Marketing, Indian Institute of Management Lucknow, 1309 Faculty Block, Plot B1, Sector 62, Noida, UP 201307, India
b Marketing, Rawls College of Business, Texas Tech University, MS 2101, Lubbock, TX, USA
c Senior Research Fellow, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, South Africa
d Regents Professor Emeritus, Georgia Institute of Technology, Scheller College of Business, 800 West Peachtree St NW, Atlanta, GA 30308-1149, USA
Abstract
An examination of consumer information search literature reveals that the effects of several antecedents (cost, price dispersion, knowledge,
prior experience) on ofine information search vary greatly in terms of the directions and magnitudes of the determinants effect sizes, particularly
indicating the possibility of inverted-U shaped relationships. Also, despite a wide range of studies undertaken, there remains a need for identifying
an overarching framework for consumer information search. This article synthesizes previous empirical studies on ofine information search
literature, and attempts to provide and test a framework that advances our understanding of the current state of this literature. The review identifies
significant antecedents to offline information search, and also tests the moderating effects of demographic variables and study conditions on the
direct effects. In the context of the main effects, findings suggest that the nature of relationships of several antecedents with the central construct
is indeed inverted-U shaped. Further, moderator analyses identify the boundary conditions under which specific theories hold. The closing section
provides future research directions.
2014 New York University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Offline information search; Offline consumer information search; Inverted-U shaped relationship; Moderators; Meta-analysis
Introduction
Consumer information search behavior has a long tradition
of being a useful mechanism for understanding consumer shopping behavior, including consumer choice, and choice processes
(e.g. Beatty and Smith 1987; Bettman 1974; Punj and Staelin
1983). Over the last few decades, multiple studies have repeatedly investigated the effects of different antecedent variables
on offline information search. However, the studies conclusions vary greatly in terms of the directions and magnitudes of
the determinants effect sizes. For example, past research findings on the relationship between cost and information search
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2014.03.001
0022-4359/ 2014 New York University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
234
Table 1
Categories of antecedents to information search.
Author(s)
Newman (1977)
Cost
Situational Variables
(urgency, financial
pressure, special buying
opportunities, location of
residence)
Personality Variables
Bettman (1979)
Properties of Choice
Situation (availability of
information, difficulty of
choice task, time
pressure)
Market Environment
(number of alternatives,
complexity of
alternatives, information
availability)
Cost
Knowledge
Situational Variables
(time pressure, social
pressure, financial
pressure, ease of access of
information)
Benet
Potential Payoff/Product
Importance (perceived
risk, price, social
visibility)
Individual Differences
(in-store vs.
prior-processing, abilities,
concern with optimality
of choice)
Knowledge and
Experience (usage of
product)
Individual Differences
(involvement, ability,
training)
Conict and
Conict-Resolution
Strategies
Market Environment
Market Environment
(number of alternatives,
complexity of
alternatives, information
availability)
Size of evoked set
Situational Factors
Situational Variables
(time pressure, social
pressure, financial
pressure, ease of access of
information)
Interest in cars
Knowledge and
Experience (usage of
product)
Individual Differences
(involvement, ability,
training)
Conict and
Conict-Resolution
Strategies
Perceived risk
Perceived benefits
Cost
Involvement
Risk aversion
Potential Payoff
(perceived risk, financial
pressure, price, social
visibility)
Individual brand
uncertainty
Knowledge and
Experience (usage of
product)
Amount of
experience, positive
experience, product
knowledge
Search cost
Srinivasan and
Ratchford (1991)
Moorthy et al.
(1997)
Authors (based on
EoI theory)
Factors Unique to a
Consumer (e.g. usable
prior knowledge, prior
memory structure)
Involvement
Potential Payoff/Product
Importance (perceived
risk, price, social
visibility)
Cost of Search
(psychological
costs)
Other Variables
(household role,
party of major
influence, social
class, occupation,
age, stage of life
cycle)
Experience
Individual Differences
(involvement, ability,
training)
Categories of variables as identified by the authors (in italics). Specific variables as identified/used by the authors (in regular font).
235
236
237
Table 2
Directions of the hypothesized relationships and the effects reported in studies included in the meta-analysis.
Antecedent variables
Risk Theory
Risk Theory
Risk Theory
Involvement Theory
Hypotheses
Hypothesized
relationship
Number of
effects
reported
Range of
reported
effects (r)
Cumulative n
H1
Inverted-U
11a /17b
0.31 to 0.60
5,561
H2
Inverted-U
33/37
0.61 to 0.54
9,264
H3
H4
Inverted-U
16/21
16/21
0.40 to 0.54
0.88 to 0.36
5,666
4,829
H5
H6
H7
+
+
+
13/16
24/26
18/22
0.33 to 0.33
0.38 to 0.43
0.060.53
3,567
10,872
4,821
H8
Inverted-U
30/43
0.34 to 0.55
12,090
H9
Inverted-U
24/36
0.54 to 0.52
10,360
H10
20/25
0.17 to 0.80
8,186
All summary statistics (e.g. F, t, Z, chi-square) obtained across studies are converted to the common correlation coefficient metric, r.
a Number of statistically significant (at *p < 0.05) effects reported.
b Total number of effects reported.
238
Potential payoff
239
search for more information. For those consumers who have low
prior knowledge/experience, the cost of acquiring information
outweighs the benefit that they associate with acquiring the current information, and so undertake limited information search.
