Invisible Rankings: When Do Consumers Assume Best-to-Worst Ordinality When Choosing from an Unnumbered List?

Clicks: 6
ID: 321333
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #20 of 197 articles by views in journal of consumer research

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 197 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Consumers frequently use lists that were created by marketers, experts, or media platforms, such as a list of favorite restaurants. The authors refer to such lists as curated lists because they include items that appear to be endorsed or recommended by the list maker. Although these lists are typically ranked and numbered, marketers sometimes create lists that are not numbered, making it unclear whether the items have been ranked. Twelve studies (N = 5,530) reveal that when presented with an unnumbered curated list, consumers regularly assume that a fundamental characteristic of numbered lists—best-to-worst ordinality—applies. Specifically, the authors find that when a list contains an endorsement cue (e.g., superlative adjectives, markers of exclusivity, list qualification criteria), consumers rely on the conversational norm of best-to-worst ordinality. This inferential process leads consumers to prefer and choose items that are located vertically higher on the list. However, consumers are less likely to assume best-to-worst ordinality when an unnumbered list does not resemble a typical list: when endorsement cues are absent or conversational norms governing lists are weakened in other ways. This research advances knowledge of how consumers process curated lists in everyday consumption contexts, while also providing actionable recommendations for list makers.
Reference Key
openalex_W7168908668 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Mathew S. Isaac, Milica Mormann, Shailendra Pratap Jain
Journal journal of consumer research
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jcr/ucag023
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucag023
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.