Rebecca W. Hamilton

Feature Fatigue: When Product Capabilities Become Too Much of a Good Thing

As technology advances, it becomes more feasible to load products with a large number of features, each of which individually might be perceived as useful. However, too many features can make a product overwhelming for consumers and difficult to use. Three studies examine how consumers balance their desires for capability and usability when they evaluate products and how these desires shift over time. Because consumers give more weight to capability and less weight to usability before use than after use, they tend to choose overly complex products that do not maximize their satisfaction when they use them, resulting in ”feature fatigue.” An analytical model based on these results provides additional insights into the feature fatigue effect. This model shows that choosing the number of features that maximizes initial choice results in the inclusion of too many features, potentially decreasing customer lifetime value. As the emphasis on future sales increases, the optimal number of features decreases. The results suggest that firms should consider having a larger number of more specialized products, each with a limited number of features, rather than loading all possible features into one product.

Is There a Substitute for Direct Experience? Comparing Consumers' Preferences after Direct and Indirect Product Experiences

We show that direct product experiences (e.g., product trials) and indirect product experiences (e.g., reading a product description) result in different levels of mental construal and product preferences. Study 1 demonstrates that increasing experiential contact with a product triggers more concrete mental construal and increases preferences for products that are easy to use relative to those that are more desirable but difficult to use. Studies 2 and 3 show that the effect of product experience can be attenuated by encouraging consumers to think concretely prior to product exposure and by asking consumers to choose products for others instead of themselves.

Why Do People Suggest What They Do Not Want? Using Context Effects to Influence Others' Choices

Previous research has demonstrated that peoples preferences for an alternative can be reliably influenced by the other alternatives with which it is considered. This article examines the role of context effects in interactive decision making. Three studies examine peoples intuitive abilities to influence others by leveraging context effects and their reactions when they believe others are manipulating the choice context to influence them. Experimental results show that people use context effects systematically when trying to influence others and, that under certain conditions, the perception of influence may enhance rather than decrease the effectiveness of this persuasion tactic. Copyright 2003 by the University of Chicago.

Confidence via Correction: The Effect of Judgment Correction on Consumer Confidence

At times, consumers are motivated to reduce the influence of a product recommendation on their judgments. Based on previous research, it is unclear whether this correction process will increase or decrease consumers’ confidence in their judgments. We find that source credibility moderates the effect of correction on confidence: correction decreases confidence when a product recommendation comes from a high credibility source but increases confidence when the same message comes from a low credibility source. As a result, correction increases the effectiveness of recommendations from low credibility sources on purchase intentions. Notably, this “confidence via correction�? effect is further moderated by elaboration, such that the effect is attenuated for high elaboration consumers. Our results have implications for understanding consumers’ reactions to persuasive messages and for both marketing practitioners and consumer protection agencies using correction cues to influence message persuasiveness.