Disjunctive Model (Marketing Research) - Definition
If you still have questions or prefer to get help directly from an agent, please submit a request.
We’ll get back to you as soon as possible.
- Marketing, Advertising, Sales & PR
- Accounting, Taxation, and Reporting
- Professionalism & Career Development
Law, Transactions, & Risk Management
Government, Legal System, Administrative Law, & Constitutional Law Legal Disputes - Civil & Criminal Law Agency Law HR, Employment, Labor, & Discrimination Business Entities, Corporate Governance & Ownership Business Transactions, Antitrust, & Securities Law Real Estate, Personal, & Intellectual Property Commercial Law: Contract, Payments, Security Interests, & Bankruptcy Consumer Protection Insurance & Risk Management Immigration Law Environmental Protection Law Inheritance, Estates, and Trusts
- Business Management & Operations
- Economics, Finance, & Analytics
Back to: MARKETING, SALES, ADVERTISING, & PR
Disjunctive Model (Marketing Research) Definition
It is a model used in the study of consumer decision-making processes to assess products of different brands. This model asserts that consumers expect a minimum level of satisfaction on certain attributes of a product. Generally, these are the attributes and features which are most important to them. While making a purchase they may rule out all other non-important features of the product and focus on the main attributes. A high degree of satisfaction in those secondary, less-important features does not compensate for a lower satisfaction level on the important features. While manufacturing a product, the producers need to make sure not to compromise with those main features. Although, those features may vary from one customer to another. For example, a car buyer may think the mileage and the price is most important for him while buying a car. He may then rule out all the cars which do not meet the criteria set by him for these two features even when the cars offer other better features. It is an important model for formulating marketing strategies by assessing the customer expectations.
References for Disjunctive Model
Academic Research on Disjunctive Model
Issues in marketing's use of multi-attribute attitudemodels, Wilkie, W. L., & Pessemier, E. A. (1973).Journal of Marketing research, 428-441. This paper explains the simplistic form of the linear compensatory attitude modelling which includes a higher proportion of some significant research questions which involves measurements, analysis and concepts. The conclusion and result of this marketing research thesis as regards the model are explained for each problem and rapt attention was focused on further developments which were also suggested in this paper. The effect of individual and situation-related factors on consumer selection of judgmentalmodels, Park, C. W. (1976). Journal of Marketing Research, 144-151. The aim of this paper is to explain the reported tests as regards the hypothesis which states that the consumers use of a particular judgmental model in explaining a product is dependent on the prior familiarity and or the product complexity. The result gotten from this paper shows that two major factors influence the respondents selection of the judgmental models. Hence, this paper explains the effects of the individual and the situation-related factors as regards the selection of judgmental models. A comparison of linear and nonlinearevaluationprocessmodels, Pras, B., & Summers, J. (1975). Journal of Marketing Research, 276-281. According to this research paper, the result of the test for comparative analysis of the nonlinear and linear evaluation process model using the 3 x 3 x 2 (number of model x levels of a number of attributes x level of acceptability of alternatives) factorial design were reported. The result, however, dictates that the nonlinear model may give a germane method for better understanding of the formation of the consumer preference. In a nutshell, this study is a comparison of the linear and non-linear evaluation process models. Judgmental rules and stages of the familiarity curve: Promotional implications, Park, C. W., & Lessig, V. P. (1977). Journal of Advertising,6(1), 10-16. This paper predicts different ways in which consumers usage of several compositions of rules is most likely to contrast as their (consumers) brand and product familiarity increases with time. The major correlations suggested in this paper are based on the empirical results and theories of the processed information. Special focus was as well placed on the promotional implication of these aforementioned relationships. This study explains the stages and the judgmental rules binding the familiarity curve; using the promotional implication as a case study. Explaining consumer decision making throughevaluationprocessmodels, Pras, B. (1978). InMarketing(pp. 145-161). Gabler Verlag. This paper explains the ways in which consumers mix information especially when it comes to decision making. This process was however explained via the help of the seminal contribution of researchers