Cited By
View all- Yuan JPeng XLiu YWang Q(2024)“Don’t Look at Me!”: The Role of Avatars’ Presentation Style and Gaze Direction in Social Chatbot DesignComputers in Human Behavior10.1016/j.chb.2024.108501(108501)Online publication date: Nov-2024
The Illusion of Increased Customization: Framing Choices as a Creative Process Increases Perceived Customization
Article No.: 495, Pages 1 - 12
Abstract
People are increasingly able to receive customized options. Despite this abundance of options, people may not view products as customized to their wants and needs. Across five experiments, we provide evidence for a possible solution. We find evidence for the Illusion of increased customization: Framing choices as a creative process increases a chosen option’s perceived customization. Even with a constant choice set, choosing by (creative) attributes rather than choosing from all available options produces the Illusion of increased customization. The Illusion of increased customization arises in part because people feel a greater sense of co-creation when choosing via a seemingly creative process. Consequently, the Illusion of increased customization extends to choices that express preferences (e.g., liking blue over red) but is significantly diminished with choices that describe objective needs (e.g., needing a small versus large T-shirt). Additionally, heightened perceived customization from the Illusion of increased customization results in greater willingness-to-pay for the chosen option.
Supplemental Material
- Download
- 81.64 MB
- Transcript
References
[1]
S Sinem Atakan, Richard P Bagozzi, and Carolyn Yoon. 2014. Consumer participation in the design and realization stages of production: How self-production shapes consumer evaluations and relationships to products. International journal of research in marketing 31, 4 (2014), 395–408.
[2]
Kristoffer Bergram, Marija Djokovic, Valéry Bezençon, and Adrian Holzer. 2022. The digital landscape of nudging: A systematic literature review of empirical research on digital nudges. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–16.
[3]
James R Bettman, Mary Frances Luce, and John W Payne. 1998. Constructive consumer choice processes. Journal of consumer research 25, 3 (1998), 187–217.
[4]
Lyle Brenner, Yuval Rottenstreich, and Sanjay Sood. 1999. Comparison, grouping, and preference. Psychological Science 10, 3 (1999), 225–229.
[5]
Eva C Buechel and Chris Janiszewski. 2014. A lot of work or a work of art: How the structure of a customized assembly task determines the utility derived from assembly effort. Journal of Consumer Research 40, 5 (2014), 960–972.
[6]
Kevin D Carlson and Andrew O Herdman. 2012. Understanding the impact of convergent validity on research results. Organizational Research Methods 15, 1 (2012), 17–32.
[7]
Darren W Dahl and C Page Moreau. 2007. Thinking inside the box: Why consumers enjoy constrained creative experiences. Journal of Marketing Research 44, 3 (2007), 357–369.
[8]
Benedict GC Dellaert and Stefan Stremersch. 2005. Marketing mass-customized products: Striking a balance between utility and complexity. Journal of marketing research 42, 2 (2005), 219–227.
[9]
LLP Deloitte. 2015. The Deloitte Consumer Review Made-to-Order: The rise of Mass Personalization.
[10]
Simone Dohle, Sina Rall, and Michael Siegrist. 2014. I cooked it myself: Preparing food increases liking and consumption. Food Quality and Preference 33 (2014), 14–16.
[11]
Nikolaus Franke, Peter Keinz, and Christoph J Steger. 2009. Testing the value of customization: when do customers really prefer products tailored to their preferences?Journal of marketing 73, 5 (2009), 103–121.
[12]
Nikolaus Franke and Martin Schreier. 2010. Why customers value self-designed products: The importance of process effort and enjoyment. Journal of product innovation management 27, 7 (2010), 1020–1031.
[13]
Nikolaus Franke, Martin Schreier, and Ulrike Kaiser. 2010. The “I designed it myself” effect in mass customization. Management science 56, 1 (2010), 125–140.
