ArticlePDF Available

Collect them all! Increasing product category cross-selling using the incompleteness effect

March 2022
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 50(3)

DOI:10.1007/s11747-021-00835-6

License
CC BY 4.0

Authors:

Katie Quinn Spangenberg

Seattle University

Eric R. Spangenberg

University of California, Irvine

The familiar state of tension associated with an incomplete collection or an unfinished jigsaw puzzle is predicted by Lewin’s (1926; 1935) field theory. This feeling evokes a drive to completion—a phenomenon we label the incompleteness effect —which is useful to marketers endeavoring to cross-sell products and services. In three studies using online product configurators, we find that consumers faced with visual representations of incomplete product category collections, such as an evening drinks menu or a puzzle with its pieces representing services, are significantly more likely to complete the collection or finish the puzzle by cross-purchasing from a greater number of product or service categories as compared to those using a conventional online shopping format. We identify theoretical mechanisms through which the incompleteness effect works and potential moderators for the effect. Findings suggest that managers offering products or services across several categories can increase cross-selling by eliciting people’s drive toward completion.

Panini sticker album for the 2018 Soccer World Cup

…

Study 1 -Serial mediation of feelings of incompleteness, impulse to complete, and number of products considered on completion (Condition C vs. D). Note. All coefficients are unstandardized, and the value in parentheses is the coefficient when including all mediators in the regression. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. a The indirect effect of

…

Study 3 -All condition manipulations

…

Study 1 -Results for Hypothesis 5

…

Figures - uploaded by Katie Quinn Spangenberg

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Katie Quinn Spangenberg

Content may be subject to copyright.

ORIGINAL EMPIRICAL RESEARCH

Collect them all! Increasing product category cross-selling using

the incompleteness effect

Christoph Bauer

&Katie Spangenberg

&Eric R. Spangenberg

&Andreas Herrmann

Received: 25 November 2019 /Accepted: 17 December 2021

#The Author(s) 2022, corrected publication 2022

Abstract

The familiar state of tension associated with an incomplete collection or an unfinished jigsaw puzzle is predicted by Lewin’s

(1926; 1935) field theory. This feeling evokes a drive to completion—a phenomenon we label the incompleteness effect—which

is useful to marketers endeavoring to cross-sell products and services. In three studies using online product configurators, we find

that consumers faced with visual representations of incomplete product category collections, such as an evening drinks menu or a

puzzle with its pieces representing services, are significantly more likely to complete the collection or finish the puzzle by cross-

purchasing from a greater number of product or service categories as compared to those using a conventional online shopping

format. We identify theoretical mechanisms through which the incompleteness effect works and potential moderators for the

effect. Findings suggest that managers offering products or services across several categories can increase cross-selling by

eliciting people’s drive toward completion.

Keywords Cross-selling .Completeness .Field theory .Incompleteness effect .Zeigarnik effect

Cross-selling is the act of selling different product offerings to

existing customers, thereby providing additional perceived

benefits to consumers as well as increased revenues to the

firm. The average profit associated with cross-buying cus-

tomers is greater than that of consumers not offered, or not

engaging in, cross-buying opportunities (Shah et al., 2012),

and the costs of encouraging existing customers to increase

purchases through cross-buying are much lower than those

associated with new customer acquisition (Hart et al., 1990;

Reichheld, 1996). Cross-buying customers are likely to be-

come more loyal as they purchase multiple items across prod-

uct categories (e.g., switching costs increase; Min et al., 2016),

and more loyal consumers are likely to revisit a successful

cross-selling firm as future needs arise. Relatedly, in the

non-profit sector, donors who have experienced the satisfac-

tion of making a donation that completes a project are more

likely to return to the platform and donate in the future (Argo

et al., 2020;Wash,2013). Cross-selling tactics are therefore

recognized as a key strategic challenge for marketing man-

agers. Herein, we demonstrate in two contexts (beverages

and banking services) how online configurators can create

incomplete collections of products or services in the minds

of consumers, thereby encouraging cross-buying purchases

that would not have otherwise been considered. This cross-

selling technique can benefit marketing strategists in various

organizations who desire to increase their customers’

Stephanie Noble served as Area Editor for this article.

*Eric R. Spangenberg

ers@uci.edu

Christoph Bauer

christoph.bauer@simon-kucher.com

Katie Spangenberg

kquinn1@seattleu.edu

Andreas Herrmann

andreas.herrmann@unisg.ch

Simon-Kucher & Partners, Am Sandtorkai 74,

20457 Hamburg, Germany

Albers School of Business and Economics, Seattle University, 901

12th Ave, Seattle, WA 98122, USA

Center for Global Leadership, Paul Merage School of Business,

University of California Irvine, 4293 Pereira Drive, SB1 Ste 5300,

Irvine, CA 92697, USA

Institute for Mobility IMO-HSG, University of St. Gallen,

Bahnhofstraße 8, CH-9000 St. Gallen, Switzerland

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-021-00835-6

/ Published online: 22 March 2022

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (2022) 50:713–741

propensity to engage in cross-buying of their respective goods

and services.

The current research builds from the contemporary schol-

arship of marketing and consumer behavior while drawing

from seminal theoretical work of psychologists almost a cen-

tury ago. Early in the twentieth century, Zeigarnik (1927,

1938) demonstrated that people possess better memory for

tasks they have started but not yet finished than for those

already completed. A consumption-related instantiation ofthis

“Zeigarnik effect”is exhibited by people collecting Panini

stickers

: a missing sticker space is much more salient in a

collector’s memory than those already filled (see Fig. 1).

Perhaps due to such heightened awareness of missing prod-

ucts, it has been shown that consumers are less likely to pur-

chase a partially empty carton of eggs or a half full six-pack

beverage carrier than they are to choose “complete”sets of a

given product, even if such “incomplete”product bundles are

correspondingly priced (e.g., an individual beverage is 1/6

the cost of a six pack; Barasz et al., 2017). This behavior is

consistent with the tendency of people to reengage with

interrupted action, complete a set, or fulfill a goal without

explicit instruction to do so (i.e., the “Ovsiankina [1928]

effect”).

Arguably underlying these effects is Lewin’s(1926,

1935) field theory, wherein the motivation to act or put

forth effort toward task completion is contingent upon a

state of internal tension caused by unmet needs or goals,

which can be eliminated by fulfilling a perceived quasi-

need through task completion (Lewin, 1926,1935). When

tasks are comprised of many steps (e.g., player stickers in

Panini albums), the goal gradient effect applies (i.e., people

accelerate behavior as they make progress toward their

goals) (Hull, 1932;Kivetzetal.,2006). As a marketing

example, research has shown that people fill car washing

stamp cards more quickly the closer they are to completion

(Nunes & Drèze, 2006).

