ARTICLES

Guest 18/07/2023 Guest 18/07/2023

Can I Get The Uhhh…

Essie spaghetti strap.jpg — SPAGHETTI STRAP ANYONE?

A couple of days ago, I had sent my little (17 year old) sister to Boots to get our mum a birthday gift. I told her to get anything that she thought mum would like. A couple of hours later when I came home, she was sat on the sofa, gift-less. “Oseye, I have something to tell you,” she said. “I didn’t find anything because there was too much to choose from”.

If you think about how beauty stores are designed, there is in fact a lot of choice. Choice is more abundant than it has ever been. Later on that day we had settled on getting mum a nail polish. She likes pink, but which shade of pink do we decide to get? Boatloads of Love? Stretch Your Wings? Spring Awakening? Sew Gifted? Spaghetti Strap? Eternal Optimist? It reminds me of ordering at a restaurant… or even dating for that matter… “Hello, can I get the uhhh…”

I’d like to talk about the psychology of choice and what our endless options mean for us.

What motivates consumers to buy?

According to Chernev et al. (2015), there are four key factors that motivate consumers to purchase goods: 1) When people want to make a quick and simple choice; 2) when the product is complex; 3) when it’s difficult to compare alternatives; and 4) when consumers don’t have preferences.

In a health and beauty store (Boots) | If I make this picture black and white, this may explain why it’s so hard to choose a shade of nail polish.

Excessive choice makes us feel overwhelmed.

Excessive choice is termed choice overload. The choice overload hypothesis states that an increase in the number of options we have to choose from may lead to negative consequences, i.e., a decrease in motivation to make a choice, and a decrease in satisfaction when finally choosing an option (Scheibehenne et al., 2010). Iyengar and Lepper (2000) carried out a study using an assortment of jams. In a food market, the researchers set up a table displaying 24 attractive and high quality jams.

After that, the researchers only placed 6 of the jams on display, limiting the choice of shoppers. Try and guess what display experienced more purchases. The researchers found that although shoppers were more interested in looking around the 24 jams, they were more likely to make a purchase from the display of 6 jams (up to ten times more). This indicates that shoppers are more likely to make a purchase if they have less to choose from (Iyengar & Lepper, 2000). What is more, the larger display of jams led to lower customer satisfaction than the smaller display. What’s your favourite jam flavour? Mine is strawberry.

Shoppers are more likely to make a purchase if they have less to choose from.

The rejection mindset.

Endless choice can also have a negative impact on online dating. According to Pronk and Denissen (2020), the more dating profiles people see, the more likely they are to reject them.

Brands have a large impact.

Misuraca et al. (2019) found that choice overload only appears in the absence of brand names, and disappears when all options present are brand names. Participants expressed more positive feelings such as higher satisfaction and higher enjoyment towards familiar brands, rather than unfamiliar brands, or no brand. Familiar brands were also associated with lower perceived task difficulty and decreased regret. This research implies that consumers prefer branded items when making a choice.

Later on, Misuraca et al. (2021) wanted to see if these results were similar among adolescents. The researchers found that choice overload disappeared among adolescents when facing either a large or a small amount of brand name options. However, when no brand names were present, adolescents reported choice overload (greater dissatisfaction and regret with larger assortments). Misuraca and colleagues suggest that current recommendations for displaying a smaller assortment of choice may not be as effective as it is thought to be.

Choice deprivation vs. overload.

Choice deprivation refers to when we have less choice than desired, and is the opposite to choice overload. Reutskaja et al. (2022) studied choice deprivation and overload across different countries; collectivistic (prioritises groups) and individualistic (prioritises individuals). The researchers found that choice deprivation was more likely to be experienced in collectivistic countries such as Brazil and India, and less so in Japan, China, and Russia. The USA, an individualistic country, was however associated with choice overload more than choice deprivation.

The findings of this study indicate that choice deprivation has a larger negative impact than choice overload on choice satisfaction. Participants reported that they preferred having an ideal amount of choice; not too much, and not too little, therefore the researchers suggest that marketers should focus on displaying the right amount of choice to consumers rather than too much (e.g., websites should show a set amount of products and consumers can be given the option to see less or more if they want). What is more, the researchers state that there should be great efforts made on lessening deprivation for those who live in scarcity.

Participants reported that they preferred having an ideal amount of choice; not too much, and not too little.

The eyes tell no lies.

It is likely that in the future, that more and more studies concerning choice may implement eye-tracking technology. Eye-tracking is a common procedure in marketing and retail research because it can measure a consumer’s attention. Eye-tracking technology can tell researchers where a participant’s attention is drawn to, how long they look at objects for, and how many times they look at an object (Bialkova et al., 2020). What is more, eye –tracking technology can be used in both the lab and in the field (i.e., stores, supermarkets, desktops, mobile phones, etc.), and it is non-invasive.

Fast fashion choice overload.

Fast fashion stores offer a lot of clothing. A lot. Due to this, Hwang et al. (2020) propose that there needs to be research carried out on what factors can decrease choice overload in fast fashion stores. Although consumers enjoy having options to explore, efforts should be made towards improving store layouts to help consumers navigate themselves around the abundance of products, and in order for consumers to not have to think too hard.

We ended up taking mum shopping on her birthday.

