The Shorter the Better? An Inverted U-Shape Relationship between Service Duration and Value Judgment in Efficiency-Focused Services

Main Article Content

Liang-Chu Ho
Wen-Bin Chiou

Abstract

Consumers tend to evaluate services based on the time required to perform such services, when the value of the latter positively correlates with efficiency. This study investigated how consumers use the efficiency heuristic, referring to the tendency of consumers to infer the value of a service from the perceived efficiency with which it is performed. We studied 81 participants who had experienced car problems. The relationship between time devoted to a given service and judgments about its value showed a quadratic trend, with an inverted U-shape, in regard to a service in which value was related to efficiency. Specifically, participants judged services to be more valuable when they involved relatively moderate amounts of time to complete, compared to when they involved comparatively shorter or longer periods of time. The current research suggests that when a service was judged in terms of efficiency, consumers seemed to apply the efficiency heuristic not only to the time required for service performance, but also to labor costs.

Article Details

How to Cite
Ho, L.-C., & Chiou, W.-B. (2018). The Shorter the Better? An Inverted U-Shape Relationship between Service Duration and Value Judgment in Efficiency-Focused Services. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 5(6). https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.56.4751
Section
Articles
Author Biographies

Liang-Chu Ho, National Sun Yat-sen University

Institute of Education

Wen-Bin Chiou, National Sun Yat-sen University

Institute of Education

References

Wyer R. S., Scrull T. K. Memory and cognition in its social context. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1989.

Fiske S. T., Taylor, S. E. Social cognition. Hightstown, NJ: McGraw-Hill, 1991.

Yeung C. W., Soman D. The duration heuristic. Journal of Consumer Research 2007; 34: 315–326.

Kahneman D., Tversky A. Subjective probability: a judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology 1971; 3: 430–454.

Tversky A., Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 1974; 185: 1124–1131.

Kirk R. E. Experimental design: Procedures for the behavior science (4th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1995.

Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1988.

Hendry A. P., Kinnison M. T. The pace of modern life: measuring rates of contemporary microevolution. Evolution 1999; 53: 1637–1653.

Kirkcaldy B., Furnham A., Levine R. Attitudinal and personality correlates of a nation’s pace of life. Journal of Managerial Psychology 2001; 16: 20–34.

Riley J. C. The timing and pace of health transitions around the world. Population and Development Review 2005; 31: 741–764.

Levine R. The pace of life. American Scientist 1990; 78: 450–459.

Levine R. Geography of time: on tempo, culture and the pace of life. New York: Basic Books, 1997.

Levine R., Norenzayan A. The pace of life in 31 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 1999; 30: 178–205.

Hsee C. K., Blount S., Loewenstein G. F., Bazerman M. H. Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of options: a review and theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin 1999; 125: 576–590.