In contrast, those consumers who have moderate information
do assume that their state of uncertainty may change by acquiring more information, and are motivated to undertake a greater
amount of information search. Based on the above discussion,
we propose that the relationship between information search and
knowledge/prior experience will be inverted-U shaped:
Proposition 3. The relationship between information search
and knowledge/prior experience is inverted U-shaped.
In our review, we treat the two variables separately depending
upon how the authors of the specific studies have operationalized
them in their investigations. Therefore, we hypothesize:
H8. The relationship between information search and knowledge is inverted U-shaped.
H9. The relationship between information search and prior
experience is inverted U-shaped.
Individual difference variables
EoI acknowledges the difference in tastes (Stigler 1961,
p. 216) among consumers which may affect information
search. We offer the category individual differences as another
antecedent category that affect consumer information search.
We expect that the direction of the relationships of different
individual difference variables with information search will be
different, and hence we do not offer any specific proposition for
the overall category of variables.
Involvement. Involvement theory was originally introduced
in social psychology, but has been adopted extensively in consumer behavior. Laaksonen (1994) defines involvement as the
amount of arousal, interest, or activation a person experiences
in a specific situation. Involvement (i.e. an arousal or concern
about the purchase decision) figures prominently in consumer
search effort theories. Researchers have argued that involvement
can be conceived in behavioral terms such as the time or energy
spent on information search, the number of alternatives considered, and the extent of the decision process (Laaksonen 1994;
Stone 1984).
Mitchell (1981) reports that, at higher involvement levels,
consumers will aggressively search for relevant information.
Petty and Cacioppo (1981) assert that high product involvement
motivates consumers to examine carefully product advantages
and disadvantages, which means greater information search.
Consumers are thought to engage in systematic or comprehensive search under high-involvement conditions, but minimize
search activity and rely on simple schemas or cognitive heuristics
under low-involvement conditions (Engel, Kollat, and Blackwell
1973). Hence, greater extent of involvement will lead to greater
amount of information search. We hypothesize that:
H10. The relationship between information search and involvement is positive.
240
Antecedents: Findings
Antecedents (direct effects)
For each of the ten antecedent variables, Table 2 summarizes the underlying theories, the hypothesized relationships
with information search, number of effects reported, range of
reported effects, and the cumulative n. We do not include the
antecedent benet in the meta-analysis since the number of effect
sizes obtained for this antecedent is less than ten. The findings
on the direct effects are discussed below. The conceptualization
and measurement of all the ten variables are fairly consistent
across all the studies included in the meta-analysis.
Methodology: Direct effects
Although correlations are the most common metrics found
in the 62 studies, many studies also report F, t, and chi-square
statistics. We convert these summary statistics to the common
correlation coefficient metric, r (e.g. Wolf 1986) (Table 2),
therefore ensuring the use of bivariate correlations in the metaanalysis. In order to test the hypotheses on the five inverted-U
shaped relationships (H1 , H2 , H3 , H8 , H9 ), ideally, we need
to identify at least three levels (i.e. low, medium, and high) of
each antecedent. However, different levels are not operationalized for any of the five variables in the studies included in our
meta-analysis. We, therefore, need to create post hoc categories
in order to test our hypotheses.
The relationships of the antecedent variables number of alternatives, cost and price dispersion, with information search
are explained by cost theory. In order to test the hypotheses,
therefore, we need to identify proxy variables that meaningfully represent cost of search (since the observed effect sizes
by themselves are inadequate for testing an inverted-U shaped
relationship). For these three antecedents, the parameters we
choose for creating post hoc categories that represent varying
levels of these antecedents are product category (i.e. infrequently/frequently purchased), and the similarity/dissimilarity
among products in each product category included in the studies. We argue that for infrequently purchased product categories,
searching for an additional product gives the consumer a larger
benefit and thus a greater incentive to search. Therefore, consumers are expected to search more for infrequently purchased
products and search less for frequently purchased products.
We define the similarity/dissimilarity among products as the
extent to which the products are homogeneous/heterogeneous
in that particular product category. We argue that the cost of
search is lower for homogeneous products than that associated
with the search for heterogeneous products. Four post hoc categories emerge representing four levels of increasing cost for
each antecedent variable: frequently purchased and similar, frequently purchased and dissimilar, infrequently purchased and
similar, and infrequently purchased and dissimilar. It is expected
that the cognitive cost, and hence, the cost associated with information search for frequently purchased and similar products
(e.g. groceries) will be the lowest, and that associated with infrequently purchased and dissimilar products (e.g. cars, house)
241
Table 3
Antecedent variables testing hypotheses for direct effects.