which pegs at decision theory and its psychology. Although, most research on the internet has also explained this process. Nonetheless, this paper also explained the ways in which the evaluation process models have helped consumers in the aspect of decision making. Modellingsupermarket product selection, Heeler, R. M., Kearney, M. J., & Mehaffey, B. J. (1973). Journal of Marketing Research, 34-37. This study examines the ways in which supermarkets models their products. According to the research carried out in this paper, supermarket chains account for more than eight thousand new products offering per annum. However, this paper explains the choice process which aims at reducing the time allocated to the management appraisal and hence secure a better understanding of the type of decision rule adopted as well as the variables employed. The result obtained from this analysis provides important proof for an additive model of attitude formation. Toward understanding attitude structure: a study of the complementarity of multi-attribute attitudemodels, Bruno, A. V., & Wildt, A. R. (1975). Journal of Consumer Research,2(2), 137-145. In this research paper, an alternative to the outdated method of selecting a model as representative of an entire population was explained. According to this research, important procedures which cover the usefulness of predictive result and also add important managerial information to questions which were formally answered in an archaic way were resolved solely via the application of the goodness of fit effectiveness processes. This paper channels its resources towards understanding the attitude structure in which the complementarity of multi-attribute attitude model was taken as a case study. Sequential and cyclical nature of information processingmodelsin repetitive choice behaviour, Sheth, J. N., & Raju, P. S. (1974). ACR North American Advances. According to this paper, the cyclical and sequential nature of the information processing models in their repetitive choice behaviour was considered. Hence, the processes involved in the information processing models were vastly and thoroughly explained in this research paper. Probabilistic subset-conjunctivemodelsfor heterogeneous consumers, Jedidi, K., & Kohli, R. (2005). Journal of Marketing Research,42(4), 483-494. According to this study, two generalizations of the disjunctive and conjunctive screening rules were established and explained. The first according to this paper is that they rest the requirement that explains that an acceptable alternative has to be in sync with all (conjunctive) or one (disjunctive) of the criteria. The second assignment was that they discard the assumption which explains that consumers sometimes make a deterministic judgment as regards evaluating their alternative. Also, this paper explains the latent-class method for the calculation of the subset-conjunctive rules as well as the consideration of the probabilities of the attribute level using either the choice data or consideration. Modellingan organizational buyer's productevaluationstrategy: Validity and procedural considerations, Scott, J. E., & Wright, P. (1976). Journal of Marketing Research, 211-224. This study reports that the subjunctive weights provided by the organizational buyer to different cues were explained and calculated by making use of the regression procedures with information gotten from an in-office product-concept estimation task. According to this paper, several validity tests of the calculated weighing constant were carried out and they include a comparison with a known-group of the model, cross-validation and the comparison with self-reports. The major effects as regards the estimated models of the variations in the product-concept profiles adopted in this task were also explained. Hence, this paper estimates the validity and procedural information of the buyers product evaluation strategy. The predictive aspects of a joint-space theory of stochastic choice, Best, R. J. (1976). Journal of Marketing Research, 198-204. According to this study, an empirical study which explains the relationship between the choices of the brand behaviour and the distances that exist between the brands displayed in joint-space and the configuration of the ideal points which helps to explain five major operative models of choice behaviours. Out of a total number of 77 individual models, 73 were found to be significant while 57 produced a significant prediction of the future of the brand choice behaviour. This paper, however, focuses on the predictive aspect of the joint space theory of the stochastic choice. Selected issues inmodellingconsumerbrandchoice: the extended competitive vulnerabilitymodel, Laroche, M. (2002). InEssays by distinguished marketing scholars of the Society for Marketing Advances(pp. 69-114). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. According to this research paper, several problems as regards the modelling of the consumer brand choice were explained and an extension in the competitive vulnerability model was also discussed.