Bialkova, S., Grunert, K.G., & van Trijp, H.C. (2020). From desktop to supermarket shelf: Eye-tracking exploration on consumer attention and choice. Food Quality and Preference, 81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.103839

Chernev, A., Böckenholt, U., & Goodman, J. K. (2015). Choice overload: A conceptual review and meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25, 333-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2014.08.002

Hwang, J., Tung, T. & Cho, H. (2020). Too Many Choices? Consumer Behavior in Fast Fashion Stores. International Textile and Apparel Association Annual Conference Proceedings, 77(1). https://doi.org/10.31274/itaa.12129

Iyengar, S. S. & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 995-1006. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.995

Misuraca, R., Ceresia, F., Teuscher, U., & Faraci, P. (2019). The Role of the Brand on Choice Overload. Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, 18(1), 57-76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-019-00210-7

Misuraca, R., Ceresia, F., Nixon, A.E., & Scaffidi Abbate, C. (2021). "When is more really more? The effect of brands on choice overload in adolescents". Journal of Consumer Marketing, 38(2), 168-177. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-08-2020-4021

Pronk, T. M. & Denissen, J. J. A. (2020). A Rejection Mind-Set: Choice Overload in Online Dating. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(3), 388-396. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619866189

Reutskaja, E., Cheek, N. N., Iyengar, S., & Schwartz, B. (2022). Choice Deprivation, Choice Overload, and Satisfaction with Choices Across Six Nations. Journal of International Marketing, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069031X211073821

Scheibehenne, B., Greifeneder, R., & Todd, P. M. (2010). Can There Ever Be Too Many Options? A Meta-Analytic Review of Choice Overload. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 409-425, https://doi.org/10.1086/651235

Guest 08/06/2023 Guest 08/06/2023

Have You Seen A Plus-Size Mannequin Before?

The shop window can be seen as a “microcosm of consumer culture that reflects it’s changing ideals and also how those changes might affect the desires of the consumer” (Engdahl & Gelang, 2019). Behind these shop windows we can usually find mannequins which are more than just a block of moulded fibre glass and plastic.

Whilst wandering through a department store, I happened to come across a not so typical male mannequin. “Is that a plus-size male mannequin?” I gasped under my breath to my cousin. (Yes, we all get excited over different things). The thing is, I had never seen a plus-size male mannequin in person although I have an active interest in body image research as a third year Psychology student. It was a big deal to me because it’s a sign of progression and inclusion in a very promising, yet under-delivering, fashion industry.

Plus-size is a term predominantly used in ‘the West’ (North America and Europe) and typically refers to a size of clothing designed for people who are larger than average (according to the Cambridge Dictionary as of mid-2022). There is generally a lack of consensus on the definition of plus-size and also what size range plus-size applies to. Presently, plus-size research has mainly focused on women, whether it be women’s experiences of being plus-size or on women’s plus-size bodies in the media. Despite this positive progress, many consumers, models, and supporters of body positivity question why similar research concerning plus-size men hasn’t gained traction as of yet when plus-size men certainly exist (Thompson & McKinney, 2020). Many of those who regard themselves as ‘plus-size’ feel rather neglected by clothing retailers in terms of genuine representation and accessibility to quality clothing.

Back to the topic of mannequins, after conducting a study on the size of mannequins used in high street fashion retailers in the UK, Robinson and Aveyard (2017) highlighted that on average, female mannequins were underweight, potentially promoting unrealistic body ideals. In comparison, a number of male mannequins appeared to be unrealistically muscular.

What is more, mannequin research also suggests that female mannequins have negative consequences for both male and female consumers low in appearance self-esteem (Argo & Dahl, 2018). Consumers who are lower in appearance self-esteem evaluate products displayed by mannequins more negatively compared to those with higher appearance self-esteem. If a consumer cannot reach the unattainable beauty standard of a mannequin, why bother wearing what it’s wearing too?

There is one reason why plus-size mannequins aren’t mainstream – and it may be due to stigma towards plus-size and obese models. According to research by Aagerup (2022), individuals’ implicit associations towards obese models do not reflect the positive attitudes that they openly express. In other words, people may say, “Yeah, I’m okay with plus-size models, love ‘em”, but it may not be reflective of how they really feel.

Recently, research has shown that the use of models with diverse body sizes in fashion advertising can have a positive effect on brand attitude (Joo & Wu, 2021). That being the case, Aagerup (2022) posits that brands only use (a handful of) untraditional models to not only project an inclusive and relatable image, but to also reduce the likelihood of criticism from consumers and body positivity activists.

Aagerup, U. (2022). Men’s and women’s implicit negativity towards obese fashion models. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 13(3), 273-288. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2021.1977164

Argo, J. J. & Dahl, D. W. (2018). Standards of Beauty: The Impact of Mannequins in the Retail Context. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(5), 974-990. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucx072

Engdahl, E. & Gelang, M. (2019). The changing ethos and personae of shop-window mannequins within consumer culture: Expressions of gendered embodiment. Journal of Consumer Culture, 19(1), 21-46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540516668228

Joo, B. R., & Wu, J. (2021). The impact of inclusive fashion advertising with plus-size models on female consumers: The mediating role of brand warmth. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 12(3), 260-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2021.1905021

Robinson, E. & Aveyard, P. (2017). Emaciated mannequins: a study of mannequin body size in high street fashion stores. Journal of Eating Disorders, 5, (13). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40337-017-0142-6

Thompson, M. L. & McKinney, E. C. (2020). “The Men’s Plus Size Apparel Market: Bigger, but Not Better”. International Textile and Apparel Association Annual Conference Proceedings, 77(1). https://doi.org/10.31274/itaa.12036