This paper aims to propose a framework for psychological reactance–triggered adverse effects of variety reductions in grocery product categories on shoppers’ patronage intentions.
The paper tests this framework in two field studies with European shoppers.
Participants perceived mild (let alone aggressive or conspicuous) variety reductions as a threat to their prior freedom of choice (i.e. a precondition for the occurrence of domain-specific reactance). Through lower satisfaction with the reduced variety and anger towards the grocer, this threat, in turn, fostered adverse patronage intentions. Such effects depended on product category nature (utilitarian vs hedonic) and shoppers’ intrinsic need for variety, attitude towards private-label items and general proclivity towards experiencing reactance.
By applying psychological reactance theory to a variety reduction context, this paper offers new implications for assortment reduction research. Certain limitations call for future reactance theory–framed inquiry.
The findings caution against traditional grocers’ drastic variety reduction policy and highlight conditions enabling assortment rationalisation without severely affecting freedom of choice.
Drawing on notions such as “the tyranny of choice”, critics have urged traditional grocers to drastically reduce variety. However, this paper shows that shoppers perceive variety reductions as threats to their prior freedom, which traditional grocers themselves educated them to expect and enjoy.