Antecedent variables
(support for hypotheses)
Levels of antecedent
variables (where applicable)
Unweighted r
(observed)
Weighted r
(corrected)
Nature of
relationship
Number of Alternatives*
H1 (No)
NAlternativesF S
10
0.009
0.046**
Linear
NAlternativesF DS
NAlternativesIF S
NAlternativesIF DS
3
3
0.160
0.192
0.138
0.302
CostF S
10
0.236
0.190**
CostF DS
CostIF S
CostIF DS
10
7
10
0.077
0.017
0.013
0.090
0.035
0.023
PriceDF S
0.195
0.200**
PriceDF DS
PriceDIF S
PriceDIF DS
0.282
0.121
0.320
0.146
Time Pressure
H4 (Yes)
21
0.20
0.14
Linear
Perceived Risk
H5 (Yes)
16
0.11
0.13
Linear
Financial Constraint
H6 (Yes)
26
0.13
0.04
Linear
Uncertainty
H7 (Yes)
22
0.27
0.24
Linear
KnowledgeF LK
18
0.078
0.093**
Inverted-U
KnowledgeIF LK
KnowledgeIF HK
KnowledgeF HK
9
11
5
0.213
0.151
0.033
0.184
0.120
0.076
ExperienceF LK
0.281
0.276**
ExperienceIF LK
ExperienceIF HK
ExperienceF HK
2
19
9
0.135
.023
0.089
0.135
0.016
.080
25
0.30
0.26
Cost
H2 (Yes)
Price Dispersion
H3 (Yes)
Knowledge
H8 (Yes)
Prior Experience
H9 (Yes)
Involvement
H10 (Yes)
Inverted-U
Inverted-U
Inverted-U
Linear
indicates that no study has been found in these categories. *Product Category not reported in one study. K = No. of Studies. All weighted and unweighted rs
are significant at <0.0001. The extensions appearing in subscript indicate: For antecedents Number of Alternatives, Cost, and Price Dispersion: (a) F S: frequently
purchased; similar; (b) F DS: Frequently Purchased; Dissimilar; (c) IF S: Infrequently Purchased; Similar; (d) IF DS: Infrequently Purchased; Dissimilar For
antecedents Knowledge and Prior Experience, (a) F LK: Frequently Purchased; Low Product Knowledge; (b) IF LK: Infrequently Purchased; Low Product Knowledge; (c) IF HK: Infrequently Purchased; High Product Knowledge; (d) F LK: Frequently Purchased; High Product Knowledge. **The correlation coefficients
associated with the different levels are different (sig. at p < 0.05).
study was found for the category PriceDIF S ) bear out that consumers undertake different amounts of information search at
different levels of price dispersion, as hypothesized, providing
support for H3 . Medium levels of perceived price dispersion
lead to the highest amount of information search. Since cost
of search is a function of price dispersion, it is expected that
at medium levels of dispersion, consumers obtain the highest
amount of information than at high or low levels of price dispersion. Therefore, though the overall relationship between price
dispersion and information search is positive, following cost
theory, we find that the amount of information search is low
when price dispersion is high (PriceDIF DS = 0.146). It is likely
that consumers do not search for more information when they
242
example, for the antecedent cost, we obtain positive and negative valences for the two clusters obtained (Table 4). This study
weights the effect size r using the relevant sample size information, and also estimates the associated file drawer N (Table 4).
(Note that the results reported in Table 4 are those based on all
studies that measure information search in terms of number of
brands and time. We report the results of a separate meta-analysis
conducted on the findings based on studies that measure information search in terms of time only in Web Appendix B. The
results of the two findings are similar, demonstrating that our
findings are robust.) Homogeneity tests are carried out on a total
of fifteen clusters of direct effects, following the recommendations of Hedges and Olkin (1985), and results indicate that
moderator analysis should be carried out on thirteen relationships (Web Appendices C and D).
We make specific suppositions regarding the different clusters of effect sizes that emerge for the four antecedent variables.
For cost, the cluster that displays a weighted r of 0.09
(CostHigh/Low ) is assumed to represent either high or low level of
cost of search (or, both), and a weighted r of 0.29 (CostMedium ) is
assumed to represent the medium level of cost of search. These
assumptions are reasonable since theory as well as our findings on direct effects demonstrate that the amount of search
undertaken is the highest when cost of search is medium. Similar suppositions are made for the variables price dispersion,
knowledge and prior experience.
Hypotheses: Effect of moderators
Hypotheses are presented on thirteen relationships that are
moderated by seven moderators.
Age. Extant literature on information processing and decision making has extensively investigated the effects of age,
with conflicting findings. For example, Otnes (1990) finds that
age positively affects information search, while others (e.g.
Schaninger and Sciglimpaglia 1981) report the opposite effect.
Examining the social psychology literature on the impact of cognitive aging on the ability of decision-making, Mata, Schooler,
and Rieskamp (2007) find that search costs are higher for older
adults. Age-related cognitive decline is attributed to decreased
attentional capabilities (McDowd 1997). Kirasic et al. (1996)
show that age negatively affects information-processing speed
and working memory. This finding is in line with the theory of
cognitive competence as outlined by Schaie and Willis (1993),
which suggests that the ability to perform tasks decline with age.
The studies that report the age of respondents are categorized
as follows: <30 years, and >30 years, as per extant practice
(Irwin and McClelland 2003). In line with the theory of cognitive
competence, we predict the following:
H11a. For the moderator age, the effect size for information
search and each of the antecedents is high for consumers <30
years and low for consumers >30 years.
On the other hand, older consumers tend to be more risk
averse and are expected to undertake more information search
than the younger ones. Also, there are studies that suggest that
younger adults take less time to perform tasks predominantly
Table 4
Search for moderators.
Antecedent variables
Number of Alternatives
16
Unweighted r
(observed)
0.072
Weighted r
(corrected)
Observed
variance
Sampling
error variance
Residual variance (%
age of total variance)
File drawer Nf
(rc = .05)
Q (d.f.)
