Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effect of positive anticipatory utility on product pre‑order evaluations and choices

  • Original Empirical Research
  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Given the increase in marketers’ use of pre-ordering strategies in which product sales precede the product’s delivery, this research presents a systematic set of four studies exploring how increasing positive anticipatory utility impacts consumers’ pre-order evaluations. The authors propose that compared to price discounts, non-monetary promotions that enhance positive anticipation will be more effective in reducing consumers’ negative responses to longer temporal delays for pre-orders. Findings show that affect-laden marketing tools (e.g., free products, products positioned as hedonically superior, creating anticipatory buzz) attenuate the negative effects due to pre-order temporal delays. Findings also indicate positive anticipatory utility is the underlying mechanism for the observed effects. The research provides guidance regarding the strategic presentation of pre-order promotions; when the time for product delivery is longer, marketers should use various tools that increase positive anticipation to reduce the negative effects of temporal delays.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Following prior literature (Watson et al., 1988), we measured affective value with three items (e.g., “I feel very enthusiastic about the offer”; α in Studies 1 and 2 both > .90).

  2. Anticipatory utility for the price discount is greater than the control condition for the one-week time frame (p < 0.01), but does not reach significance for the nine-week delay (p = .61).

  3. We show complete regression results for the mediator and the outcome variable of purchase intention in the Web Appendix Table W1.

  4. Drawing from Amos and Spears (2010), perceived product attractiveness was measured using two items seven-point scale (r = .88; “The headphone is appealing”, “The headphone is attractive”).

  5. We would like to thank an anonymous reviewer for suggesting this empirical testing.

  6. The researchers did not have the ability to measure the direct awareness of the promotion or number of customers who passed by the promotion signage.

  7. In a study not reported here due to length concerns, we show that the moderating role of non-monetary promotion also extends to sweepstakes offers.

References

  • Amos, C., & Spears, N. (2010). Generating a visceral response. Journal of Advertising, 39(3), 25–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aydinli, A., Bertini, M., & Lambrecht, A. (2014). Price promotion for emotional impact. Journal of Marketing, 78(4), 80–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batra, R., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Integrating marketing communications: New findings, new lessons, and new ideas. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 122–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benhabib, J., Bisin, A., & Schotter, A. (2010). Present-bias, “Quasi-hyperbolic discounting, and fixed costs. Games and Economic Behavior, 69(2), 205–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, J., & Milkman, K. L. (2012). What makes online content viral? Journal of Marketing Research, 49(2), 192–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berns, G. S., Laibson, D., & Loewenstein, G. (2007). Intertemporal choice–toward an integrative framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(11), 482–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, C., Burton, S., & Howlett, E. (2017). It’s only natural: The mediating impact of consumers’ inferential beliefs on the relationships between product claims, perceived product healthfulness, and purchase intentions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(5), 698–719.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blattberg, R. C., & Neslin, S. A. (1990). Sales promotion : Concepts, methods and strategies. Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broida, R. (2014). Get an HP Stream 13 Laptop and Gift card for $199 Shipped. Cnet. Retrieved. http://www.cnet.com/news/get-an-hp-stream-13-laptop-and-gift-card-for-199-shipped/.

  • Burton, S., Cook, L. A., Howlett, E., & Newman, C. L. (2015). Broken halos and shattered horns: Overcoming the biasing effects of prior expectations through objective information disclosure. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(2), 240–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4), 65–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chew, S. H., & Ho, J. L. (1994). Hope: An empirical study of attitude toward the timing of uncertainty resolution. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 8(3), 267–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V. (2008). Delight by design: The role of hedonic versus utilitarian benefits. Journal of Marketing, 72(3), 48–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chun, H. H., Diehl, K., & MacInnis, D. J. (2017). Savoring an upcoming experience affects ongoing and remembered consumption enjoyment. Journal of Marketing, 81(3), 96–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chu, L. Y., & Zhang, H. (2011). Optimal preorder strategy with endogenous information control. Management Science, 57(6), 1055–1077.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desai, K. K., & Ratneshwar, S. (2003). Consumer perceptions of product variants positioned on atypical attributes. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(1), 22–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhar, R., & Wertenbroch, K. (2000). Consumer choice between hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(1), 60–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 307–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O’donoghue, T. (2002). Time discounting and time preference: A critical review. Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2), 351–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guha, A., Biswas, A., Grewal, D., Verma, S., Banerjee, S., & Nordfält, J. (2018). Reframing the discount as a comparison against the sale price: Does it make the discount more attractive? Journal of Marketing Research, 55(3), 339–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grewal, D., Marmorstein, H., & Sharma, A. (1996). Communicating price information through semantic cues: The moderating effects of situation and discount size. Journal of Consumer Research, 23(2), 148–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grewal, D., Monroe, K. B., & Krishnan, R. (1998). The effects of price-comparison advertising on buyers’ perceptions of acquisition value, transaction value, and behavioral intentions. Journal of Marketing, 62(2), 46–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardisty, D. J., & Weber, E. U. (2020). Impatience and savoring vs. dread: Asymmetries in anticipation explain consumer time preferences for positive vs. negative events. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 30(4), 598–613.

  • Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis. (T. D. Little, Ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

  • Hewett, K., Rand, W., Rust, R. T., & Van Heerde, H. J. (2016). Brand buzz in the echoverse. Journal of Marketing, 80(3), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, J. P., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ, 327(7414), 557–560.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houston, M. B., Kupfer, A. K., Hennig-Thurau, T., & Spann, M. (2018). Pre-release consumer buzz. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46(2), 338–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulland, J., & Houston, M. (2021). The importance of behavioral outcomes. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 49, 437–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyer, G. R., Blut, M., Xiao, S. H., & Grewal, D. (2020). Impulse buying: A meta-analytic review. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(3), 384–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozup, J. C., Creyer, E. H., & Burton, S. (2003). Making healthful food choices: The influence of health claims and nutrition information on consumers’ evaluations of packaged food products and restaurant menu items. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 19–34.

  • Kuehnl, C., Jozic, D., & Homburg, C. (2019). Effective customer journey design: Consumers’ conception, measurement, and consequences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(3), 551–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, A., Killingsworth, M. A., & Gilovich, T. (2014). Waiting for merlot: Anticipatory consumption of experiential and material purchases. Psychological Science, 25(10), 1924–1931.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein, D. R., Netemeyer, R. G., & Burton, S. (1990). Distinguishing coupon proneness from value consciousness: An acquisition-transaction utility theory perspective. Journal of Marketing, 54(3), 54–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein, D. R., Ridgway, N. M., & Netemeyer, R. G. (1993). Price perceptions and consumer shopping behavior: A field study. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(2), 234–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. SAGE publications, Inc.

  • Loewenstein, G. (1987). Anticipation and the valuation of delayed consumption. The Economic Journal, 97(387), 666–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malkoc, S. A., & Zauberman, G. (2006). Deferring versus expediting consumption: The effect of outcome concreteness on sensitivity to time horizon. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), 618–627.

    Google Scholar 

  • McShane, B. B., & Böckenholt, U. (2017). Single-paper meta-analysis: Benefits for study summary, theory testing, and replicability. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(6), 1048–1063.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mukherjee, A., Jha, S., & Smith, R. J. (2017). Regular price $299; pre-order price $199: Price promotion for a pre-ordered product and the moderating role of temporal orientation. Journal of Retailing, 93(2), 201–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulhern, F. J., & Padgett, D. T. (1995). The relationship between retail price promotions and regular price purchases. Journal of Marketing, 59(4), 83–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, C., Burton, S., Netemeyer, R., Andrews, J. C., & Kees, J. (2018). Marketers’ use of alternative front-of-package nutrition symbols: An examination of effects on product evaluations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46(3), 453–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowlis, S. M., Mandel, N., & McCabe, D. B. (2004). The effect of a delay between choice and consumption on consumption enjoyment. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(3), 502–510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowlis, S. M., & Simonson, I. (1996). The effect of new product features on brand choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 33(1), 36–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donoghue, T., & Rabin, M. (1999). Doing it now or later. American Economic Review, 103–124.

