GET IT? GOT IT. GOOD! ENHANCING NEW PRODUCT ACCEPTANCE

BY FACILITATING RESOLUTION OF EXTREME INCONGRUITY

October 2010

Ji Hoon Jhang

Susan Jung Grant

Margaret C. Campbell

Ji Hoon Jhang is a doctoral candidate in marketing (ji.jhang@colorado.edu), Susan Jung Grant is

assistant professor of marketing (susan.jung.grant@colorado.edu), and Margaret C. Campbell is

associate professor of marketing (meg.campbell@colorado.edu) at the Leeds School of Business,

University of Colorado, Boulder. All three authors contributed equally to this project. The

authors would like to thank Alice M. Tybout, Brian Sternthal and John G. Lynch for their

feedback on previous versions of this manuscript.

2

ABSTRACT

Highly innovative products may offer consumers greater benefits than incrementally new

products, yet they have a higher failure rate. The present research addresses the challenge faced

by new products that are extremely different from existing offerings by drawing on theorizing

regarding the evaluation of schema incongruity. Specifically, the authors posit that consumers’

acceptance of extremely incongruent products will be increased by strategies that facilitate

cognitive flexibility and thereby the likelihood that consumers will be able to make sense of

incongruent new products. The authors examine the influence of three manipulations of

cognitive flexibility – positive affect, a future (vs. past) launch description, and a cognitive

flexibility prime – on evaluations of new products. Results from four experiments show that

these factors enhance participants’ evaluations of extremely incongruent new products by

facilitating ability to make sense of the new products. Results also indicate that understanding of

the benefits provided by extremely new products, rather than affect arising from resolution, leads

to higher evaluations of these products.

KEYWORDS: new products, incongruity, cognitive flexibility, innovation

3

Not only do new product launches have notoriously low rates of success – failure

estimates span 40% to 90%, depending on the product category (Gourville 2006) – innovations

that venture too far beyond expectations seem especially prone to failure. For example, recent

product flops such as Crystal Pepsi, Colgate Kitchen Entrees, and Premier smokeless cigarettes,

are remarkable for their incongruity with consumer expectations. Recent research supports the

idea of the problematic success of extremely different new products, finding that consumers were

four times more likely to choose an incrementally new product over a really new one (Alexander,

Lynch and Wang 2008). In fact, for consumers who reported an intention to buy a new product

(60% of the original 2,700 participants), an actual purchase was twice as likely for incrementally

new as compared to really new products. Overall, research suggests that the more extreme the

innovation, the more likely a new product is to fail.

With the acceleration of marketplace change and demand for innovation, there are

frequently strategic reasons for companies to introduce new products that deviate from

consumers’ expectations. For instance, a firm may leverage existing technologies to new product

categories to meet consumers’ needs, resulting in product attributes quite different from

expectations. Dyson, for example, recently employed the wind-tunnel engineering from their

bagless vacuum cleaners to launch a bladeless fan, thus introducing a highly unexpected point of

difference. Adopting extreme incongruity as a point of difference can also allow new entrants to

leapfrog incumbents and build awareness. Extreme incongruity is likely to attract attention to the

brand’s position, thus fueling word of mouth and other viral communications. Further, adopting

extremely incongruent innovations can contribute to a brand’s reputation for innovation.

Given marketplace desire for innovation and high failure rates of new products that

deviate from consumer expectations, it is important to gain insight into how to increase

4

consumer acceptance of such products. The literature on schema incongruity provides insight

into moderate incongruity, but is silent on the question of how to enhance consumer perceptions

of extreme incongruity. Theorizing by Mandler (1982) provides an understanding of the

challenges related to extreme incongruity. He proposed that the processing that results from

different degrees of congruity of a new item with an existing category schema influences

evaluation of the new item. He proposed that congruent items conform to expectations and thus

are not arousing, resulting in mildly positive evaluations due to familiarity (e.g., Tesser 1978).

Moderate incongruity, however, evokes arousal as the consumer elaborates in attempting to

resolve the incongruity. Because the moderately incongruent new item shares associations and

connections with existing schema, the consumer is able to resolve the incongruity; the process of

resolution is proposed to lead to stronger positive evaluation. Extreme schema incongruity,

however, conflicts with existing schema knowledge and thus is difficult to resolve. Because of

the lack of resolution, extremely incongruent items are less positively evaluated than moderately

incongruent options.

An implication of this theorizing is that new products that are extremely incongruent with

consumers’ expectations are likely to receive lower evaluations than new products that are

moderately incongruent with consumers’ expectations. Consumer research supports Mandler’s

theorizing, showing an inverted-U relationship such that moderately incongruent new products

are often evaluated more positively than either congruent or extremely incongruent options (e.g.,

Maoz and Tybout 2002; Meyers-Levy, Louie and Curren 1994; Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989;

Peracchio and Tybout 1996) unless other factors, such as risk, limit enjoyment of resolution (e.g.,

Campbell and Goodstein 1999). Though not the focal domain of the current research, a body of

work on brand extensions sounds a similar caveat: New products that depart more radically from

5

consumers’ notions of the parent brand – BMW camera, Frito-Lay cereal, Levi’s business suit –

are evaluated less favorably than extensions that are moderately incongruent – BMW

lawnmower, Frito-Lay crackers, Levi’s casual pants (Aaker and Keller 1990; Park, Milberg and

Lawson 1991). Overall, we see that new products that are extremely incongruent from

consumers’ expectations are unlikely to be positively evaluated.

Key to Mandler’s theorizing and the work that followed is the idea that the lower

evaluation of extremely incongruent as compared to the more positive evaluation of moderately

incongruent options is driven by ability to resolve the incongruity. Consumers evaluate

extremely incongruent products unfavorably because they are unable to resolve the departure

from expectations and evaluate moderately incongruent options positively when they are able to

resolve the incongruity (e.g., Campbell and Goodstein 1999; Maoz and Tybout 2002; Meyers-

Levy and Tybout 1989; Peracchio and Tybout 1996). Conceptualizing the problem of new

product acceptance within this schema-incongruity framework provides a theoretical foundation

for understanding how to overcome resistance to extremely incongruent new products. That is,

we propose that facilitating incongruity resolution can increase evaluations of extremely

incongruent new products. Specifically, we hypothesize that enhancing cognitive flexibility will

lead to higher evaluations of extremely incongruent products by boosting consumers’ ability to

resolve extreme incongruity. Our identification of how to increase evaluations of extremely

incongruent options offers important contributions to both the schema congruity and the new

product acceptance literatures.

In the following section, we discuss sources of incongruity in new products to clarify our

focus and contribution. We then discuss cognitive flexibility and how it can influence

evaluations of extremely incongruent new products. This leads to a discussion of factors that

6

increase cognitive flexibility. We employ three different manipulations of cognitive flexibility in

four studies in order to provide convergent evidence for our hypothesis that increased cognitive

flexibility leads to more positive evaluations of extremely incongruent new products.