Importantly, perceptions of incomplete sets or unfulfilled

goals can be created ad hoc and externally influenced by mar-

keters (Barsalou, 1983). For example, a bank may generate a

list of “essential financial services,”or a brand-related “shop-

ping list”may accompany a recipe; such actions represent

marketer-generated “to-dos”for consumers when such com-

binations may otherwise not have comprised people’sconsid-

eration sets. In the current research, we test Lewin’s field

theory (1926,1935), which suggests a greater likelihood of

consumers making cross-buying choices to complete such

lists relative to conditions under which product or service

offerings are independently presented—a drive to completion

we refer to as the “incompleteness effect.”Although recent

work examines related concepts (i.e., pseudo-sets; Barasz

et al., 2017), research to date has not studied how aspects of

online product configurators influence cross-buying and set

completion.

We also build from recent work examining a critical driver

of consumer purchase behavior: customer inspiration. Among

the findings of Böttger et al. (2017), visual components of

advertising increase customer inspiration, increasing purchase

likelihood. We examine this finding in conjunction with those

of Cheema and Bagchi (2011) to show how visual (vs. textual)

cues can inspire people to consider cross-buying products they

may not otherwise.

Across three studies we demonstrate how online prod-

uct configurators can be used to present people with a

collection or puzzle they are inspired to complete, there-

by making several contributions to the literature. First,

we experimentally demonstrate that the completion im-

pulse can be elicited in online shopping contexts to in-

crease cross-selling. To our knowledge, this is the first

research to show that online product configurators can

effectively trigger the impulse to complete a set, thereby

increasing consumers’likelihood of cross-buying prod-

ucts to do so. Second, we examine drivers of the incom-

pleteness effect. Online shopping configurators reduce

the number of decisions a consumer must make, thus

increasing likelihood of set completion (Jin et al.,

2013),aneffectlikelytobedrivenbymultiplemecha-

nisms. Specifically, online configurators increase the

number of products considered (and potentially pur-

chased) without requiring consumers to decide whether

to continue shopping. We also show that the way the

product categories are grouped (individually vs. part of

an interrelated set) and presented (visually vs. textually)

increases perceptions of incompleteness and therefore set

completion impulse, thereby increasing the likelihood

that consumers will buy all products presented as a set.

Using a phased manipulation of product configurators,

we examine separate components of this process and find

that perceptions of incompleteness, impulse to complete

a set, and number of products considered all play a role.

Importantly, we use a phased manipulation of product

configurators to examine our complete model, thereby

avoiding exaggerating the effect of any single product

configurator manipulation.

Finally, we examine moderating effects identifying bound-

ary conditions for the incompleteness effect. While previous

research has shown some support for our hypothesized incom-

pleteness effect (Barasz et al., 2017), it has not examined

conditions under which this effect is more or less likely to

manifest, as we do. Notably, we study how perceived feasi-

bility and justification of purchase can moderate the incom-

pleteness effect. That is, when a consumer perceives no pos-

sible path to completing the full set or no ability to justify

Panini sticker collections, common in Europe, are players on sports teams

(e.g., World Cup soccer teams), much like baseball card collections in North

America.

714 J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

purchasing all items, we see no increase in cross-buying pur-

chases or set completion. Such empirical findings advance

theory regarding goal pursuit and help managers implement

this effect in practice.

Background

Lewin’s field theory set the stage for a long tradition of goal-

related work explored by scholars; he showed that setting a

goal can generate tension that can only be removed through

goal attainment and until a goal is attained, the “incomplete

task”discomforts a person (Lewin, 1926,1935). This state of

tension associated with the desire to complete collections and

factors associated with alleviating said tension are demonstrat-

ed across multiple studies (e.g., Garland & Conlon, 1998;

Long & Schiffman, 1997). Scholars have more recently di-

rected effort to applying knowledge of goal setting and goal

completion (Locke & Latham, 1990) to questions regarding

consumption-related decisions and behaviors (e.g., Barasz

et al., 2017;Nunes&Drèze,2006). Originating from the work

motivated by Lewin’s(1926) field theory, our research most

closely follows a growing body of contemporary research by

marketing scholars and consumer psychologists. Table 1syn-

opsizes this marketing-relevant research, helps identify gaps

in the literature, and illustrates how our work contributes to the

theoretical and methodological understanding of this stream

of inquiry.

People are more motivated by how much is left to reach

their target rather than how far they have come (Hull, 1932).

Demonstrations of this goal gradient effect in marketing con-

texts include Kivetz and colleagues (2006) and Nunes and

Drèze (2006) who used bonus/stamp cards to show that the

time between visits to a café or car-wash facility became in-

creasingly shorter when customers neared the completion goal

of a full card. Importantly, these two papers examined how

overcoming the “starting problem”(i.e., whether a stamp card

was empty or already started with two stamps) changed com-

pletion likelihood. Partially addressing a gap in the literature,

we examine how grouping items together as a set can increase

completion even when all consumers start with an empty

shopping basket and items are not as closely related as repeat

café or car-wash visits. Relatedly, Cheema and Bagchi (2011)

found greater motivation to work toward goals by giving peo-

ple visual finish lines relative to their objectives (i.e., goal

persistence and effort increased as ease of goal visualization

increased). Specifically, Cheema and Bagchi (2011) study at-

tenuationofgoalcompletionwheninterrelated(non-pur-

chase-related) tasks are split into subgoals and/or become

more proximate with regard to level of task completion (e.g.,

commitment to savings). Incorporating their findings on visu-

al progress into our studies, we consider how the acquisition

of somewhat disparate products or services can be visually

Fig. 1 Panini sticker album for the 2018 Soccer World Cup

715J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

Table 1 Synopsis of literature on sets and goal completion—relevance and extensions of current work

Reference Independent variable(s) Dependent variable(s) Type of Studies Key Findings

Current work Product Presentation

(individual items, basic

configurator, as part of a set

or puzzle to complete,

visually linked)

Set completion,

cross-buying product

Controlled

online

configurator

experiments

•Presenting items as a set to be completed increases likelihood of cross-buying purchases to

complete the set

•Visual presentation (using multiple instantiations) of an incomplete collection of product or service

categories increases impulse to complete a set, leading to increased likelihood of

cross-purchasing from a greater number of product or service categories

•Feasibility and rationalization moderate the effect of set completion

NO COMPLETION REWARD How current work extends findings

Argo et al. (2020)

JEBO

Whether a donation completed

acampaign

Donation size Field

experiment

•Donors contributed significantly more money

to reach exact fundraising target

•Donors make donations that complete a

campaign significantly more frequently than

donations that reach any other given fraction

of the target

Studies completed in marketing context

Böttger et al. (2017)

Marketing-induced

inspiration, idea shopping,

ease of imagery processing

Customer loyalty,

emotional attachment,

satisfaction

Lab experiment,

Field

experiment

•Purchase goals can be externally induced via

marketing tactics

•Customer inspiration increases when: 1) firms

present existing products in new or

unexpected combinations and 2) firms

increase ease of imagery processing in

Categories

Considered

Completion

Impulse

A, B

B, C

C, D

H1, H5

C, D

Moderators

Feasibility

Rationalization

Outcomes

Set Completion

Cross-buying products

purchased/researched

Product Evaluation

Time spent evaluating

cross-buying products

Fig. 2 Conceptual model. Note. Study 1 tests H1–H5;Study2testsH1;Study3testsH6–H7.