0.19
0.082
0.003
0.079 (96.72)
45
486.488a
Moderator
analysis
Cost
CostHigh/Low
CostMedium
27
10
0.16
0.27
0.09
0.29
0.02
0.018
0.004
0.005
0.003 (76.60)
0.013 (72.51)
23
48
115.38a (26)
37.3a (9)
Price Dispersion
Price DispersionHigh/Low
Price DispersionMedium
15
6
0.10
0.41
0.08
0.41
0.073
0.006
0.004
0.002
0.03 (88.58)
0.005 (74.10)
11
42
131.33a (14)
22.90a (5)
21
16
26
22
0.20
0.11
0.13
0.27
0.14
0.13
0.04
0.24
0.06
0.01
0.05
0.01
0.004
0.004
0.002
0.004
0.05 (92.58)
0.01 (53.84)
0.05 (95.58)
0.01 (67.70)
39
26
44
82
283.13a
34.64a
587.36a
67.84a
Time Pressure
Perceived Risk
Financial Constraint
Uncertainty
(20)
(15)
(25)
(21)
Knowledge
KnowledgeHigh/Low
KnowledgeHigh/Low
KnowledgeMedium
12
26
5
0.14
0.16
0.51
0.13
0.15
0.51
0.097
0.003
0.005
0.004
0.003
0.003
0.07 (57.12)
0.000 (6.54)
0.002 (55.90)
18
51
46
27.97a (11)
27.74 (25)
7.84 (4)
Prior Experience
Prior ExperienceHigh/Low
Prior ExperienceMedium
28
8
0.18
0.25
0.14
0.24
0.009
0.019
0.003
0.002
0.006 (63.47)
0.017 (87.45)
53
31
76.59a (27)
63.39a (7)
25
0.30
0.26
0.03
0.003
0.03 (92.31)
103
322.72a (24)
Involvement
Levels of antecedent
variables (where
applicable)
a Heterogeneous.
Nf = Fail-Safe N. rc = critical value of r.
243
244
H14b. For the moderator product type, as per cost theory, the
effect size for information search and each of the antecedents is
high for search products, and low for credence and experience
products.
Due to space limitations predictions and findings on the
moderators gender, education and income, are reported in Web
Appendix E.
Methodology and ndings: Moderator effects
Effect sizes (Table 4) are partitioned into subgroups based
on the moderator variables (Geyskens, Steenkamp, and Kumar
1998; Viswesvaran and Sanchez 1998) (Table 5). In order to
test the hypotheses, post hoc t tests of difference in mean effect
sizes between subcategories of the same variable (e.g. experiment vs. non experiment) are computed with the Bonferonni
correction for simultaneous tests. The hypothesized relationships, the underlying theories, and the kind of support obtained
for the hypotheses, are presented in Table 5.
Age (H11a /H11b ). Of the 13 hypotheses for the moderator age,
we test eight, and find support for all eight; five hypotheses could
not be tested due to insufficient data. Overall, we find strong support for H11a and H11b . The increased cognitive capacity of the
younger consumer probably provides an explanation for the findings for costHigh/Low (rage<30 = 0.12; rage>30 = 0.16), and on
price dispersionHigh/Low (rage<30 = 0.10; rage>30 = 0.003), as the
cost associated with searching for information is high, and older
consumers search for less information. A possible reason for the
findings on uncertainty (rage<30 = 0.32; rage>30 = 0.15) could be
that in the context of uncertainty while all consumers undertake
increased information search, younger consumers are able to
process more information. Another possible explanation could
be that younger consumers find an uncertain situation more
challenging than older consumers. A similar argument explains
the observation on involvement (rage<30 = 0.42; rage>30 = 0.30).
Findings on these four antecedents provide support for H11a .
The findings for time pressure (rage<30 = 0.29;
rage>30 = 0.11) is in line with Freuds (1911/1959) developmental theories and the work of Green, Fry, and Myerson
(1994) on intertemporal choice that suggest that the level
of patience changes over the lifespan of an individual, and
that young people are more impatient than older people, and
therefore, search for less information. The findings on perceived
risk (rage<30 = 0.12; rage>30 = 0.22) agree with the reasoning
that younger consumers are more impatient, and higher risk
takers. The findings on knowledgeHigh/Low (rage<30 = 0.14;
rage>30 = 0.06) and prior experienceHigh/Low (rage<30 = 0.24;
rage>30 = 0.11) also agree with the reasoning that younger
consumers are greater risk takers and so in the context of high
or low prior experience/knowledge they are not motivated to
look for more information and mitigate the risk associated with
making a choice. These findings provide support for H11b . The
analysis for the moderator age allows us to identify boundary
conditions under which specific theories hold.
Respondent type (H12 ). Of the 13 hypotheses for the
moderator respondent type, we test eight hypotheses, and find
245
246
*p < 0.05 (t-test); n.c.: not calculated. Multiple regression did not enter this variable in the regression model; n.a.: not available, since
enough information is not present due to non reporting; K in parentheses.
a Hypothesized direction of effect size for each moderator group; = High; = Low.
b Support obtained (Y)/not obtained (N).
CC Cognitive Competence.
c Read: cognitive competence provides an explanation for this relationship.