POSITIONING AND SOURCES OF INCONGRUITY

Two important aspects of product positioning answer the questions: 1), “what is it?” by

providing a frame of reference; and 2) “what of it?” by providing a point of difference (Keller,

Sternthal and Tybout 2002). Both frame of reference and points of difference can be sources of

incongruity. We draw this distinction to clarify that, whereas much of the extant research on new

product acceptance focuses on the first question, examining category membership that is

incongruent with expectations, the focus of our research is the second question. Existing research

on really new products contributes important understanding of the first source of new product

failure and ways to enhance consumer acceptance. For example, research shows that when a new

product is difficult to categorize, consumer evaluations can be improved by facilitating

inferences from multiple categories (Gregan-Paxton et al. 2005) and analogical reasoning

(Gregan-Paxton et al. 2002; Moreau, Markman and Lehmann 2001; Roehm and Sternthal 2001),

and providing opportunities for mental simulation (Hoeffler 2003; Zhao, Hoeffler and Dahl

2009). These approaches facilitate category understanding and hence enhance evaluations of the

new product.

Our research focuses on the second aspect of new product positioning, complementing

the existing research by examining new product incongruity that arises from the novelty of a

differentiating benefit. While providing a point of difference is critical to new product success,

consumers often have difficulty appreciating the benefit provided by a product attribute that is

extremely incongruent from their expectations. In these cases, consumers may understand the

7

category membership, but have difficulty reconciling the extremely incongruent attribute. For

example, consumers understood that Crystal Pepsi was a soft drink, but the colorless nature of

the product was incongruent with expectations for a cola and many consumers had difficulty

understanding the benefit of the attribute. We contribute to the literature by exploring how to

increase consumer response to new products that include differentiating attributes that are

extremely incongruent with consumer expectations. Drawing from the literature showing that the

ability to resolve moderate incongruity leads to positive evaluations of moderately incongruent

products, we propose that consumer evaluation of a new product with an extremely incongruent

attribute or benefit can be increased by facilitating resolution of the incongruity. We next

propose that cognitive flexibility can lead to increased resolution of extreme incongruity.

COGNITIVE FLEXIBILITY AND INCONGRUITY RESOLUTION

In order to positively evaluate a product with an incongruent attribute, a consumer needs

to achieve insight into the benefit provided by the attribute. When an attribute does not fit with

the consumer’s schema, the consumer must engage in processing that results in connections

between disparate schemata in order to understand the attribute and resolve the incongruity. We

thus propose that cognitive flexibility, such that a multiplicity of perspectives and information

can be considered and held in mind for judgment (e.g., Isen 2001), increases the probability of

resolution of extreme incongruity. The cognitive flexibility to consider multiple facets increases

the likelihood of making a connection such that the consumer can understand the extremely

novel attribute, reconciling it with the product schema. Cognitive flexibility facilitates the

consideration of associations that extend beyond concepts that are strongly linked to the product

category. We propose that increased cognitive flexibility enhances the ability to resolve

8

incongruity, leading to more positive evaluation of an extremely incongruent option than without

an increase in cognitive flexibility.

Prior research on moderate incongruity provides some support for our proposition.

Research shows, for example, that people who score high on dogmatism, tending to be closed to

new information and perspectives, are less likely to rate moderately incongruent options

favorably than less dogmatic people (Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989). Similarly, the positive

evaluation of moderately incongruent options does not appear when task involvement is low,

such that flexible processing of information is unlikely (Maoz and Tybout 2002). These results

suggest that some amount of cognitive flexibility is necessary to resolve even moderate

incongruity. This lends support to the idea that increasing cognitive flexibility can enhance

resolution of extreme incongruity, leading to more positive evaluations, Thus, we propose that

cognitive flexibility moderates the relationship between incongruity and evaluation such that

cognitive flexibility enhances evaluations of extremely incongruent new products. Proposition 1

formalizes our view on the role of cognitive flexibility.

P1: Cognitive flexibility moderates the effect of incongruity on product

evaluations such that evaluations of an extremely incongruent product will be

more favorable when the consumer is, versus is not, cognitively flexible.

Based on this proposition, we hypothesize that factors that foster cognitive flexibility can

heighten evaluation of products that introduce attributes perceived to be extremely incongruent

for the category. Identifying multiple ways of increasing cognitive flexibility and showing a

commensurate increase in evaluation of extremely incongruent new products will provide

convergent evidence for the proposed process underlying enhanced consumer evaluations. We

9

next discuss three factors that prior literature suggests increase consumers’ cognitive flexibility:

positive (vs. neutral) affect, a future (vs. past) frame and a prime (vs. no prime) to think broadly.

Positive Affect and Cognitive Flexibility

A significant body of research has documented that positive affect can facilitate cognitive

flexibility (e.g., Estrada et al. 1997; Isen 2001; Isen et al. 1985; Isen and Daubman 1984; Isen et

al. 1987). For example, Isen et al. (1987) showed that people in a positive affective state

performed better than people in a negative or neutral state on tasks that required creative

problem-solving involving the ability to see the relatedness in divergent stimuli and identify

connections in a purposeful way. Similarly, Isen and Daubman (1984) found that people

experiencing positive affect tended to categorize stimuli more inclusively. Evidence likewise

suggests that positive affect fosters greater openness to new information (Bakamitsos 2006;

Roehm and Sternthal 2001), reduces the tendency to anchor prematurely (Estrada et al. 1997),

enhances evaluations of brand extensions that depart from the parent brand (Barone, Miniard and

Romeo 2000), and broadens consideration sets (Kahn and Isen 1993). Positive affect additionally

leads to more relaxed and exploratory (Clore, Schwarz and Conway 1994) and more abstract,

higher-level (Labroo and Patrick 2009) processing. Based on the strong support that positive

affect can lead people to think more flexibly, increasing the likelihood of making novel

associations and the ability to relate divergent materials in a useful way, we hypothesize that

positive, relative to neutral, affect will increase the ability to resolve extreme incongruity,

leading to more favorable evaluation of an extremely incongruent product.

H1: Positive affect moderates the effect of incongruity on product evaluations

such that evaluations of an extremely incongruent product will be more favorable

when the consumer is experiencing positive versus neutral affect.

10

Temporal Frame and Cognitive Flexibility

Recent findings suggest a second factor can influence cognitive flexibility and the

breadth of information used in evaluations: whether the information is cast in the future versus

the past. Jung Grant and Tybout (2008) find that people contemplating a future event are more

likely to incorporate multiple sources of information than when thinking of a past event, in which

case evaluations tend to be based on a single, salient cue. This work suggests that a future frame

expands the information that receives consideration, leading to greater likelihood that the

commonalities among disparate exemplars will be taken into account. Thus, we hypothesize that,

by facilitating connections that lead to incongruity resolution, a future, relative to past, frame

will lead to more favorable evaluation of an extremely incongruent product.

H2: Temporal frame moderates the effect of incongruity on product evaluations

such that evaluations of an extremely incongruent product will be more favorable

when information is in a future versus past frame.

Priming Cognitive Flexibility

In addition to examining factors that give rise to cognitive flexibility (i.e., positive affect

and a future frame), we also prime cognitive flexibility. Although there is no single definition,

cognitive flexibility includes the ability to consider and hold in mind a multiplicity of

perspectives and alternatives (see Isen 2001 for a review; c.f., Murray et al. 1990). Drawing from

this, we propose that instructions to consider multiple aspects will engender more flexible

cognition, fostering resolution, and thus more positive evaluations of extreme incongruity.

H3: A cue to consider multiple perspectives moderates the effect of incongruity on

product evaluations such that evaluations of an extremely incongruent product

will be more favorable when the consumer is cued versus not cued.

