Processing Resources, Prices & Purchase Likelihood (#233)
How to Cite this Report
APA StyleMichael O'Donnell, Leif D. Nelson. Processing Resources, Prices & Purchase Likelihood. (2015, December 02). Retrieved 06:40, March 25, 2017 from http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjMz
MLA Style"Processing Resources, Prices & Purchase Likelihood" Michael O'Donnell, Leif D. Nelson. 02 Dec 2015 16:16 25 Mar 2017, 06:40 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjMz>
MHRA Style'Processing Resources, Prices & Purchase Likelihood', Michael O'Donnell, Leif D. Nelson, , 02 December 2015 16:16 <http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjMz> [accessed 25 March 2017]
Chicago Style"Processing Resources, Prices & Purchase Likelihood", Michael O'Donnell, Leif D. Nelson, , http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjMz (accessed March 25, 2017)
CBE/CSE StyleProcessing Resources, Prices & Purchase Likelihood [Internet]. Michael O'Donnell, Leif D. Nelson; 2015 Dec 02, 16:16 [cited 2017 Mar 25]. Available from: http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MjMz
|Reference to Original Report of Finding||Wadhwa, M., & Zhang, K. (2015). This Number Just Feels Right: The Impact of Roundedness of Price Numbers on Product Evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(5), 1172-1185.|
|Title||Processing Resources, Prices & Purchase Likelihood|
|If the original article contained multiple experiments, which one did you attempt to replicate? e.g., you might respond 'Study 1' or 'Experiment 4'.||Study 3|
|Link to PDF of Original Report||View Article|
|Brief Statement of Original Result||2 (processing resources constrained or unconstrained) X 2 (price round, $80, or non-round, $81.43) between subjects design. Outcome variable is self-reported purchase likelihood of digital camera binoculars on a 9-point scale. When processing resources are constrained, purchase likelihood is higher if the price is $80, but when processing resources are unconstrained, purchase likelihood is higher if the price is $81.43.|
|Type of Replication Attempted||Fairly Direct Replication|
|Result Type||Failure to Replicate|
|Difference?||Same Direction, .82, .48|
|Number of Subjects||801|
|Number of Subjects in Original Study||177|
|Year in which Replication Attempt was Made||2015|
|Name of Investigators (Real Names Required)||Michael O'Donnell, Leif D. Nelson|
|Detailed Description of Method/Results||
Participants were randomly assigned by Qualtrics to either remember a 7-letter randomly generated string or a single letter (all participants were asked to remember either the same string or letter, each of which was randomly generated.)|
Participants were next asked to evaluate a pair of digital camera binoculars. A photo of the binoculars was presented, with the phrase "This is a pair of binoculars and digital camera combo perfect for viewing all the action up-close and capturing it digitally as well." and a list of three features. The price was displayed beneath the binoculars. Participants were randomly assigned by Qualtrics to either see a round price, $80, a non-round price, $81.43, and a non-round lower price, $78.57. The first two prices are identical to those used in the original study, while the third price is new to this replication.
Participants were then asked to indicate their likelihood of purchasing the digital camera binoculars on a 9-point scale, where 1 = very unlikely and 9 = very likely.
The study consisted of six possible conditions. Four of the six conditions were replications of the original study. The two other conditions, corresponding to the non-round lower price, were added to test the effect of round prices with a price point lower than $80.
A two-way ANOVA predicting purchase likelihood from price and processing resources yields no significant main effects (main effect for price F(2, 795) = .72, p = .49; main effect for resources F(1, 795) = .01, p = .94; and no significant interaction effect F(2, 795) = .37, p = .69).
Focusing on the 4 replication conditions, a 2 way ANOVA predicting purchase likelihood from price and processing resources yields no significant main effects (main effect for price F(1, 527) = .10, p = .75; main effect for resources F(1, 527) = .07, p = .80; interaction effect F(1, 527) = .42, p = .52).
Simple effects analyses did not replicate the simple effects reported in the paper. The simple effect for constrained processing resources, t(527) = .22, p = .82, d = .019 ; the simple effect for unconstrained processing resources, t(527) = .71, p = .48 d = .06.
Attached figures include 1.) graphs of the 4 condition means from the original paper 2.) graphs of the 6 condition means from the replication 3.) constrained processing resources simple effect size comparison 4.) unconstrained processing resources simple effect size comparison
This project was pre-registered on As Predicted:
An OSF page containing a printout of the As Predicted pre-registration, data, Stata syntax, and a printout of the survey is available here:
To access the files, open the link and click on the "Archive of OSF Storage" folder.
|Any Known Methodological Differences |
(between original and present study)?
|The replication was constructed from the method section of Study 3. The exact stimuli and wording from the paper were not provided, and the replication study is a close approximate based on the information provided in the paper.|
|Email of Investigator|
|Name of individuals who |
actually carried out the project
|M.O. ran subjects, M.O. and L.D.N. analyzed data.|
|Location of Project||Mturk|
|Characteristics of Subjects |
(subject pool, paid, etc.)
|Adults tested through internet|
|Where did these subjects reside?||United States|
|Was this a Class Project?||No|
|Further Details of Results as pdf|
|Email of Original Investigator|
|I have complied with ethical standards for experimentation on human beings and, if necessary, have obtained appropriate permission from an Institutional Review Board or other oversight group.|
|TAG: Attention TAG: JDM TAG: Language TAG: Learning TAG: Memory TAG: Perception TAG: Performance TAG: Problem Solving TAG: Social Cognition TAG: Social Psychology TAG: Thinking|