See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/280311630

Name-Letters and Birthday-Numbers: Implicit Egotism Effects in Pricing

Article  in  Journal of Marketing · May 2014

DOI: 10.1509/jm.13.0059

CITATIONS READS
14 1,568

2 authors:

Keith Coulter Dhruv Grewal

Clark University Babson College
35 PUBLICATIONS   1,835 CITATIONS    234 PUBLICATIONS   35,722 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Location of numeric information View project

Reframing the Discount with a Comparison to the Sale Price: Does It Make the Discount More Attractive? View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Keith Coulter on 24 July 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Name-Letter and Birthday-Number
Implicit Egotism Effects in Pricing

Keith S. Coulter

Dhruv Grewal

December 18, 2013

Keith S. Coulter is Associate Professor of Marketing, Clark University, Graduate School of

Management, 950 Main Street, Worcester, Massachusetts, 01610-1477. phone: (860)429-1152;
email: kcoulter@clarku.edu.

Dhruv Grewal (dgrewal@babson.edu) is the Toyota Chair in E-Commerce and Electronic

Business at the Department of Marketing of Babson College, Babson Park, MA 02457.

The authors appreciate the feedback of Rajneesh Suri, Scott Motyka and Maastricht University
seminar participants.
 Name-Letter and Birthday-Number
Implicit Egotism Effects in Pricing

Abstract

This research examines how the implicit egotism resulting from consumers’ positive self-
associations affects their evaluations of product prices. The effects can occur when the product’s
price and the consumer share either name letters (name-letter/price effect), or birthday numbers
(birthday-number/price effect).Through a series of studies, we demonstrate that the positive
affect linked to name-letters and birthday-numbers transfers directly to consumers’ price
predilections, and ultimately affects their purchase intentions. More specifically, consumers like
prices (e.g., “fifty-five dollars”) that contain digits beginning with the same first letter (e.g., “F”)
as their own name (e.g., “Fred” or “Mr. Frank”) more than prices that do not. Similarly, prices
containing cents digits (e.g., $49.15) that correspond to a consumer’s date of birth (e.g., April 26)
also enhance pricing liking and purchase intentions. Across groups of consumers, our findings
demonstrate that implicit egotism effects can result in greater purchase intentions for a higher
priced product compared to a lower-priced product.

Keywords: behavioral pricing; name-letter effects, name-price effect, birthday-price effect.

 1

In today’s highly competitive marketplace, firms are increasingly adopting mass-

personalization programs, in which product and price offerings are tailored toward the individual

consumer. In such programs, each customer is treated as “relevant” and unique, and that personal

relevance/uniqueness is reinforced by appealing to consumers’ sense of implicit egotism. The

term “implicit egotism” refers to the fact that people have positive associations about themselves,

and these associations can non-consciously spill over into their evaluations of objects that they

associate with the self. The “spill-over” can only occur, however, if implicit egotism cues are

provided that allows the consumer to make the self/object connection (Greenwald and Banaji

1995; Nuttin 1987). Two powerful implicit egotism cues that have not been examined within the

marketing literature are (1) the match between the first letter of a customer’s first (or last) name

and the first letters of the digits in a price-name, and (2) the match between a customer’s birthday

and the digits in a price. In this paper we examine those cues.

As an example of the first cue, we show that Fred (or Mr. Franklin) is more likely to

purchase a brand of coffee at a sale price of $8.55 than at a sale price of $8.66, whereas Sally (or

Ms. Smith) is more likely to purchase that same brand of coffee at a sale price of $8.66. For Fred

(or Mr. Franklin) and Sally (or Ms. Smith), the first letters of the cents digits (i.e., “fifty-five”

and “sixty-six,” respectively) directly correspond to the first letters (i.e., F and S) of their names.

Regarding the second cue, we demonstrate that Arthur (born on January 15), might be more

likely to purchase a hamburger if it is priced at $4.15 than if it is priced at $4.10, whereas Betty

(born on February 10) might be more likely to purchase that hamburger priced at $4.10.

Name-letter and birthday-number linkages such as these have previously been

investigated in the context of brand names (Brendl, Chattopadhyay, Pelham, and Carvallo 2005).

For example, research has shown that Tom (or Mr. Thomas) is more likely to buy a Toyota,
 2

Linda (or Mrs. Lundy) is more likely to purchase a Lexus, and Henry (born on January 5) might

prefer “Five Guys” brand chilidogs over those of other restaurant chains. However, the practical

significance of these findings is limited in that marketers typically have little ability to alter

brand names or product characteristics in order to incorporate name-letters or birthday-numbers.

Thus, if these same implicit egotism effects were found to apply to (i.e., or could be evoked by)

an easily-modified product attribute, the practical significance would be dramatically increased.

Attribute-specific egotism effects have been hypothesized (Brendl et al 2005), but never

conclusively demonstrated. In this paper, we demonstrate such findings regarding the price

attribute.

We examine our expectations and hypotheses in the context of two experiments, two

quasi-experiments, and one field study. In our first study, we examine “T” and “E” name-letter

effects associated with two prices ($622 or $688) presented in verbal format. The name letters

correspond to participants’ last names. We find that name-letter/price matching enhances both

price liking and purchase intentions. In our second study, price stimuli ($8.55 or $8.66) are

presented as Arabic numerals in visual format, and we examine the effects associated with

matching the (last) name-letters “F” and “S.” We also examine the moderating role of price

rehearsal, which allows us to confirm process. Our third study expands the generalizability of our

findings by demonstrating several different (first) name-letter effects across a range of prices in a

field setting (i.e., involving retail automobile purchases). In this study, we are able to examine

the impact of matching different price digits in a seven-digit price.

In our fourth (experimental) study, we demonstrate that implicit egotism can also

manifest in the form of birthday-number/price matching effects, and that ego threat moderates

(i.e., enhances) these effects. Finally in a fifth (experimental) study, we examine birthday-
 3

number/price and name-letter/brand matching effects concurrently. By investigating several

different process mediators, we are able to show that these two matching strategies impact

purchase intentions not only in terms of their effects on attribute liking, but also in terms of their

more general effects on ad evaluations. In Figure 1, we present our organizing framework, and

the relationships tested by the various studies.

Insert Figure 1About Here

In summary, this research makes several important contributions. It is the first series of

studies to: 1) conclusively demonstrate that implicit egotism affects product attributes, 2)

investigate the price attribute in terms of both name-letter and birthday-number matching effects,

3) demonstrate the importance (i.e., in a name-letter context) of matching price presentation

format (i.e., visual versus verbal) to numerical processing mode, 4) show that birthday-number

and name-letter effects can operate independently, but concurrently, within the same advertising

stimulus, 5) demonstrate the moderating effects of ego threat on the (birthday-number/price 

purchase intentions) relationship, and 6) demonstrate that the implicit ego-driven affect elicited

by either name-letter or birthday-number matching can transfer not only to the associated price

or product-related attribute, but to other aspects of the ad (i.e., ad evaluations) as well.

THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT

Implicit Egotism and Name-Letter Effects

As noted earlier, theories of implicit egotism suggest that people’s positive associations

about themselves spill over into their evaluations of objects associated with the self (Greenwald

and Banaji 1995; Pelham et al. 2002, Perham, Carvallo, and Jones 2005). Thus, people are

attracted to cities, states, careers, or brands that either consciously or non-consciously remind

them of themselves (Pelham et al. 2003, p.800). Because people prefer letters contained in their
 4

own names more than other letters (e.g., Johnson 1986; Hoorens and Nuttin 1993; Kitayama and

Rarasawa 1997; Jones et al. 2002), and because they are reminded of themselves when they

encounter other people, objects, or events whose name begins with the same letter (or series of

letters) as their own names (e.g., Johnson 1986; Nuttin 1987; Jones et al. 2002), they tend to

express a greater liking of, or predisposition toward, those name-related objects. This positive

bias was originally termed the “name-letter effect” (Nuttin 1985).1

The implicit egotism that drives name letter effects has also been shown to create

preference for numbers (and objects associated with those numbers) that reflect one’s date-of-

birth (i.e., both day-of-the-month as well as year; Kitayama and Rarasawa 1997; Koole,

Dijksterhui and van Knoppernberg 2001; Jones et al. 2002; Jones et al. 2004). We refer to this as

the birthday-number effect. A representative review of findings in the literature regarding both

name-letter and birthday-number effects are provided in Table 1.

Insert Table 1 about Here

A limitation of some of these studies is that they involve archival data, which cannot

establish causality and increases the likelihood that the results are confounded with a number of

other variables (Gallucci 2003; Simonsohn 2011). In addition, review of Table 1 studies

demonstrates a need to establish these effects in more realistic experimental and field settings,

and to generalize to other factors that managers have greater control over (e.g., attributes such as

the price of a product or service, rather than brand names).

Underlying Method of Affect Transfer

Presumably, personal names and dates carry positive affect because they serve to define a

person’s self-concept (Koole and Pelham 2003). Thus if a person and a brand share name letters,

1
With regard to preferences for things that do not have first and last names (e.g., cities, occupations), people’s first
and last names offer interchangeable predictors (Pelham et al. 2002).
 5

one possibility is that the valence could transfer directly from the person to the brand (i.e.,

independent of any conscious brand-related thoughts), in a process similar to that described by

the Dual Mediation model of persuasion (MacKenzie, Lutz, and Belch 1986; Mitchell 1986).

Alternatively (and in concurrence with parallel constraint satisfaction models; Read, Vanman,

and Miller 1997), Brendl et al. (2005) suggest that valence transfer from the name letter to the

brand is attribute-specific, rather than global in nature. They argue that name letters directly

influence consumers’ perceptions of product attributes that are accessible, prototypical, or

relevant to a current active need, which then drive their overall liking for the brand. The actual

name letters in the attribute may be consciously or non-consciously perceived, but the name-

letter linkage (and the affect transfer) likely occurs below the threshold of conscious awareness.

Importantly, despite Brendl et al.’s (2005) indirect transfer hypothesis, their studies

showed that the preferred brand shared name letters with the personal source, not the brand’s

attribute. As such, the authors could not definitively confirm their arguments (Brendl et al. 2005,

p. 412). If valence transfer does indeed occur through an attribute, we should expect implicit

egotism to be just as likely to influence purchase intentions if the personal source and the

attribute share first letters. Thus, Tom may be more likely to buy a Toyota - but he may also buy

a Chevy if he is focused on its unique form of six-speed variable transmission.

The attribute that we investigate is price. Compared with other attributes, prices are

unique in that they can be expressed as a series of letters (e.g., “eight dollars and twenty-two

cents”) or numeric characters (e.g., $8.22). Thus, focusing on the price attribute enables us to

examine both name-letter as well as birthday-number effects.

Name-Letter/Price Effects

Research in the field of numerical cognition suggests that people process numerical
 6

information, including prices, using a dedicated cognitive subsystem (Ashcraft 1992; Dehaene

1997), and that numbers can be mentally represented in both auditory and visual formats.2

Numbers (e.g., 22) processed in the auditory (phonological) code are represented by a sequence

of word sounds (e.g., “twent-ē-tü”), whereas numbers processed in the visual code are

represented on a visuo-spatial medium based on their appearance as either Arabic numerals (e.g.,

“22”) or written words (e.g., “twenty-two”) (Coulter, Choi, and Monroe 2012).