The
findings
on
costHigh/Low
(rSearch = 0.09;
rExperience = 0.19;
rCredence = 0.01)
and
costMedium
(rSearch = 0.30; rExperience = 0.19; rCredence = 0.32) are not
as per expectations. Note that the effect sizes for the two levels
of the antecedent cost display similar patterns: effect sizes
for experience products are the lowest. Experience products
are usually hedonic (e.g. meal at a restaurant), while search
and experience products are often utilitarian (e.g. opening a
bank account, buying insurance) in nature. Information on
product attributes is processed by consumers when undertaking
information search. We argue that search and credence products can be described in terms of attributes that are usually
utilitarian (and not hedonic) in nature. However, attributes
describing experience products are usually more hedonic (and
less utilitarian). These differences in the nature of attributes
increase the cost of processing this information associated
with experience products. The cognitive processes involved
in processing information on attributes for the different types
of products, therefore, probably provides an explanation for
the findings for the two levels of cost of information search.
The findings on perceived risk (rSearch = 0.16; rExperience = 0.13;
rCredence = 0.13) are not significant. Overall, we find good
support for H14a/b . The analysis for the moderator product type
also allows us to identify boundary conditions under which
specific theories hold.
Additional analysis. We undertake additional analysis on a
different type of product type, subcategorizing the effect sizes
by infrequently purchased/frequently purchased products (HP ,
Table 5). The reason for undertaking this additional analysis is
to test an alternative product type categorization that is widely
used and extensively adopted in extant literature, and is a means
for validating the findings obtained for the other moderators.
Infrequently purchased products are those that are not bought
often, and therefore, consumers are expected to undertake more
extensive information search on these products than on the ones
that are frequently purchased. Habit has been shown to exert a
strong influence in the case of frequently purchased products and
services. Also, infrequently purchased products usually call for
a higher monetary investment, which further explains the need
for undertaking more information search. The marginal benefit
associated with information search for an infrequently purchased
product is more than that associated with that of a frequently
purchased product. We expect that most of the hypothesized
relationships are dictated by perceived risk. However, we note
an exception. We expect that when consumers have low product
knowledge/prior experience they will undertake less information search for infrequently purchased products due to the cost
associated with searching for information.
Based on the above arguments, we make the following predictions:
HP . For the moderator product type (infrequently purchased/frequently purchased), the effect size for information
search and each of the antecedents is high for infrequently
purchased products, and low for frequently purchased products.
Of the 13 hypotheses for the moderator product type (infrequently purchased/frequently purchased product), we test 13
247
248
249
(a)
Cost1
(0.137***)
-0.189***
(-0.192***)
Cost2
(0.128***)
Benefit
(R2=0.108)
0.195***
(0.198***)
0.354***
(0.361***)
(0.099***)
Knowledge1
-0.225***
(-0.229***)
Knowledge2
0.024
(0.025)
Knowledge3
0.482***
(0.491***)
(0.084***)
(0.197***)
(0.091***)
Information Search
R2=0.567
(R2=0.552)
0.086***
(0.087***)
Perceived Risk
-0.113***
(-0.114***)
Prior Exp1
0.241***
(0.245***)
Prior Exp2
(b)
Cost1
Cost2
0.757a
(0.790a)
Cost
(0.000***)
Benefit
(R2=0.044)
Knowledge1
(0.196***)
-0.738***
(-0.735***)
Knowledge2
Knowledge3
0.087***
(0.087***)
Perceived Risk
Prior Exp1
(0.074)
-0.419
(-0.438)
0.061a
(0.047a)
0.256***
(0.261***)
0.352***
(0.361***)
Knowledge
0.087***
(0.087***)
0.942
(0.938)
Information Search
R2=0.569
(R2=0.552)
0.236***
(0.269***)
Prior Exp
-0.429***
(-0.426***)
0.912a
(0.913a)
Prior Exp2
1. Solid lines represent relationships between antecedents and information search, as proposed by Models 1a and 2a. Results of Models 1a
and 2a are in parentheses. Dotted lines represent additional relationships suggested by modification indices, as suggested by Models 1b and
2b. Results of Models 1b and 2b are not in parentheses.
2. *** indicates significance at p < .01 level; ** indicates significance at p < .05 level; * indicates significance at p < .1 level
Fig. 1. (a) Model 1a and Model 1b. (b) Model 2a and Model 2b.
250
more information because of a higher level of involvement compared to older consumers. This finding suggests that in providing
information, retailers may use affect-based appeals for younger
consumers and cognition-based appeals for older consumers
online as well as offline. The finding on the moderating effect of
age on time pressure, suggests that promotion and product cues
that lay an increased emphasis on aspects that shorten the information search stage and help consumers make choices quickly,
may be appropriate for younger consumers.
Even though consumers generally undertake a greater amount
of information search for infrequently purchased products, under
the conditions of price dispersion (high or low), and time pressure they are likely to undertake a limited search for infrequently
purchased products compared to frequently purchased products.
This observation suggests that the increased cost of information
search is a likely reason. An implication for retailers is that they
may provide price-related information for some of the top competing brands in the product category, thereby encouraging the
consumer to buy from that particular retailer, as well as increasing consumer trust in the retailer. It is especially convenient to
provide this information on retailers websites.
Consumer interactions with stores and brands to obtain
information prior to purchasing a product/service are increasingly taking place on the Internet, often through a variety of
devices (accessed through desktop computers, laptops or mobile
devices). However, this assertion may not apply equally to all
product categories. For example, consumers information search
and purchase of frequently purchased products (e.g. grocery
items a product category that is strongly represented in the
studies included in the meta-analysis) from online stores are limited. Also, consumers reach out across various channels to shop.