11

OVERVIEW OF THE STUDIES

The present research takes two approaches to exploring the proposition that cognitive

flexibility increases evaluation of extreme incongruity. The first is a consumer-driven approach

entailing interventions that enhance consumers’ cognitive flexibility so that they can make sense

of extreme incongruity, leading to more positive evaluations. Thus, the first two studies test the

role of positive affect (measured in Study 1 and manipulated in Study 2) in providing the

cognitive flexibility that facilitates greater favorability toward extremely incongruent products.

The second study also examines whether the resolution of the extreme incongruity mediates the

effect of positive affect on the favorable evaluation of the extremely incongruent product. In

Study 3, we manipulate temporal frame to examine the extent to which a future frame stimulates

cognitive flexibility, thereby enhancing extremely incongruent product evaluations.

The second approach is message-driven; ad copy provides a rationale for the incongruent

attribute. This enables examination of whether higher evaluations stem from the enjoyment that

results from resolving the incongruity, as previously theorized, or whether they are due to the

persuasive impact of gaining insight into the incongruity. Therefore, we vary the availability of a

benefit rationale for the extreme incongruity and test whether the presence or absence of a

rationale affects evaluations when participants have been primed to think flexibly versus not

primed.

STUDY 1

The purpose of the first study was to examine whether positive affect moderates the

impact of incongruity on new product evaluations. Evidence that respondents experiencing

positive affect provide more favorable evaluations of an extremely incongruent product would

12

support our notion that positive affect facilitates incongruity resolution. We manipulated new

product congruity and measured affect to examine the effects of these variables on evaluations.

Stimuli Development

Following Meyers-Levy and Tybout (1989), we developed three variations of a digital

alarm clock with increasingly distant attributes. The congruent clock had an easy-to-read LED

display, a snooze function, and adjustable volume. The moderately incongruent clock included

an automatic Daylight Savings Time change function, a perpetual calendar, and a one-week

weather forecast. The extremely incongruent clock was described as having voice-recognition

technology, in addition to the Daylight Savings Time function and weather forecast.

Participants and Procedure

Sixty undergraduates in two sections of a marketing class read one of three product

descriptions and evaluated it on three 9-point scales anchored by unfavorable/favorable,

unappealing/appealing, and bad/good, with higher values indicating more positive evaluation (

= .93). Participants then rated the perceived incongruity of the product on two items anchored by

atypical/typical and unusual/usual ( = .94), with higher values indicating greater perceived

congruity. Affect was measured by having participants rate 10 unfamiliar words (e.g., “ianthine,”

“solferino”) on 7-point scales anchored by unpleasant/pleasant and averaging the ratings;

positive affect leads to higher ratings of unfamiliar words (Isen et al. 1985). The class section

factor did not interact with any variables, so we collapsed across the sections for the analyses.

Results

Product evaluation. As expected, analysis yielded a main effect of product incongruity on

evaluations (F(2, 57) = 13.28, p < .01). Replicating existing research, contrasts showed that the

moderately incongruent clock was evaluated more favorably (M = 7.76) than both the congruent

13

(M = 5.60; F(2, 57) = 26.43, p < .01) and the extremely incongruent clock (M = 6.58; F(2, 57)

= 7.71, p < .01).

[Insert Table 1 around here]

A marginal two-way interaction of product incongruity and affect (β = -1.27, t = -1.75, p

= .08) qualified the main effect. Importantly, participants with higher affect scores rated the

extremely incongruent product more favorably than did participants with lower scores. To

explore the nature of the interaction, we compared evaluations of moderately and extremely

incongruent products using a spotlight analysis at plus and minus one standard deviation from

the mean of the affect score (Aiken and West 1991). This analysis revealed higher evaluations of

the extremely incongruent product when affect was higher (β = 1.85, t = 2.76, p = .01). As

expected, this difference did not emerge for evaluations of the moderately incongruent product (β

= .58, t = 1.59, n.s.). Of note, higher affect participants rated the extremely incongruent product

as favorably as the moderately incongruent one (β = .60, t = 1.14, n.s.). Participants with lower

affect scores rated the moderately incongruent product more favorably than either the congruent

(β = 2.07, t = 4.01, p < .01) or the extremely incongruent product (β = - 2.01, t = - 3.64, p = .01),

replicating the inverted U-pattern observed in prior research.

[Insert Figure 1 around here]

Perceived schema incongruity. We next examined participants’ ratings of the perceived

incongruity of the new products. There were two reasons for this analysis. First, we wanted to

confirm that the new product descriptions manipulated perceived incongruity as intended.

Second, we wanted to explore a potential alternative explanation for the observed pattern of

evaluations. We propose that positive affect increases consumers’ flexible thinking, enhancing

their ability to resolve extreme incongruity. Consumers perceive that the new product is

14

incongruent but are able to make sense of the new product. An alternative explanation that could

produce the same pattern of evaluations is that positive affect signals that the environment is

benign, allowing people to broaden their perspectives and pay attention to “the big picture”

(Labroo and Patrick 2009). The big-picture view could increase categorization breadth by

focusing attention on superordinate features, enhancing perceptions of similarity (Isen and

Daubman 1984). If this were the case, perceptions of schema incongruity would be influenced by

positive affect such that perceived incongruity would decrease as positive affect increased.

We thus conducted a regression analysis with perceived schema incongruity as the

dependent variable and product incongruity and affect as independent variables to examine the

effects of the manipulations of incongruity and positive affect on the perception of incongruity,.

Our analysis yielded only a main effect of product incongruity (β = -2.07, t = -10.29, p < .01)

with no interaction. Contrasts revealed that the congruent product was rated as more congruent

(M = 7.84) than the moderately incongruent product (M = 5.29), which was rated as more

congruent than the extremely incongruent product (M = 3.92; all βs > |1.59|, all ts > |2.71|, all ps

< .01), supporting our congruity manipulation. Furthermore, contrasts at each level of product

incongruity showed that perceived schema incongruity did not differ as a function of affect (all

ps > .1). Taken together, our data suggest that perceived incongruity was successfully

manipulated and that positive affect did not change perceptions of schema incongruity.

Discussion

Study 1 provides preliminary support for our primary hypothesis, demonstrating that

affect moderated the effect of product incongruity on evaluations. Participants who were not

experiencing positive affect evaluated the moderately incongruent product more favorably than

either the congruent product or the extremely incongruent product, replicating the inverted-U

15

pattern found in prior research. Participants who were experiencing positive affect, however,

evaluated the extremely incongruent product as favorably as the moderately incongruent product;

positive affect attenuated the inverted-U pattern. Participants feeling positive affect evaluated the

extremely incongruent product more favorably than did participants feeling less positive affect.

Overall the results provide initial support that positive affect fosters cognitive flexibility,

facilitating the resolution of extreme incongruity, and thus leading to higher ratings of the

extremely incongruent product. The results also rule out a possible rival account. We find that

positive affect does not influence ratings of perceived incongruity, a pattern that is incompatible

with a big-picture explanation for the evaluations.

While supportive of the proposed process, the data from Study 1 do not allow

examination of the underlying resolution that we propose accounts for the increased evaluations

of the extremely incongruent option. Therefore, the next study includes process-level measures.

Additionally, because Study 1 measures rather than manipulates affect, we are unable to

determine whether positive affect facilitated resolution or whether a successful resolution

contributed to positive affect, a relationship first suggested by Mandler (1982). We manipulate

affect in our next experiment to provide a cleaner test of the hypothesized causal relationship.

