Current issue
Archive
About the Journal
About
Editorial Office
Scientific Board
Abstract & Indexing
Contact
Reviewers list
Editorial Policies
Authorship & COI
Ethical principles
Crossmark
Principles of Transparent Checklist
Open access
Reviewing procedure
Instruction for Authors
Guidelines for Authors
Manuscript Types
Manuscript structure
How to submit
SCIENCE ARTICLE
Does attribute and goal framing affect the willingness to pay for consumption goods in realistic shopping settings?
1
, Poland
Submission date: 2025-01-29
Final revision date: 2025-04-26
Acceptance date: 2025-06-04
Online publication date: 2025-06-26
Publication date: 2025-06-26
Corresponding author
Management 2025;(1):698-718
KEYWORDS
JEL CLASSIFICATION CODES
C93
D91
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Research background and purpose:The aim of this study is to examine the influence of attribute and goal framing on the valuation of consumption goods in realistic (out-of-lab) shopping settings.
Design/methodology/approachThe study employs experimental economic methods, conducting four field experiments with a total of 1602 shopping center customers as participants. In each experiment, willingness to pay (WTP) for consumer products was measured, while framing conditions (positive vs. negative) were manipulated.
Findings:Although the experiments involved two different types of products (durable and fast-moving) and two different valuation procedures (hypothetical and real-payment), their results were remarkably consistent: neither attribute framing nor goal framing had an impact on WTP for the presented products.
Value added and limitations:To the best of the author’s knowledge, this study is the first to investigate the impact of attribute and goal framing on WTP using field experiment data. In light of both this study and the existing literature, it can be concluded that the framing effect may be more likely to appear in assessment tasks than in the context of eliciting consumer WTP for private goods.
REFERENCES (53)
1.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
2.
Ajzen, I., Brown, T.C., & Carvajal, F. (2004). Explaining the discrepancy between intentions and actions: The case of hypothetical bias in contingent valuation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(9), 1108-21.
3.
Bohm, P., Lindén, J., & Sonnegård, J. (1997). Eliciting Reservation Prices: Becker–DeGroot–Marschak Mechanisms vs. Markets. The Economic Journal, 107(443), 1079–1089.
4.
Braun, K. A., Gaeth, G. J., Levin, I. P. (1997). Framing effects with differential impact: The role of attribute salience. Advances in Consumer Research, 24, 405-411.
5.
Brzozowicz, M. (2019). Hypothetical bias and framing effect in the valuation of private consumer goods. Central European Economic Journal, 5(52), 260-269.
6.
Buda, R., & Zhang, Y. (2000). Consumer product evaluation: the interactive effect of message framing, presentation order, and source credibility. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 9(4), 229-242. https://doi.org/10.1108/106104....
7.
Burböck, B., Kubli, V., Maček, A., & Bobek, V. (2019). Effects of different types of framing in advertising messages on human decision behaviour. International Journal of Diplomacy and Economy, 5(1), 27-41.
8.
Carson, R. T., Flores, N. E., & Meade, N. F. (2001). Contingent valuation: controversies and evidence. Environmental and Resource Economics, 19(2), 173-210.
9.
Dolgopolova, I., Li, B., Pirhonen, H., & Roosen, J. (2021). The effect of attribute framing on consumers’ attitudes and intentions toward food: A Meta-analysis. Bio-Based and Applied Economics, 10(4), 253-264.
10.
Donovan, R. J., & Jalleh, G. (1999). Positively versus negatively framed product attributes: The influence of involvement. Psychology & Marketing, 16(7), 613-630.
11.
Foster, H., & Burrows, J. (2017). Hypothetical bias: a new meta-analysis. In D. McFadden & K. Train (Eds.), Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods: A Comprehensive Critique (pp. 270–91). Edward Elgar Publishing.
12.
Gamliel, E., & Herstein, R. (2007). The effect of framing on willingness to buy private brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 24(6), 334-339. https://doi.org/10.1108/073637....
13.
Gamliel, E., & Herstein, R. (2012). Effects of message framing and involvement on price deal effectiveness. European Journal of Marketing, 46(9), 1215-1232. https://doi.org/10.1108/030905....
14.
Ganzach, Y., & Karsahi, N. (1995). Message framing and buying behavior: A field experiment. Journal Business Research, 32, 11–17.
15.
Gifford, K., & Bernard, J. C. (2006). Influencing consumer purchase likelihood of organic food. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(2), 155-163.
16.
Hardisty, D. J., Johnson, E. J., Weber, E. U. (2010). A dirty word or a dirty world? Attribute framing,political affiliation, and query theory. Psychological Science, 21(1), 86−92.
17.
Harrison, G.,W., List, J.A. (2004). Field experiments. Journal of Economic Literature, 42(4), 1009-55.
18.
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280-1300.
19.
Hoehn, J., & Randall, A. (1987). Too Many Proposals Pass the Benefit Cost Test. American Economic Review, 79, 544-551.Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
20.
Hardisty, D. J., Johnson, E. J., Weber, E. U. (2010). A dirty word or a dirty world? Attribute framing, political affiliation, and query theory. Psychological Science, 21(1), 86−92.
21.
Hoehn, J., & Randall, A. (1987). Too Many Proposals Pass the Benefit Cost Test. American Economic Review, 79, 544-551.
22.
Howard, K., & Salkeld, G. (2009). Does attribute framing in discrete choice experiments influence willingness to pay? Results from a discrete choice experiment in screening for colorectal cancer. Value in Health, 12(2), 354-363.
