The Effect of Novel Attributes on Product Evaluation : Explaining Consumer Resistance to Technological Innovation

By Ashesh Mukherjee. 2001

520 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Marketing, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e5f2a4fd700a2fb6efbb7f4cce3a6653834408bc

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Science and Operations Research

1. Gautham G. Vadakkepatt
2. D. Thompson
3. John D. Wells
4. Shyam Sundar
5. J. Valacich
6. Roland T. Rust
7. Katrin Talke
8. Ya You

In Marketing

1. D. Thompson
2. Rebecca W. Hamilton
3. Gita V. Johar
4. Alexander Kock
5. Gergana Y. Nenkov
6. Hans-Georg Gemünden
7. J. Valacich
8. S. Heidenreich

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Gita V. Johar
2. S. Kalyanaraman
3. D. Thompson
4. Rebecca W. Hamilton
5. Gergana Y. Nenkov
6. J. Valacich
7. Shyam Sundar
8. John D. Wells

Citations in the corpus

• Consumer desire for control as a barrier to new product adoption (2017, background): “…have remained stable over AC C EP TE D M AN U SC R IP T ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT DESIRE FOR CONTROL AND NEW PRODUCT ACCEPTANCE 5 time, suggesting that transient factors such as the economic climate cannot fully account for such high failure rates (Gatignon & Robertson, 1989; Mukherjee & Hoyer, 2001).”
• Too Exciting to Fail, Too Sincere to Succeed: The Effects of Brand Personality on Sensory Disconfirmation (2016, unknown): “…out a measure of perceived functional efficacy on three 7 point items (“Please indicate the extent to which the product . . . [is likely to perform poorly/well; will offer few/a lot of advantages; will add a little/a lot of value]; Mukherjee and Hoyer 2001; Thompson, Hamilton, and Rust 2005).”
• The Psychological Appeal of Personalized Content in Web Portals: Does Customization Affect Attitudes and Behavior? (2006, background): “Use of novel features may be interpreted by consumers as an indication of extra value being offered by marketers ( Mukherjee & Hoyer, 2001 ).”
• A Meta-Analysis of Electronic Word-of-Mouth Elasticity (2015, background): “Second, prior research has shown that the addition of a novel product attribute may result in consumers evaluating the new product poorly because of associated learning costs (Mukherjee and Hoyer 2001), thus negatively affecting sales or at least dampening the eWOM elasticity.”
• The diffusion of microgeneration technologies – assessing the influence of perceived product characteristics on home owners' willingness to pay (2011, background): “Research has shown that in the case of highcomplexity products, people often value novel attributes negatively because of the anticipated high learning costs involved (e.g. Mukherjee and Hoyer, 2001).”
• Impulse purchases of new products: an empirical analysis (2009, background): “Substantial research on innovations has appeared in the consumer behavior, marketing and management literatures over the last 30 years (Rogers, 1976; Olshavsky and Spreng, 1996; Moreau et al., 2001; Mukherjee and Hoyer, 2001; Steenkamp and Gielens, 2003).”
• How to overcome pro-change Bias: : Incorporating passive and active innovation resistance in innovation decision models (2014, background): “When individuals who are reluctant to lose control confront new products, the novel elements likely cause a lack of confidence in their successful use (Mukherjee and Hoyer, 2001) and thus lead to a perceived loss of control (Bagozzi and Lee, 1999).”
• The Mixed Blessings of Technological Innovativeness for the Commercial Success of New Products (2011, background): “Also, customers might perceive introduction of novel attributes as a signal for additional value (Mukherjee and Hoyer, 2001).”
• Upgrades and New Purchases (2006, background): “Furthermore, if consumers perceive added features as trivial, the enhancements may backfire and actually diminish the value of the product (Mukherjee and Hoyer 2001; Simonson, Carmon, and O’Curry 1994).”
• The Effect of Perceived Novelty on the Adoption of Information Technology Innovations: A Risk/Reward Perspective (2010, background): “As discussed earlier, we posit that the “newness” of an IT innovation will stimulate a positive affective belief (i.e., high perceived novelty) (Cox & Locander, 1987; Mukherjee & Hoyer, 2001), which creates a positive affective mood.”
• Feature Fatigue: When Product Capabilities Become Too Much of a Good Thing (2005, methodology): “We measured product capability using three items (extent to which the products were likely to perform poorly/well, offer few/a lot of advantages, and add little/a lot of value; Mukherjee and Hoyer 2001).”