A,B,C,D

superscripts denote Study1 conditions compared to

test indicated hypotheses

719J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

to be much greater for those with clear-cut goals versus those

with indefinite points of completion. Similarly, Ovsiankina

(1928) found clear-cut goals to be twice as likely to be re-

sumed versus indefinite actions. It is difficult to experience a

sense of incompleteness if one does not know what constitutes

completion. Barsalou (1983,1991) provides ample evidence

that people create categories when they might not otherwise

exist (i.e., ad hoc categories). Marketers can similarly create

ad hoc collections (sometimes across categories) in con-

sumers’minds (Ratneshwar et al., 1996). From a configura-

tion standpoint, product offerings can then be portrayed as an

interrelated program with a specified number of elements,

with the goal being completion of the collection by purchasing

each element. Explicitly linking products to one another in a

product configurator will increase consumers’impulse to

complete the set, increasing attention paid to all of the offer-

ings, thereby increasing likelihood of consumers buying

more—or the full set of—products offered. Suggesting the

products are part of a “larger whole”(vs.loosely related items)

allows the consumer to see that there may be a set that needs

completing, which would increase product consideration and

set completion. Formally, we hypothesize:

H3 Presentation of products as a set of interrelated products

(vs. presentation as distinct, unrelated items) increases the

impulse to complete the set, leading to consideration of

more product offerings, resulting in increased likelihood

of set completion.

Presentation of products as visually linked in a set In the

Panini sticker albums, a placeholder with a certain number is

created for each sticker (e.g., in Fig. 1, the missing sticker is

labeled #441 [out of 690 for the FIFA 2018 World Cup]).

Empty, numbered placeholders provide obvious visual re-

minders of a collection’s incompleteness. Without this num-

bered placeholder, a missing sticker of the collection would

be less obvious, if not unnoticed. Zeigarnik (1927)and

Ovsiankina (1928) both found visualization of incomplete-

ness to be an important moderator to the urge to complete.

Zeigarnik (1927) notes that the aesthetic structure of a com-

pletion task (e.g., visual wholeness), and consequently, the

visual clarity of incompleteness influenced capability to

remember an uncompleted task. Relatedly, Ovsiankina

(1928) described that some trial participants reported the

“eye catching”character of an obviously unfinished work

as reason for task resumption. Consistent with these early

observations, Böttger et al. (2017) found people to be in-

spired to pursue consumption-related goals when induced

by marketing stimuli, while Cheema and Bagchi (2011)

found a visually presented progress bar to increase effort

and commitment toward goal completion (i.e., saving for a

trip). They showed that distance-to-goal was perceived as

lower shortly before completion with the progress bar

visualization tool motivating greater savings rates—afind-

ingalsoconsistentwithLewin’s(1926,1935) field theory.

Therefore, we predict visual (vs. textual) cues will magnify

perceptions of incompleteness, which increase the comple-

tion impulse, and result in more products being considered.

Formally, we hypothesize:

H4 Visual (vs. textual) depiction of missing products will

increase perceptions of incompleteness, increasing the

impulse to complete a set, leading to consideration of

more product offerings, resulting in greater likelihood

of completing a set.

Effect on cross-buying products Next, we should also see

consumers evaluating cross-buying products differently than

the initially considered products as a result of marketing efforts

of the firm (Kumar et al., 2008), such as visual representation. In

a dinner setting scenario for example, people commonly shop for

red wine, white wine, and sparkling wine, whereas juice and

grappa are cross-buying products that “complete”the drink of-

ferings of the party. Without clear suggestion provided/created

by marketers (e.g., drinks for every dinner course), the under-

standing of what constitutes completion of one’s set of drinks for

the evening is less likely to occur in consumers’minds. Thus, the

(amendable) incompleteness of a collection visually represented

by placeholders on a product configurator (akin to missing team

member stickers in a Panini album) creates an incomplete set,

making consumers more likely to purchase (i.e., complete) the

collection.

Nunes and Drèze (2006) found consumers to have an in-

creased interest in completing a stamp card as evidenced by

less time passing between purchases as people’s stamp cards

neared completion. Relatedly, we would expect consumers to

exhibit different shopping behavior for products that are pur-

chased last in a set of choices (i.e., the cross-buying products

that complete a set). As people fill their baskets with products

from primary categories (e.g., red, white, and sparkling wines)

their shopping task nears completion. A configurator effec-

tively reduces the amount of effort directed at whether con-

sumers will shop for beverages beyond the wines they have

selected; rather than expending effort deciding whether to

continue shopping or not, they are automatically advanced

to the next product, where they can decide whether or not to

purchase an item, especially one they may not otherwise have

considered. This automatic exposure to visually depicted

cross-buying product choices should lead to increased goal-

related (i.e., set completing) cross-buying choice behavior

(Cheema & Bagchi, 2011). Thus, motivation to complete the

set could manifest through increased attention to, and more

positive evaluation of, visually presented cross-buying prod-

ucts (e.g., juice and grappa) in a configurator. Formally:

720 J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

H5 Visual salience of incompleteness (vs. textual grouping)

will affect behavior towards cross-buying products such

that consumers will A) provide more positive evalua-

tions, B) spend more time evaluating, and C) be more

likely to purchase the cross-buying products.

The conceptual model in Fig. 2illustrates the relationships

among constructs including the hypothesized mediators and

moderators, which we test across three studies. In Study 1 we

examine the incompleteness effect in a vineyard product sales

scenario. Study 2 replicates Study 1 in the context of banking

services, where professional service firms stand to enormous-

ly benefit from an increase in cross-selling to existing cus-

tomers. In Study 3 we test moderating Hypotheses 6 and

7—discussed in detail preceding that study—in a banking

services field study with a different visual incompleteness

manipulation than that of the first two studies.

Study 1: Vineyard product sales study

Participants and procedure

This study used a real online shopping site for vineyard prod-

ucts to test our hypotheses. A commercial market research

firm screened participants to ensure participants had wine-

related beverage needs and wants (i.e., the consumers had

invited guests for a meal to their home or restaurant in recent

years and indicated a likelihood of purchasing wine over beer

for such occasions); fewer than 15% of those contacted qual-

ified. Participants were given the following purchase scenario:

You want to celebrate your birthday and you have invit-

ed 10 friends to an evening meal/dinner to your home.

You and your friends are Italy fans. You have become

besotted with Tuscany in particular. Therefore, you

want to buy drinks for dinner from one of the most

renowned vineyards of Tuscany. You have already had

good experiences with this vineyard in the past. The

vineyard is also well known by many of your friends.

The online store of the vineyard you want to use for your

order has been (anonymously) activated for you. Please

fictitiously order drinks there for your birthday dinner.

Please assume that you have the required glasses for

each respective drink or that you can borrow them from

a good neighbor. By clicking on save and send in the

shopping cart you complete this test purchase. At the

end we briefly ask you about your test purchase.

Eight hundred participants were randomly assigned to one

of four online shopping conditions; seven were dropped for

incomplete surveys leaving a final sample size of 793. Screen

shots associated with each condition are shown in Figs. 3a to

3d. In each figure, the top picture is the start screen of the

online shop, the bottom left shows the display after selection

of first product, and the bottom right is the overview display

after purchase (or non-purchase) in each of the five product

categories. Each example screenshot in Figs. 3a to 3d shows

the primary products (i.e., sparkling wine, red wine, and white

wine) having been selected but not the cross-buying products

(i.e., juice and grappa).

Condition A served as a baseline group who viewed a

conventional online layout (see Fig. 3a). When participants

clicked “Start,”they began on the sparkling wines category,

where they could browse and select one of three sparkling

wines and the quantity. They could also visit other product

categories using the product menu on the left side of their

screen. Each product category had three product offerings,

of which only one product could be selected. Price and quality

always increased in order from left to right, consistently la-

beled Classico (left), Selezione (center) and Eccelenza (right).

By clicking “Add to Cart”participants were sent—as is com-

mon with online stores—to the shopping cart (see Fig. 3a

bottom left). There, they saw their current selections and ad-

ditional products that may be of interest to them (i.e., products

from unpurchased categories). Thus, even in the condition

without the configurator, we ensured that all participants saw

all products offered, consistent with the three experimental

conditions. Participants could click “Shop more products”or

click directly on a remaining product to view the page. With

each additionally selected product, the list of products below

the shopping cart shortened until it was empty (i.e., participant

had selected a product from each of the five categories).

Importantly, however, participants did not have to select a

product from every category—when they were done, they

clicked “Save configuration and send.”

In Condition B, the five product categories were presented

as five individual items in a configurator (see Fig. 3b). As in

Condition A, participants started on the sparkling wines and

selected one of the three product options. In this condition,

once the customer clicked “Select,”the name of the selection

appeared next to the category name in the configurator (e.g.,

Eccelenza, bottom left of Fig. 3b). Participants could also

click “No selection”or “Next,”and would move to the next

product category (or the overview page, if they were in the last

category). On the overview page, product categories where no

explicit decision had been made were labeled, “No [missing

product category].”In this respect, the incomplete nature of

the selection in the configurator was textually (vs. pictorially)

displayed for participants, presenting a relatively difficult

form of visualization (Cheema & Bagchi, 2011). Although

there was not a specific “Shop more products”button in

Conditions B, C, or D, participants could return to any of

the five categories to change their selection or click on the

“Go to Shopping Cart.”Total price for each product category

was identical across all conditions.

721J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

Condition C was identical to Condition B with one modi-

fication: in Condition C we changed the title and labels of the

product categories to present the five product categories as an

interrelated shopping task (see Fig. 3c), wherein each product

choice was presented as part of a “larger whole.”First, the

page title was changed from “Our product categories at a

glance”to “Our dinner product program—everything for your

dinner.”Second, the product categories were renamed to tell a

connected story around the ordinary course of a dinner as

opposed to simple descriptors (e.g., “Our Sparkling Wine”

was changed to “A welcoming sparkling wine;”see

Methodological Appendix for all changes). Everything else

(e.g., products, prices) was the same.

Although Condition C provided a “completion of a larger

whole”task, a feeling of incompleteness is more likely to be

experienced when a completion goal and the (temporary) incom-

pleteness are made salient. Thus, Condition D was identical to

Condition C with the addition of a Panini column

on the right

side of the configurator (see Fig. 3d), to ease visualization of the

completion goal. Rather than representing the selection (or non-

selection) as text (such as in Conditions B and C), “digital

stickers”were used as placeholders for each product choice

(i.e., Classico, Selezione, or Eccelenza) in a category. Thus, cor-

responding placeholders remained empty with non-selection,

akin to a partially filled Panini sticker album. We also incorpo-

rated a progress bar visually depicting level of completion.

Following Cheema and Bagchi (2011), we developed this visual

manipulation in consultation with expert colleagues, landing on a

combination of placeholders and a progress bar emphasizing

missing elements to ease visualization of a product program

completion goal. In all conditions, purchases and time spent were

recorded for participants upon their clicking “Save configuration

and send.”Participants then completed a questionnaire with mea-

sures of quality, predicted mediators, and manipulation checks

(see Table 2for all measures).

Results

Interrelated set manipulation check In Study 1, we used

two manipulation checks designed to assess the changes be-

tween conditions because different things were manipulated in

each condition. From Condition B to C, the only difference

was the verbiage in Condition C linking products together (To

what extent doyou perceived the products as partof a product

program that is designed to be fully utilized? 1 = Not at all,

10 = Very Much). As expected, a oneway ANOVA on our

treatment Conditions B-D revealed that embedding products

in a dinner program resulted in significantly greater perception

that the products existed as part of a larger product program

(F(2, 593) = 9.23, p< 0.001). Contrasts revealed that both

Conditions C and D were perceived to exist as part of a larger

product program relative to Condition B (M

=6.29,SD =

2.41; M

=7.03,SD =2.08;M

=7.17,SD =2.11;Bvs.C:

F(2, 593) = 11.56, p= 0.007; B vs. D: F(2, 593) = 15.84, p

< 0.001), but there was no difference between Conditions C

and D (p=0.55).

Visualization manipulation check Moving from Condition C

to Condition D, we added visual emphasis (cf., Cheema &

Bagchi, 2011), predicting it would increase feelings of incom-

pleteness (How noticeable was the completeness [incomplete-

ness] of the program based on the visual presentation in the

product configurator? 1 = Not noticeable at all,10 = Very

noticeable). A oneway ANOVA confirmed that salience of

incompleteness differed between groups (F(3, 789) = 44.84,

p< 0.001). Participants in the Panini condition (Condition D)

=7.56,SD = 2.12) reported significantly higher salience

of incompleteness than those in Condition C (M

=6.47,SD

=2.53;F(3, 789) = 19.54, p< 0.001), Condition B (M

6.03, SD = 2.43; F(3, 789) = 38.69, p< 0.001), or Condition

A(M

=5.73,SD =2.64;F(3, 789) = 55.06, p<0.001).

Those in Condition C also reported significantly higher salience

of incompleteness compared to Condition A (F(3, 789) = 9.18,

p= 0.003); there were no other significant differences.

Main analysis We first tested the effects of our manipulations

on completion of the product program (i.e., purchasing a product

from each of the five categories). A chi-square test of indepen-

dence showed a significant effect of condition on completion

(χ

(3, N= 793) = 147.20; p< 0.001, φ= 0.43). Hypothesis 1

predicted a monotonically increasing percentage of participants

purchasing an item in all five product categories. Consistent with

this prediction, 20.3% of participants completed the program in

Condition A, while in Conditions B and C, 37.7% and 55.7% of

participants respectively made selections from each category.

Finally, in Condition D, 78.6% of participants completed the

program—almost four times as many as when product catego-

ries were presented individually. Further, the percent of com-

pleted programs in each condition was significantly different

from each other condition (all ps < 0.001) (see Table 3).

Next, a oneway ANOVA revealeda significant main effect

of condition on the average number of product categories

purchased (F(3, 789) = 69.72, p< 0.001, η

= 0.21).

Planned contrasts showed significant differences between

groups, supporting the monotonic increase predicted by

Hypothesis 1. Specifically, participants in Condition B (M

=3.68,SD = 1.32) purchased more products than those in

Condition A (M

=3.11,SD =1.34;F(1, 789) = 25.54; p<

0.001) and participants in Condition C (M

=4.30,SD =

1.34) purchased more products than those in Condition B

(F(1, 789) = 29.34; p< 0.001). Participants in Condition D

=4.63,SD = 1.34) purchased more products than those

in Condition C (F(1, 789) = 8.59; p<0.001).

We use Panini column as colloquial shorthand to label this manipulation as it

conceptually corresponds to the idea of an obvious, visually missing sticker in

a Panini sticker collection album.

722 J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

Fig. 3 3a. Study 1 –Condition A: Individually presented product cate-

gories. 3b. Study 1 –Condition B: Basic configurator. 3c. Study 1 –

Condition C: Configurator with products as part of an interrelated set.

3d. Study 1 –Condition D: Configurator with products presented as an

interrelated set and increased visual salience

723J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

Fig. 3 (continued)

724 J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

Fig. 3 (continued)

725J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

Fig. 3 (continued)

726 J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

Product categories presented individually (Condition A)

vs. basic configurator presentation (Condition B) Recall

that our product configurator offered identical products at

identical prices but embedded the products in a configurator

guiding consumers through each product category.

Hypothesis 2 predicted the number of products purchased

would increase because a configurator (vs. conventional on-

line store) forces consumers to browse more product catego-

ries. We compare Conditions A and B to test the basic effect of

using an online product configurator. In Condition A, the

number of purchased products (M=3.11)wasalmostequal

to the number of product category pages viewed (M=3.55),

suggesting participants did little browsing and only viewed

products relevant to them. The grappa, for example, was

viewed by fewer than 50% of participants in Condition A. In

Condition B, however, participants were guided through the

products by the configurator (although it was possible to skip

a category). Indeed, the number of product categories consid-

ered was significantly higher in Condition B (M

=4.76,SD

= 0.58) than in Condition A (M

=3.55,SD =1.34;F(1,

394) = 138.32;p <0.001,η

= 0.26). Thus, it seems that

moving through product categories via a configurator under-

lies the positive effects of product configurator use on cross-

buying. Testing the causal relationship between the number of

Table 2 Study 1 –Measures

Measures Anchors

Condition A vs. B

Mediator

# of Categories Considered Number of category pages browsed (max. 5)

Condition B vs. C

Manipulation Check

Product Program

Perception

To what extent do you perceive the products as part of a product programthat is designed to be

fully utilized?

1=Not at all

10= Very much

Mediators

Completion Impulse To what extent did you experience the impulse to buy a product in all five categories? 1 =Not at all

10= Very much

# of Categories considered Number of category pages browsed (max. 5)

Condition C vs. D

Manipulation Check

Visual Emphasis of

Incompletion

You have [not] completed the dinner program: How noticeable was the completeness

[incompleteness] of the program based on the visual presentation in the product

configurator?

1=Not noticeable at all

10= Very noticeable

Mediators

Perception of Incompleteness To what extent did the non-selectionof products leave the impression of an incomplete product

program?

1=Not at all

10= Very much

Completion Impulse To what extent did you experience the impulse to buy a product in all five categories?

# of Categories Considered Number of category pages browsed (max. 5)

Product Evaluations

How attractive was the juice you viewed? 1= Not attractive at all

7= Very attractive

*Participants could

select “not sure”

How attractive was the grappa you viewed?

Potential Confounds (α=.94)

Fairness How do you evaluate the product configuration regarding FAIRNESS? 1=Very bad

7= Very goodComplexity How do you evaluate the product configuration regarding SIMPLICITY?

How do you evaluate the product configuration regarding CLARITY?

User Friendliness How do you evaluate the product configuration regarding USABILITY?

How do you evaluate the product configuration regarding LAYOUT?

Satisfaction & Quality

Quality How did the online store you viewed compare to other online stores known to you? 1= Much worse

7= Much better

Satisfaction How satisfied were you with the configured solution? 1= Very dissatisfied

7= Very satisfied

All variables were translated to English from original participant questionnaire in German

727J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

observed categories and set completion using PROCESS

(Model 4; Hayes, 2017), we found that the indirect effect of

condition on completion through number of product catego-

ries viewed was significant (b=5.34,SE=7.73,95%CI:

3.62, 23.53; see Fig. 4), confirming Hypothesis 2.

Basic configurator presentation (Condition B) vs.

Products presented as part of interrelated set (Condition

C) We next compared Condition B with Condition C to test

theimpactofofferingproductsaspartofa“larger whole”or

set in a configurator. Our theoretical reasoning predicted that

when products were embedded in a larger whole, participants

would experience a greater impulse to complete the program

(To what extent did you experience an impulse to buy a prod-

uct in all five categories? 1 = Not at all,10 = Very Much).