STUDY 2

The primary objective of Study 2 is to provide evidence regarding the process by which

positive affect leads to more favorable evaluation of extremely incongruent new products.

Drawing on schema research (e.g., Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989; Peracchio and Tybout 1996),

we propose that resolution requires elaboration to reconcile the relationship between incongruent

aspects of the product and active schema to make sense of the incongruity. In Study 2, we thus

measure incongruity resolution by the participants’ ability to “make sense” of the new product

16

and examine whether our measure of resolution plays a mediational role in how manipulated

positive affect enhances evaluation.

Stimuli development. To increase ability to generalize, we developed and pretested new

product stimuli (Appendix A). Participants (N=59) rated one of three products on two 7-point

items anchored by atypical/typical and unusual/usual ( = .96); vitamin-fortified orange juice

was perceived to be congruent (M = 5.71), vitamin-fortified coffee to be moderately incongruent

(M = 3.71), and vitamin-fortified vodka to be extremely incongruent (M = 2.00). Differences

among incongruity levels were significant (all ps < .01).

Affect manipulation. Following a procedure used by Wright and Mischel (1982), affect

was manipulated by asking participants to recall and write for 10 minutes about either an event

that made them happy (positive affect condition) or one that made them bored (neutral condition).

A pretest (N = 45, with 22 in the positive affect condition) verified the affect manipulation.

Participants showed expected differences in feelings on four measures of positive affect

(positive, exhilarated, good, happy, all Fs > 13, all ps < .01) and four neutral measures (bad,

bored, unhappy, and neutral, all Fs > 11, all ps < .01).

Participants and Procedure

Participants were 125 undergraduates from an introductory marketing class in partial

fulfillment of a course requirement. We conducted the experiment using a 2 (affect: positive vs.

neutral) × 2 (product incongruity: moderate vs. extreme) between-subjects design. (Because

Study 1 successfully replicated and moderated the inverted-U across three levels of incongruity

and our theoretical interest is in improving evaluations of extreme relative to moderate

incongruity, we did not include congruent options in any of the rest of our studies.) Participants

first wrote for 10 minutes about an event that made them either happy or bored as part of a study

17

of college students’ personal experiences. Then, as an ostensibly separate study, participants read

a description of a new product and evaluated it on the same three 9-point items as used in Study

1 ( = .91). Perceived schema incongruity of the product was measured on the two pretest items

( = .82). Then participants were asked to what extent the new product made sense to them on a

7-point scale, anchored by “makes no sense” and “makes sense.”

Results

Perceived schema incongruity. Examination of rated product incongruity with a 2 (affect)

× 2 (incongruity) analysis of variance yielded only a main effect of incongruity (F(1, 121) =

15.43, p < .01), indicating that the incongruity manipulation worked as intended. Participants

rated the moderately incongruent product, vitamin-fortified coffee, as more congruent (M = 3.44)

than the extremely incongruent, vitamin-fortified vodka (M = 2.55; F(1, 123) = 15.27, p < .01).

Importantly, there were no differences in perceived incongruity between the neutral and positive

affect conditions across levels of product incongruity. Ratings of the incongruity of vitamin-

fortified coffee (M = 3.72) and vitamin-fortified vodka (M = 2.48) were no different for neutral

than positive-affect respondents (Mcoffee = 3.17; F(1, 121) = 2.84, p = .09; Mvodka = 2.62; F(1,

121) =.19, p = .66; see Table 1). Note that while the contrast for the moderately incongruent

product approaches significance, the direction of the comparison is opposite to what would be

predicted by the big-picture account; the moderately incongruent product was perceived as

directionally less congruent in the positive affect condition. As in Study 1, the adequacy of the

big-picture explanation (Labroo and Patrick 2009) to account for our results appears unpromising.

Product evaluation. Our analysis revealed the predicted interaction of product

incongruity and affect on evaluation (F(1, 121) = 6.15, p = .02). Consistent with our hypothesis,

vitamin-fortified vodka was evaluated more favorably in the positive-affect condition (M = 6.95)

18

than in the neutral-affect condition (M = 5.19; F(1, 121) = 12.38, p = .01). For vitamin-fortified

coffee, however, there was no effect of affect (Mpositive = 6.19, Mneutral = 6.19; F < 1).

Furthermore, in the positive-affect condition, the moderately incongruent (M = 6.19) and the

extremely incongruent products (M = 6.95) were equally favored (F(1, 121) = 2.35, p = .13). In

the neutral-affect condition, the moderately incongruent coffee (M = 6.19) was rated more

favorably than the extremely incongruent vodka (M = 5.19; F(1, 121) = 3.91, p = .05; see Table

1), replicating earlier research. Taken together, these data support H1.

Mediated moderation. To understand the underlying process, we examined whether the

incongruity x affect effect on product evaluation was mediated by incongruity resolution.

Following the procedure outlined in Muller et al. (2005), we tested whether the moderated effect

was mediated by the makes-sense measure. (See equations below and least squares regression

results in Table 2).

(1) DV = β10 + β11 IV + β12 MO + β13 IV*MO + ε1

(2) ME = β20 + β21 IV + β22 MO + β23 IV*MO + ε2

(3) DV = β30 + β31 IV + β32 MO + β33 IV*MO + β34 ME + β35 ME*MO + ε3

Note: DV(dependent variable) = product evaluation, IV(independent variable) = product incongruity,

MO(moderator) = affect, ME(mediator) = makes-sense

[Insert Table 2 here]

Results from the first equation replicated the ANOVA results, showing a main effect of

product incongruity qualified by a two-way interaction of product incongruity and affect. The

second equation supported the same pattern of effects for the makes-sense measure. There was a

main effect of product incongruity qualified by a two-way interaction of product incongruity and

affect. In the third equation, the coefficient for the product incongruity × affect interaction was

not significant and was reduced from equation 1 (from 1.75 to .82) while makes-sense

significantly predicted product evaluation. Further, examination of the coefficients reveals that

19

the effect of product incongruity on makes-sense depends on affect (23 ≠ 0, and the average

partial effect of makes-sense on evaluation (i.e., 34 is nonzero; see Figure 2).

[Insert Figure 2 here]

We also used a bootstrap analysis to assess the indirect effect of product incongruity x

affect (using the INDIRECT SPSS macro; Preacher and Hayes 2008). This revealed a positive

(.87) and significant mean indirect effect, with a 95% confidence interval excluding zero (.146 to

1.71). The results indicate that the moderation (by affect) of the residual direct effect of product

incongruity on evaluation is mediated by incongruity resolution (i.e., makes sense).

Discussion

In summary, our results replicate Study 1, showing that affect moderates the relationship

between incongruity and new product evaluations; positive affect increased the evaluation of an

extremely incongruent product relative to neutral affect. Furthermore, the results of Study 2

provide process-level insight into the role of incongruity resolution in mediating the relationship

between positive affect and new product evaluations. By manipulating affect in Study 2, we were

also able to rule out the possibility that incongruity resolution elevated participants’ affect, rather

than affect affecting resolution. These results strengthen our view that cognitive flexibility

facilitates incongruity resolution, leading to more positive evaluations of an extremely

incongruent product. To further test that the effects are due to cognitive flexibility – as opposed

to some other aspect of affect – we investigate two additional cognitive flexibility manipulations

in the next two studies to test for convergent evidence.

