Does it make sense to use scents to enhance brand memory? Journal of Marketing Research, 40(1), 10-25.
- Morrin, M., Krishna, A., & Lwin, M. O. (2011). Is Scent-Enhanced Memory Immune to Retroactive Interference? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(3), 354-361.
- Nevid, J. S., & McClelland, N. (2010). Measurement of implicit and explicit attitudes toward Barack Obama. Psychology & Marketing, 27, 989-1000.
- Pieters, R., Warlop, L., & Wedel, M. (2002). Breaking through the clutter: Benefits of advertisement originality and familiarity for brand attention and memory. Management Science, 48(6), 765-781.
- Pugliesi, A. (2021). Alimentation et perte de goût [Food and loss of taste]. L’Aide-Soignante, Elsevier, 35(223), 25-27. (In French).
- Quartz. (2013). The simple reason products fail: Consumers don’t understand what they do.
- Rajagopal, P., & Burnkrant, R. E. (2009). Consumer evaluations of hybrid products. Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 232-241.
- Ratliff, K. A., Swinkels, B. A. P., Klerx, K., & Nosek, B. A. (2012). Does one bad apple (juice) spoil the bunch? Implicit attitudes toward one product transfer to other products by the same brand. Psychology & Marketing, 29(8), 531-540.
- Rosa, J. A., Porac, J. F., Runser-Spanjol, J., & Saxon, M. S. (1999). Sociocognitive dynamics in a product market. Journal of Marketing, 63(4), 64-77.
- Schifferstein, H. N. J., & Block, S. T. (2002). The signal function of thematically (in)congruent ambient scents in a retail environment. Chemical Senses, 27, 539-549.
- Sirieix, L. (1999). La consommation alimentaire : problématiques, approches et voies de recherche. Recherche et Applications En Marketing, 14(3), 41-58. (In French).
- Srivastava, K., & Sharma, N. K. (2012). Consumer attitude toward brand-extension incongruity: The moderating role of need for cognition and need for change. Journal of Marketing Management, 28, 652-675.
- Sujan, M. (1985). Consumer knowledge: Effects on evaluation strategies mediating consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(1), 31-46.
- Thompson K., Haziris N., & Alekos, P. (1994). Attitudes and Food Choice Behaviour. British Food Journal, 96, 11, 9-13.
- Whitfield, M., & Jordan, C. H. (2009). Mutual influence of implicit and explicit attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 748-759.
- Yue, T., Fu, A., Xu, Y., & Huang, X. (2021). The rank of a value in the importance hierarchy of values affects its relationship to self-concept: a SC-IAT study. Current Psychology.
- Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35(2), 151-175.