Retailers, therefore, embrace a multichannel context, leveraging
traditional as well as new and evolving channels to reach out to
consumers. In sum, the traditional (i.e. offline) channel continues to be an important component in a retailers channel mix,
and consumer search behavior in this channel is an activity that
retailers may ignore at their own peril.
We expect that the categories of variables affecting consumer
information search investigated in this meta-analysis, are likely
to influence search undertaken across new and evolving channels as well. For example, Korgaonkar, Silverblatt, and Girard
(2006) suggest that in the online context, perceived risk is greater
for experience goods than for search goods. Zauberman (2003)
demonstrate that in the context of online consumer information search, cost of search is a key determinant of the amount
of search undertaken. Therefore, the categories of antecedent
variables that we investigate in our meta-analysis (e.g. cost, perceived risk, knowledge) as well as the moderating variables (e.g.
product type search, experience, credence), in the context of
offline information search, are likely to affect consumer information search in the online context as well (e.g. Konus, Verhoef,
and Neslin 2008).
Implications for theory and research
Main effects. First, the review makes it apparent that empirical investigations in the area of consumer information search
purchased, frequently purchased), and demographic characteristics (age) are tested on the direct effects. Overall, we find
strong support for all the moderators. Through the moderator
analysis we are able to identify specific conditions under which
certain theories hold (Table 5). For the moderator age, we offer
competing hypotheses based on the theory of cognitive competence and that of risk theory. Our findings suggest that theory of
cognitive competence explains the moderating effect of age for
the variables costHigh/Low , price dispersionHigh/Low , uncertainty
and involvement. Risk theory provides an explanation for the
moderating effect on the variables time pressure, perceived risk,
knowledgeHigh/Low and prior experienceHigh/Low.
Our findings on the moderator product type (search, experience, credence), identifies conditions in which cost theory or
risk theory provide explanation for the observed effect sizes. The
moderating effect of search/experience/credence product type
on consumer information search under the conditions of price
dispersionHigh/Low , nancial constraint and involvement may be
explained by risk theory. Similarly, the tenets of cost theory probably provide an explanation for the moderating effect on number
of alternatives, knowledgeHigh/Low and prior experienceHigh/Low.
Similarly, for another product type categorization (infrequently purchased/frequently purchased), we find that it is
risk theory that provides explanation for the moderating effect
on most of the antecedent variables. Our moderator analysis
also indicates that there are several relationships (e.g. price
dispersion search/experience/credence product type; prior
experience search/experience/credence product type) that have
not received adequate attention in the context of offline consumer
information search. The information search literature will benefit from undertaking studies on these relationships that have so
far received limited attention.
251
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Professors Ruth Bolton, Shelby
Hunt, Brian Ratchford, and Dr. Leslie Vincent for their comments on an earlier version of this paper. The authors would
also like to thank the editors and the three anonymous reviewers
for providing a truly collegial review process.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary material related to this article can be
found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jretai.2014.03.001.
References
Anderson, Erin, Wujin Chu and Barton A. Weitz (1987), Industrial Purchasing: An Empirical Exploration of the Buyclass Framework, Journal of
Marketing, 51 (July), 7186.
Anderson, Eugene W. and Mary W. Sullivan (1993), The Antecedents and
Consequences of Customer Satisfaction for Firms, Marketing Science, 12
(2), 12543.
252
Assmus, Gert, John U. Farley and Donald R. Lehmann (1984), How Advertising
Affects Sales: Meta-Analysis of Econometric Results, Journal of Marketing
Research, 21 (1), 6574.
Avery, Rosemary J. (1996), Determinants of Search for Nondurable Goods: An
Empirical Assessment of the Economics of Information Theory, Journal of
Consumer Affairs, 30 (2), 390420.
Baradell, Janet G. and Kitty Klein (1993), Relationship of Life stress and Body
Consciousness to Hypervigilant Decision Making, Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 64 (2), 26773.
Bauer, Raymond A. (1960), Consumer Behavior as Risk-Taking, in Dynamic
Marketing for a Changing World, Hancock R. S. ed. Chicago: American
Marketing Association, 38998.
Beatty, Sharon E. and Scott M. Smith (1987), External Search Effort: An Investigation across Several Product Categories, Journal of Consumer Research,
14 (June), 8395.
Bettman, James R. (1974), Toward a Statistics for Consumer Decision Net
Models, Journal of Consumer Research, 1 (1), 7180.
(1979), An Information Processing Theory of Consumer
Choice, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Bettman, James R. and Whan C. Park (1980), Effects of Prior Knowledge
and Experience and Phase of the Choice Process on Consumer Decision
Processes: A Protocol Analysis, Journal of Consumer Research, 7 (3),
23448.
Bloch, Peter H., Daniel L. Sherrel and Nancy M. Ridgeway (1986), Consumer Search: An Extended Framework, Journal of Consumer Research,
13 (June), 11926.
Bodur, H. Onur and Lissa Matyas (2008), When Do Consumers Prefer More
Choice? Moderating Effects of Regulatory Focus, Advances in Consumer
Research, 35, 7878.
Brucks, Merrie (1985), The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Information
Search Behavior, Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (June), 116.
Burnkrant, Robert E. (1976), A Motivational Model of Information Processing
Intensity, Journal of Consumer Research, 3, 2130.
Carlson, John A. and R. Preston McAfee (1983), Discrete Equilibrium Price
Dispersion, Journal of Political Economy, 91 (3), 48093.