Indeed, participants in Condition C reported a significantly

stronger impulse to complete the program (M

=6.26,SD

= 2.71) than those in Condition B (M

=5.38,SD =2.86;

F(1, 398) = 10.13, p= 0.002). Next, we tested our hypothesis

that an increased impulse to complete the program would lead

participants to consider more categories and ultimately com-

plete the program. Using PROCESS (Model 6; Hayes, 2017),

we found a significant indirect effect, as the confidence inter-

val did not contain zero (b= 5.34, SE = 1.75, 95% CI: 2.08,

8.92), supporting Hypothesis 3 (see Fig. 5). Thus, embedding

product categories in an interrelated “larger whole”program

was more likely to activate a completion impulse that in turn

led participants to consider more product categories, and

eventually to purchase the full set of products offered.

Although participants felt a stronger completion impulse in

Condition C associated with the larger story connecting the

products, the textual depiction of a non-selected product did

not elicit a strong effect of incompleteness. Perceived sense of

incompleteness (To what extent did the non-selection of prod-

ucts leave the impression of an incomplete product program?

1=Not at all,10 = Very Much) did not significantly differ

between Conditions B and C (F(1, 399) = 0.46, p=0.50).

However, we predicted this stronger feeling of incompleteness

to manifest in the Panini condition, which we test next.

Products presented as part of interrelated set (Condition

C) vs. Products linked visually (Condition D) Recall our

prediction that visual salience of incompleteness should lead to

greater perceptions of incompleteness using the Panini column,

thereby strengthening the completion impulse, leading to

consideration of more product categories and resulting in higher

completion percentages. A PROCESS model (Model 6; Hayes,

2017) found the indirect effect of condition on completion

through: (1) perceptions of incompleteness, (2) completion im-

pulse, and (3) number of categories considered, was not signifi-

cant (b= 0.0004, SE = 0.009; 95% CI: -0.02, 0.02). Looking at

each indirect path, however, we observed that the effect of con-

dition on completion through (1) perceptions of incompleteness

and (2) completion impulse was positive and significant (b=

0.06, SE = 0.03; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.12; see Fig. 6). We attribute the

lack of a significant indirect effect through number of categories

considered to a ceiling effect. Indeed, the mean number of cate-

gories considered for both conditions C and D neared the max-

imum (4.93 and 4.97 categories, respectively). Thus, we find

partial support for Hypothesis 4.

Cross-buying products As predicted by Hypothesis 5, differ-

ences between conditions for purchases and attractiveness

should be pronounced for the cross-buying products as com-

paredtotheprimaryofferings.Wefoundthatsignificantlymore

participants in Condition D purchased grappa and juice as com-

pared to those in Condition C (Grappa: 87% vs. 77%; F(1, 395)

=7.02,p= 0.008, η

= 0.02; Juice: 91% vs. 76%; F(1, 395) =

18.39, p< 0.001, η

= 0.04). Additionally, as predicted, all

participants in Condition D spent more time looking at grappa

and juice than participants in Condition C (Grappa: M

18.89 s; M

= 15.30 s; F(1, 395) = 6.11, p= 0.01, η

0.02; Juice: M

= 24.15 s; M

=20.28s;F(1, 395) = 4.62,

p= 0.03, η

= 0.01). Finally, participants evaluated grappa

significantly more positively (1 = Not attractive,7 =

Attractive) in Condition D versus Condition C (M

=5.24,

=4.82;F(1, 367) = 7.99, p=0.011;η

= 0.02) and the

difference between conditions for juice was marginally signifi-

cant in the predicted direction (M

= 4.96, M

=4.67;F(1,

380) = 3.69, p= 0.057; η

=0.01).

In contrast, there were no

differences across conditions for any of the primary offerings

regarding purchase rate or attractiveness (see Table 4for all

results). Thus, Hypothesis 5 was supported.

Potential confounds Consultation with managerial and academ-

ic marketing professionals before running Study 1 suggested

some possible confounds. Specifically, the Panini column may

be perceived as: (1) an unfair representation of products, (2) not

Participants who selected “Not sure”(N=28forgrappa,N=15forjuice)

regarding attractiveness of each product were excluded from this analysis.

Table 3 Study 1 –Results

supporting Hypothesis 1 Condition A Condition B Condition C Condition D

Participant N 195 199 201 196

Percentage of participants purchasing

complete set of all 5 products

20.3%

37.7%

55.7%

78.6%

Mean (SD) number of product categories

purchased (maximum 5)

3.11

(1.34) 3.68

(1.32) 4.30

(1.34) 4.63

(1.34)

Different subscripts reflect significant differences between groups at p<.01

728 J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

user friendly, or (3) more complex than typical online stores. We

tested for these confounds after participants completed their shop-

ping exercise. These variables (Fairness, Simplicity, Clarity,

Usability, Layout, 1 = Very bad,7 = Very good) loaded onto

a single factor and therefore were combined for analysis (α=

0.94). There were no significant differences across conditions

(F(3, 789) = 0.79, p> 0.50). Additionally, one question

assessing how the online store in the study compared to other

online stores (How did the online store you viewed compare to

other online stores known to you? 1 = Much worse,7 = Much

better) revealed no significant differences in perceived quality

across conditions (F(3, 789) = 2.04, p= 0.11). Another question

regarded the impact on customer satisfaction of our Condition D;

critical observers may consider the Panini-configurator a some-

what sneaky marketing manipulation that could create customer

dissatisfaction. While somewhat obliquely addressing this criti-

cism, we asked participants how satisfied they were with their

configured solution (1 = Very dissatisfied, 7=Very satisfied).

No differences across conditions (F(1, 789) = 1.04, p= 0.35)

suggested no evidence of unease with the Panini method.

Study 2: Banking study

Participants and procedure

Study 2 is a straightforward replication of Study 1 exploring

the incompleteness effect in the context ofbanking services—

an industry where cross-selling is a prominent management

topic. This study was conducted through a commercialmarket

research company with 634 employed German adults aged

25–50 (46.0% Female). Participants were asked to consider

the following purchase scenario:

You decided to accept a new job offer in Austria and

move there. On recommendation of your new employer,

you want to open a salary account at the BANK

(anonymized, prestigious Austrian banking institution).

The following website shows the respective product cat-

egory “Account & Cards.”Please choose an account

plus possible complementary products from this catego-

ry. Click on “Save & Submit”in the Shopping Cart to

finalize the online purchase. You will then be forwarded

to a questionnaire. There we ask you about your

selection.