  • Okada, E. M. (2005). Justification effects on consumer choice of hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(1), 43–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • VillarroelOrdenes, F., Ludwig, S., De Ruyter, K., Grewal, D., & Wetzels, M. (2017). Unveiling what is written in the stars: Analyzing explicit, implicit, and discourse patterns of sentiment in social media. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(6), 875–894.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, K. W., & Park, J. Y. (2009). Shopping value, shopping goal and WOM-focused on electronic-goods buyers. Journal of Global Academy of Marketing Science, 19(2), 68–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perdue, B. C., & Summers, J. O. (1986). Checking the success of manipulations in marketing experiments. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(4), 317–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pigott, T. D. (2012). Advances in Meta-Analysis. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raghubir, P. (1998). Coupon value: A signal for price? Journal of Marketing Research, 35(3), 316–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roggeveen, A. L., Grewal, D., Townsend, C., & Krishnan, R. (2015). The impact of dynamic presentation format on consumer preferences for hedonic products and services. Journal of Marketing, 79(6), 34–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shampanier, K., Mazar, N., & Ariely, D. (2007). Zero as a special price: The true value of free products. Marketing Science, 26(6), 742–757.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., & Fong, G. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 845.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S. (1994). The effects of filled waiting time and service provider control over the delay on evaluations of service. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(1), 38–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thielman, S. (2015). Apple watch sales reach nearly 1m on first day of orders. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/apr/13/apple-watch-preorder-sales-first-day. Accessed 22 Apr 2016.

  • Tilley, A. (2015). Apple watch scored an estimated 1 million pre-orders on launch day. http://www.forbes.com/sites/aarontilley/2015/04/13/apple-watch-scored-an-estimated-1-million-pre-orders-on-launch-day/#5558240d4f77. Accessed 22 2016.

  • Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiecek, A., Wentzel, D., & Erkin, A. (2020). Just print it! The effects of self-printing a product on consumers’ product evaluations and perceived ownership. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(4), 795–811.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. (2014). Emotions and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(5), viii-xi.

  • Williamson, O., & Ghani, T. (2012). Transaction cost economics and its uses in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(1), 74–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, M., Teunter, R. H., & Zhu, S. X. (2019). Online marketing: When to offer a refund for advanced sales. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 36(3), 471–491.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiong, G., & Bharadwaj, S. (2014). Prerelease buzz evolution patterns and new product performance. Marketing Science, 33(3), 401–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zauberman, G., Kim, B. K., Malkoc, S. A., & Bettman, J. R. (2009). Discounting time and time discounting: Subjective time perception and intertemporal preferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(4), 543–556.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Editor, Area Editor, and four anonymous reviewers for their many helpful comments. We particularly appreciate the constructive suggestions and direction provided by the AE. The authors also thank Jacob Suher for his insightful comments on a previous version of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marketing, The School of Business, Portland State University, 631 SW Harrison St., Portland, OR, 97,201, USA

    Amaradri Mukherjee

  2. College of Business, University of Wyoming, 1000 E. University Ave., Dept. 3275, Laramie, WY, 82071, USA

    Ronn J. Smith

  3. Department of Marketing, Walton College of Business, University of Arkansas, 302 Business Building, Fayetteville, AR, 72701, USA

    Scot Burton

Authors
  1. Amaradri Mukherjee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ronn J. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Scot Burton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ronn J. Smith.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Gergana Nenkov served as Area Editor for this article.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 4499 kb)

Appendix

Appendix

Dependent measures and reliability values

Positive anticipatory utility (Hardisty & Weber, 2020; Kumar et al., 2014)

(0 = Not at all, 100 = Extremely Happy/Excited/Enthusiastic)

Right now, I feel happy about the anticipation of getting the pre-ordered product

Right now, I feel excited about the anticipation of getting the pre-ordered product

Right now, I feel enthusiastic about the anticipation of getting the pre-ordered product

Cronbach’s alpha – Study 1 = 0.98, Study 2 = 0.98

Average Variance Extracted – Study 1 = 0.94, Study 2 = 0.95

Purchase Intention (Kozup, Creyer, and Burton 2003)

(1 = Very Unlikely, 7 = Very Likely)

How likely would you be to purchase the advertised product, given the information shown?

(1 = Less Likely, 7 = More Likely)

Would you be more likely or less likely to purchase the product, given the information shown?

(1 = Not probable, 7 = Very probable)

Given the information shown, how probable is it that you would consider the purchase of the product?

Cronbach alpha – Study 1 = 0.95, Study 2 = 0.95, Study 3 = 0.96

Average Variance Extracted – Study 1 = 0.88, Study 2 = 0.83, Study 3 = 0.88

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mukherjee, A., Smith, R.J. & Burton, S. The effect of positive anticipatory utility on product pre‑order evaluations and choices. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 51, 551–569 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-021-00810-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-021-00810-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation