1 / 26

Effects of Phonetic Symbolism and Auditory Price Encoding on Comparative Price Perceptions

Effects of Phonetic Symbolism and Auditory Price Encoding on Comparative Price Perceptions. Keith Coulter Clark University. Dehaene’s (1992) Triple Code Model. Numbers can be mentally represented and encoded in three different forms: Visual (Arabic) code – based on written form (e.g., 72)

koen
Download Presentation

Effects of Phonetic Symbolism and Auditory Price Encoding on Comparative Price Perceptions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Effects of Phonetic Symbolism and Auditory Price Encoding on Comparative Price Perceptions Keith Coulter Clark University

  2. Dehaene’s (1992) Triple Code Model • Numbers can be mentally represented and encoded in three different forms: • Visual (Arabic) code – based on written form (e.g., 72) • Auditory (verbal) code – numbers represented by a sequence of phonemes (e.g., “seventy” and “two”) • Analog (magnitude) code – judgments of relative “size,” arrayed in parallel format along L-R oriented mental number line

  3. Dehaene’s (1992) Triple Code Model • Verbal, visual, and analog representations are neurologically connected (through corpus callosum)(Noel 2001) • Both phonological and analog magnitude representations will be evoked when consumers are exposed to comparative price advertisements ** • Phonological representations will affect relative analog encoding (Vanhuele, Laurent, and Dreze 2006)…. How??

  4. Psycholinguistics • Phonetic (“sound”) symbolism – ability of particular phonemes to convey information • Vowels (front/back: refers to position of tongue) • Consonants [fricatives (e.g., s,f,v,z) vs. stops (e.g., p,k,t,b,g,d,c) • Distinctions are related to a variety of spatial dimensions! • Back vowel/stops – large size • Front vowel/fricatives – small size • Evolutionary result of using resonant cavity as a cue to body size (Fitch 1994; 1997)

  5. TABLE 1 Note: English numbers four, five, and nine and Chinese number lyo (6) do not fall into listed categories and are not included in table.

  6. TABLE 2 Note: English numbers one, three, and nine, and Chinese numbers yee (1), uhr (2), woo (5), lyo (6), chee (7), and jyo (9) do not fall into listed categories and are not included in table. Small/Large Summary (Based on both Vowels and Consonants) EnglishChinese Small: 3, 6, 8, 7 Small: 1,7 Large: 2, 1 Large: 2, 5, 8, 9

  7. Hypotheses: Regular and Sale Prices • Sale-price phonological codes associated with perceptions of “smallness” (“largeness”) should increase (decrease) the likelihood that sale prices are perceived as small in comparison to regular prices, thereby increasing (decreasing) the magnitude of the perceived discount

  8. Experiment 1 • Stimuli: 4 comparative regular/sale price (ice cream scoop) ads • Constant sale-price phonological length • N= 201 • Experiment: 2 (rehearsal/non-rehearsal)** x 4 (sale price: $7.66, $7.22, $2.33, $2.22) • Procedure: view target/non-target ads; distraction task; complete questionnaire

  9. TABLE 3 E1 Manipulations (English Only) Product = ice cream scoop Discount/Value Hypotheses: A>B; C > D

  10. Measures • APD: (perceived – actual)/actual % discount • Value – 2-items; 7-point scales • Purchase likelihood – 2-items; 7-point scales • Attention – 2-items; 7-point scales • Recall

  11. Results: APD • Price combination x phonological rehearsal interaction [F(3,193)= 12.25, p<.001] • No rehearsal (means reflect accuracy): • $10-$7.22 M= -.02 • $10-$7.66 M= +.01 • $3-$2.33 M= +.02 • $3-$2.22 M= -.04

  12. Results: APD • Price combination x phonological rehearsal interaction [F(3,193)= 12.25, p<.001] • Phonological rehearsal (means reflect inaccuracy): • $10-$7.22 M= -.09 • $10-$7.66 M= +.30 (discount reinforced) • $3-$2.33 M= +.28 (discount reinforced) • $3-$2.22 M= -.10

