Lecture introduction: Market characteristics of quality signals
● Unpredictability of subjective experiences
○ Especially for products with hard to observe or discern quality
○ You do not know the quality until you experience
■ Experience good.
1. Movies
2. High art
3. Museum
● Objective quality measures for evaluation are largely lacking
○ Standard from objective point of view is lacking
■ What is 'beautiful'?
■ People have different opinions. That subjectivity is the main topic of
today.
○ Who decides?
■ Standards? Agenda?
○ How iis it announced?
● Consumers may respect quality in CCI but attach different meaning to the term
○ People think differently with different backgrounds
● Agreement on quality (high or low) means that there are major differences of opinions
● Self-reinforcing feedback loops
○ Heard behavior are helpful explaining inequality in the 'distribution' of success
Why Some Awards Are More Effective Signals of Quality Than Others:
A Study of Movie Awards
Main points
(lecture)
Compare effectiveness of different awards (signals of quality) on consumer purchase behavior
by considering the extent to which selection system typology impacts the competitive process
How do the effectiveness of each award differ across the mainstream and independent U.S
motion picture industries?
This article developed and empirically tested a conceptual framework that predicts which types
of awards are the most effective as signals of quality in different contexts
Overall, our results suggest that consumers give different degrees of credibility to different types
of awards, and that the composition of the award jury influences the effectiveness of the
awards.
,This article argues that, depending on the type of product involved, end consumers rely on
different types of information sources, that is, consumer-, expert-, or peer- based information
Key terminologies
Juries
can be primarily composed of end consumers, experts, or peers
Selection system theory
describes three ideal types of product selection: market, expert, and peer selection
Market or consumer selection
consumers select among the products available based on their own judgments
Experts selection
consumers may select among the products available after consideration of the opinions of
experts
Peers selection
consumers can be guided by the evaluations of competing producers (peers) when selecting
among the available products
Attribution theory
in their decision-making process, consumers do not simply accept signals of quality with blind
faith but attempt to assess for themselves whether the source of the cue is credible or not
● Source credibility
○ Trustworthiness and expertise
○ Consumers weight on information provided by a signal from a highly credible
source
Source-Credible awards
Assumed to be high in the case in which an award jury is composed of types of persons (i.e.,
consumers, experts, or peers) similar in kind, according to selection system typology, to the
sources on which the audience normally relies when making a buying decision
Salience
prominence or “level of activation” of a brand in a consumer’s memory
Salient awards
assumed to be high up in a consumer’s consideration set and thus in the end are likely to have
more effect on purchase decisions than other types of awards
Herd behavior
consumer’s decision- making process is highly influenced by the opinions and actions of others
—and consequently creates inequality and unpredictability of market shares.
Awards
, may provide the award winners with money and fame or other benefits, such as statuettes or
specific privileges. More important, though, an award may function as a signal of quality that
helps consumers and other actors in the value system in their product selection process.
experience product
consumers will have to view a movie themselves to be sure whether they like it, and they will not
get a refund if the movie does not meet their expectations
● Strong social interaction among consumers generates "herd behavior"
○ Decision-making process are highly influenced by the opinions and actions of
the others
■ Creating inequality and unpredictability of market shares
● Criteria consumers use to evaluate the quality of a film are not utilitarian (hedonic)
○ Strong impetus for potential consumers to look for credible and salient signals.
● Previous research on film and quality signals point to
○ Review - arthouse film - expert based
○ WOM- mainstream films- market based
Word of mouth
Awards and its function as the signal of quality
The 'selected' are producers of cultural products
The 'selectors' evaluate the quality of those products : they determine the value as jury
The role of awards as a signaling device seems particularly important in the cultural industries,
where the actual quality of products is often difficult to determine prior to consumption
● composition of the jury selecting the award winners to be an important determinant of an
award’s effectiveness.
Juries can be composed of consumers, expert or peers. Selection system theory (three ideal
types of product selection) is used to determine how consumers normally select among
available products.
1. Market/consumer selection
2. Expert selection
3. Peer selection
Empirical setting … U.S. motion picture industry
● clear example of an experience product
○ This increases the importance of signals of quality that consumers can take into
account in their decision whether or not to view a particular movie
● Unpredictability of subjective experiences
○ Especially for products with hard to observe or discern quality
○ You do not know the quality until you experience
■ Experience good.
1. Movies
2. High art
3. Museum
● Objective quality measures for evaluation are largely lacking
○ Standard from objective point of view is lacking
■ What is 'beautiful'?
■ People have different opinions. That subjectivity is the main topic of
today.
○ Who decides?
■ Standards? Agenda?
○ How iis it announced?
● Consumers may respect quality in CCI but attach different meaning to the term
○ People think differently with different backgrounds
● Agreement on quality (high or low) means that there are major differences of opinions
● Self-reinforcing feedback loops
○ Heard behavior are helpful explaining inequality in the 'distribution' of success
Why Some Awards Are More Effective Signals of Quality Than Others:
A Study of Movie Awards
Main points
(lecture)
Compare effectiveness of different awards (signals of quality) on consumer purchase behavior
by considering the extent to which selection system typology impacts the competitive process
How do the effectiveness of each award differ across the mainstream and independent U.S
motion picture industries?
This article developed and empirically tested a conceptual framework that predicts which types
of awards are the most effective as signals of quality in different contexts
Overall, our results suggest that consumers give different degrees of credibility to different types
of awards, and that the composition of the award jury influences the effectiveness of the
awards.
,This article argues that, depending on the type of product involved, end consumers rely on
different types of information sources, that is, consumer-, expert-, or peer- based information
Key terminologies
Juries
can be primarily composed of end consumers, experts, or peers
Selection system theory
describes three ideal types of product selection: market, expert, and peer selection
Market or consumer selection
consumers select among the products available based on their own judgments
Experts selection
consumers may select among the products available after consideration of the opinions of
experts
Peers selection
consumers can be guided by the evaluations of competing producers (peers) when selecting
among the available products
Attribution theory
in their decision-making process, consumers do not simply accept signals of quality with blind
faith but attempt to assess for themselves whether the source of the cue is credible or not
● Source credibility
○ Trustworthiness and expertise
○ Consumers weight on information provided by a signal from a highly credible
source
Source-Credible awards
Assumed to be high in the case in which an award jury is composed of types of persons (i.e.,
consumers, experts, or peers) similar in kind, according to selection system typology, to the
sources on which the audience normally relies when making a buying decision
Salience
prominence or “level of activation” of a brand in a consumer’s memory
Salient awards
assumed to be high up in a consumer’s consideration set and thus in the end are likely to have
more effect on purchase decisions than other types of awards
Herd behavior
consumer’s decision- making process is highly influenced by the opinions and actions of others
—and consequently creates inequality and unpredictability of market shares.
Awards
, may provide the award winners with money and fame or other benefits, such as statuettes or
specific privileges. More important, though, an award may function as a signal of quality that
helps consumers and other actors in the value system in their product selection process.
experience product
consumers will have to view a movie themselves to be sure whether they like it, and they will not
get a refund if the movie does not meet their expectations
● Strong social interaction among consumers generates "herd behavior"
○ Decision-making process are highly influenced by the opinions and actions of
the others
■ Creating inequality and unpredictability of market shares
● Criteria consumers use to evaluate the quality of a film are not utilitarian (hedonic)
○ Strong impetus for potential consumers to look for credible and salient signals.
● Previous research on film and quality signals point to
○ Review - arthouse film - expert based
○ WOM- mainstream films- market based
Word of mouth
Awards and its function as the signal of quality
The 'selected' are producers of cultural products
The 'selectors' evaluate the quality of those products : they determine the value as jury
The role of awards as a signaling device seems particularly important in the cultural industries,
where the actual quality of products is often difficult to determine prior to consumption
● composition of the jury selecting the award winners to be an important determinant of an
award’s effectiveness.
Juries can be composed of consumers, expert or peers. Selection system theory (three ideal
types of product selection) is used to determine how consumers normally select among
available products.
1. Market/consumer selection
2. Expert selection
3. Peer selection
Empirical setting … U.S. motion picture industry
● clear example of an experience product
○ This increases the importance of signals of quality that consumers can take into
account in their decision whether or not to view a particular movie