23.
Huizenga, H. M., Zadelaar, J. N., Jansen, B. R. J., Olthof, M. C., Steingroever, H., Dekkers, L. M. S., van Duijvenvoorde, A. C. K., Figner, B., & Agelink van Rentergem, J. (2023). Formal models of differential framing effects in decision making under risk. Decision, 10(3), 197–234. https://doi.org/10.1037/dec000....
24.
Jedidi, K., & Jagpal, S. (2009). Willingness to pay: measurement and managerial implications. In V.R. Rao (Ed.). Handbook of pricing research in marketing (pp. 37-60). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/978184....
25.
Kagel, J. (1995). Auctions: A Survey of Experimental Research. In J. Kagel & A. E. Roth (Eds.). Handbook of Experimental Economics (pp. 501–585). Princeton University Press.
26.
Kahneman, D., & Ritov, I. (1994). Determinants of Stated Willingness to Pay for Public Goods: A Study in the Headline Method, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 9, 5-38.
27.
Kreiner, H., & Gamliel, E. (2018). The role of attention in attribute framing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 31(3), 392-401.
28.
Kahneman, D., Ritov, I. & Schkade, D. (1999). Economic Preference or Attitude Expression?: An Analysis of Dollar Responses to Public Issues. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19(1-3), 203-36.
29.
Kim, J., Kim, J. E., & Marshall, R. (2014). Search for the underlying mechanism of framing effects in multi-alternative and multi-attribute decision situations. Journal of Business Research, 67(3), 378-385.
30.
Kühberger, A. (2023). A systematic review of risky-choice framing effects. EXCLI Journal, 22, 1012–1031.
31.
Levin, I. P., & Gaeth, G. J. (1988). How consumers are affected by the framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(3), 374-378.
32.
Levin, I. P., Gaeth, G. J., Schreiber, J., & Lauriola, M. (2002). A new look at framing effects: Distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88(1), 411-429.
33.
Levin, I.P., Schneider, S.L., Gaeth, G.J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76, 149−218.
34.
Liu, D., Juanchich, M., & Sirota, M. (2020). Focus to an attribute with verbal or numerical quantifiers affects the attribute framing effect. Acta Psychologica, 208, 103088.
35.
Majer, J. M., Zhang, K., Zhang, H., Höhne, B. P., & Trötschel, R. (2022). Give and take frames in shared-resource negotiations. Journal of Economic Psychology, 90, 102492.
36.
Marteau, T. M. (1989). Framing of information: Its influence upon decisions of doctors and patients. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28(1), 89-94.
37.
Meyerowitz, B. E., & Chaiken, S. (1987). The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 500-510.
38.
Nabi, R. L., Walter, N., Oshidary, N., Endacott, C. G., Love-Nichols, J., Lew, Z. J., & Aune, A. (2020). Can emotions capture the elusive gain-loss framing effect? A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 47(8), 1107-1130.
39.
Okada, E. M., & Mais, E. L. (2010). Framing the “Green” alternative for environmentally conscious consumers. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 1(2), 222-234. https://doi.org/10.1108/204080....
40.
Paese, P.W. (1995). Effect of framing on actual time allocation decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 61, 67–76.
41.
Piñon, A., & Gambara, H. (2005). A meta-analytic review of framing effect: Risky, attribute, and goal framing. Psicothema, 17, 325−331.
42.
Robberson, M. R., & Rogers, R. W. (1988). Beyond fear appeals: Negative and positive appeals to health and self-esteem. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 277–287.
43.
Ryan, A. M., & Spash, C. L. (2011). Is WTP an attitudinal measure? Empirical analysis of the psychological explanation for contingent values. Journal of Economic Psychology, 32(5), 674-687.
44.
Saad, G., & Gill, T. (2014). The framing effect when evaluating prospective mates: An adaptationist perspective. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35(3), 184-192.
45.
Sheth, J.N., Newman, B.I., & Gross, B.L. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22, 159–170.
46.
Smith, V. K. (1992). Arbitrary Values, Good Causes, and Premature Verdicts. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 22, 71-89.
47.
Tu, J., Kao, T., & Tu, Y. (2013). Influences of framing effect and green message on advertising effect. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 41(7), 1083-1098. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.20....
48.
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453−458.
49.
Wallach, K., Hamilton, R., & Ward, M. (2019). This Paper is Not For Everyone: Message Framing and Perceived Preferences. Advances in Consumer Research, 47, 896-897.
50.
Wertenbroch, K., & Skiera, B. (2002). Measuring consumers’ willingness to pay at the point of purchase. Journal of Marketing Research, 39, 228-241.
51.
Wu, C-S. and Cheng, F-F. (2011) ‘The joint effect of framing and anchoring on internet buyers’ decision-making’. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 10(3), 358–368.
52.
Yang, Y., Solgaard, H. S., & Ren, J. (2018). Does positive framing matter? An investigation of how framing affects consumers’ willingness to buy green electricity in Denmark. Energy Research & Social Science, 46, 40-47.
53.
Yoon, S., Fong, N. M., & Dimoka, A. (2019). The robustness of anchoring effects on preferential judgments. Judgment & Decision Making, 14(4), 470–487. https://doi.org/10.1017/S19302....
| eISSN: | 2299-193X |
| ISSN: | 1429-9321 (1997-2019) |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