Participants were randomly assigned to one of three online

shopping conditions identical to Conditions A, C, and D from

Study 1, and therefore we label our conditions as such. Seeing

Product Presentation

(Individually Presented

Categories = 0, Basic

Configurator = 1) .17*** (-.63*)

4.40***

1.22***

Completion

Number of

Categories

Considered

Fig. 4 Study 1 –Mediating effect

of number of categories consid-

ered on completion (Condition A

vs. B). Note. All coefficients are

unstandardized, and the value in

parentheses is the coefficient

when including the mediator in

the regression. *p<.05,**p<

.01, ***p< .001

Product Presentation

(Basic Configurator = 1,

Interrelated set = 2 ) .73*** (-.11)

34.65**

.89**

Completion

Impulse

Number of

Categories

Considered

.17***

Fig. 5 Study 1 –Serial mediation effect of completion impulse and cat-

egories considered on completion (Condition B vs. C). Note. Figure 5

depicts the indirect effect of condition on completion via 1) impulse to

complete and 2) number of categories considered. All coefficients are

unstandardized, and the value in parentheses is the coefficient when in-

cluding the mediator in the regression. *p<.05,**p<.01,***p< .001

729J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

marginal benefit of inclusion of the basic product configurator

(Study 1, Condition B), and desiring to simplify

operationalization of Study 2, we focus on the “larger whole”

and the visual salience of incompleteness relative to baseline

Condition A. The home screen and product configurators

followed the design of Study 1, and Fig. 7shows the banking

product configurator with visual salience (Condition D). The

top image in the figure shows the start screen, and the bottom

left image shows the credit card offerings (one of the two

optional cross-buying products). The bottom right image dis-

plays the shopping cart view after selection or non-selection of

the four product categories. The primary offerings (i.e., ac-

count tariff and debit card) and one cross-buying product

(i.e., overdraft facility) have been selected, but not the second

cross-buying product (i.e., credit card).

As in Study 1, Condition A was a conventional homepage

(see Methodological Details Appendix for all stimuli).

Participants viewed the bank’s promise of performance and

product categories could be seen in the menu bar on the left.

All participants were required to choose an option from each

of the two primary offerings (account tariff and debit card).

After clicking “Select”and “Add to Cart,”participants were

navigated to the shopping cart view where they saw the text,

“The following additional products could be of interest to

you,”accompanying any missing products. Participants could

click a “Shop more”button to view and select the optional

cross-buying products (i.e., credit card and overdraft facility),

which served as dependent measures. Participants submitted

their purchases by clicking “Save configuration and send.”

In Condition C, the start page and all products were em-

bedded together in a product configurator as part of a “larger

whole.”The program was given a title (“Our account and

cards solution—All about your daily banking”)andthe

product offerings were numbered. After the start page, partic-

ipants were guided through each page of the configurator.

Once a participant clicked “Select,”their chosen product

was listed using text next to the category name in the

configurator. Participants had to choose a product for each

primary offering, but they could choose “No selection”for

the optional cross-buying product categories.

Condition D (shown in Fig. 7) builds upon the idea of a

“larger whole”with the intention of making incompleteness

more prominent and easier to visualize, increasing likelihood

that customers would purchase cross-buying options to com-

plete the product program. As in Study 1, the addition of a

Panini column with “digital stickers”enabled customers to

more easily envision incompleteness by visually representing

unselected products. Participants were again guided through

the configurator, but the selected options were presented with

pictures (vs. text), and the unselected products with visual

placeholders. After submitting their purchases,all participants

completed two questions assessing the effectiveness of our

manipulations.

Results

A oneway ANOVA confirmed an effective product program

manipulation (To what extent did you perceive the offerings as

part of a product program designed to be completely utilized? 1

=Notatall;10 = Very much), (F(2, 629) = 8.83, p< 0.001, η

= 0.03). Specifically, Condition A (M

=6.31,SD =2.41)was

perceived to be significantly less a part of a product program

designed to be completely utilized than Condition C (M

7.11, SD = 2.27; F(2, 629) = 12.80, p< 0.001) or Condition

D(M

= 7.14, SD = 2.22; F(2, 629) = 13.54, p< 0.001). An

Product Presentation

(Interrelated set = 2,

Visually linked = 3)

Completion

Perception of

Incompleteness

Number of

Categories

Considered

Completion

Impulse

.63**

.23*** (.89***)

.30***

3.31**

.007

.31***

Fig. 6 Study 1 –Serial mediation of feelings of incompleteness, impulse

to complete, and number of products considered on completion

(Condition C vs. D). Note. All coefficients are unstandardized, and the

value in parentheses is the coefficient when including all mediators in the

regression. *p<.05,**p<.01,***p< .001.

The indirect effect of

condition on completion via 1) feelings of incompleteness, 2) impulse to

complete, and 3) number of categories considered is not significant (b=

.0004, 95% CI: -.02, .02).

The indirect effect of condition on completion

via 1) feelings of incompleteness and2) impulse to complete issignificant

(b= .06, 95% CI: .02, .12)

730 J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

additional manipulation check (You have [not] completed our

basic banking program: How noticeable was the [in]complete-

ness of the program based on the type of visual presentation in

the product configurator? 1 = Not noticeable at all;10 = Very

noticeable), compared effectiveness of the incompleteness visu-

alization manipulation between Conditions C and D (i.e., both

conditions with product configurators). A oneway ANOVA re-

vealed that participants in Condition D (M

=7.52,SD =2.34)

reported incompleteness as more noticeable than those in

Condition C (M

=6.44,SD =2.54;F(1, 418) = 20.54, p<

0.001, η

=0.05).

Recall that Hypothesis 1 predicted that a product

configurator would lead to more set completions than a con-

ventional homepage, and salient visualization of an incom-

plete set would further increase completion compared to

text-only presentation of offerings. Supporting this prediction,

only 9.8% of participants in Condition A completed the set

(i.e., chose the two cross-buying products) compared to 46.4%

of participants in Condition C (χ

(1, N= 425) = 70.72, p<

0.001, φ= 0.41). Further, a significantly higher proportion of

participants in Condition D (65.6%) selected the complete set

of offered products as compared to Condition C (46.4%; χ

(1,

N= 420) = 15.55, p<0.001,φ=0.19).

These findings were supported by a oneway ANOVA com-

paring the number of products purchased by conditions. A

main effect of condition was found (F(2, 631) = 131.28, p

<0.001,η

= 0.29) and pairwise comparisons confirmed a

monotonically increasing pattern such that participants in

Condition D (M

=3.53,SD = 0.71) purchased significantly

more products than those in Condition C (M

=3.26,SD =

0.79; D vs. C: F(2, 631) = 15.25, p< 0.001) who purchased

significantly more products than those in Condition A (M

2.44, SD =0.67;Cvs.A:F(2, 631) = 135.93, p<0.001).