STUDY 3

Study 3 examined a second variable that increases cognitive flexibility to test whether the

effects of positive affect observed in Studies 1 and 2 converge with an additional manipulation of

20

cognitive flexibility. Recent findings suggest that people use information more comprehensively

when they evaluate a future rather than a past event (Jung Grant and Tybout 2008). Thus, we

expect that a future frame will increase cognitive flexibility, helping consumers draw on more

information to resolve the extreme incongruity, and thereby enhancing evaluations. A past frame

fosters a narrow focus, and is not expected to encourage flexible thinking nor boost evaluations.

Similar results for temporal frame as found for affect would support our interpretation that

cognitive flexibility is the construct at work.

Method

In Study 3, 149 undergraduates participated in partial fulfillment of a course requirement.

The experiment was a 2 (temporal frame: future vs. past) × 2 (product incongruity: moderate vs.

extreme) between-subjects design. We used the same product stimuli as in Study 2 and

manipulated temporal frame by describing the product launch as a past or future event (adapted

from Jung Grant and Tybout 2008). Participants evaluated the product ( = .91), rated the

product’s perceived schema incongruity and indicated their ability to make sense of the product

on the same measures as Study 2.

Results

Perceived schema incongruity. Participants perceived vitamin-fortified coffee as more

congruent (M = 3.51) than vitamin-fortified vodka (M = 2.59; F(1, 147) = 15.93, p < .01). There

were no differences in perceived schema incongruity as a function of temporal frame across

either moderate (Mpast = 3.55 vs. Mfuture = 3.46; F(1, 145) < 1, n.s.) or extreme (Mpast = 2.57 vs.

Mfuture = 2.61; F(1, 145) < 1, n.s.) incongruity. Thus, the incongruity manipulation was successful.

Product evaluation. A 2 (temporal frame) × 2 (product incongruity) ANOVA yielded a

main effect of temporal frame (F(1,145)=7.16, p<.01), which was qualified by a two-way

21

interaction (F(1, 145) = 8.44, p < .01), indicating that temporal frame moderates the impact of

product incongruity on evaluation. As expected, vitamin-fortified vodka was evaluated more

favorably when the launch was in the future (M = 7.11) than the past (M = 5.51; F(1, 145) =

15.68, p < .01), whereas vitamin-fortified coffee was rated similarly in the future (M = 6.25) as

in the past (M = 6.32; F(1, 145) < 1, n.s.). Though not anticipated, in the future condition, the

extremely incongruent vodka was evaluated more positively (M = 7.11) than the moderately

incongruent coffee (M = 6.25; F(1, 145) = 4.39, p < .05). In the past condition, the moderately

incongruent product was rated more favorably (M = 6.32) than the extremely incongruent (M =

5.51; F(1, 145) = 4.05, p < .05; see Table 1). In sum, this pattern conceptually replicates Study 2.

Mediated moderation. In order to gain insight into the underlying process, we tested

mediated moderation with the three equations (Muller et al. 2005) and bootstrapping (Preacher

and Hayes 2008) methods described in Study 2 (see Table 2). The results show that the makes-

sense measure mediates the interaction of product incongruity and temporal frame. Specifically,

1) the effect of product incongruity on product evaluation is moderated by temporal frame

(equation 1), 2) the effect of product incongruity on makes-sense is moderated by temporal

frame (equation 2), and 3) the product incongruity × temporal frame effect on evaluation is

reduced while makes-sense is highly significant (equation 3). Further, examination of

coefficients revealed that temporal frame moderates the path from product incongruity to makes-

sense. Finally, the bootstrap test of the indirect effect of product incongruity x temporal frame

was positive (.74) and significant, with a 95% confidence interval excluding zero (.17 to 1.60).

These analyses demonstrate that the temporal frame moderation of the residual direct effect of

product incongruity on evaluation is mediated by incongruity resolution.

Discussion

22

Drawing on theorizing that predicts differences in cognitive flexibility by temporal frame,

we find that evaluations of an extremely incongruent product are enhanced when it is described

as a future (versus past) launch. Similar to positive affect, the future frame manipulation

facilitated resolution, yielding more favorable evaluations. Together, Studies 1-3 support our

hypothesis that cognitive flexibility, whether arising from positive affect or a future frame,

increases the likelihood that consumers will resolve extreme incongruity leading to enhanced

evaluations. Cognitive flexibility affects the ability to reconcile an innovation that does not fit

with existing schema, and resolution, in turn, increases evaluations.

Having established that cognitive flexibility affects the ability to resolve extreme

incongruity and that resolution results in more favorable evaluations of extremely incongruent

new products, we now turn to the question of why resolution of the extremely incongruent new

product results in more favorable judgments. Prior literature on moderate incongruity suggests

that positive affect from the process of resolution (i.e., enjoyment) lifts attitudes and subsequent

evaluation (Mandler 1982; Maoz and Tybout 2002; Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989; Peracchio

and Tybout 1996). However, to our knowledge, there is no strong evidence that resolution

produces positive affect that drives evaluations. Peracchio and Tybout (1996) examine “pretaste

affect” and “posttaste affect,” but these are, in fact, evaluation, measured by how appealing, tasty,

desirable, high quality, and appetizing the subjects perceived the stimulus (cake) to be. Maoz and

Tybout (2002) provide directional evidence that levels of incongruity and involvement influence

task satisfaction but do not show mediation. Furthermore, when participants’ thoughts were

analyzed, no difference in positive and negative thoughts (e.g., Meyers-Levy and Tybout 1989;

Peracchio and Tybout 1996) suggests that affect valence may not differ by resolution.

23

We propose that a second way in which resolution could lead to more positive

evaluations is by a more cognitive route. The outcome of resolution is insight into or

understanding of the new product benefits. That is, making sense of the incongruity results in

understanding; this insight alone could drive higher ratings. We propose that insight into why an

incongruent product makes sense, rather than the rewarding feelings from resolution, drives more

favorable evaluations.

To compare the two accounts, we manipulate cognitive flexibility and vary the presence

of a benefit rationale in advertising copy for an extremely incongruent new product. We present

the benefit rationale as advertising copy, giving participants a reason for the extreme incongruity

such that they gain insight into why the new product attribute makes sense without personally

experiencing resolution. Because each account makes different predictions for effects of benefit

rationale, this design allows us to explore the two ways in which resolution could lead to more

positive evaluations.

The existing process-satisfaction account predicts that positive affect from resolution

drives more positive evaluations. This suggests that cognitively flexible consumers, who are able

to resolve on their own, will rate the product less favorably when ad copy presents a benefit

rationale, than when no such rationale is provided; this is because giving a benefit rationale to

cognitively flexible consumers deprives them of the pleasure of the process of resolving.

Furthermore, providing people who are not cognitively flexible with the “answer” would not

increase evaluations because they would not gain affect arising from experienced resolution.

The proposed insight-based account predicts a different pattern of effects such that

evaluations of cognitively flexible consumers will not be affected by the presence or absence of a

benefit rationale. Whether they make sense of the product by thinking flexibly or by having the

24

insight provided by a rationale, cognitively flexible consumers will evaluate the extremely

incongruent product relatively favorably. Evaluations by consumers who are not cognitively

flexible will be increased by the presence of a benefit rationale. As in the first three studies,

consumers who are not cognitively flexible will not resolve the extreme incongruity, and thus

evaluate the extremely incongruent product relatively unfavorably. The presence of a benefit

rationale will provide insight, allowing cognitively inflexible consumers to make sense of the

extreme incongruity. Thus, we propose that cognitively inflexible consumers will evaluate an

extremely incongruent product more favorably in the presence, relative to absence, of a benefit

rationale in the advertising copy. Proposition 2 formalizes the insight-based account.

P2: The effect of cognitive flexibility on evaluation of an extremely incongruent product

is moderated by the presence of a benefit rationale. With cognitive flexibility, evaluation

of an extremely incongruent product will be relatively positive regardless of the presence

or absence of a benefit rationale. Without cognitive flexibility, evaluation of an extremely

incongruent product will be higher when a benefit rationale is present versus absent.

STUDY 4

The primary goal of Study 4 is to examine whether resolution facilitates more favorable

evaluations due to process satisfaction or due to insight per se. In addition, we primed cognitive

flexibility to further corroborate that it is cognitive flexibility that drives the effects of the

psychological variables of positive affect and temporal frame found in the previous studies.

Method

As part of a course requirement, 134 undergraduates participated in a 2 (cognitive

flexibility: no prime vs. flexible prime) x 2 (advertising copy: benefit rationale absent vs. benefit

rationale present) between-subjects study. Given that cognitive flexibility includes the ability to

25

consider multiple sources of information and alternatives, we asked participants to think of either

one explanation (no cognitive-flexibility prime) or multiple possible explanations (cognitive-

flexibility prime) for an ambiguous situation. Participants read a short story adapted from a

flexible thinking exercise in which a can of cola explodes inside a car on a hot day. Participants

in the no cognitive-flexibility condition rated the likelihood of one given explanation for the

explosion. In the cognitive-flexibility condition, participants generated as many explanations for

the explosion as they could. Next, in an ostensibly unrelated study, all participants read about an

extremely incongruent new product, vitamin-fortified vodka (same description as in Studies 2

and 3). While this was all that participants in the benefit rationale-absent condition read, those in

the benefit rationale-present condition, also read the following additional ad copy, “Why produce

a vitamin-fortified vodka? Vodka is dehydrating; replacing lost vitamins can help people feel

better.” Participants then completed the same measures used in prior studies for product

evaluation ( = .89), perceived schema incongruity ( = .89), and the extent to which the new

product made sense. Lastly, participants responded to five 7-point measures of affect anchored

by cheerful/depressed, sad/joyful, annoyed/pleased, happy/unhappy, and good/bad ( = .88).

Results and Discussion

Perceived schema incongruity. As expected, a 2 (cognitive flexibility) × 2 (advertising

copy) ANOVA of the manipulation check yielded no significant differences. Likewise, none of

the contrasts was significant, indicating that neither the cognitive flexibility prime (Mflexible =

2.66 vs. Mnot flexible = 2.47; F(1, 130) < 1) nor the rationale (Mpresent = 2.54 vs. Mabsent = 2.57; F(1,

130) < 1) impacted participants’ perceptions of the vitamin-fortified vodka’s incongruity. The

low means and lack of effects support successful manipulation of extreme incongruity.

26

Product evaluation. Evaluations were examined with a 2 (cognitive flexibility) × 2

(advertising copy) ANOVA, revealing a main effect of cognitive flexibility (F(1, 130) = 3.83, p

= .05) qualified by an advertising copy × cognitive flexibility interaction (F(1, 130) = 4.18, p

= .04; Figure 3). In support of P2, when participants were primed to think flexibly, evaluations of

the vitamin-fortified vodka were equally positive regardless of the rationale’s presence (M =

6.71) or absence (M = 6.86; F(1, 130) < 1). Participants without the cognitive flexibility prime,

however, evaluated the vitamin-fortified vodka more favorably in the presence (M = 6.74) than

absence (M = 5.70; F(1, 130) = 7.04, p < .01) of a rationale. The low evaluation of the extremely

incongruent new product provided by the non-cognitively flexible participants in the no-rationale

condition replicates prior studies–without a rationale, those who are not primed to think flexibly

do not resolve the extreme incongruity–while insight provided by the rationale led to higher

evaluations. Also consistent with our interpretation, when there was no rationale, flexible

thinking led to higher evaluations of the vitamin-fortified vodka (M = 6.86) than when flexible

thinking was not primed (M = 5.70; F(1, 130) = 7.69, p < .01). In the presence of a rationale,

however, the vitamin-fortified vodka was equally favored, regardless of cognitive flexibility

(Mflexible = 6.71 vs. Mnot flexible = 6.74; F(1, 130) < 1).

[Insert Figure 3 here]

Affect. Participants’ rated affect was also examined. Consistent with our insight-based

account, a 2 (cognitive flexibility) × 2 (advertising copy) analysis yielded no significant results.

We found none of the contrasts to be significant, indicating that participants’ affect was not

influenced by the presence or absence of the benefit rationale (Mflexible-rationale = 4.23, Mnot flexible-

rationale = 4.12, Mflexible-no rationale = 4.17, Mnot flexible-no rationale = 4.11, all Fs <1).

27

Mediated moderation. Given that affect from the resolution process does not explain the

evaluation results, we tested whether making sense of the product, whether through own

resolution or a rationale provided in the copy, mediated the interaction between cognitive

flexibility and ad copy, following the same methods described in the previous studies.

Regression results (see Table 2) showed: 1) an effect of cognitive flexibility on product

evaluation moderated by advertising copy (equation 1); 2) an effect of cognitive flexibility on

makes-sense moderated by ad copy (equation 2); and 3) that the effect of the cognitive flexibility

× ad copy interaction on evaluation was reduced while makes-sense significantly predicted

product evaluation (equation 3). Further, the bootstrap test revealed a negative (-.62) and

significant indirect effect, with a 95% confidence interval excluding zero (-1.37 to -.08). Taken

together, the analyses provide strong evidence that the moderation of the residual direct effect of

product incongruity on evaluation is mediated by incongruity resolution. In summary, the results

provide additional support that cognitive flexibility, in this study manipulated with a prime

instruction, facilitates resolution, leading to more positive evaluations of extremely incongruent

new products. By using an instruction to consider multiple possibilities, this study provides

convergent evidence that positive affect (Studies 1 and 2) and future frame (Study 3) facilitated

resolution by increasing cognitive flexibility. Importantly, Study 4 results further demonstrate

that insight, not positive affect generated from the resolution process, drives the more positive

evaluations.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

Our findings extend work on schema incongruity by moving beyond positive evaluation

of moderately incongruent and negative evaluation of extremely incongruent options, to identify

conditions under which extremely incongruent options can be evaluated positively. Like Meyers-

28

Levy and Tybout (1989) and many others, we find relative preference for moderately

incongruent new products and disfavor for extremely incongruent ones under typical processing

conditions. Additionally, we propose and demonstrate that increasing cognitive flexibility

enables consumers to make sense of incongruity, which results in more positive evaluations of

extremely incongruent new products. Specifically, eliciting cognitive flexibility by positive

affect (Studies 1 and 2), a future frame (Study 3), and prior generation of multiple explanations

for a situation (Study 4), increased participants’ ability to resolve extreme incongruity such that

extremely incongruent new products were evaluated more favorably than when participants

experienced less positive affect, focused on a past frame, or did not consider alternatives. In fact,

under each manipulation of cognitive flexibility, participants rated the extremely incongruent

products at least as favorably as the moderately incongruent ones. This work is the first to show

ways to increase evaluations of extremely incongruent new products.

