We're more likely to upgrade if the base price feels closer
If you offer a range of differently-priced products, it's better to put your lowest price at or above rather than below a certain numerical boundary (e.g. $1.05 instead of $0.95). Doing so increases upgrades to the next most expensive item.
Kim, J., Malkoc, S. A., & Goodman, J. K. (2021). The Threshold-Crossing Effect: Just-Below Pricing Discourages Consumers to Upgrade. Journal of Consumer Research.
The study
378 people were were split into two groups and offered two coffees, small and large, with prices either $0.95 and $1.20 or $1 and $1.25.
Results showed that people were 55.5% likely to upgrade to a large coffee when the small was $1 than when it was $0.95 (28.9%). Average coffee sale prices were also higher in the boundary condition ($1.14 vs $1.02).
Kim, J., Malkoc, S. A., & Goodman, J. K. (2021). The Threshold-Crossing Effect: Just-Below Pricing Discourages Consumers to Upgrade. Journal of Consumer Research.
Key Takeaways
Offer upgrades? Use boundary pricing.
If you offer more than one product option at different prices, boundary pricing can help improve the rate of upgrades. This is because, next to a price set just below a boundary (e.g. $95), increasing a base price to just above ($105) makes the upgrade option ($135) appear cheaper and less of a painful step up. It's because of the way we encode numbers, chunking them into broader numerical categories to infer value. This increases willingness to upgrade and therefore spending.
Works with multiple upgrade options
As long as the prices all sit within the same price boundary, the effects persist for product ranges with more than two options, as was shown with further studies on purchases of apartments and cars, which both offered multiple upgrade options. Maximise upgrade range by setting your base price around a more round numerical amount (e.g $10,000 vs $11,000). This will allow you to offer upgrade options that sit within a broader, albeit the same price boundary ($10000-19000 vs $11000-11999).
Present options together, not sequentially
The effects of boundary pricing disappear when the options are shown separately (different screens / post-purchase), relying upon the user's memory in some way. Ensure that users can easily see the value of upgrading, by showing the base price next to the upgrade. Note that impact also reduces when the upgrade option sits in a higher boundary ($205) than the base ($105).
In further detail
We're more likely to upgrade if the base price feels closer
If you offer a range of differently-priced products, it's better to put your lowest price at or above rather than below a certain numerical boundary (e.g. $1.05 instead of $0.95). Doing so increases upgrades to the next most expensive item.
Kim, J., Malkoc, S. A., & Goodman, J. K. (2021). The Threshold-Crossing Effect: Just-Below Pricing Discourages Consumers to Upgrade. Journal of Consumer Research.
The study
378 people were were split into two groups and offered two coffees, small and large, with prices either $0.95 and $1.20 or $1 and $1.25.
Results showed that people were 55.5% likely to upgrade to a large coffee when the small was $1 than when it was $0.95 (28.9%). Average coffee sale prices were also higher in the boundary condition ($1.14 vs $1.02).
Kim, J., Malkoc, S. A., & Goodman, J. K. (2021). The Threshold-Crossing Effect: Just-Below Pricing Discourages Consumers to Upgrade. Journal of Consumer Research.
Key Takeaways
Offer upgrades? Use boundary pricing.
If you offer more than one product option at different prices, boundary pricing can help improve the rate of upgrades. This is because, next to a price set just below a boundary (e.g. $95), increasing a base price to just above ($105) makes the upgrade option ($135) appear cheaper and less of a painful step up. It's because of the way we encode numbers, chunking them into broader numerical categories to infer value. This increases willingness to upgrade and therefore spending.
Works with multiple upgrade options
As long as the prices all sit within the same price boundary, the effects persist for product ranges with more than two options, as was shown with further studies on purchases of apartments and cars, which both offered multiple upgrade options. Maximise upgrade range by setting your base price around a more round numerical amount (e.g $10,000 vs $11,000). This will allow you to offer upgrade options that sit within a broader, albeit the same price boundary ($10000-19000 vs $11000-11999).
Present options together, not sequentially
The effects of boundary pricing disappear when the options are shown separately (different screens / post-purchase), relying upon the user's memory in some way. Ensure that users can easily see the value of upgrading, by showing the base price next to the upgrade. Note that impact also reduces when the upgrade option sits in a higher boundary ($205) than the base ($105).
In further detail
We're more likely to upgrade if the base price feels closer
The study
378 people were were split into two groups and offered two coffees, small and large, with prices either $0.95 and $1.20 or $1 and $1.25.
Results showed that people were 55.5% likely to upgrade to a large coffee when the small was $1 than when it was $0.95 (28.9%). Average coffee sale prices were also higher in the boundary condition ($1.14 vs $1.02).
In detail
Scarcity
We value things more when they’re in limited supply
Social Proof
We copy the behaviors of others, especially in unfamiliar situations
Prospect Theory
A loss hurts more than an equal gain feels good
Reciprocity
We’re hardwired to return kindness received
Framing
We make very different decisions based on how a fact is presented
Loss Aversion
We feel more negative when losing something than positive when we gain it
Self-Expression
We constantly seek out ways to communicate our identity to others
Default Effect
We tend to accept the option pre-chosen for us
Priming
Our decisions are shaped by memories recalled from things just seen or heard
Anchoring
What we see first affects our judgement of everything thereafter
Autonomy Bias
We have a deep-seated need to control our situations
Fast & Slow Thinking
We make knee-jerk spontaneous decisions that can cause regretful damage
Status Quo Bias
We tend to stick with our previous choices, even if the alternatives might be better
Dynamic Norms
We’re more likely to change if we can see a new behavior developing
Round Pricing Preference
We prefer and trust whole numbers over those ending in a 9
Salience
Our choices are determined by the information we're shown