Weber Fechner law
(also called Weber–Fechner’s law, Fechner’s law, Weber’s law, or Weber– Fechner theory)
(also called Weber–Fechner’s law, Fechner’s law, Weber’s law, or Weber– Fechner theory)
DESCRIPTION
The thesis that a just noticeable difference in a stimulus is proportional to the magnitude or intensity of the original stimulus.
The thesis that a just noticeable difference in a stimulus is proportional to the magnitude or intensity of the original stimulus.
KEY INSIGHTS
Based on pioneering research by Ernst Weber in 1834 on perceptions of change in stimuli and subsequent development in collaboration with Gustav Fechner (Fechner 1964), the relationship between physical magnitudes of stimuli and their perceived intensity was developed and quantified. In studying such relationships, Fechner concluded, ‘In order that the intensity of a sensation may increase in arithmetical progression, the stimulus must increase in geometrical progression.’ Such a conclusion has since formed the basis of the Weber–Fechner law.
Based on pioneering research by Ernst Weber in 1834 on perceptions of change in stimuli and subsequent development in collaboration with Gustav Fechner (Fechner 1964), the relationship between physical magnitudes of stimuli and their perceived intensity was developed and quantified. In studying such relationships, Fechner concluded, ‘In order that the intensity of a sensation may increase in arithmetical progression, the stimulus must increase in geometrical progression.’ Such a conclusion has since formed the basis of the Weber–Fechner law.
Sensory perceptions of weight, vision (brightness), and sound, among other areas, have since been the subject of considerable research examination, where the relationship between stimulus and perception is typically observed to be logarithmic. In particular, research on perception of stimuli finds that the just noticeable difference (abbreviated JND), or differential threshold, which is the smallest detectable change or difference in a sensory input that is perceivable by an individual, is a constant fraction of the level of stimulation. Marketing researchers have subsequently examined the law for its usefulness to understand pricing perception for, among other topics, different magnitudes of pricing and price comparisons in relation to reference prices as well as consumer perceptions of other sensory stimuli, and have found the law’s predicted relationships to be consistent with research findings in many markting-related areas.
KEYWORDS Stimuli, perception, detectable change
IMPLICATIONS
Marketers seeking to understand better how and to what extent consumers may perceive pricing levels and pricing changes may benefit from a greater knowledge of the relationships indicated by the Weber– Fechner law. Ultimately, consumer responses to pricing strategies and tactics may be a function of relationships between stimuli and perception that are predicted by the Weber–Fechner law. Similarly, consumer responses to promotions and other marketing stimuli may also be potentially understood better by examining such stimuli in terms of consumer perceptions and the relationships expected given the Weber–Fechner law and the just noticeable difference (JND) or differential threshold concept.
Marketers seeking to understand better how and to what extent consumers may perceive pricing levels and pricing changes may benefit from a greater knowledge of the relationships indicated by the Weber– Fechner law. Ultimately, consumer responses to pricing strategies and tactics may be a function of relationships between stimuli and perception that are predicted by the Weber–Fechner law. Similarly, consumer responses to promotions and other marketing stimuli may also be potentially understood better by examining such stimuli in terms of consumer perceptions and the relationships expected given the Weber–Fechner law and the just noticeable difference (JND) or differential threshold concept.
APPLICATION AREAS AND FURTHER READINGS
Pricing
Miranda, M. J. (2001). ‘The Influence of Price Reductions on Shoppers’ Reference Price and Reservation Price when Upgrading to Premium Brands,’ Journal of Targeting Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 10(1), 42–54.
Miranda, M. J. (2001). ‘The Influence of Price Reductions on Shoppers’ Reference Price and Reservation Price when Upgrading to Premium Brands,’ Journal of Targeting Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 10(1), 42–54.
Skouras, T., Avlonitis, G. J., and Indounas, K. A. (2005). ‘Economics and Marketing on Pricing: How and Why do they Differ?’ Journal of Product and Brand Management, 14(6), 362–374.
Monroe, K. B., and Lee, A. Y. (1999). ‘Remembering Versus Knowing: Issues in Buyers’ Processing of Price Information,’ Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(2), 207–225.
Monroe, Kent B. (1973). ‘Buyers’ Subjective Perceptions of Price,’ Journal of Marketing Research, 10(1), February, 70–80.
Monroe, Kent B. (1971). ‘The Information Content of Prices: A Preliminary Model for Estimating Buyer Response,’ Management Science, 17(8), Application Series, April, B519–B532.
Promotion
Ailawadi, K. L., and Neslin, S. A. (1998). ‘The Effect of Promotion on Consumption: Buying More and Consuming it Faster,’ Journal of Marketing Research, 35(3), 390–398.
Ailawadi, K. L., and Neslin, S. A. (1998). ‘The Effect of Promotion on Consumption: Buying More and Consuming it Faster,’ Journal of Marketing Research, 35(3), 390–398.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Fechner, G. T. (1964). Elemente der Psychophysik (Elements of Psychophysics). Amsterdam: E. J. Bonset. (Original work published 1860.)
Fechner, G. T. (1964). Elemente der Psychophysik (Elements of Psychophysics). Amsterdam: E. J. Bonset. (Original work published 1860.)
Weber, E. H. (1996). ‘On Touch and on the Sense of Touch and Common Sensibility,’ in H. E. Ross and D. J. Murray (eds. and trans.), E. H.Weber on the Tactile Senses, 2nd edn.), Hove: Erlbaum.
Cooper, P. (1969). ‘Subjective Economics: Factors in a Psychology of Spending,’ in B. Taylor and G. Wills (eds.), Pricing Strategy. London: Staples, 112–121.