Attribute-task compatibility as a determinant of consumer preference reversals

The authors propose that consumers' preferences are systematically affected by whether they make direct comparisons between brands (e.g., a choice task) or evaluate brands individually (e.g., purchase likelihood ratings). In particular ''comparable'' attributes, which produce precise and easy-to-compute comparisons (e.g., price), tend to be relatively more important in comparison-based tasks. Conversely, ''enriched'' attributes (e.g., brand name), which are more difficult to compare but are often more meaningful and informative when evaluated on their own, tend to receive relatively greater weight when preferences are formed on the basis of separate evaluations of individual options. Consistent with this analysis, systematic preference reversals were observed in a series of studies, which tested the proposed explanation on the basis of attribute-task compatibility, demonstrated that the findings generalize across preference elicitation tasks and attributes that have the characteristics prescribed by their theory, and examined rival accounts. The authors discuss the theoretical implications of this research and explore its consequences for the measurement of buyers' preferences and for marketers' pricing, merchandising, distribution, and communications strategies.