Across conditions, then, we again find support for Hypothesis

1 and replicate the findings of Study 1 in a different domain.

Discussion and further hypotheses

Studies 1 and 2 supported our hypotheses regarding people’s

desire to complete an unfinished set in two different shopping

contexts. These two experiments involved situations of online

cross-selling and simultaneous purchase decisions for prod-

ucts and services. In Study 3, we turn to decision-making in

thecaseofservicescustomersbuyover time, as there are often

situations in which purchases do not occur all at once. For

example, people may buy an iPad, iPhone, iMac, and an

Apple watch, but rarely purchase them simultaneously.

Similarly, in the case of banking products or services, people

may not decide on a savings account, an insurance plan, and a

pension at a single point intime. In such situations, we believe

the incompleteness effect can be used to create a “set”of

products or services that customers will want to “complete”

over time. We also consider a different marketing stimulus for

presenting an incomplete task—that of a visually incomplete

puzzle, the pieces of which represent chosen (and missing)

services. Importantly, in Study 3 we test our moderating hy-

potheses that the incompleteness effect depends on con-

sumers’perceived feasibility of set completion and purchase

rationalizations.

Feasibility Boundary conditions for the incompleteness effect

suggested in the literature include feasibility. The perceived

feasibility of a task has beenshown to moderate completion of

a task across a variety of situations (Locke & Latham, 1990).

As a task decreases regarding perceived feasibility, partici-

pants should become less likely to remember their prior per-

formance (Zeigarnik, 1927,1938) or resume interrupted ac-

tions (Ovsiankina, 1928). If a task is perceived to be too dif-

ficult or unattainable, people’s motivation to engage in said

task is lower (Locke, 1982; Locke & Latham, 1990). In other

words, setting goals that are too high can have a negative

effect on performance (Locke, 1982). Related research has

Table 4 Study 1 –Results for Hypothesis 5

Cross-buying products

Juice Grappa

Condition C Condition D pCondition C Condition D p

Percent purchased 76% 91% < 0.001 77% 87% 0.008

Time spent browsing

in seconds (SD)

20.28 (16.84) 24.15 (19.01) 0.030 15.30 (10.55) 18.89 (17.57) 0.010

Attractiveness (SD) 4.63 (1.63) 4.96 (1.66) 0.057 4.82 (1.57) 5.24 (1.53) 0.011

Primary Offerings

Red Wine White Wine Sparkling Wine

Condition C Condition D pCondition C Condition D pCondition C Condition D p

Percent purchased 97% 98% 0.38 86% 91% 0.11 95% 96% 0.67

Time spent browsing

in seconds (SD)

20.81 (20.50) 20.30 (19.34) 0.80 23.63 (18.66) 24.90 (21.39) 0.53 31.49 (21.69) 31.68 (20.54) 0.93

Attractiveness (SD) 5.42 (1.37) 5.64 (1.32) 0.13 5.29 (1.39) 5.52 (1.38) 0.11 5.17 (1.48) 5.44 (1.45) 0.08

731J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

shown that as confidence in ability to complete a task in-

creases, so too does performance (Bandura, 1986;Bandura

&Cervone,1983; Dachler & Mobley, 1973). However, the

risk that people may abandon a task altogether does exist, in

that a task deemed already partially failed, or an “all-or-noth-

ing”type of goal can kill motivation (Cochran & Tesser,

1996; Soman & Cheema, 2004). As related to the current

work, the incompleteness effect should be less likely to occur

if product program completion is perceived as too difficult to

attain. Formally:

H6 Feasibility will moderate the incompleteness effect such

that if product program completion is deemed unfeasible

by the consumer, consumers will be less likely to com-

plete the program.

Fig. 7 Study 2 –Condition D: Configurator with products presented as part of an interrelated set and increased visual salience

732 J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. (2022) 50:713–741

Rationalization Another potential moderator relates to a

person’s task justification or rationalization for their

actions. The degree to which one remembers prior per-

formance (Zeigarnik, 1927,1938) and likelihood of

resuming interrupted tasks (Ovsiankina, 1928)depends

on the degree to which people were involved in their

initial task-related actions, as well as the degree to

which they were initially committed to completing a

task. People are more motivated to stay engaged (or

complete a task) when it is personally relevant. A per-

sonally relevant goal is associated with greater impor-

tance, thereby creating greater internal tension which

results in greater motivation to complete the task

(Locke & Latham, 2006).

Justification of need was shown by Zeigarnik (1927,

1938) and Ovsiankina (1928) to be associated with in-

creased tension resulting in greater probability of task

completion. Failure, or inability, to justify or rationalize

purchase of products from a single source will hamper

likelihood of increased purchase of a complete set of

offerings. Relatedly, the concept of commitment has

been found to moderate goal pursuit (Lewin, 1935;

Locke & Latham, 1990). If commitment is absent, mo-

tivation to complete a task will also be absent (Erez &

Zidon, 1984;Nayloretal.,2013; see Locke et al., 1988

for a review). For example, Kivetz et al. (2006)manip-

ulated goal commitment in a coffee stamp card experi-

ment; in their control condition, participants received

stamp cards with no incentive to complete the goal

(i.e., they received payment regardless of card comple-

tion), and no goal gradient effect was observed (i.e.,

there was no decrease in time between visits as cus-

tomers neared completion). These authors argued that

the urge to complete the stamp card was cognitively

overridden and eliminated. Following this logic, we

hypothesize:

H7 Consumer rationalization for completion will moderate

the incompleteness effect such that it will be attenuated

as reasons for program completion decrease.

Study 3: Banking field study

Participants and procedure

Study 3 was conducted in the context of an actual cross-selling

optimization project for a German regional bank. An individ-

ualized link invited customers to participate in exchange for a

chance to win an iPad or 100 euros. Customers who opted in

were informed that the bank’s products had been combined

into new categories-of-need, where each category focused on

a specific financial need. The largest percentage of customers

currently had only the “Liquidity”category-of-need filled

(i.e., used only their checking account and/or credit cards at

the bank); the study was conducted using customers from this

group who had online banking access. Participants were ran-

domly assigned to one of three conditions illustrated in Fig. 8.

Of the 5,000 qualified customers, 459 usable surveys were

completed (N

=180,N

=133,N

= 146; 40.2% female;

15 –80 years old).

In Condition A, participants saw only their current status of

product use in textual form (e.g., the Group A participant in

Fig. 8only uses the “Liquidity”category). Next, participants

were told they would be informed at regular intervals regard-

ing remaining categories-of-need. Participants were not told

how many remaining categories-of-need

Collect them all! Increasing product category cross-selling using the incompleteness effect

Abstract and Figures