Understanding Consumer Reactions to Assortment Unavailability

3.6 Experimental results
We provide the average AE and SSI scores in Table 3.1. To test the significance of the three
independent variables and the two interaction variables, we use an ANOVA (394 degrees of
freedom [d.f.] and 5 d.f., respectively). We display the ANOVA results in Table 3.2.
Table 3.1: Descriptive statistics of the controlled experiment (n = 383)
Equity of delisted brand
- Low
- High
Assortment size
- Small (6 brands)
- Large (9 brands)
Assortment structure
- One-third high equity
- Two-thirds high equity
3.6.1 Main effects
70
Assortment
Evaluation (1–7)
Average Standard
4.38
3.86
3.92
4.24
3.85
4.30
Deviation
1.23
1.42
1.38
1.34
Store Switching
Intention (1–5)
Average Standard
2.94
3.45
3.41
3.18
Deviation
The first hypothesis predicts that AE will be lower (H1a) and SSI will be higher (H1b) when a
high-equity brand is delisted than when a low-equity brand is delisted. In support of these
hypotheses, the AE is lower (3.86 versus 4.38; F = 15.1, p < 0.01) and SSI is higher (3.55 versus
2.9; F = 20.1, p < 0.01) for high-equity brand delistings than for low-equity brand delistings. We
also find support for the proposition that AE will be higher (H2a) and SSI lower (H2b) when a
brand delisting occurs in a large instead of a small assortment; AE is higher for larger
assortments (3.92 versus 4.24; F = 5.8, p < 0.01), and SSI is higher for smaller assortments (3.41
versus 3.18; F = 3.0, p < 0.01). Finally, H3a and H3b predict that, when the percentage of high-
equity brands is higher, AE will be higher and SSI will be lower. Our results show that
1.45
1.24
3.46
3.14
1.37
1.32
1.33
1.42
1.35
1.38
n
160
223
196
187
192
191