Importantly, although research has shown that the different codes prompt processing in

different areas of the brain (Dehaene et al. 1993; Dehaene and Cohen 1995), research has also

demonstrated that the visual, analog, and auditory codes are neurologically connected with one

another - that is, there are paths linking the different representations within and across each of

the brain hemispheres (Noel 2001; Pinel et al. 1999). This means that although a visual pricing

stimulus (e.g., $22) will lead to a price being represented in the corresponding visual code (e.g.,

$22), and a verbal pricing stimulus will lead to a price being represented in the corresponding

auditory code (e.g.,“twent-ē-tü”), either form of encoding can also lead to a price being

concurrently represented in a “non-corresponding” verbal/visual format (Luna and Kim 2006;

2009; Logie, Gillhooly, & Wynn 1994; Coulter and Coulter 2010; Coulter, Choi, and Monroe

2012).

A plethora of studies in the cognitive and developmental psychology literature(s) have

demonstrated that the verbal format associated with a spoken word and the visual format

associated with a written word are closely linked (see Berninger et al. 2006 for a discussion).

Further, written language skills are learned through recognition of sounds as words comprised of

letters (Gillam and Johnston 1992). Thus if a price stimulus is presented and encoded verbally

2
According to Dehaene’s “Triple Code” model, numbers can also be processed and encoded as analog magnitude
representations, which are judgments of relative size (e.g., “large” or “small”) arrayed along a left-to-right-oriented
mental number line (Dehaene, Bossini, & Giraux 1993).
 7

(e.g., as “twent-ē-tü”), we expect that a written word representation (e.g., “twenty-two,” rather

than the numeric character representation “22”) will also be evoked. The consumer will then be

able to make the non-conscious connection between his or her own name letters (e.g., “Ted” or

Ms. “Thomas”) and the letters contained in the price (e.g., “Twenty-Two”). We refer to this as

the “Name-Letter/Price Effect.” As a consequence, positive valence transfer should occur,

resulting in greater liking for the price and ultimately greater purchase intentions. Importantly,

the first letter of the consumer’s name and the first letter of the price need not represent an exact

phonetic match (e.g., the “E” in “Edith” and the “E” in “Eight” represent different sounds).

Rather it is sufficient that the verbal representation elicit that visual letter in the mind of the

consumer. We expect:

H1 : If prices are presented verbally, consumers will demonstrate greater price liking and
purchase intentions if the price does (vs. does not) share name first-letter with the
consumer.

If a price is not presented verbally, but rather is presented visually as a series of numeric

characters (e.g., $30), visual encoding of those characters is expected to occur. But research has

shown that visual/auditory encoding as a series of words or word-sounds may also occur,

depending on the needs of the task (Dehaene 1992; Gallistel and Gelman 1992; Cohen and

Dehaene 1996; Dehaene et al. 1998; Coulter, Choi, and Monroe 2012). For example, when it is

necessary to write out numeric characters (e.g., $8.55) on a check, visual as well as verbal word

representations (e.g., “eight dollars and fifty-five cents”) will also be encoded (Coulter, Choi,

and Monroe 2012).

Research has also shown that auditory (together with visual and analog) representations

are encoded during the mental rehearsal of (visually presented) Arabic numerals (e.g., $4) in a

simulated comparative shopping environment (Vanhuele, Laurent, and Dreze 2006; Coulter and
 8

Coulter 2010). Here, rehearsal of the price information equates to verbal presentation in the

previous hypothesis. When consumers mentally “hear” the prices, both auditory representations

as well as visual word-names should be evoked (e.g., “4” evokes “fö(ə)r” and “four”). That

evocation should allow the consumer to make the connection between the first letter in his or her

own name, and the first letter in the price. Therefore, when the price is presented visually as

numeric characters, we would expect the name-letter/price effect to occur when the price is

rehearsed, but not to occur when not rehearsed. This implies a three-way (rehearsal x price x

name-letter) interaction. We posit:

H2 : There will be a three-way interaction of price, name-letter, and rehearsal on price liking
and purchase intentions. More specifically, when consumers mentally rehearse the price,
we expect a name-letter/price effect. When they do not mentally rehearse the price, we
do not expect a name-letter/price effect.

Birthday-Number/Price Effects

Although far less research has been carried out with regard to birthday-numbers,

evidence also indicates that people are positively biased toward other persons, objects, or events

that share numbers corresponding to their birthdays (Perham, Mirenberg, and Jones 2002; Jones

et al. 2004). Thus, for example, Patsy might be attracted to Gregg because they share the same

actual birthday (Pelham et al. 2003), or because his street address corresponds to her birthday

year (e.g., 1965; Jones et al. 2004).

As noted earlier, birthday number effects are hypothesized to result from the same

implicit egotism that drives name-letter preference (Jones et al. 2004). Just as encoding in

spoken/written word format may be necessary in order for name-letter effects to manifest, we

expect that visual encoding as Arabic numerals will be particularly salient for manifesting

birthday-number effects. That is, if a price stimulus is presented visually (i.e., in the form of

numeric characters), a consumer should make the connection between his or her birthday-
 9

numbers (e.g., the 30th of April) and the numbers in the price stimulus (e.g., $30). We refer to

this as the “Birthday-Number/Price Effect.” The affect that is transferred should manifest as

liking of the price attribute and increased brand purchase intentions. Thus we posit:

H3 : If prices are presented visually (as numeric characters), consumers will demonstrate
greater price liking and purchase intentions if the price does (vs. does not) share birthday
numbers with the consumer.

Ego-Threat Moderating Effects

If name-letter and birthday-number effects are indeed driven by implicit egotism

(Greenwald and Banaji 1995; Nuttin 1987), then it stands to reason that when a person’s positive

sense of self is compromised, he/she might attempt to overcome that “threat” by showing

exaggerated name-letter preference. In support of this argument, several findings show that when

respondents have recently written about a personal flaw, they overcome the implied ego

challenge by expressing even greater predilection toward people, objects, or events that reflect

their name-letter preference (Jones et al. 2002). We expect that the same moderating effects

should apply toward a product attribute. More specifically, when consumers’ egos are

threatened, an ordinal interaction effect should occur such that the hypothesized birthday-

number/price matching effects will be increased. We posit:

H4: The greater price liking and purchase intentions that consumers demonstrate under
birthday-number/price matching conditions will be increased when consumers’ implicit
egotism is threatened.

Multiple Digit Prices

Assuming the appropriate presentation context, we expect that both name-letter and

birthday-number effects will manifest in the case of single-digit prices, or multiple-digit prices

when all digits match the consumer’s name-letter or birthday-number. In the case of multiple-

digit prices when all digits do not match (e.g., Edward and “Eight-thirty-four”), manifestation of
 10

effects may be related to: a) cumulative number, b) proportion, or c) placement of price-digit

matches (i.e., first versus last digits).

Regarding the first two factors, there is no a priori theoretical basis for determining what

cumulative number or proportion of price-digit matches might be required, although our

expectation is that a majority of matches would generate the effect. Regarding the third factor,

prices are distinctive in that each numeric character represents some unique unit of value, and

each is typically verbalized as a separate word - particularly if segregated through use of a

comma (e.g., $8,197) or as cents digits (e.g., $81.97).3 For example, the three numeric characters

in “$8.25” are expressed as “eight-twenty-five.” Conversely, the three letter-characters in “red”

are expressed as “red.” What this means is that although it is likely that affect could transfer from

“Robert” to “red” (i.e., name-letter matches first letter of attribute) but not from “Dan” to “red”

(i.e., name letter matches last letter of attribute), in the case of the price attribute it may be

equally likely that affect could transfer from “Fred” to “$8.25” (i.e., name-letter matches first

letter of third numeric character) as from “Fred to “$5.28” (name-letter matches first letter of

first numeric character).

Research in numerical cognition has demonstrated both left-digit (Thomas and Morwitz

2009) as well as right-digit (Coulter and Coulter 2007) effects. Therefore, one might expect that

matching on left or right digits could create more pronounced implicit egotism effects than

matching on “interior” digits. Further, due to economic considerations, managers may have

greater latitude in varying right digits in general, and cents digits in particular, than they would in

varying left-most dollar digits. Thus in both our experimental and quasi-experimental studies,

choice of digit manipulations is based primarily on prior research, and practical rather than

theoretical considerations.
3
Exceptions to this rule would involve such numbers as 10, 11, 12, and 13-19.
 11

STUDY 1

Stimuli and Procedures

The base 10 numerical system consists of ten integers, each with a unique word name

(e.g., 1 = “one”; 2 = “two”). The numbers 11 (“eleven”) and 12 (“twelve”) also represent unique

word names. Beyond the number 12, however, numerical word names are essentially variations

of single integer names (e.g., “thirteen” = “three plus ten”). Therefore, we expect that price-

related name-letter effects are limited to the following letters: “O” (one), “T” (two, three, ten,

twelve), “F” (four, five), “S” (six, seven), “E” (eight, eleven), and “N” (nine). For the purposes

of our first study, we randomly chose to examine the letters “T” and “E.” We examine other

letters in subsequent studies.

Study 1 involved a 2 (last name letter: T/E)  2 (price number: $622/$688) between-

subjects quasi-experimental design (with 20 participants/cell). We created short, 15–20 second

radio commercials for a fictitious sporting goods retailer. In each commercial, the announcer

mentioned a special price for a fictitious brand of bicycle, and the brand name (Mizuki Pro) did

not begin with either of the target letters. The price was either $622 (i.e., “six twenty-two,”

consistent with the name-letter “T”) or $688 (i.e., “six eighty-eight,” consistent with the name-

letter “E”). We chose to manipulate the tens and units digits (rather than hundreds, which

remained constant at 6), because: a) prior research has indicated that the auditory manipulation

of these digits affects price preference and choice (e.g., Coulter, Choi, and Monroe 2012), b)

manipulating two digits rather than one was expected to create a stronger effect, and c)

manipulating right-most (versus left-most) digits reduces differences in economic value.

The participants (N = 120) were students, faculty, and staff chosen from phone

directories and e-mail lists at several major Eastern U.S. universities, based on alphabetical
 12

listings of their last names (only participants who did not also have target letters as the first letter

in their first names were included in this sample). Participants were contacted by e-mail and

asked to click on a link that allowed them to take part in our study. After they clicked on the link,

the scenario explained that a new sporting goods retailer would soon be moving to the area, and

we wanted to examine whether it could be price competitive. Each person then heard a radio

commercial with one of the two (randomly determined) prices. Next, they completed a brief

questionnaire to assess price liking and purchase intentions (Appendix A), using items consistent

with previous research (e.g., Dodds, Monroe and Grewal 1991; Suri and Monroe 2003). The

questionnaire also contained relevant demographic questions. Our expectation was that

participants whose last names began with “E” (“T”) and who were exposed to the $688 ($622)

price would express greater price liking and purchase intentions than those whose last name

began with “E” (“T”) and who were exposed to the $622 ($688) price.

Results

In a quasi-experimental design, the inability to assign participants randomly to name-

letter groups could introduce confounds if the groups vary on some other, untested variable

linked to price preference. However we found no significant differences across name-letter

conditions in terms of demographics (i.e., age, gender, marital status, educational, nationality,

and income). In addition, we questioned participants regarding the nature of our experiment;

none revealed an understanding of its purpose or any awareness of the name-letter/price linkage.

Price Liking. ANOVA revealed a significant two-way (name letter  price-ending)

interaction (F(1,116) = 17.19, p < .001) (Figure 2a). Neither main effect was significant. When

participants’ last names began with “E,” the group exposed to the higher $688 price indicated

significantly greater price liking than the group exposed to the $622 price (M$688=4.42, M$622=
 13

3.29; F(1, 116) = 9.18, p < .01). Similarly, when participants’ last names began with “T,” the group

exposed to the $622 price indicated significantly greater price-liking than the group exposed to

the $688 price (M$622=4.43, M$688= 3.38; F(1, 116) = 8.04 p < .01). Thus, H1 is supported.

Purchase intention. ANOVA results again revealed the expected two-way (name letter 

price-ending) interaction (F(1,116) = 22.52, p < .001) (Figure 2b). Neither main effect was

significant. ANCOVA’s were also run including all of the aforementioned demographic

variables as covariates, and none were significant at p>.10. Follow-up contrasts indicated that

when participants’ last name began with “E,” those exposed to the higher $688 price were

significantly more likely to purchase than were those exposed to the $622 price (M$688=4.91,

M$622= 3.88; F(1,116) = 8.19, p < .01). Thus, H1 is again supported. This result also demonstrates

that name-letter/price matching can overcome economic value in driving purchase intentions.

When participants’ last name began with “T,” those exposed to the $622 price were

significantly more likely to purchase than were those exposed to the $688 price (M$622=5.13,

M$688= 3.75; F(1, 116) = 14.83, p < .001). Of course, one might expect greater purchase intention at

$622 than at $688 due to economic considerations, but not to the extent that a 9% decrease in

price prompted a 36.8% increase in purchase intentions.

Insert Figure 2 About Here

Mediation Analysis. As a final step in our analysis, we tested whether price liking

mediates the effects of the (name-letter x price-name) interaction on purchase intentions. For the

test of mediation, we used the bootstrap PROCESS macro method suggested by Hayes (2012).

PROCESS Model 8 estimates the conditional (i.e., moderated by name-letter) indirect effects of

a causal variable (i.e., price) on an outcome variable (i.e., purchase intentions) through a

proposed mediator (i.e., price liking), as well as the conditional direct effect of that causal
 14

variable on the outcome variable. Here [(a1i +a3iW) bi] represents the indirect effects of the

independent variable on the dependent variable through the mediator, and (c1’+c3’W) represents

the conditional direct effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable.

Our results showed that both the overall liking [F(3,116)= 5.75, p=.0011] and purchase

intentions [F(4,115)= 8.01, p<.001] “outcome” models were significant. The significant (price x

name-letter) interaction (t= 3.56, p<.001) implies that the indirect effect of price on purchase

intentions through price liking is moderated by name-letter. The normal theory tests for the

conditional indirect effects indicated positive non-standardized coefficients at both values of the

moderator (1.89 and 2.06), and the bootstrap results showed that the bias corrected and

accelerated 95% confidence intervals (CI) excluding zero were .84(lower)/2.93 (upper) and

1.26(lower)/2.84(upper).The conditional direct (non-mediated) effects were also significant at

both values of the name-letter moderator [coefficient = -1.13, t= -3.13, p<.005, and coefficient =

.76, t= 2.08, p<.05]. Lower/upper confidence intervals for the direct effects were -1.85/-.41 and

.037/1.48, respectively. Therefore, price liking partially mediates the (price x name-letter) 

purchase intentions relationship.

Discussion

Study 1 supports our expectations regarding name-letter effects resulting from verbal

price presentation. Purchase intentions were greater for the higher priced brand in the “E” name-

letter conditions, which suggests that the positive affect transfer resulting from participants’

name-letter/price associations (rather than the economic value of the prices) drove both price

liking and brand purchase intentions. Interestingly, our partial mediation results indicate that

although matching name-letter to price triggered implicit egotism valence transfer, price was not

the only construct to benefit from that transfer. Rather (as we will address in a subsequent study),
 15

affect could also have been transferred to either other pertinent attributes (e.g., manufacturing

quality) or to the ad itself, which also impacts purchase intentions. In the next quasi-experiment,

we present prices in written numeral format to determine if these same effects (but involving

different letters) will again become manifest. We also examine a third (moderating) variable –

price rehearsal.

STUDY 2

Stimuli and Procedures

Study 2 involved a 2 (last name letter: F/S)  2 (price number: $8.55/$8.66)  2 (price

rehearsal: yes/no) between-subjects quasi-experimental design (with 16-17 participants/cell).

Name letter was the fixed factor; assignment of participants to the price number and price

rehearsal conditions was randomly determined. One of the two price combinations appeared in a

print ad for a fictitious brand of coffee (see Appendix B). The brand name (LIVE coffee) did not

begin with either of the target letters, and the price was not included in any lines of text.

In the rehearsal conditions, participants were asked to “read to yourself, without speaking

out loud” any sale prices they encountered, and to rehearse the prices internally to keep them in

memory (i.e., because they would later be asked to recall those prices). This rehearsal

manipulation is consistent with previous studies that have based their design on in-store price

comparisons (e.g., Vanhuele et al. 2006). Because products are not always located contiguously,

consumers comparing prices must retain the prices associated with particular products or brands

in short-term working memory. This paired association learning is facilitated by internal price

recitation. The manipulation instructions ensured that participants mentally “heard” the prices,

evoked the verbal/visual price-word representations, and therefore made the hypothesized name-

letter associations. No such instructions were provided in the rehearsal-absent condition.

 16

As in Study 1, participants (N = 130) included students, faculty, and staff chosen from

telephone directories and e-mail lists at several major Eastern U.S. universities (i.e., based on

alphabetical listings of their last names). After clicking on an online link, participants viewed the

print ad containing one of the two prices; they subsequently completed a brief questionnaire with

items otherwise identical to Study 1, but modified to match the product. We expected that if

participants whose last names began with “F” (“S”) mentally rehearsed the price-names, those

who saw the $8.55 ($8.66) price would express greater price liking and purchase intentions (H2)

than those who were exposed to the $8.66 ($8.55) price. We expected that these effects would be

negated when prices were not rehearsed.

Results

Because participants were (non-randomly) assigned to test-letter conditions, to account

for potential confounds we again examined demographic variables. We found no significant

differences across name-letter groups in terms of age, gender, marital status, educational level,

nationality, or income. In addition, in response to questions about the nature of the experiment,

none of the participants revealed an understanding of the purpose of the study or an awareness of

the name-letter/price linkage.

Price Liking. As expected, ANOVA revealed a significant three-way (last name-letter 

price-ending  rehearsal) interaction (F(1,122) = 23.64, p < .001). Further as expected, in the

rehearsal condition we obtained a significant two-way (name-letter  price-ending) interaction

(F(1,122) = 45.33, p < .001). Follow-up contrasts revealed that when participants’ last names began

with “F” and they rehearsed the prices, those who viewed the $8.55 price indicated significantly

greater price liking than those who viewed the $8.66 price (M$8.55=5.33, M$8.66= 3.40; F(1, 122) =

24.75, p < .001). Conversely, when participants’ last name began with “S” and they rehearsed the
 17

prices, those who viewed the $8.66 price indicated significantly greater price liking than those

who viewed the $8.55 price (M$8.66=5.15, M$8.55= 3.35; F(1, 122) = 20.70, p < .001). As expected,

the two-way interaction was non-significant in the non-rehearsal condition (F(1,122) = 0.02, n.s.),

and there were no significant differences across “F” (M8.55 = 3.78, M8.66 = 3.85) or “S” (M8.55 =

3.70 vs. M8.66 = 3.69) name-letter groups. Thus, H2 is supported.

Purchase intention. ANOVA revealed a significant three-way (name-letter  price-ending

 rehearsal) interaction (F(1,122) = 11.86, p < .01) (Figure 3). As expected and again in support of

H2, in the rehearsal condition we obtained a significant two-way (name-letter  price-ending)

interaction (F(1,122) = 22.39, p< .001) (see Figure 3a). Follow-up contrasts revealed that when

participants’ last name began with “S” and they rehearsed the prices, those who viewed the

higher $8.66 price were significantly more likely to purchase than those who viewed the $8.55

price (M$8.66=5.60, M$8.55= 3.89; F(1, 122) = 11.28, p = .001).

Further, when participants’ last name began with “F” and they rehearsed the prices, those

who viewed the $8.55 price were significantly more likely to purchase the brand than those who

viewed the $8.66 price (M$8.55=5.63, M$8.66= 3.95; F(1, 122) = 11.10, p = .001). Although one

would expect greater purchase intentions at $8.55 than at $8.66 due to economic value, one

would not expect that a 1% decrease in price could result in a 43% increase in purchase

intentions. Finally, in the non-rehearsal condition, as expected we did not find a significant two-

way (name-letter  price-ending) interaction (F(1,122) = 0.02, n.s.), and there was no significant

difference in means across the four groups (F: M8.55 = 4.10 vs. M8.66 = 4.10; S: M8.55 = 4.20 vs.

M8.66 = 4.19) (Figure 3b). Thus H2 is again supported.

Insert Figure 3 About Here

Finally we performed a test of moderated mediation similar to the one in Study 1,

 18

however this time employing PROCESS Model 12 (i.e., due to the presence of two moderators;

Hayes 2012). As expected, results revealed that price liking partially mediates the (price x name-

letter)  purchase intentions relationship, but only in the price rehearsal conditions.4

Discussion

These results support our expectations regarding name-letter effects as they relate to

prices presented visually as Arabic numerals. Name-letter preferences only became manifest

when affect was transferred due to the mental rehearsal of price names. We argue that this

rehearsal non-consciously evoked personal name-letter associations, and that is was implicit

egotism, rather than the economic value of the prices, that drove both price liking and brand

purchase intentions. When only the numeric characters were processed and encoded (i.e., as

Arabic numerals in the non-rehearsal conditions), name-letter effects did not emerge. Our

findings of partial mediation again imply that affect was transferred not only to the triggering

attribute (i.e., price), but to other attributes (e.g., “time well spent” – see Appendix B), to the ad

itself, or directly to the Live Coffee brand. We examine some of these other possible mediators

in a subsequent study.

