Talk:Experience good

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Economics (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Marketing & Advertising (Rated Stub-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
 

Merge[edit]

Merge - As per comment on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Philip_Nelson_(professor), I believe the concept is notable, but only one article is required for Search good, Experience good and Philip Nelson (professor).Jonpatterns (talk) 10:00, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Merge Search, Experience and Credence goods articles[edit]

I propose that the three articles, search good, experience good and credence good be merged into a single article entitled search-experience-credence (SEC) classification of goods and services (or similar title). Both economists and marketers make use of the Search→Experience→ Credence (SEC) classification of goods and services. The classification scheme is based on the ease or difficulty of consumer evaluation activities and information acquisition activities. These days most economics and marketers treat the three classes of goods as a continuum.

Justification for merge

(1) It makes little sense to have three separate articles, when a single article containing all three types would highlight the inter-relationships between the three and also focus on the nature of the continuum (which is sadly lacking in the three separate articles. In other words, merging adds value to the overall meaning.

(2) The classification scheme has become a standard feature of economics and marketing texts. It is widely considered as a framework for understanding the differences between goods and services, and the implications arising from those differences. In other words, treating these as a single typology or classification is entirely consisten with the way that scholars treat these concepts.

(3) The quality of the three articles, search good, experience good and credence good varies enormously. Merging them will help to lift the overall standard because it will eliminate the need to write three separate intros and explain the context in each separate article.


Definitions

For the record, brief definitions follow and selected references are added at the end.

Search goods: are those which possess attributes that can evaluated prior to purchase or consumption. Consumers rely on prior experience, direct product inspection and other information search activities to locate information that assists in the evaluation process. Most products fall into the search goods category (e.g. clothing, office stationery, home furnishings).
Experience goods: are goods or services that can be accurately evaluated only after the product has been purchased and experiences. Many personal services fall into this category (e.g. restaurant, hairdresser, beauty salon, theme park, travel, holiday).
Credence claims: are goods or services that are difficult or impossible to evaluate even after consumption has occured. Evaluation difficulties may arise because the consumer lacks the knowledge or technical expertise to make a realistic evaluation or, alternatively because the cost of information-acquisition may outweigh the value of the information available. Many professional services fall into this category (e.g. accountant, legal services, medical diagnosis/treatment, cosmetic surgery)


Suggested References

Ford, G.T., Smith, D.B. and Swasy, J.L. "An Empirical Test of the Search, Experience and Credence Attributes Framework", in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 15, Micheal J. Houston (ed.), Provo, UT : Association for Consumer Research, pp 239-244 <Online: http://acrwebsite.org/volumes/6817/volumes/v15/NA-15>

Mitra,K., Reiss, M.C. and Capella, L.M., "An Examination of Perceived risk, Information Search and Behavioral Intentions in Search, Experience and Credence Services", Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 13, no.: 3, 1999, pp 208-228

Benz, Men-Andri, Strategies in Markets for Experience and Credence Goods [E-book], Springer, 2007 ISBN 978-3-8350-9580-9 - especially see Chapter 1 'Experience and Credence Goods: An Introduction' - pp 1-5 <online: http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-8350-9580-9_1>


Harsh V. Verma, Services Marketing: Text and Cases, 2nd ed, India, Dorling-Kinderly, 2012, pp 261-264 (Google Books, https://books.google.com.au/books?id=nfszVjvXj1QC&pg=PA262&lpg=PA262&dq=search+experience+credence+goods+%22services+marketing%22&source=bl&ots=gfuhRegdDD&sig=-WeDt_mTJ5yLVPENxhgXSrfJIMA&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=search%20experience%20credence%20goods%20%22services%20marketing%22&f=false BronHiggs (talk) 22:22, 2 January 2017 (UTC)