Information Presentation & Consumer Choice: Implications for Product Explanations and Multiattribute Decisions

Information presentation and framing are foundational topics in consumer research and judgment and decision-making. Decades of work show that logically equivalent or similarly valid descriptions can yield different evaluations and choices, highlighting that preferences are often constructed in response to how information is presented (Lichtenstein & Slovic, 2006; Slovic, 1995; Tversky & Kahneman, 1981). In this dissertation, I examine how information presentation shapes consumer choice in two contexts that are common in the marketplace but underexamined in prior research: (1) how firms present explanations regarding how products work, and (2) how firms present upgrade decisions in multiattribute choices. Chapter 1 examines the role of information presentation in the context of product explanations. Marketers in many categories do not just claim that a product works, they explain how it works by describing a causal chain linking an input to an outcome. For example, a skincare product might be described as increasing cell turnover in order to reduce wrinkles. These explanations vary in how their causal steps are framed, with some maintaining consistent directionality across steps (increase → increase) and others alternating between increases and decreases. In this chapter, I examine whether these differences in description shape consumer choice. I find that directionally consistent explanations are easier to process and therefore lead consumers to infer greater efficacy, ultimately increasing likelihood of choice. Chapter 2 examines the role of information presentation in the context of multiattribute decisions. In practice, firms often frame these decisions in one of two formats: they can present a set of fully assembled options (preconfigured choice) or prompt consumers to build a product by selecting levels of individual attributes (customization). Although the two formats can yield the same underlying outcomes, I find that they lead to different upgrade behavior: consumers select upgrades on more attributes when choosing among preconfigured options than when configuring the product themselves, and this difference is most pronounced for less important attributes. I argue that this pattern arises from how the two formats present the cost of each upgrade. Customization displays the marginal cost of each upgrade, prompting consumers to weigh whether each attribute is worth its added expense, a judgment of justifiability, whereas preconfigured choice embeds these costs within the total prices of assembled options, reducing such scrutiny. Across a series of experiments, I test this account by manipulating marginal cost salience and justifiability considerations directly, examine when the effect is strongest, and explore its practical consequences.