An alternate explanation for our findings is that it was merely the alliterative sounds of

the prices themselves that had an effect. Alliteration does not require a repetition of letters but

rather of sounds, and prior research has demonstrated that alliteration may be linked not only to

brand name recall but to positive attitudes as well (Lowrey, Shrum, and Dubitsky 2003; Leigh

1994; Reece, Vanden Bergh and Li 1994; McQuarrie and Mick 1992, 1993). In each of our first

two studies we manipulated two digits rather than one – thus alliteration was already present in

our prices in both target and non-target conditions. That presence seemingly rules out alliteration

4
ANCOVA with purchase intentions as the dependent measure and the demographic variables as covariates
revealed that none of the covariates were significant at p>.10. See Web Appendix for mediation analysis details.
 19

as an alternate explanation. Nevertheless, we conducted a follow-up study where we varied

name-letter (“F” vs. “Ph”) – but not phoneme.5 Results (i.e., an effect in the case of “F” but not

“Ph”) confirmed our expectations that alliteration is not driving our results.

The external generalizability of the findings from Studies 1 and 2 may be limited,

however, in that we investigated only two sets of price endings and two specific name letters in

each quasi-experiment. Furthermore, our sample populations were restricted, and we were unable

to randomly assign participants to our blocking variable (name-letter group). Thus to address

these threats to external validity, in our next Study we examine the name-letter/price matching

effect using actual customer purchase data from a retail business establishment. We also examine

which price digits may be the most likely to impact name letter effects.

(FIELD) STUDY 3

Stimuli, Method, and Procedures

An automobile dealership with three retail business locations in two Eastern U.S. states

agreed to provide the data for our field study. Each dealership sold approximately 60 vehicles per

month, of which roughly 25% (15 per dealership; total 45) were non-financed. We did not have

access to specific automobile make or model purchase information, but we learned the final

purchase prices (i.e., which included taxes and fees). We decided to examine cash (i.e., non-

dealer-financed) purchases only, because final payments (minus any prior deposits) typically

relied on cashier’s checks, for which the purchase prices appeared on the second line of the

check in written-word format. Assuming buyers read the amount they were paying, we could be

5
In the follow-up study, a 2 (first name-letter: F/Ph)  2 (price: $8.55/ $8.22) between-subjects quasi-experimental
design was employed (22 participants/cell). All stimuli and procedures were identical to Study 2. ANOVA revealed
a significant name-letter  price-ending interaction (F(1,84) = 13.83, p< .001): (“F”: M$8.55=4.89, M$8.22= 3.89; F(1,84)
= 12.55, p= .001) and (“Ph”: M$8.22=4.30, M$8.55= 3.82; F(1,84) = 2.95, n.s.). Results rule out alliteration as an
alternate explanation and support the name-letter/price effect. More details are provided in the Web-Appendix.
 20

reasonably certain that visual as well as verbal price-word representations had been processed

and encoded (Coulter, Choi, and Monroe 2012).

To protect customer confidentiality, the dealer agreed to provide first-name information

only. Of the approximately 45 non-financed automobile sales per month, approximately 17%

were sold to persons whose first names began with T, F, S, E, N, or O (7–8 vehicles/month).

Over a three-year period, 275 purchases thus matched our name-letter criteria. After the

purchases had been finalized, customers also completed a very brief customer satisfaction

survey, and we employed the results from the final question, “How would you rate your liking of

the deal you received at (dealership)?” (1–10, “liked very little/liked very much”), as our

dependent measure. There was no survey question that specifically addressed purchase prices;

however, price liking and deal liking should be highly correlated. Approximately 67% of

customers completed this survey question, resulting in a final usable sample group of N = 183.

All of the purchase prices were between $10,000 and $99,000. Thus each price had a total

of seven digits, including the two that represented cents. For each customer’s name-letter

purchase price, we recorded the number of times that the corresponding price-names appeared in

that seven-digit price. For example, if Fred paid $25, 471.46 for his vehicle (including taxes and

fees), three of the digits in that price (i.e., the 5, the first 4, and second 4) represent price names

that match Fred’s name-letter. If Samantha paid $17,429.46 for her new vehicle, two digits from

that price (i.e., the 7 and the 6) represent matches.

In general, price names representing multiple digits (i.e., “ten,” “eleven,” and “twelve”)

could correspond to any two consecutive digits except the thousands, hundreds, units, or second

cents digit. For example, the price name “ten” appears in the price $25,410.67, but not in the

price $25,104.67. No digit follows the second cents digit, so it could not represent a 10, 11, or
 21

12. Also in the case of any “ten,” “eleven,” or “twelve,” we recorded only the first of the two

corresponding digits as a match. Thus, for example, when examining “T” name-letter purchases

if we were to observe a price of $25,412.67, the ten-thousands digit would be recorded as a

match (“twenty”), as would the tens (“twelve”). But the unit digits would not be recorded as a

match, because it is not pronounced as “tü” or written as “two.”

Finally, the price-name “one” could be used to represent the thousands digit (e.g.,

$21,555.55), the hundreds digit (e.g., $25,155.55), the units digit (e.g., $25,551.55), or the

second cents digit (e.g., $25,555.51), but not the ten-thousands, tens, or first cents digits (see

Table 2). In sum, we evaluated the prices according to their verbal/written-word representations,

such that not all price names could represent all seven digits. However, all seven digits could be

represented by a minimum of nine price names (i.e., the blank column spaces in Table 2). Once

the price names corresponding to customer name letters had been recorded, we examined

whether they could predict customer deal liking.

Insert Table 2 About Here

Analysis and Results

As noted earlier, for each of the seven digits, we recorded whether the customer’s name

matched a price name. We then summed across digits to create our independent variable (labeled

“total-match”). When deal liking was regressed on the total-match variable, the model was

significant (F(1,181) = 21.067; p < .001), in support of our fundamental prediction.

Because not all price names could represent all seven digits in our target prices, we next

examined each of the digits individually in a multiple regression analysis (all variance inflation

factors were less than 1.1). Matching on four of the seven digits affected deal liking, but

matching on the other three did not. Specifically, matching on the ten-thousands (F(1,181) = 7.47, p
 22

= .007), thousands (F(1,181) = 8.41, p<.01), first cents (F(1,181) = 14.29, p< .001), and second cents

(F(1,181) = 6.34, p = .01) digits influenced consumers’ feelings about the deal. There was no effect

of matching customers’ name letters with price names for the hundreds (F(1,181) = .04, n.s.), tens

(F(1,181) = .62, n.s.), or units (F(1,181) = .59, n.s.) digits. Thus, both left-digit (primacy) and right-

digit (recency) effects appeared to occur. Other than contributing to the total, matching the

“interior” digits was less important in terms of driving name-letter effects.

Finally, we examined name letters individually. When deal liking was regressed on the

total-match variable, the model was significant for the name letters “O” (F(1,17) = 4.40, p = .05),

“T” (F(1,24) = 9.31, p <.01), “F” (F(1,24) = 11.51, p <.005), “S” (F(1,67) = 5.43, p<.05), and “E”

(F(1,16) = 6.18, p <.05). Notably, the model was significant for the name letter “O,” despite (a) the

few data points (i.e., 17), (b) its match with only one price name (i.e., “one”), and (c) the

potential for “one” to represent only four of the seven digits (i.e., thousands, hundreds, units, and

second cents) in our seven-digit prices (see Table 2). Therefore, this finding lends strong support

to our theory.

Although the results were in the predicted direction, our model was not significant in the

case of the name-letter “N” (F(1,23) = 1.86, n.s.). In many ways, this result was not surprising,

because a wealth of studies have demonstrated the positive effects of 9-ending prices on brand

preference and purchase intentions (see Anderson and Simester 2003a, 2003b; Schindler 1991).

Thus, all customers (not just those with matching name letters) might have been predisposed

toward prices with nines appearing in the thousands, units, or second-cents places. Perhaps such

a general predisposition could mask any existing name-letter effects.

Finally, we also analyzed cases where the buyer’s name had zero matches with the price

(M=7.72, n=39), 1 match with the price (M=7.92, n=74), or 2 or more matches with the price
 23

(M=8.21, n=70). The results demonstrated that deal liking was directionally stronger (than zero

matches) for 1 match (F(1,180) = 1.02, p=.31), but was significantly higher for 2 or more matches

F(1,180) = 12.24, p < .001). The results also supported the difference between 1 and 2 or more

matches (F(1,180) = 9.97, p < .01). Thus, this analysis seems to suggest that in the case of multiple

digit prices, two or more digit matches (or 29% of total digits) are required in order for name-

letter effects to manifest.

Discussion

As posited in our first two hypotheses, consumers will exhibit name-letter preferences if

they form the word representations of price-names that elicit name-letter associations. In Study

1, we argue that these representations were encoded due to the verbal presentation of prices in

radio commercials. In Study 2, we argue that these representations were encoded due to the

mental rehearsal of price-names that accompanied the visual presentation of Arabic numerals

(e.g., $8.55). Finally in our (field) Study 3, we argue that these representations were encoded due

to the transcription of price-names that appeared on customers’ checks (Coulter, Choi, and

Monroe 2012). But can implicit egotism drive price liking and brand purchase intentions if prices

are visually presented as numeric characters - and not rehearsed?

As noted earlier, implicit egotism has also been shown to impact preference effects

associated with birthday numbers (Nuttin 1985; Pelham et al., 2003). Also as noted earlier,

whereas the verbal code (and accompanying visual encoding as price words) may be necessary in

order for price-related name-letter effects to manifest, we expect that the numeric-character form

of visual encoding will be particularly salient for birthday numbers. Therefore to further

generalize the findings observed in our earlier studies to that of a purely “visual processing/

visual encoding” environment, we next examine implicit egotism effects as they apply to
 24

birthday numbers. We also include a manipulation of personal “threat” which allows us to

examine the process behind our hypothesized effects (Jones et al. 2002).

STUDY 4

Stimuli and Procedures

We first created an online survey that included an ad for a pasta dinner promotion at a

local (fictitious) restaurant (see Appendix C). In the advertised price, the dollars digits remained

constant at $39 (greater than any possible day-of-the-month birthday number), whereas the cents

digits varied. We included the phrase “includes 15% gratuity and all taxes” to disguise the

potentially “unusual” price-endings. Final sale prices for items purchased online typically

include taxes and shipping, which increases variability and reduces the probability of observing

the more typical round numbers. Two hundred five students from a major Eastern U.S. university

took part in the experiment. We employed a 3 (birthday number: match/no-match-cents-added/

no-match-cents-subtracted) x 2 (threat/no-threat) between subjects design.

After they first clicked on the survey link, participants were told that the purpose of the

study was to examine the relationship between consumers’ “time frame horizon” (i.e., as

indicated by responses to historical “date-related” questions), and online purchase patterns. On

the following page they were asked a series of questions regarding historical dates (e.g., date

J.F.K. was slain; Valentine’s Day). Included among those questions was an item pertaining to

their birthdate. The purpose of the other items was to disguise our interest in birthday numbers.

In the “threat” condition, participants were informed that their score on the historical

items was 10% below the mean of other survey respondents. In the “non-threat” condition,

participants received no such information. A number of studies have demonstrated that

 25

substandard test performance relative to one’s peers will serve as an ego threat (e.g., Greenberg

and Pyszczynski 1985: Heatherton and Vohs, 2000; Vohs and Heatherton 2001, 2004).

The birthday-number matching manipulation was operationalized by using the day of the

month entered as the cents digits of the price in the stimulus ad. For example, if a participant

indicated that his or her birthdate was April 16, the price appearing in the stimulus advertisement

would appear as $39.16. For the other two conditions, participants viewed a price where five

cents was either added to or subtracted from their day of birth. Thus, in the previous example, the

price in the stimulus advertisement would appear as either $39.11 or $39.21. Whether

participants were exposed to a price containing their actual birthday-number or to a price

containing cents digits that were five cents above or below that number was randomly

determined. The exception to this randomization occurred in the case of birthday numbers less

than 5; to avoid negative numbers or change the dollar amount, only the 5-cents added condition

was employed. Our expectation was that those participants who viewed their birthday number as

part of the price would express greater price-liking and purchase intentions. Our stimulus ad

appeared on the third page of the questionnaire. After viewing the stimulus, participants

completed a series of questionnaire items similar to earlier studies.

Results

All possible birthday numbers (i.e., 1–31) were represented in our sample, with

frequencies ranging from 2 (i.e., 10) to 9 (i.e., 6, 15, 17). For purposes of analysis, we created a

birthday-number/cents-digit matching versus non-matching categorical variable. Non-matching

was further categorized as higher or lower.

Purchase Intentions. We found a significant (threat x match) 2-way interaction effect

(F(2,199)= 2.86, p= .05). The differences between match/no-match means in both the threat (MM=
 26

5.19 vs. MNMA=3.39 and MNMB=3.59; F(1,199) = 51.16, p < .01)6 and non-threat conditions (MM=

4.58 vs. MNMA= 3.72 and MNMB= 3.74; F(1,199) = 9.94, p < .001) were significant, supporting H3.

However the match/no match difference was significantly greater in the former (threat)

condition than in the latter (non-threat) condition (F(1,199) = 5.53, p < .05), demonstrating an

ordinal interaction and confirming underlying process. Thus H4 is supported. Within each threat

condition, there was no difference between the two non-match conditions. As in previous studies,

price liking results mirrored those of purchase intentions, and mediation analysis indicated

partial mediation.7

Discussion

Results of Study 4 confirm our expectations regarding birthday-number matching effects.

Importantly, by including a manipulation of personal “threat,” we confirm the process behind our

results (Jones et al. 2002). In our final study, we investigate birthday-number/price and name-

letter/brand matching effects concurrently. In addition, by examining other possible mediators of

these relationships, we are able to determine whether the affect-transfer triggered by implicit

egotism in our matching conditions impacts either non-relevant attributes, or reactions to the ad

itself. For example, if the price-ending is matched to respondents’ birthday numbers, does that

impact price liking only, or can it also affect the liking of other product attributes, evaluation of

the advertisement, or some other variable that also impacts purchase intentions? In Study 5 we

address these important questions.

STUDY 5

Stimuli and Procedures

In Study 5 we replicate Study 4, but a) only examine the non-threat condition, b) employ

6
M= match condition; NMA = no-match, cents-added condition; NMB = no match, cents-subtracted condition
7
See Web Appendix for price liking and mediation analysis results.
 27

only the 5-cents added manipulation for the non-birthday-matching prices, and c) include a (first)

name-letter/brand matching variable as one of our manipulations. Thus our study involves a 2

(birthday number: match/no-match) x 2 (name-letter: match/no-match) experimental design.

Assignment to conditions was randomly determined.8

The stimulus used in our experiment was modified, such that the price and “brand-

cuisine” attribute information was prominently presented in the upper left portion of the ad (see

Appendix D). We chose 26 Italian restaurant names (e.g., “Eduardo’s) and 26 cuisine adjectives

(e.g., “Excellent”), such that the first name letter of the restaurant always matched the first letter

of the adjective. Thus, in our name-letter matching conditions, Ethan might see an ad for

“Eduardo’s Excellent” cuisine, whereas in our non-matching conditions Ethan might see an ad

for “Angelino’s Awesome” cuisine. A pretest revealed no significant differences in preference

among any of the restaurant name/cuisine adjective combinations.

The cover story was altered such that participants were told that the purpose of the study

was to examine not only the relationship between consumers’ “time frame horizon” (i.e., as

indicated by responses to historical “date-related” questions) and online purchase patterns, but

also the relationship between consumers’ “recognition of popular names” (i.e., as indicated by

responses to “name-letter” questions) and online purchase patterns. Further, on the following

page they were asked a series of questions regarding both historical dates and names of popular

figures (e.g., first name of the Queen of England). Included among those questions were items

pertaining to the first letter of their first name as well as their birthdate. Finally questionnaire

items also included an item assessing food liking and two items measuring ad liking (Appendix

8
Specific name-letters and birthday numbers were pooled in the match/no-match conditions. Thus, it is possible that
any given name-letter (e.g., “z”) or birthday-number (e.g., “26”) could appear in the match condition, but not in the
non-match condition (or vice-versa). Ensuring equal and all letters/numbers in both conditions would require a (26 x
2 x 31 x 2) quasi-experimental design.
 28

A). All other procedures and measures were identical to Study 4. One hundred fifty-seven

students from a major Northeastern university participated in the experiment.

Results

All possible birthday numbers were represented in our sample, with frequencies ranging

from 2 (i.e., 4, 6, 12, 18, 27) to 9 (i.e., 10, 14, 20, 26). All possible name-letters except Q and X

were also represented in our sample, with frequencies ranging from 2 (i.e., I, N, O, W, Y) to 15

(i.e., J). For purposes of analysis, we created a birthday-number/cents-digit matching versus non-

matching categorical variable, as well as a name-letter/restaurant-attribute matching versus non-

matching categorical variable.

Purchase Intentions. Similar to Study 4, ANOVA revealed a significant birthday-

number/price matching effect [MMatch= 3.84 vs. MNon-Match=3.16; F(1,153)= 9.87, p<.005].

Birthday-number/price matching generated significantly greater purchase intentions than non-

matching. Thus H3 is again supported. Consistent with previous research (Brendl et al., 2005),

the name-letter/brand matching effect was also significant [F(1,153)= 12.53, p=.001]. Mean

purchase intentions in the name-letter/brand matching condition (M= 3.88) were significantly

greater than mean purchase intentions in the non-matching condition. The interaction between

birthday-number/price match and name-letter/brand match was not significant (F(1,153)= .50, n.s.].

This result suggests that the price matching effects we have demonstrated are robust, and can

operate in conjunction with name-letter/brand effects.

Price Liking, Product Liking, and Ad Evaluations. Consistent with Study 5, for price

liking there was a significant birthday-number/cents-digit matching effect [F(1,153)= 6.88, p=.01].

Mean price liking in the matching condition (M= 3.32) was significantly greater than in the non-
 29

matching, cents-added condition (M = 2.71). The name-letter matching variable was not

significant (p=.501).

Conversely with regard to product-attribute (food) liking, ANOVA revealed a significant

name-letter/brand matching effect [F(1,153)= 17.45, p<.001]. Food liking in the name-letter

matching condition (M= 5.14) was significantly greater than in the non-matching condition (M=

4.24). In this instance the birthday-number matching effect was not significant.

Finally with regard to ad evaluations, ANOVA revealed both a significant birthday-

number/price matching effect [F(1,153)= 9.38, p=.003] as well as a significant name-letter/brand

matching effect [F(1,153)= 11.42, p=.001]. Ad evaluations in the birthday matching condition (M =

4.76) were significantly greater than ad evaluations in the non-matching condition (M = 4.13),

and ad evaluations in the name-letter/brand matching condition (M= 4.79) were significantly

greater than evaluations in the non-matching condition (M = 4.10).

Mediation Analysis. Due to the significant ad evaluation and product attribute evaluation

effects, as a final step in our analysis we investigated whether either of these variables might

mediate (i.e., in addition to price liking) the (birthday-number/price-matching  purchase

intentions) or (name-letter/brand-matching purchase intentions) relationships. Because the

mediators were not expected to be linked in series, we utilized PROCESS Model 4 (Hayes

2012). In regard to the first relationship, results were similar to previous studies - that is, price

liking was found to be a significant mediator of the effects of birthday-number matching on

purchase intentions [total effect (c)= .67, t= 3.05, p<.005, LLCI= .24, ULCI= 1.11; indirect

effect (a x b)= .25, Sobel Z= 2.37, p=.02, LLCI= .15, ULCI= .74]. Interestingly, however, ad

evaluations were also found to be a significant mediator [indirect effect (a x b) =.12, Sobel Z=

1.99, p=.05, LLCI= .03, ULCI= .31]. The mediating effect of product-attribute (food) liking was
 30

not significant (p=.44). Because the direct effect (c’) of birthday-matching on purchase intentions

was also non-significant (p=.17), these results indicate that ad and price liking fully mediate the

birthday-number/price-matching  purchase intentions relationship.

With regard to the second (name-letter) relationship, findings were as expected given

previous results reported in the literature (Brendl et al., 2005) - that is, product-attribute (food)

liking was found to be a significant mediator of the effects of name-letter/brand matching on

purchase intentions. As with birthday-number matching, ad evaluations were also found to be a

significant mediator, but the mediating effect of price liking was not significant. As in our

previous studies, the significant direct effect is indicative of partial mediation.9

Discussion

Results of Study 5 indicate that both name-letter and birthday-number sources of implicit

egotism can drive purchase intentions simultaneously. In this study we assume that these are

separate and distinct processes – that is, birthday-numbers affect the price attribute, whereas

name-letters affect the product attribute. As demonstrated in earlier studies, name-letters could

also impact the price attribute,10 but only if prices are rehearsed (i.e., which is not the case here).

Thus, in both instances, affect is transferred due to visual associations involving alpha-numeric

characters (birthday) or written words (brand-name).

A second implication of this study is that the implicit ego-driven affect elicited by either

name-letter or birthday-number matching can transfer not only to the associated price or product-

related attribute, but also to other aspects of the ad (i.e., in this case, ad evaluations). This

conclusion is in agreement with the partial mediation results of our earlier studies, and has

important managerial relevance. Specifically it demonstrates that marketers could benefit from

9
See Web Appendix for complete statistics related to name-letter mediation results.
10
Such a scenario could be envisioned, for example, if a respondent named “Fred” was also born on the 15 th (and
was included in our birthday-matching condition).
 31

matching name-letter or birthday-number to price, even if price is not the primary determinant

attribute in driving choice. In such instances effects through price liking might be mitigated,

whereas effects through ad evaluations could still persist.

Third, in our earlier follow-up to Study 2 we find that alliteration is not driving our name-

letter results (see Footnote 13 and Web Appendix). Here, however, all participants are exposed

to alliteration in the form of restaurant-name/cuisine-adjective combinations. The fact that name-

letter effects still occur seems to once again rule out the alliterative process as an alternate

explanation.

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

The results of our five studies support our expectations regarding name-letter and

birthday-number implicit egotism effects as they pertain to prices. In quasi-experiments 1 and 2,

participants demonstrated greater price liking and purchase intentions if the price shared name-

letters with the participant than if it did not. The name-letter preferences manifested when price

names were either orally presented or internally rehearsed (i.e., which allowed participants to

mentally “hear” the prices). This suggests that auditory encoding of sounds - and the

accompanying visual encoding of those sounds as words - was necessary in order to form name-

letter associations and elicit affect transfer. It was that positive affect (and not the economic

value of the prices) that drove both price liking and brand purchase intentions. When only the

numeric characters were processed and encoded (i.e., in the non-rehearsal conditions of Study 2),

or when the auditory representations were not linked to the specific name-letters (i.e., in the non-

target conditions of Study 1), effects failed to materialize.

In our field study, we further investigated name-letter effects by examining automobile

purchase prices corresponding to the consumer name letters O, T, F, S, E, and N. Unlike our first
 32

two studies, this study used first names rather than last names, thereby increasing the external

validity and generalizability of our findings. Although we cannot be certain that purchase prices

were verbally spoken, the fact that they were transcribed in written word format on check

payments was sufficient to elicit the name letter associations. Deal liking was predicted by name

letter matching, not only in terms of total matches, but also in terms of four of the seven

individual price digits. With one exception (N), deal liking was also predicted by name-letter

matching for each of the individual name letters. Therefore, the preponderance of evidence

strongly supports our theory.

In Study 4, we generalize the implicit egotism effects observed in Studies 1-3 to

matching birthday-number to price, rather than name-letter to price. Consistent with earlier

findings, our Study 4 mediation analysis confirms that the positive affect associated with

birthday-numbers can directly influence consumers’ liking of prices, which can subsequently

drive brand purchase intentions. In our series of studies, we show that this valence transfer can

occur when the personal source and the price share name-letters or birthday-numbers, rather than

just the personal source and the brand. This finding is particularly important, because it greatly

expands the managerial relevance of previous findings.

Birthday-number/price as well as name-letter/brand matching effects are demonstrated in

Study 5. In addition, we show that the implicit ego-driven affect that is elicited by such matching

can transfer not only to the associated price or product-related attribute (i.e., manifesting as

attribute “liking”), but to other aspects of the ad as well (i.e., in this case, ad evaluations). This

means, for example, that even if price is not the most important attribute driving purchase,

matching names or birthday-numbers to price could have potentially beneficial effects because

the matching  ad evaluations  purchase intentions linkages should prove robust.

 33

In our research, we focused on price promotions for goods and services that were very

expensive (e.g., thousand-dollar automobiles in our Field study), expensive (e.g., hundred-dollar

bicycles in Study 1), less expensive (thirty-nine dollar meals in Studies 4 and 5) and inexpensive

(eight-dollar coffee in Study 2). Thus, the research demonstrates fairly consistent findings across

a variety of both expensive and inexpensive goods and services, using a variety of research

methods (i.e., experiments, quasi-experiments, as well as a field study).

In assessing that consistency, we used meta-analytic techniques to measure: a) the overall

strength of the price matching effect on price-liking and purchase intentions, b) the overall

significance of the effects, and c) the robustness of our results. Regarding (a), we found nine

effects on price liking with an average weighted r=.39, and eight effects on purchase intentions

with an average weighted r=.41. Regarding (b), we tested the significance of the overall

relationships using Rosenthal and Rosnow’s (2008) p-value combination technique. The results

indicate that the overall relationships were significant at p < .001 for both variables. Finally

regarding (c), we used Rosenthal and Rosnow’s (2008) file drawer technique to determine that it

would take over 400 (300) null studies to reduce the significance of our price liking (purchase

intention) results to the .05 level, suggesting that the results are highly robust.

To better understand the practical significance of these effects, we employed Rosenthal

and Rosnow’s (1982) Binomial Effect Size Display (BESD). Given that the effect size was r

=.41 for purchase intentions (explaining over 16% of the variance), we examined a hypothetical

scenario of 200 consumers (of which 100 see a price that creates a name or birthday price match,

and 100 see a price that does not create such a match). For the price match group, approximately

70 are predicted to have had higher purchase intentions, whereas out of the non-match group,

only 30. Thus, when a price match exists, the propensity to buy is shown to have increased by a
 34

factor of 2.33. This finding dramatically illustrates the practical significance of our results.

Managerial and Ethical Implications

With the advent of database marketing, the marketer’s ability to quickly and efficiently

tailor product offers to meet the individual customer’s specific needs has greatly increased.

Similarly, the use of online and mobile vehicles - as well as location-based services - has enabled

firms to become much more successful in tailoring marketing communications, and in presenting

customers with unique offers. The ability to deliver customized messages and customized prices

that appeal to both the visual and auditory senses has grown exponentially in recent years with

the proliferation of computers, smart phones and tablets. A key element to the success of these

communications, as well as to product-offers in general, is whether customers consciously

perceive them to be personally relevant (Jain and Maheswaran 2000).

Our results highlight the importance of implicit egotism in increasing that personal

relevance. Both name-letters and birthday numbers carry symbolic meaning; by “matching”

these letters and numbers to prices (or other pertinent attributes), customer-brand associations are

formed. Attribute associations trigger the affect transfer that can ultimately strengthen both

interest in, and preference for, a given product (Keller 1993). Thus brand managers should

carefully design their brands as well as product and promotional materials to capitalize on the

utilization of such cues. Managers should also be aware of language and cultural variations that

could either increase or decrease the opportunities for name-letter matching (Hoorens and Nuttin

1993; Kitayama and Rarasawa 1997).

Many opportunities exist for the marketer to match name-letter or birthday-number to

price, particularly in the case of “big ticket” items where some degree of price negotiation is

customary, and where face-to-face interaction facilitates the sharing of personal information. For
 35

example, an automobile salesperson negotiating a price on a new car with a potential buyer

might be more likely to close the deal if he or she incorporates name-letters (which will be

known to the seller) or birthday-numbers (which may or may not be known to the seller) into the

final selling price. According to our field research, the first (left-most) and last (right-most) digits

of the price appear to be particularly important. Presumably (i.e., due to their relatively minor

impact on economic value), the salesperson should have a great degree of latitude in matching

the right-most dollars or cents digits.

Opportunities for name-letter/birthday-number matching also occur in numerous online

retail settings, where computer-generated prices can be quickly and easily altered with the click

of a mouse. For example, once customers have provided personal “check-out” information, the

final price can be matched with their name or date-of-birth (i.e., again in the case of cents digits,

with only a very minor impact on economic value) by varying the shipping and handling costs

charged. In the case of “return” customers, the initial sale prices to which the customer is

exposed can be likewise adapted.

Similarly, an online consumer who opts in to a location-based mobile promotional

campaign sponsored by a favorite restaurant chain could receive deal offers with prices

corresponding to his or her personal name-letter or birthday-number information. In the case of

name-letter matching, the likelihood of effects manifesting may be increased by: a) presenting

the prices verbally, b) persuading customers to “hear” the prices by encouraging them to “read

over” the information before confirming the sale, or c) embedding the prices in a line of text.

For any of these price customization strategies, privacy concerns regarding the provision

and use of personal information can arise. One might also question the ethical implications of

arbitrarily manipulating shipping and handling costs. It is not the purpose of this article to delve
 36

into the moral or ethical implications of such price manipulation strategies—merely to discuss

their implications. Further research and scholarly discourse should address these relevant

concerns.

Limitations and Further Research

Four of the six possible name letters associated with price (T, E, F, and S) were utilized

in our quasi-experiments; we recommend that future research replicate our field study findings in

an experimental setting using O’s and N’s. Also, in this paper we do not investigate the

corresponding birthday-number equivalent to H2 – that is, if prices are presented verbally,

consumers will demonstrate birthday number preferences if the brand attribute does (vs. does

not) share birthday numbers with the consumer, and if the consumer does (vs. does not) form

visual representations of the price numbers. Investigation of such a hypothesis would require that

participants first hear their birthday number (i.e., perhaps embedded within an audio ad), then

write down that number before evaluating the product offer. Future research might also examine

this reciprocal hypothesis.

With the exception of Study 5, we addressed only one of a possible myriad number of

product attributes (i.e., price). Further studies might attempt to replicate our results by addressing

other physical product characteristics. Finally, regarding birthday number effects, we

investigated the day the customer was born (1–31), but not the month (1–12) or year (e.g., 1965).

Whether our findings are consistent across these latter two categories awaits further study.

The field study results provided a number of interesting insights. The results demonstrate

support for both left-digit (primacy) and right-digit (recency) effects. In our experiments and

quasi-experiments, we examined right-digit matching. It would be beneficial for future research

to examine the relative effects of matching left-digits vs. right digits. For example, a price of
 37

$44.77 would be verbally encoded as “Forty-Four dollars and Seventy-Seven Cents.” Such a

price would represent a right digit match for Samantha, but a left digit match for Frank.

The growth in online and mobile media provides a plethora of opportunities to further

explore these concepts in greater detail (see Grewal et al. 2011). It is highly likely that media

differences will either enhance or mitigate the name-letter/price or birthday-number/ price

matching effects. For example, name-letter/price effects are likely to be stronger for ads viewed

on tablets where consumers are used to processing auditory information in addition to visual

information.

Finally, personal relevance (and implicit egotism) can also be explored in the context of

customized direct-marketing advertising messages that include the customer’s name and provide

them with willing-to-pay (WTP) pricing options (Wertenbroch and Skiera 2002). It is likely that

customers who indicate a price that matches their name-letter or birthday-number should feel

more satisfied with the deal.

 38

REFERENCES

Anderson, Eric and Duncan Simester (2003), "Mind Your Pricing Cues" Harvard Business
Review, 81(9), 96-103.

Anderson, Eric and Duncan Simester (2003), "Effects of $9 Price Endings on Retail Sales:
Evidence from Field Experiments," Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 1 (March),
93-110.

Anseel, F. and W. Duyck (2008), “Unconscious Applicants: A Systematic Test of the Name-
Letter Effect,” Psychological Science, 19 (10), 1059-1061.

Ashcraft, Mark H. (1992), “Cognitive Arithmetic: A Review of Data and Theory,” Cognition, 44
(1-2), 75 106.

Berninger, Vigrinia W., Robert D. Abbott, Janine Jones, Beverly J. Wolf, Laura Gould, Marci
Anderson-Youngstrom, Shirley Shimada and Ken Apel (2006), “Early Development of
language by Hand: Composing Reading, Listening, and Speaking Connections,”
Developmental Neuropsychology, 29 (1), 61-92.

Best, Roger J. (2009), Market-Based Management, 5th Edition. Pearson/Prentice Hall: Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey.

Brendl, C. Miguel, Amitava Chattopadhyay, Brett W. Pelham and Mauricio Carvallo (2005),
“Name Letter Branding: Valence Transfers When Product Specific Needs Are Active,”
Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (3), 405-415.

Cohen, Laurent and Stanislas Dehaene (1996), “Cerebral Networks for Number Processing:
Evidence from a Case of Posterior Callosal Lesion,” NeuroCase, 2 (3), 155 174.

Coulter, Keith S. and Robin A. Coulter, (2010) “Number Sounds and Price Perceptions: The
Effects of Phonetic Symbolism on Price Discount and Value Perceptions,” Journal of
Consumer Research, 37 (August), 315-328.

Coulter, Keith S., Pilsik Choi, and Kent B. Monroe (2012), “Comma N’ Cents in Pricing: The
Effects of Auditory Representation Encoding on Price Magnitude Perceptions,” Journal
of Consumer Psychology, 22 (3), 395-407.

Dehaene, Stanislas (1992), “Varieties of Numerical Abilities,” Cognition, 44 (1 2), 1-42.

Dehaene, Stanislas (1997), The Number Sense, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dehaene, Stanislas, Serge Bossini and Pascal Giraux (1993), “The Mental Representation of
Parity and Number Magnitude,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122 (3),
371 396.
 39

Dehaene, Stanislas and Laurent Cohen (1995), “Towards an Anatomical and Functional Model
of Number Processing,” Mathematical Cognition, 1 (1), 83 120.

Dehaene, Stanislas, Ghislaine Dehaene-Lambertz and Laurent Cohen (1998), “Abstract

Representations of Numbers in the Animal and Human Brain,” Trends Neurosci, 21 (8),
355 361.

Dodds, William B., Kent B. Monroe and Dhruv Grewal (1991), "Effects of Price, Brand, and
Store Information on Buyers' Product Evaluations," Journal of Marketing Research, 28
(August), 307-319.

Feys, Jos (1995), “Mere Ownership: Affective Self-Bias or Evaluative Conditioning?” European
Journal of Social Psychology, 25 (5), 559-575.

Gallistel, Charles R. and Rochel Gelman (1992), “Preverbal and Verbal Counting and
Computation,” Cognition, 44 (1-2), 43 74.

Gallucci, Marcello (2003), “I Sell Seashells by the Seashore and My Name is Jack: Comment on
Pelham, Mirenberg, and Jones (2002)” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85
(5), 789-799.

Gillam, Ronald B. and Judith R. Johnston (1992), “Spoken and Written Language Relationships
in Language/Learning – Impaired and Normally Achieving School-Age Children,”
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35 (December), 1303-1315.

Greenberg, Jeff and Thomas Pyszczynski (1985), “Compensatory Self-Inflation: A Response to

the Threat to Self-Regard of Public Failure,” Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 49 (1), 273-280.

Greenwald, Anthony G. and Mahzarin R. Banaji (1995), “Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes,
Self-Esteem, and Stereotypes,” Psychological Review, 102 (1), 4-27.

Grewal, Dhruv, Kusum Ailawadi, Dinesh Gauri, Kevin Hall, Praveen Kopalle and Jane
Robertson (2011), “Innovations in Retail Pricing and Promotions,” Journal of Retailing,
87 (S1), S43-S52.

Hayes, Andrew F. (2012). An Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process

Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York: Guilford Press.

Heatherton, Todd F. and Kathleen D. Vohs (2000), “Interpersonal evaluations following threats
to self: Role of self-esteem,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78 (4),
725-736.

Hoorens, Vera and Jozef M. Nuttin (1993), “Overevaluation of Own Attributes: Mere Ownership
or Subjective Frequency?” Social Cognition, 11 (1), 117-200.
 40

Hoorens, Vera and Elka Todorova (1988), “The Name Letter Effect: Attachment to Self or
Primacy of Own Name Writing?” European Journal of Social Psychology, 18 (4), 365-
368.

Hoorens, Vera, Jozef M. Nuttin, Ildiko Erdelyi-Herman and Ubolwanna Pavakanun (1990),
“Mastery Pleasure Versus Mere Ownership: A Quasi-Experimental Cross-Cultural and
Cross-Alphabetical Test for the Name Letter Effect,” European Journal of Social
Psychology, 20 (3), 181-205.

Hodson, Gordon and James M. Olson (2005), “Testing the Generality of the Name Letter Effect:
Name Initials and Everyday Attitudes,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31
(8), 1099-1111.

Jain, Shailendra Pratap and Maheswaran, Durairaj (2000), “Motivated Reasoning: A Depth-of
Processing Perspective,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (4), 358-371.

Jones, John T., Brett W. Pelham, Mauricio Carvallo and Matthew C. Mirenberg (2004), “How
Do I Love Thee? Let Me Count the J’s: Implicit Egotism and Interpersonal Attraction,”
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87 (5), 665-683.

Jones, John T., Brett W. Pelham, Matthew C. Mirenberg and John J. Hetts (2002), “Name Letter
Preferences Are Not Merely Mere Exposure: Implicit Egotism as Self-Regulation,”
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38 (March), 170-177.

Johnson, Mitzi M. S. (1986), “The Initial Letter Effect: Ego-Attachment or Mere Exposure?”
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University.

Keller, Kevin Lane (1993), “Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand
Equity,” Journal of Marketing, 57 (1), 1-22.

Kim, John, Chris T. Allen and Frank R. Kardes (1996), “An Investigation of the Mediational
Mechanisms Underlying Attitudinal Conditioning,” Journal of Marketing Research, 33
(August), 318-328.

Kitayama, Shinobu and Mayumi Rarasawa, M. (1997), “Implicit Self-Esteem in Japan: Name
Letters and Birthday Numbers,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23 (7), 736-
742.

Knewtson, Heather S. and Richard W. Sias (2010), “Why Susie Owns Starbucks: The Name
Letter Effect in Security Selection,” Journal of Business Research, 63 (December), 1324-
1336.

Komori, Megumi and Koji Murata (2008), “Implicit Egotism in Japan: Preference for First
and Family Name Initials,” Hitotsubashi Journal of Social Studies, 40(2), 101-109.

Koole, Sander, Ap Kijksterhuis and Ad van Knippenberg (2001), “What’s in a Name: Implicit
 41

Self-Esteem and the Automatic Self,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80
(4), 669-685.

Koole, Sander and Brett W. Pelham (2003) “On the Nature of Implicit Self-Esteem: The Case of
the Name Letter Effect,” in Motivated Social Perception, Steven Spencer, Steven Fein,
Mark P. Zanna, and James Olson (Eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum: Mahway, N.J., 93-116.

Leigh, James H. “The Use of Figures of Speech in Print Ad Headlines,” Journal of Advertising,
23 (2), 17-26.

Lowrey, Tina M., L.J. Shrum and Tony Dubitsky (2003), “The Relation Between Brand Name
Linguistic Characteristics and Brand-Name Memory,” Journal of Advertising, 32 (3), 7-
17.

MacKenzie, Scott B., Richard J. Lutz and George E. Belch (1986), “The Role of Attitude
Toward the Ad as a Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing
Explanations,” Journal of Marketing Research, 23 (December), 130-143.

McCloskey, Michael (1992), “Cognitive Mechanisms in Numerical Processing: Evidence from

Acquired Dyscalculia,” Cognition, 44 (1-2), 107 157.

McQuarrie, Edward F. and David Glen Mick (1992), “On Resonance: A Critical Pluralistic
Inquiry into Advertising Rhetoric,” Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (September), 180-
197.

McQuarrie, Edward F. and David Glen Mick (1993), “Special Topic Session: The New
Advertising Rhetoric,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 20 (1), Leigh McAlister
and Michael Rothschild, eds., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 308.

Melnyk, Valentyna, Klein, Kristine and Volckner, Franziska (2012), “The Double Edged Sword
of Foreign Brand Names for Companies from Emerging Countries,” Journal of
Marketing, 76 (6), 21-37.

Mitchell, Andrew (1986), “The Effect of Verbal and Visual Components of Advertisements on
Brand Attitudes and Attitude Toward the Advertisement,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 13 (June), 12-24.

Monroe, Kent B. (2003), Pricing: Making Profitable Decisions (3rd edition), New York:
McGraw-Hill.

Nelson, Leif and Joseph P. Simmons (2007), “Moniker Maladies: When Names Sabotage
Success,” Psychological Science, 18 (12), 1106-1112.

Noel, Marie-Pascale (2001), “Numerical Cognition,” in Handbook of Cognitive

Neuropsychology: What Deficits Reveal about the Human Mind, ed., Brenda Rapp, NY:
Psychology Press, 495 518.
 42

Nuttin, Jozef M. (1987), “Affective Consequences of Mere Ownership: The Name Letter Effect
in Twelve European Languages, European Journal of Social Psychology, 17 (4), 381-
402.

Nuttin, Jozef M. (1985), “Narcissism Beyond Gestalt and Awareness: The Name Letter Effect,”
European Journal of Social Psychology, 15 (July-September), 353-361.

Pelham, Brett W., Mauricio R. Carvallo, Tracy DeHart and John T. Jones (2003), “Assessing the
Validity of Implicit Egotism: a Reply to Gallucci,” Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 85 (November), 800-807.

Pelham, Brett W., Matthew C. Mirenberg and John T. Jones (2002), “Why Susie Sells Seashells
by the Seashore: Implicit Egotism and Major Life Decisions,” Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 82 (April), 469-487.

Pelham, Brett W., Carvallo, Mauricio and Jones, John T. (2005), “Implicit Egotism,” Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 14 (2), 106–110.

Pinel, Philippe, Gurvan Le Clech, Pierre-Francois Van de Moortele, Lionel Naccache, Denis
LeBihan and Stanislas Dehaene (1999), “Event-Related fMRI Analysis of the Cerebral
Circuit for Number Comparison,” Neuroreport, 10 (7), 1473 1479.

Price, C.J., R. J. Wise and R. S. Frackowiak (1996), “Demonstrating the Implicit Processing of
Visually Presented Words and Pseudowords,” Cerebral Cortex, 6 (1), 63-70.

Read, Stephen J., Eric J. Vanham and Lynn C. Miller (1997), “Connectionism, Parallel
Constraint Satisfaction Processes, and Gestalt Principles: (Re)Introducing Cognitive
Dynamics to Social Psychology,” Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1 (1), 26-
53.

Reese, Bonnie B., Bruce Vanden Bergh and Hairong Li (1994), “What Makes a Slogan
Memorable and Who Remembers It,” Journal of Current Issues and Research in
Advertising, 16 (2), 41-57

Rosenthal, Robert and Ralph L. Rosnow (2008), Essentials of Behavioral Research: Methods
and Data Analysis (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Schindler, Robert (1991), "Symbolic Meanings of a Price Ending," in Holman, R.H. and
Solomon, M.R. (Ed.), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 18, Association for
Consumer Research, Provo, UT, 794-801.

Simonsohn, Uri (2011), “Spurious? Name Similarity Effects (Implicit Egotism) in Marriage, Job,
and Moving Decisions,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101 (1), 1-24.

Staats, Arthuyd W. and Corolyn K. Staats (1958), “Attitudes Established by Classical

 43

Conditioning,” Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 57 (1), 37-40.