[14]
Noah J Goldstein, Robert B Cialdini, and Vladas Griskevicius. 2008. A room with a viewpoint: Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of consumer Research 35, 3 (2008), 472–482.
[15]
Liat Hadar and Sanjay Sood. 2014. When knowledge is demotivating: subjective knowledge and choice overload. Psychological science 25, 9 (2014), 1739–1747.
[16]
Eric B Hekler, Predrag Klasnja, Jon E Froehlich, and Matthew P Buman. 2013. Mind the theoretical gap: interpreting, using, and developing behavioral theory in HCI research. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3307–3316.
[17]
Cynthia Huffman and Barbara E Kahn. 1998. Variety for sale: Mass customization or mass confusion?Journal of retailing 74, 4 (1998), 491–513.
[18]
Anthony Jameson, Bettina Berendt, Silvia Gabrielli, Federica Cena, Cristina Gena, Fabiana Vernero, and Katharina Reinecke. 2014. Choice Architecture for Human-Computer Interaction. Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction 7, 1–2 (2014), 1–235. https://doi.org/10.1561/1100000028
[19]
Daniel Kahneman. 2011. Thinking, fast and slow. macmillan, NY,NY.
[20]
Predrag Klasnja, Sunny Consolvo, and Wanda Pratt. 2011. How to evaluate technologies for health behavior change in HCI research. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3063–3072.
[21]
Jonathan Levav, Mark Heitmann, Andreas Herrmann, and Sheena S Iyengar. 2010. Order in product customization decisions: Evidence from field experiments. Journal of Political Economy 118, 2 (2010), 274–299.
[22]
Sampada Marathe and S. Shyam Sundar. 2011. What drives customization? control or identity?. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (, Vancouver, BC, Canada,) (CHI ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 781–790. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979056
[23]
Sampada S Marathe. 2007. If you build it, they will come—Or will they? Need for uniqueness and need for control as psychological predictors of customization. In 57th annual conference of the International Communication Association, San Francisco, CA. nternational Communication Association, Washington, D.C, United States.
[24]
Aurélie Merle, Jean-Louis Chandon, Elyette Roux, and Fabrice Alizon. 2010. Perceived value of the mass-customized product and mass customization experience for individual consumers. Production and operations management 19, 5 (2010), 503–514.
[25]
Daniel Mochon, Michael I Norton, and Dan Ariely. 2012. Bolstering and restoring feelings of competence via the IKEA effect. International journal of research in marketing 29, 4 (2012), 363–369.
[26]
Michael I Norton, Daniel Mochon, and Dan Ariely. 2012. The IKEA effect: When labor leads to love. Journal of consumer psychology 22, 3 (2012), 453–460.
[27]
Krishna Savani, Hazel Rose Markus, and Alana L Conner. 2008. Let your preference be your guide? Preferences and choices are more tightly linked for North Americans than for Indians.Journal of personality and social psychology 95, 4 (2008), 861.
[28]
Rom Y Schrift, Jeffrey R Parker, Gal Zauberman, and Shalena Srna. 2018. Multistage decision processes: The impact of attribute order on how consumers mentally represent their choice. Journal of Consumer Research 44, 6 (2018), 1307–1324.
[29]
Joseph P Simmons, Leif D Nelson, and Uri Simonsohn. 2011. False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological science 22, 11 (2011), 1359–1366.
[30]
Itamar Simonson. 2005. Determinants of customers’ responses to customized offers: Conceptual framework and research propositions. Journal of marketing 69, 1 (2005), 32–45.
[31]
Nicole M Stephens, Hazel Rose Markus, and Sarah SM Townsend. 2007. Choice as an act of meaning: the case of social class.Journal of personality and social psychology 93, 5 (2007), 814.
[32]
S Shyam Sundar. 2008. Self as source: Agency and customization in interactive media. In Mediated interpersonal communication. Routledge, Oxfordshire, England, UK, 72–88.
[33]
Cass R Sunstein. 2014. Nudging: a very short guide. Journal of Consumer Policy 37 (2014), 583–588.
