Abstract
Typicality effects for specific graduate school programs were examined with the objective of determining the extent of typicality for a new program in this category. Two related issues were also addressed: the extent to which individual differences affected the typicality assessment of the new program, and the influence of “priming" in producing salient attributes for typicality assessment. The ultimate objective of this research was to provide a guideline for making some preliminary marketing positioning decisions. Although typicality was difficult to assess because of subjects’ information limitations, some clear marketing strategy guidelines did emerge.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Foti, Roseanne, Scott Fraser, and Robert Lord, “Effects of Leadership Labels and Prototypes on Perceptions of Political Leaders",Journal of Applied Psychology, 1982, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 326–333.
Hirschman, Elizabeth, “The Roles of Perception and Preference in Consumer Decision Making", AMA Educators’ Conference Proceedings. 1981, p. 185–189.
Lingle, John H., Mark W. Altom, and Douglas Medin, “Of Cabbages and Kings: Assessing the Extendability of Natural Object Concept Models to Social Things", Handbook of Social Cognition, Vol.1, ed. Robert S. Wyer, Jr. and Thomas K. Srull (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), 1985, p. 71–112.
Loken, Barbara, James Ward, and Ivan Ross, “Implications of Categorization Theory for Consumer Product Identification and Marketing Management", Working Paper, 1985.
Medin, Douglas, Mark, W. Altom, and Timothy D. Murphy, “Given Versus Induced Category Representations: Use of Prototypes and Exemplar Information in Classification", Journal of Experimental Psychology, Vol. 10, No. 3, July 1984, p. 333–352.
Nedungadi, Prakash, and J. Wesley Hutchinson, “The Prototypicality of Brands: Relationships-with Brand Awareness, Preference, and Usage", Working Paper, 1984.
Popielary, Donald, “An Exploration of Perceived Risk and Willingness to Try New Products", Journal of Marketing Research, November 1967, p. 368–372.
Rosch, Eleanor, and Carolyn B. Mervis, “Family Resemblances: Studies in the Internal Structure of Categories", Cognitive Psychology, 1975.
Rosch, Eleanor, “Principles of Categorization", Cognition and Categorization, Eleanor Rosch and Barbara Lloyd (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), 1978, Chapter 2, p. 27–48.
Smith, E.E. and D.L. Medin, Categories and Concepts (Harvard University Press), 1981, Chapter 8, p. 162–192.
Urban, Glen L. and John R. Hauser, Design and Marketing of New Products (Prentice Hall), 1980.
Ward, James, and Barbara Loken, “The Quintessential Snack Food: Measurement of Product Prototypes", Working Paper, 1985.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Academy of Marketing Science
About this paper
Cite this paper
Kennedy, E., Lawton, L. (2015). Typicality and Family Resemblance Among Selected Graduate School Programs. In: Bahn, K. (eds) Proceedings of the 1988 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference. Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17046-6_44
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17046-6_44
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-17045-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17046-6
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)