This work provides additional clarification of the role of resolution in the evaluation of

incongruent new products. First, we demonstrate that participants’ ability to make sense of, or

resolve, incongruity systematically influences product evaluations. Second, we offer evidence in

Study 4 that the understanding provided by resolution, whether self-generated or provided by the

marketer, is critical to fostering acceptance. This finding sheds light on a question raised in prior

work. Existing literature surmises that incongruity resolution is rewarding and that positive affect

arising from the resolution process contributes to the favorableness of product evaluation. On the

contrary, findings from Study 4 show that external provision of a benefit rationale resulted in

equally positive evaluations of an extremely incongruent product, even though the insight was

achieved without the process of resolving for oneself. It is the insight that the resolution yields,

rather than positive affect arising from resolution that influences favorableness. Additionally, our

29

demonstration of the mediational role of incongruity resolution rules out the possibility that

enhanced evaluations result because positive affect or future frame alters perceptions of extreme

incongruity so that it is regarded as moderate incongruity; this limits the plausibility of a rival

explanation drawn from the big-picture theory.

Although our results indicate that process-based affect did not provide an incremental

benefit to evaluations of extreme incongruity, care should be taken in generalizing this finding.

Research shows that the affect generated by meta-cognitive experience serves as the primary

basis for judgments in some instances (e.g., Tybout et al. 2005; Wanke, Bless and Biller 1996)

and that the big-picture theory accounts for some evaluations (Labroo and Patrick 2009).

Furthermore, Tybout et al. (2005) suggest that people are less likely to base evaluations on

process-based affect when relevant knowledge is inaccessible. It is plausible that relevant

knowledge is less accessible when consumers reflect on extremely incongruent innovations, as

compared to moderately incongruent new products. Thus, favorable evaluations of moderate

incongruity could be based on affect, whereas positive judgments of extreme incongruity could

be driven by content. This idea merits further testing.

MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS

This research has important implications for marketing managers. While innovation and

new product introduction are important to business success, new products have a notoriously

high failure rate. This research offers multiple potential methods for increasing new product

acceptance. Demonstrating that positive affect, future frame, consideration of multiple

alternatives and a benefit rationale increase evaluations of really new products suggests that

managers should consider influencing each of these when introducing new products. First,

managers might adopt marketing communications with positive emotional appeals, rather than

30

purely cognitive ones, when introducing incongruent new products. The ads that Apple used to

introduce the iPod, for example, featured dancing silhouettes against brightly colored

backgrounds with upbeat music focused on creating positive affect. Second, launch pre-

announcements, such that processing of a new product is in a future frame, could benefit the

company when extreme incongruity is involved. Third, marketing communications for a new

product launch could encourage consideration of multiple alternatives and perspectives such that

consumers are more cognitively flexible as they consider the new product. Lastly, it appears that

providing consumers with a benefit rationale could be a powerful tool for fostering more

favorable evaluations. When launched in 1992, Crystal Pepsi announced its superiority without a

benefit rationale. Advertising referenced taste, uniqueness, and modernity, but it did not provide

a rationale that could help consumers resolve the incongruity. When Dyson launched the Air

Multiplier, the firm offered the rationale that, unlike fans with blades, bladeless fans do not cause

unpleasant air buffeting. Importantly, our research suggests that providing a compelling benefit

rationale in communications about a new, incongruent product, is likely to increase consumer

acceptance overall.

This research offers guidance to firms pursuing growth through innovation. Instead of

focusing on new product categorization (what is it?) and consumer learning, as many have, the

present research addresses product innovations that involve an incongruent differentiated benefit

(what of it?). Scant research has focused on the second of these important questions. Our work

leverages the schema-congruity framework to provide increased understanding of the question of

how to gain acceptance of new products that are counter to consumers’ expectations.

31

REFERENCES

Aaker, David A. and Kevin Lane Keller (1990), “Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extensions,”

Journal of Marketing, 54 (January), 27-41.

Aiken, Leona S. and Stephen G. West (1991), Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting

Interactions. Newbury Park: Sage.

Alexander, David L., John G. Lynch Jr., Qing Wang (2008), “As Time Goes By: Do Cold Feet

Follow Warm Intentions for Really New Versus Incrementally New Products?” Journal of

Marketing Research, 45 (June), 307-19.

Bakamitsos, Georgios A. (2006), “A Cue Alone or a Probe to Think? The Dual Role of Affect in

Product Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 33 (December), 403-12.

Barone, Michael J., Paul W. Miniard, and Jean B. Romeo (2000), “The Influence of Positive

Mood on Brand Extension Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (March), 386-400.

Campbell, Margaret C. and Ronald Goodstein (1999), “The Moderating Effect of Perceived Risk

on Consumers’ Evaluations of Product Incongruity: Preference for the Norm,” Journal of

Consumer Research, 28 (December), 439-49.

Clore, Gerald L., Norbert Schwarz, and Michael Conway (1994), “Affective Causes and

Consequences of Social Information Processing,” in Handbook of Social Cognition, Vol. 1: Basic

32

Processes; Vol. 2: Applications, Robert S. Wyer, Jr. and Thomas K. Srull, eds. Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 323-417.

Estrada, Carlos A., Alice M. Isen, and Mark J. Young (1997), “Positive Affect Facilitates

Integration of Information and Decreases Anchoring in Reasoning Among Physicians,”

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 72 (1), 117-35.

Gourville, John T. (2006), "Eager Sellers and Stony Buyers: Understanding the Psychology of

New-Product Adoption." Harvard Business Review 84, no. 6 (June).

Gregan-Paxton, Jennifer, Steve Hoeffler, and Min Zhao (2005), “When Categorization is

Ambiguous: Factors that Facilitate the Use of a Multiple Category Inference Strategy,” Journal

of Consumer Psychology, 15 (Spring), 127-40.

___, Jonathan D. Hibbard, F. Frederic Brunel, and Pablo Azar (2002), “So That's What That Is:

Examining the Impact of Analogy on Consumers’ Knowledge Development for Really New

Products,” Psychology & Marketing, 19 (June), 533-50.

Hoeffler, Steve (2003), “Measuring Preferences for Really New Products,” Journal of Marketing

Research, 40 (November), 406-20.

Isen, Alice M. (2001), “An Influence of Positive Affect on Decision Making in Complex

Situations: Theoretical Issues With Practical Implications,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 11

(September), 75-85.

33

___ and Kimberly A. Daubman (1984), “The Influence of Affect on Categorization,”

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47 (December), 1206-17.

___, ___ and Gary P. Nowicki (1987), “Positive Affect Facilitates Creative Problem Solving,”

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52 (June), 1122-31.

___, Mitzi M. Johnson, Elizabeth Mertz, and Gregory F. Robinson (1985), “The Influence of

Positive Affect on the Unusualness of Word Associations,” Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 48 (June), 1413-26.

Jung Grant, Susan and Alice M. Tybout (2008), “The Effect of Temporal Frame on Information

Considered in New Product Evaluation: The Role of Uncertainty,” Journal of Consumer

Research, 34 (April), 897-913.

Kahn, Barbara E. and Alice M. Isen (1993), “The Influence of Positive Affect on Variety

Seeking Among Safe, Enjoyable Products,” Journal of Consumer Research, 20 (September) 257-

70.