Thomas, Manoj and Vicki Morwitz (2009), “The Ease-of-Computation Effect: The Interplay of
Metacognitive Experiences and Naïve Theories in Judgments of Price Differences,”
Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (1), 81 91.

Vanhuele, Marc, Gilles Laurent and Xavier Dreze (2006), “Consumers’ Immediate Memory for
Prices,” Journal of Consumer Research, 33 (2), 163 72.

Vohs, Kathleen. D. and Todd F. Heatherton (2001), “Self-esteem and Threats to Self:
Implications for Self-Construals and Interpersonal Perceptions,” Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 81 (December), 1103-1118.

Vohs, Kathleen D. and Todd F. Heatherton (2004), “Ego Threat Elicits Different Social
Comparison Processes Among High and Low Self-esteem People: Implications for
Interpersonal Perceptions,” Social Cognition, 22 (February), 168–191.

Wertenbroch, Klaus and Bernd Skiera (2002), “Measuring Consumers’ Willingness to Pay at the
Point of Purchase,” Journal of Marketing Research, 39 (May), 228-241.

Zajonc, Robert B. (1980), “Feeling and Thinking: Preferences Need No Inferences,” American
Psychologist, 35 (2), 151-175.

Zajonc, Robert B. (1998), “Emotions,” in D. Gilbert, S.T. Fiske, and G. Lindzey (Eds.),
Handbook of Social Psychology, 4th Edition, 591-632. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
 44

Table 1: Representative Literature

Representative Papers Empirical Approach Sample Predictor Variable Dependent Variable Findings

Studies with yocked sample Study 1: 38 flemish 6th graders; choice of letter from pairs or triads of name
Nuttin (1985) pairs. Study 2: 96 Flemish undergrads. Name letter. letters and non-name letters. Name letters were more often chosen.
Name letter (First and Last
Johnson (1986) One study. Study with 597 subjects initial letters). Attractiveness rating on a 9-point sclae. Name letters were more attractive.
Study run with 13 country 2047 undergrads studying in 12 Name letters were more often chosen.
samples and 12 language languages studiyng in numerous Name Letters (First name These results generalize across
Nuttin (1987) samples. universities in different countries. and/or Family name) choice of six most preferred letters countires.
Difference between Greater choice of name letter and
Study 1: 66 flemish high school the proportions of name-letters selected by attractiveness of name letter effect.Rules
students; Study 2: 136 flemish the person vs. other in the yoked couple out name letter frequency
Hoorens and Nuttin high school students; Study 3: (Study 1 & 2) . Ranking of alphabet from 1 overestimation as an alternative
(1993) Experimental studies 200 Flemish students Name letters to 26 in terms of attractiveness. explanation.
Name letter effects were found in both
Hoorens and Todorova Study with a sample of Belgian Name letters (Full, First, Choice of letters in both Cyrillic alphabet and languages and stronger in their normal
(1988) students. 100 Bulgarian undergrads. Family and Initials) Roman language. language --Cyrillic.

Study 1: 195 Flemish elementry

students; Study 2: 145 hungarian Name letters were more often chosen.
elemetry students; Study 3: 223 These results generalize for multiple
Hoorens, Nuttin, Herman Thai undergraduates; Study 4: Name Letters (First name, samples -- Flemish (study 1), Hungarian
and Pavakanun (1990) Four studies 300 Thai elementary students. Family name and Full name) choice of six most preferred letters (study 2), Thai (study 3 and study 4).

Kitayama and Rarasawa Japanese participants using Study 1: 219 Japanese

(1997) Japanese alphabet. undergraduates Name letter (first name). Rated all the alphabets on seven point scale. Name letters were preferred.
Study 2: 269 Japanese Rated numbers between 0 and 49 on a six
undergraduates Month and date of Birthday. point attractiveness scale. Birthday numbers were more attractive.
Name letters were preferred (Study 1,
3 & 4). These preferences were stable
Study 1: 93 Dutch university Rated all the alphabets on nine point scale across a 4-week interval (Study 1).
undergrads; Study 2: 40 Dutch Name letter (Study 1-4), and created relative name letter evaluations Support for the name letter effect and
University undergrads; Study 3: Birthday (Study 2) and (Study 1). Rated letters (Study 2-4) and birthday number effect in the feelings
54 Dutch University undergrads;; Feeling/Reason (Study 2), numbers (1-50) on five point scale (Study 2). condition (Study 2). Name letter effect
Koole, Dijksterhui & van Study 4: 50 Dutch University Response time (Study 3), and Response latencies also measured in Study was significant for high cognitive load
Knippernberg (2001) Four studies. undergrads. Cognitive Load (Study 4). 3. subjects.

Jones, Pelham, Mirenberg Name Letter (First name initial Rated liking of 26 capital letters on a 9 point
and Hetts (2002) Study of name effects. 143 undergraduates and Last name initial). scale. Name letters were preferred.
Rated liking of 1-33 numbers on a 9-point
Study of birthday effects. 143 undergraduates Birthday scale. Birthday numbers were preferred.
11-point liking scale for a dating context
Jones, Pelham, Carvallo Study 6: 86 undergraduate men: Name Letter (First or Last (Study 6), and picking jersey that had
and Mirenberg (2004) Two experiments. Study 7: 22 undergraduates. name). number that was paired to name. Name letter effect were supported.
Study 5a: 52 undergraduate
women; Study 5b: 110 Birthday number effects (Data Experiments focused on 11-point liking scale
Two experiments. undergraduate women and Month match). for a dating context (Study 5a, Study 5b). Birthday effects were supported.

Study 1: 189 undergrads in Rated liking on 9 point scales for animals

Canada; Study 2: 132 (studies 1-4), food (studies 1-4), leisure Name letter effects were found in both
undergrads in UK; Study 3: 177 (studies 1-4), national groups (studies 2-4), between and within-subjects analysis
Hodson and Olson undergrads in Canada; Study 4: Name letter (first and last letters (study 3-4) and brand names (study and name-brand effect was found only
(2005) Four studies. 188 undergrads in Canada name). 4). in the within-subject analysis.

Brand Name of cracker (Study 1-2) and tea

Study 1: 181 undergrads; Study (Study 3) had first three letters of first name
Brendl. Chattopadhyay, 2: 252 undergrads; Study 3: 88 or not (e.g., Jonathon would see Jonoki vs. Name letter brand preferred. Strength
Pelham and Carvallo Pedestrians; Study 4: 61 Elioki). Study 4 involved rating 18 chocolate of effect stronger when threat to self-
(2005) Four experiments. undergrads. First name. candy brands on a 11 point liking scale. esteem.
Name letter effect can also lead to
Nelson and Simmons Study 3: 294 undergraduates: GPA (Study 3) and number of anagrams negative performance highlighting
(2007) Two experiments Study 5: 225 online participants First name, correctly solved (Study 5). unconscious processing.
Preference for name letter based on
preference of 20 letters of the English Name letters were more attractive. The
Komori and Murata Japanese participants using Name letter (first and family language used in Japanese name initials. effect increases in a threat to self esteem
(2008) English language. 69 students name). Rated on a 7 point scale. condition.

Archival
Proportion living in state with name Increased tendency to live in state that
Pelham, Mirenberg and correspondence compared to non-name name resembles. Also similar results in
Jones(2002) Archival date Name. correspondence. eight largest US & Canadian cities.
Archival data focused on marrying others
Jones, Pelham, Carvallo Name Letter (First or Last whose first or last name resembled their
and Mirenberg (2004) Four archival studies. name). name Name letter effect were supported.
Looked at a variety of performances: Name letter effect can also lead to
Nelson and Simmons Strikeouts (Study 1), GPA (Study 2), Tier negative performance highlighting
(2007) Three archival studies First name, of Law school attended (Study 4) unconscious processing.
Calculated probability of matches between
Belgian data base (582,0007 Name Effect (first three letters these letters and the employees company Name letter matches were greater than
Anseel and Duyck (2008) Archival study. employees). of last name) name. the expected probability.
 45

Table 2
(Field) Study 3
Seven-Figure Digit Place/Price Name Correspondence

Ten- Thousands Hundreds Tens Units Cents1 Cents2

thousands

1 X X X
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 X X X X
11 X X X X
12 X X X X

** Note: X = no digit place/price name correspondence

46
 47

Figure 2
Study 1 Results

a. Liking
$622 $688

4.42 4.43
3.29 3.38

Last Name: E Last Name: T

b. Purchase Intention
$622 $688

4.91 5.13
3.88 3.75

Last Name: E Last Name: T

 48

Figure 3
Study 2 Results (Rehearsal Conditions)

a. Purchase Intentions
$8.66 $8.55

4
5.63 5.6
3
3.95 3.89
2

1
Last Name: F Last Name: S

Study 2 Results (Non-Rehearsal Conditions)

b. Purchase Intentions
$8.66 $8.55

3
4.1 4.1 4.1 4.2
2

1
Last Name: F Last Name: S
 49

APPENDIX A

Scale Items and Measurement Properties

Price Liking [Cronbach α = .93 (S1); .92 (S2); .74 (S2A); .94 (S4), .92(S5)]
 How much did you like this price? [1-7 (dislike extremely/like extremely)]
 What were your feelings about the listed sale price? [1-7 (dislike extremely/like extremely)]
 Rate the degree that you liked this price [1-7 (not at all/very much)]

Purchase Intention [Cronbach α = .91 (S1); .89 (S2); .87 (S2A); .91 (S4), .88 (S5)]
 What is the likelihood that you would buy the advertised brand if it were for sale in the local
area? [1-7 (definitely would not/definitely would)]
 Rate the probability that you would buy the brand if it were for sale in the local area. [1-7
(definitely will not/definitely will)]
 How likely do you feel you would be to buy the advertised item at the listed price?
[1-7 (very unlikely/very likely]

Ad Evaluation [r = .67 (S5)]

 Please rate how much you liked the restaurant advertisement [1-7 not at all/very much]
 What is your opinion of the product advertisement? [1-7 not at all good/very good]

Food Liking (S5)

How much did you like the food depicted in the advertisement? [1-7 not at all/very much]
 50

APPENDIX B APPENDIX C: Study 5

Stimulus Studies 2 and 3 ($8.66 Version) Angelino’s Restaurant
Tuscan Pasta Dinner for 2

Who wouldn't love to get away to Italy? Take a tour of its

charm and flavors with our delicious Tuscan Pasta Dinner
for two, truly inspired Italian gourmet fare!
Delight your palette with our Bistro Italian Dipping Sauce,
Angel Hair Pasta, Marinara Sauce, Virgin Olive Oil, Sun
Dried Tomato Basil Cheese, Baguette Bread Sticks, and
succulent Grilled Turkey Strips. Enjoy a bottle of our finest
red wine, and nibble on our heavenly Vanilla Puff Pastry
Desert Cookies as a finale!
Our restaurant is open until 11p.m. six nights a week for
your convenience.
Just: $39.__ (with this online ad; includes 15% gratuity
Appendix D and all taxes!)
Stimulus Study 6

View publication stats