Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 57–65 | Cite as

Switching behavior in automobile markets: A consideration-sets model

  • Rajan Sambandam
  • Kenneth R. Lord
Research Note


Consideration-set formation and the direct and indirect consequences of consideration-set size on switching behavior in automobile markets provide the focus for this model development and testing effort. Empirical support is provided for a model revealing that consideration sets, formed as a consequence of prior experience, product knowledge, and satisfaction, play a substantial role in a consumer’s decision to switch or repurchase the same brand acquired on the previous purchase occasion. Consideration sets are shown to affect the switching decision both directly and indirectly (by motivating retailer search activities).


Product Knowledge Product Category Consumer Research Switching Behavior Evaluation Stage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson, James C. and David W. Gerbing. 1988. “Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach.”Psychological Bulletin 103 (May): 411–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beatty, Sharon E. and Scott M. Smith. 1987. “External Search Effort: An Investigation across Several Product Categories.”Journal of Consumer Research 14 (June): 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brucks, Merrie. 1985. “The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Information Search Behavior.”Journal of Consumer Research 7 (June): 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fast, Janet, Richard Vosburgh, and William Frisbee. 1989. “The Effects of Consumer Education on Search.”Journal of Consumer Affairs 23 (Summer): 65–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fiske, Susan T. and Mark A. Pavelchak. 1986. “Category-based versus Piecemeal-based Affective Responses: Developments in Schema-Triggered Affect.” InHandbook of Motivation and Cognition. Ed. Richard M. Sorrentino and E. Tory Higgins. New York: Guilford, 167–203.Google Scholar
  6. Fornell, Claes and Donald F. Larcker. 1981. “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error.”Journal of Marketing Research 18 (February): 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Furse, David H., Girish N. Punj, and David W. Stewart. 1984. “A Typology of Individual Search Strategies among Purchasers of New Automobiles.”Journal of Consumer Research 10 (March): 417–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gensch, Dennis. 1987. “A Two-stage Disaggregate Attribute Choice Model.”Marketing Science 6 (Summer): 223–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jacoby, Jacob and Leon Kaplan. 1972. “The Components of Perceived Risk.” InAdvances in Consumer Research. Vol. 3. Ed. M. Venkatesan. Chicago, IL: Association for Consumer Research, 283–383.Google Scholar
  10. Johnson, Eric J. and J. Edward Russo. 1984. “Product Familiarity and Learning New Information.”Journal of Consumer Research 11 (June): 542–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jöreskog, Karl G. and Dag Sörbom. 1989.LISREL VII: A Guide to the Program and Applications. Second Edition. Chicago, IL: SPSS.Google Scholar
  12. Jöreskog, Karl G. and Dag Sörbom. 1990.SPSS LISREL VII and PRELIS, Users Guide and Reference. Chicago, IL: SPSS.Google Scholar
  13. Kardes, Frank R., Gurumurthy Kalyanaram, Murali Chankrashekaran, and Ronald J. Dornoff. 1993. “Brand Retrieval Consideration Set Composition, Consumer Choice, and the Pioneering Advantage.”Journal of Consumer Research 20 (June): 62–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. LaTour, Stephen and Nancy Peat. 1979. “Conceptual and Methodological Issues in Satisfaction Research.” InAdvances in Consumer Research. Vol. 6. Ed. William L. Wilkie. Miami, FL: Association for Consumer Research.Google Scholar
  15. Nedungadi, Prakash. 1990. “Recall and Consumer Consideration Sets: Influencing Choice without Altering Brand Evaluations.”Journal of Consumer Research 17 (December): 263–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nedungadi, Prakash and Vinay Kanetkar. 1992. “Incorporating Consideration Sets into Models of Brand Choice.” InAdvances in Consumer Research. Vol. 19. Ed. John F. Sherry and Brian Sternthal. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 251–252.Google Scholar
  17. Peter, J. Paul and Jerry C. Olson. 1990.Consumer Behavior and Marketing Strategy. Second Edition. Homewood, IL: Irwin.Google Scholar
  18. Punj, Girish and Richard Staelin. 1983. “A Model of Consumer Information Search Behavior for New Automobiles.”Journal of Consumer Research 9 (March): 366–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Richins, Marsha L. and Peter H. Bloch. 1991. “Post-purchase Product Satisfaction: Incorporating the Effects of Involvement and Time.”Journal of Business Research 23 (September): 145–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shocker, Allan D., Moshe Ben-Akiva, Bruno Boccara, and Prakash Nedungadi. 1991. “Consideration Set Influences on Customer Decision-Making and Choice: Issues, Models and Suggestions.”Marketing Letters 2 (August): 181–198.Google Scholar
  21. Simon, Herbert. 1979.Models of Thought. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Srinivasan, Narasimhan and Brian T. Ratchford. 1991. “An Empirical Test of a Model of External Search for Automobiles.”Journal of Consumer Research 18 (September): 233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sujan, Mita. 1985. “Consumer Knowledge Effects on Evaluation Strategies Mediating Consumer Judgments.”Journal of Consumer Research 12 (June): 31–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tulving, Endel and Zena Pearlstone. 1966. “Availability versus Accessibility of Information in Memory for Words.”Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 5 (August): 381–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wilde, Louis. 1981. “Information Costs, Duration of Search and Turnover: Theory and Applications.”Journal of Political Economy 89 (6): 1122–1141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wright, Peter L. and Frederic Barbour. 1977. “Phased Decision Strategies: Sequels to an Initial Screening.” InNorth Holland/TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences, Vol. 6: Multiple Criteria Decision Making. Eds. Martin K. Starr and Milan Zeleny. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing, 91–109.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Marketing Science 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rajan Sambandam
    • 1
  • Kenneth R. Lord
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.the State University of New YorkBuffalo
  2. 2.Ohio State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations