Consumer Maximization of Utilitarian and Informational Reinforcement: Comparing Two Utility Measures with Reference to Social Class.
Richer shoppers get more reinforcement from each item, not from buying more—so focus on value density, not quantity, in your reward plans.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team looked at 1,000 UK households who scan every grocery receipt.
They asked: do richer families buy more stuff, or do they just value each item more?
They split products into two reward types: utilitarian (tastes good, cleans well) and informational (shows status, has brand prestige).
What they found
Richer shoppers did not fill bigger carts.
Instead, they got more joy or status from each single item.
The model fit the data well, showing higher per-unit utility, not higher quantity.
How this fits with other research
Mellitz et al. (1983) laid the groundwork. Their hill-climbing rule says people pick the option that gives the best immediate payoff. The 2017 study uses that same rule to explain why a luxury yogurt feels better per spoonful, not per extra carton.
Schenk et al. (2020) tested matching law in a basketball video game. Players chose shots that matched the point payoff, just like shoppers matched brand value to price. Both studies show the matching law works outside the lab.
GRADARDANO et al. (1964) found pigeons sometimes matched and sometimes maximized, depending on small setup changes. The 2017 data add humans to the list: when utilitarian and informational rewards are clear, people maximize per unit, not per trip.
Why it matters
When you design a token system or a parent training plan, think value per unit, not volume. A high-status sticker may go further than ten plain ones for some clients. Ask: does this reward give more punch per use for this family?
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Test one high-prestige reward against five generic ones in your token board and count which keeps the client on task longer.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Based upon the Behavioral Perspective Model (BPM), previous analysis has shown that consumers tend to maximize utility as a function of the level of utilitarian (functional) and informational (social) reinforcement offered by brands. A model of consumer brand choice was developed, which applied a Cobb-Douglas utility function to the parameters that constitute the BPM, using consumer panel data. The present paper tested a variation of the previous model, which allows for measures of consumer utility at the level of aggregate household, in addition to utility per consumed product unit (e.g., gram), and examined the relations of obtained utility with consumers' social class and age. Results indicate that the model fitted the data well, generating consistent parameters, and that utility per product unit, but not total household utility, was positively correlated to social class. These findings suggest that, in the case of supermarket food items, higher-income households obtain higher levels of utility than lower-income households by purchasing brands that offer more utilitarian and informational reinforcement per product unit rather than their buying larger quantities of brands offering lower reinforcement levels.
The Behavior analyst, 2017 · doi:10.1287/mnsc.45.10.1324