Chen, Chien-Chung (2012), Detecting Moderator Effects On Construct Relationships In Empirical Sales Research: A Meta-Analysis, Journal of
Management & Marketing Research, 11 (September), 118.
Cheon, Hongsik John, Chang-Hoan Cho and John Sutherland (2007), A MetaAnalysis of Studies on the Determinants of Standardization and Localization
of International Marketing and Advertising Strategies, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 19 (4), 10947.
Claxton, John, Joseph N. Fry and Bernard Portis (1974), A Taxonomy of Prepurchase Information Gathering Patterns, Journal of Consumer Research,
1 (December), 3542.
Cox, Donald F. and Stuart U. Rich (1964), Perceived Risk and Consumer
Decision-Making: The Case of Telephone Shopping, Journal of Marketing
Research, 1 (4), 329.
Davids, Anthony and Bradley B. Falkoff (1975), Juvenile Delinquents Then and
Now: Comparisons of Findings from 1959 and 1974, Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 84 (April), 1614.
Darby, Michael R. and Edi Karni (1973), Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud, Journal of Law and Economics, 16 (April),
6788.
DeSarbo, Wayne S. and Jungwhan Choi (1999), A Latent Structure Double
Hurdle Regression Model for Exploring Heterogeneity in Consumer Search
Patterns, Journal of Econometrics, 89, 42355.
Dholakia, Utpal M. (2001), A Motivational Process Model of Product Involvement and Consumer Risk Perception, European Journal of Marketing, 35
(11/12), 134060.
Dowling, Grahame R. and Richard Staelin (1994), A Model of Perceived Risk
and Intended Risk-Handling Activity, Journal of Consumer Research, 21
(June), 11934.
Engel, James F., David T. Kollat and Roger L.D. Blackwell (1973), Consumer
Behavior, 21st ed. New York: Free.
Eysenck, Michael W. and Manuel G. Calvo (1992), Anxiety and Performance: The Processing Efficiency Theory, Cognition and Emotion, 6,
40934.
Fern, Edward F. and Kent B. Monroe (1996), Effect Size Estimates: Issues
and Problems in Interpretation, Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (2),
89105.
Freud, Sigmund (1911/1959), Formulations Regarding the Two Principles of
Mental Functioning, New York: Basic Books.
Gemunden, Hans Georg (1985), Perceived Risk and Information Search: A
Systematic Meta-analysis of the Empirical Evidence, International Journal
of Research in Marketing, 2, 79100.
Geyskens, Inge, Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp and Nirmalya Kumar (1998),
Generalizations About Trust in Marketing Channel Relationships Using
Meta-Analysis, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 15,
22348.
Glass, Gene V. (1976), Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research,
Educational Research, 5 (10), 38.
Grace, James B. and Jon E. Keeley (2006), A Structural Equation Model
Analysis of Postfire Plant Diversity in California Shrublands, Ecological
Applications, 16, 50314.
Green, Leonard, Astrid F. Fry and Joel Myerson (1994), Discounting of Delayed
Rewards: A Life-Span Comparison, Psychological Science, 5, 336.
Gregan-Paxton, Jennifer and Deborah Roedder-John (1995), Are Young Children Adaptive Decision Makers? A Study of Age, Journal of Consumer
Research, 21 (4), 56780.
Gough, Matthew (2011), Looking After Your Pearls: The Dilemmas of Mental
Health Self-Disclosure in Higher Education Teaching, Journal of Mental
Health Training, Education & Practice, 6 (4), 20310.
Guiltinan, Joseph P. (1987), The Price Bundling of Services: A Normative
Framework, Journal of Marketing, 51, 7485.
Hassanein, Khaled and Milena Head (2006), The Impact of Infusing Social
Presence in the Web Interface: An Investigation Across Product Types,
International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 10 (2), 3155.
Hedges, Larry V. and Ingram Olkin (1985), Statistical Methods for MetaAnalysis, Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Hill, C. Jeanne (2001), The Nature of Problem Recognition and Search in the
Extended Health Care Decision, Journal of Services Marketing, 15 (6/7),
45479.
Hockey, G. Robert J. (1970), Effect of Loud Noise on Attentional Selectivity,
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 22, 2836.
Hunter, John E. and Frank L. Schmidt (1990), Methods of Meta-Analysis:
Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings, Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Irwin, Julie R. and Gary H. McClelland (2003), Negative Consequences
of Dichotomizing Continuous Predictor Variables, Journal of Marketing
Research, 60 (August), 36671.
Jacoby, Jacob, Donald E. Speller and Carol K. Berning (1974), Brand Choice
Behavior as a Function of Information Load: Replication and Extension,
Journal of Consumer Research, 1, 3342.
Jacoby, Jacob, Robert A. Chestnut and William A. Fisher (1978), A Behavioral
Process Approach to Information Acquisition in Nondurable Purchasing,
Journal of Marketing Research, 15 (November), 53244.
James, William L. and Brenda S. Sonner (2001), Just Say No to Traditional Student Samples, Journal of Advertising Research, 41 (SeptemberOctober),
6371.
Johnson, Eric J. and J. Edward Russo (1984), Product Familiarity and Learning
New Information, Journal of Consumer Research, 11 (June), 54250.
Kahneman, Daniel (1973), Attention and Effort, Englewood Cliff, NJ: PrenticeHall.
Katona, George and Eva Mueller (1955), A Study of Purchase Decisions, in
Consumer Behavior: The Dynamics of Consumer Reaction, Clark L. H. ed.