[34]
Richard H Thaler and Cass R Sunstein. 2008. Nudge: improving decisions about health. Wealth, and Happiness 6 (2008), 14–38.
[35]
Kelly Tepper Tian, William O Bearden, and Gary L Hunter. 2001. Consumers’ need for uniqueness: Scale development and validation. Journal of consumer research 28, 1 (2001), 50–66.
[36]
Alessio Trentin, Elisa Perin, and Cipriano Forza. 2014. Increasing the consumer-perceived benefits of a mass-customization experience through sales-configurator capabilities. Computers in Industry 65, 4 (2014), 693–705.
[37]
Sigurd Villads Troye and Magne Supphellen. 2012. Consumer participation in coproduction:“I made it myself” effects on consumers’ sensory perceptions and evaluations of outcome and input product. Journal of marketing 76, 2 (2012), 33–46.
[38]
Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman. 1981. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. science 211, 4481 (1981), 453–458.
[39]
Ana Valenzuela, Ravi Dhar, and Florian Zettelmeyer. 2009. Contingent response to self-customization procedures: Implications for decision satisfaction and choice. Journal of marketing research 46, 6 (2009), 754–763.
[40]
Kathleen D Vohs, Roy F Baumeister, Brandon J Schmeichel, Jean M Twenge, Noelle M Nelson, and Dianne M Tice. 2018. Making choices impairs subsequent self-control: A limited-resource account of decision making, self-regulation, and active initiative. In Self-regulation and self-control. Routledge, Oxfordshire, England, UK, 45–77.
[41]
Jing Wang, Nathan Novemsky, Ravi Dhar, and Roy F Baumeister. 2010. Trade-offs and depletion in choice. Journal of Marketing Research 47, 5 (2010), 910–919.
[42]
Klaus Wertenbroch and Bernd Skiera. 2002. Measuring consumers’ willingness to pay at the point of purchase. Journal of marketing research 39, 2 (2002), 228–241.
[43]
Jungmin Yoo and Minjung Park. 2016. The effects of e-mass customization on consumer perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty toward luxury brands. Journal of business research 69, 12 (2016), 5775–5784.
[44]
Paul Zipkin. 2001. The limits of mass customization. MIT Sloan management review 42, 3 (2001), 81.
Index Terms
- The Illusion of Increased Customization: Framing Choices as a Creative Process Increases Perceived Customization
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
QoS customization in distributed object systems
Special issue: MiddlewareApplications built on networked collections of computers are increasingly using distributed object platforms such as CORBA, Java Remote Method Invocation (RMI), and DCOM to standardize object interactions. With this increased use comes the increased ...
Audio Matters Too: How Audial Avatar Customization Enhances Visual Avatar Customization
CHI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsAvatar customization is known to positively affect crucial outcomes in numerous domains. However, it is unknown whether audial customization can confer the same benefits as visual customization. We conducted a preregistered 2 x 2 (visual choice vs. ...
Online Customization Sharing Ecosystems: Components, Roles, and Motivations
CSCW '17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social ComputingThe rise of open platforms and public APIs has enabled more users of customizable software to customize by installing plugins or add-ons that are created and shared by others. Despite the prevalence of online customization sharing, we know little about ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
May 2024
18961 pages
ISBN:9798400703300
DOI:10.1145/3613904
Copyright © 2024 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 11 May 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 6,199 of 26,314 submissions, 24%
Upcoming Conference
CHI '25
- Sponsor:
- sigchi
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- View Citations1Total Citations
- 333Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)333
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)42
Reflects downloads up to 12 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View all- Yuan JPeng XLiu YWang Q(2024)“Don’t Look at Me!”: The Role of Avatars’ Presentation Style and Gaze Direction in Social Chatbot DesignComputers in Human Behavior10.1016/j.chb.2024.108501(108501)Online publication date: Nov-2024
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderFull Text
View this article in Full Text.
Full TextHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format