  13. Results • Price combination x phonological rehearsal interaction effects • [F(3,193)= 7.12, p=.007] value • [F(3,193)= 6.03, p=.012] purchase likelihood • Recall/attention/involvement non-significant in predicting non-adjusted discount perceptions

  14. Limitations • Non-conscious processing precludes definitive manipulation check • Mere sounds of the words themselves or extraneous factors associated with the sale price numbers (e.g., size, appearance, representativeness) could have caused effects

  15. Experiment 2 • Phonological suppression utilized to impede auditory price encoding (Dehaene 1992; Lee and Kang 2002) • Hypothesis: non-verbal rehearsal of alternate (attribute-related) phonological phrase will cause participants to suppress phonological codes, while still encoding analog magnitude representations

  16. Experiment 2 • Stimuli: 2 comparative (steak knife) ads • N= 171 • Experiment: 4 (suppression: none, neutral, fricative, stop) x 2 (sale price: $6.66, $6.22) • “silver serrated edges” • “cuts cooking time” • “easy grip handle” • Procedure: view target/non-target ads; distraction task; complete questionnaire

  17. TABLE 4 E2 Manipulations (English Only) Product = steak knife Discount/Value Hypotheses: A>B (no suppression); A=B (suppression)

  18. Results • APD: Price combination x suppression interaction [F(3,163)= 3.99, p<.01] • Rehearsal • Front vowel/fricative M= +.07 • Back vowel/stop M= -.01 • Suppression • No significant differences for any of the 3 types of suppression • Value: price combination x suppression interaction [F(3,163)= 6.23, p<.001]

  19. Limitation • Findings could be driven by non-phonetic characteristics of the chosen number combinations • These effects became more apparent when participants rehearsed price-related information, or… • Were suppressed when participants recited non-attribute related information

  20. Experiment 3 • Again examine effects of price-related vs. non-price-related phonetic rehearsal on price discount perceptions • Prices are examined across English vs. Chinese students • Sale prices are characterized as front vowel/fricatives in one language but back vowel/stops in the other

  21. TABLE 5 E3 English/Chinese Manipulations Product = steak knife Discount Hypotheses: No Suppression (rehearsal occurs in native language) (A) Sale price $7.88 - English > Chinese (B) Sale price $7.01 - Chinese > English Suppression (rehearsal occurs in English) (A) Sale price $7.88 - English = Chinese (B) Sale price $7.01 - Chinese = English

  22. Experiment 3 • Stimuli: 2 comparative (steak knife) ads • N= 160 • Experiment: 2 (rehearsal: price-related/non-price-related phonemes) x 2 (price combination: $12-$7.88, $9.50-$7.01) x 2 (native language: English/Chinese) • “easy grip handle” • Procedure: view target/non-target ads; distraction task; complete questionnaire

  23. Results • APD: prices x rehearsal-type x language interaction [F(1,152)= 100.82, p<.001] • Sale price $7.88 and price-rehearsal in native language: • English overestimate discount (M= +.03) • Chinese underestimate discount (M= -.11) • (no effects when neutral phrase was rehearsed) • Sale price $7.01 and price-rehearsal in native language • English underestimate discount (M= -.15) • Chinese overestimate discount (M= +.14) • (no effects when neutral phrase was rehearsed) • Value: similar 3-way interaction [F(1,152)=38.44, p<.001]

  24. Limitations • Differences in processing numbers across English/Chinese languages? • Random assignment of subjects • Bilinguals?

  25. Summary • Phonemes associated with price names may impact numerical magnitude and value perceptions • Non-relevant, non-price-related phonemes do not appear to generate the same effect • The effect may be more pronounced if non-exact analog magnitude representations (i.e., involving relative judgments) are encoded

  26. Limitations and Future Research • Effects may not transfer to low-involvement contexts • Serial price layout does not facilitate graphic solution of relative discount “computation;” thus prices may be more likely to be encoded phonologically than visually • Can repetitive phonemes involve other than cents digits?

More Related