New York: New York University Press, 3087.
Kirasic, Kathleen C., Gary L. Allen, Shannon H. Dobson and Katherine S.
Binder (1996), Aging, Cognitive Resources, and Declarative Learning,
Psychology and Aging, 11 (4), 65870.
Konus, Umut, Peter C. Verhoef and Scott A. Neslin (2008), Multichannel
Shopper Segments and Their Covariates, Journal of Retailing, 84 (4),
398413.
Korgaonkar, Pradeep, Ronnie Silverblatt and Tulay Girard (2006), Online
Retailing, Product Classifications, and Consumer Preferences, Internet
Research, 16 (3), 26788.
253
Peterson, Robert A. (2001), On the Use of College Students in Social Science Research: Insights from a Second-Order Meta-Analysis, Journal of
Consumer Research, 28 (3), 45061.
Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo (1981), Issue Involvement as a Moderator of the Effects on Attitude of Advertising Content and Context, In
Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 8, Monroe K. B. ed. Provo, UT:
Association for Consumer Research, 204.
Punj, Girish N. and Richard Staelin (1983), A Model of Consumer Information
Search Behavior for New Automobiles, Journal of Consumer Research, 9
(March), 36680.
Putrevu, Sanjay and Brian T. Ratchford (1997), A Model of Search Behavior
with an Application to Grocery Shopping, Journal of Retailing, 73 (4),
46386.
Ratchford, Brian T. and Narasimhan Srinivasan (1993), An Empirical Investigation of Returns to Search, Marketing Science, 12 (1), 7387.
Roedder-John, Deborah, Carol A. Scott and James R. Bettman (1986), Sampling Data for Covariation Assessment: The Effect of Prior Beliefs on Search
Patterns, Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (1), 3847.
Roedder John, Deborah and Catherine A. Cole (1986), Age Differences in
Information Processing: Understanding Deficits in Young and Elderly Consumers, Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (3), 297315.
Rothschild, Michael (1974), Searching for the Lowest Price when the Distribution of Prices is Unknown, Journal of Political Economy, 82 (4),
689711.
Schaie, K. Warner and Sherry L. Willis (1993), Age Difference Patterns of
Psychometric Intelligence in Adulthood: Generalizability Within and Across
Domains, Psychology and Aging, 8 (1), 4455.
Schaninger, Charles M. and Donald Sciglimpaglia (1981), The Influence of Cognitive Personality Traits and Demographics on Consumer
Information Acquisition, Journal of Consumer Research, 8 (2),
20816.
Sears, David O. (1986), College Sophomores in the Laboratory: Influences of a
Narrow Data Base on Social Psychologys View of Human Nature, Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (3), 51530.
Simon, Herbert A. (1957), Models of Man: Social and Rational, New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
(1979), Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations, American Economic Review, 69 (4), 493513.
(1987), Satisficing, In The New Palgrave: A Dictionary
of Economics, Vol. 4, Eatwell , John , Milgate M. and Newman P. eds. New
York: MacMillan, 2435.
Smith, Gerald E., Meera P. Venkataraman and Ruby R. Dholakia (1999),
Diagnosing the Search Cost Effect: Waiting Time and the Moderating
Impact of Prior Category Knowledge, Journal of Economic Psychology, 20,
285314.
Srinivasan, Narasimhan and Brian T. Ratchford (1991), An Empirical Test of a
Model of External Search for Automobiles, Journal of Consumer Research,
18 (2), 23342.
Stahl, Dale O. II (1989), Oligopolistic Pricing with Sequential Consumer
Search, The American Economic Review, 79 (4), 70012.
Staal, Mark A. (2004), Stress, Cognition, and Human Performance: A Literature Review and Conceptual Framework [NASA Technical Memorandum
212824], Moffett Field, CA: NASA-Ames Research Center.
Stigler, George (1961), Economics of Information, Journal of Political Economy, 69 (3), 21325.
Stone, Robert N. (1984), The Marketing Characteristics of Involvement,
Advances in Consumer Research, 11 (1), 2105.
Sultan, Fareena, John U. Farley and Donald R. Lehmann (1990), A MetaAnalysis of Applications of Diffusion Models, Journal of Marketing
Research, 27 (February), 707.
Szymanski, David M. and David H. Henard (2001), Customer Satisfaction:
A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Evidence, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 29 (1), 1635.
Tellis, Gerald J. and Birger Wernerfelt (1987), Competitive Price and Quality under Asymmetric Information, Marketing Science, 6 (Summer),
24053.
Urbany, Joel E. (1986), An Experimental Examination of the Economics of
Information, Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (2), 25771.
254
Urbany, Joel E., Peter A. Dickson and Rosemary Kalapurakal (1996), Price
Search in the Retail Grocery Market, Journal of Marketing, 60 (2),
91104.
Urbany, Joel E., Peter R. Dickson and William L. Wilkie (1989), Buyer Uncertainty and Information Search, Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (2),
20814.
Varian, Hal R. (1980), A Model of Sales, The American Economic Review, 70
(4), 6519.
Viswesvaran, Chockalingam and Juan I. Sanchez (1998), Moderator
Search in Meta-Analysis: A Review and Cautionary Note on Existing Approaches, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58 (1),
7787.
Vriend, Nicolaas J. (1996), Rational Behavior and Economic Theory, Journal
of Economic Behavior and Organization, 29, 26385.