Keller, Kevin L., Brian Sternthal, and Alice M. Tybout (2002), “Three Questions You Need to

Ask About Your Brand,” Harvard Business Review, 80 (September), 80-86.

Labroo, Aparna A. and Vanessa M. Patrick (2009), “Psychological Distancing: Why Happiness

Helps You See the Big Picture,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (February), 800-09.

34

Mandler, George (1982), “The Structure of Value: Accounting for Taste,” in Affect and

Cognition: The 17th

Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, Margaret S. Clark and Susan T.

Fiske, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 3-36.

Maoz, Eyal and Alice M. Tybout (2002), “The Moderating Role of Involvement and Differentiation

in the Evaluation of Brand Extensions,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12 (2), 119-31.

Meyers-Levy, Joan, Therese A. Louie, and Mary T. Curren (1994), “How Does the Congruity of

Brand Names Affect Evaluations of Brand Name Extensions?” Journal of Applied Psychology,

79 (February), 46-53.

Meyers-Levy, Joan and Alice M. Tybout (1989), “Schema Congruity as a Basis for Product

Evaluation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (June), 39-54.

Moreau, C. Page, Arthur Markman, and Donald Lehmann (2001), “What Is It? Categorization

Flexibility and Consumers’ Responses to Really New Products,” Journal of Consumer Research,

27 (March), 489-98.

Muller, Dominique, Charles Judd, and Vincent Yzerbyt (2005), “When Moderation is Mediated

and When Mediation is Moderated,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 852-63.

Murray, Noel, Harish Sujan, Edward R. Hirt and Mita Sujan (1990), “The Influence of Mood on

Categorization: A Cognitive Flexibility Hypothesis,” Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 58 (September), 411-25.

35

Park, C. Whan, Sandra Milberg, and Robert Lawson (1991), “Evaluation of Brand Extensions:

The Role of Product Feature Similarity and Brand Concept Consistency,” Journal of Consumer

Research, 18 (September), 185-93.

Peracchio, Laura P. and Alice M. Tybout (1996), “The Moderating Role of Prior Knowledge in

Schema-Based Product Evaluation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (December), 177-92.

Preacher, Kristopher J. and Andrew F. Hayes (2008), “Asymptotic and Resampling Strategies for

Assessing and Comparing Indirect Effects in Multiple Mediator Models,” Behavior Research

Methods, 40 (3), 879–91.

Roehm, Michelle and Brian Sternthal (2001), “The Moderating Effect of Knowledge and

Resources on the Persuasive Impact of Analogies,” Journal of Consumer Research, 28

(September), 257-72.

Tesser, Abraham (1978), “Self-Generated Attitude Change,” in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in

Experimental Social Psychology. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 289-338.

Tybout, Alice M., Brian Sternthal, Prashant Malaviya, Georgios A. Bakamitsos, and Se-Bum

Park (2005), “Information Accessibility as a Moderator of Judgments: The Role of Content

versus Retrieval Ease,” Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (June), 76-85.

Wanke, Michaela, Herbert Bless, and Barbara Biller (1996), “Subjective Experience versus

Content of Information in the Construction of Attitude Judgments,” Personality and Social

Psychology Bulletin, 22 (November), 1105-13.

36

Wright, Jack and Walter Mischel (1982), “Influence of Affect on Cognitive Social Learning

Person Variables,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43 (November), 901-14.

Zhao, Min, Steve Hoeffler and Darren W. Dahl (2009), “The Role of Imagination-Focused

Visualization on New Product Evaluation,” Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (February) 44-65.

37

FIGURE 1

Study 1: Spotlight Analysis

38

FIGURE 2

Mediated moderation model

Product

Incongruity

Makes

Sense

Product

Evaluation

Positive

Affect

39

39

FIGURE 3

Results of Study 4: Evaluation of Vitamin-Fortified Vodka

as a Function of Benefit Rationale and Cognitive Flexibility

Higher values indicate more favorable overall evaluation on 1-9 scale.

40

40

TABLE 1

Summary of evaluation means by condition from Studies 1-3

Congruent

Moderately

Incongruent

Extremely

Incongruent

Study 1 Positive affect (measured) 5.82 8.1 7.5

Neutral affect (measured) 5.38 7.46 5.46

Study 2 Positive affect (manipulated) - 6.19 6.95

Neutral affect (manipulated) - 6.19 5.19

Study 3 Future frame - 6.25 7.11

Past frame - 6.32 5.51

Higher values indicate more favorable overall evaluation on 1-9 scale.

41

41

TABLE 2

Least Squares Regression Results for Mediated Moderation in Studies 2-4

Equation 1

(criterion PE)

Equation 2

(criterion MS)

Equation 3

(criterion PE)

Predictors β t β t β t

Study 2 PI -.991

(β11)

-1.976* -1.517

(β21)

-3.600** .049

(β31)

.107

A 7.321E-15

(β12)

.000 -.133

(β22)

-.312 .568

(β32)

.496

PI x A 1.752

(β13)

2.478** 1.338

(β23)

2.254* .819

(β33)

1.317

MS .686

(β34)

5.651**

MS x A -.085

(β35)

-.453

Study 3 PI -.807

(β11)

-2.011* -1.000

(β21)

-3.031** -.089

(β31)

-.264

TF -.066

(β12)

-.162 .298

(β22)

.892 -.483

(β32)

-.486

PI x TF 1.665

(β13)

2.904** 1.009

(β23)

2.141* .941

(β33)

1.990*

MS .718

(β34)

7.021**

MS x TF .036

(β35)

.213

Study 4 CF 1.159

(β11)

2.774** .645

(β21)

1.787 .877

(β31)

2.367*

AC 1.039

(β12)

2.654** .950

(β22)

2.810** -.950

(β32)

-.990

CF x AC -1.185

(β13)

-2.044* -1.087

(β23)

-2.171* -.584

(β33)

-1.142

MS .438

(β34)

3.578**

MS x AC .284

(β35)

1.614

PE = product evaluation, PI = product incongruity, A = affect, MS = makes sense, TF = temporal frame, CF = cognitive

flexibility, AC = advertising copy, * p < .05. ** p < .01.

42

42

APPENDIX A

PRODUCT DESCRIPTIONS USED IN STUDIES 2-4

Vitamin-Fortified Orange Juice [a congruent product]

Founded over half a century ago, this respected company follows an uncompromised

passion for the highest quality. The company is introducing a specially-formulated

beverage. This enhanced orange juice is fortified with extra vitamins and omega-3.

Made with the freshest oranges, this juice maintains world-class taste while including

vitamins A and D and is a rich source of omega-3 EPA and DHA.

Vitamin-Fortified Coffee [a moderately incongruent product]

Founded over half a century ago, this respected company follows an uncompromised

passion for the highest quality. The company is introducing a specially-formulated

beverage. This enhanced coffee is fortified with extra vitamins and omega-3. Made

from expertly roasted coffee beans, this coffee maintains world-class taste while

including vitamins A and D and is a rich source of omega-3 EPA and DHA.

Vitamin-Fortified Vodka [an extremely incongruent product]

Founded over half a century ago, this respected company follows an uncompromised

passion for the highest quality. The company is introducing a specially-formulated

beverage. This enhanced vodka is fortified with extra vitamins and omega-3. Made

from European potatoes, this vodka maintains world-class taste while including

vitamins A and D and is a rich source of omega-3 EPA and DHA.