Login
Our partner in Romania 𝗜𝗦𝗥𝗔 𝗖𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿 has published the following article that we are happy to share:
How promotion mechanics shape credibility
Shoppers don’t judge all “equal value” promotions equally. There are moments when math matches but trust does not. In Episode 3 of ISRA & Revista Piața’s series on Romanians’ trust in temporary price reductions (TPR), we find that the mechanic of a promotion can raise or depress credibility even when the benefit is mathematically identical.
🔍 Discounts of “2 for 1” are better trusted vs “-50%” (mean credibility score 3.4 vs. 3.2), consistently across demographics.
🔍 “3 for 2” (~33%) secures very good trust (51%, with avg. 3.5), but a straight “-35%” lags by comparison (just over 40%, with avg. 3.2). It performs similarly to “6+2 free” (avg. 3.2) which would also translate into ~33% off as benefit.
🔍 There are in some cases clusters of parity such as the one proved for ~25% benefit. This is shown by “4 for 3”, “-25%”, and “-50% on the 2nd” all landing around 3.4 average trust scores.
🔍 Quantity bonus vs %-off: “500g + 100g free” (~16.7%) is less credible than “-15%” (3.3 vs. 3.5).
🔍 “-20% on the 2nd product” (~10%) is less trusted than a simple “-10%” (average scores of trust: 3.4 vs. 3.6).
𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗶𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀
When economics are equal, it is important to choose the mechanic that signals clarity and fairness to shoppers. Results recommend to keep the math simple (e.g., “2 for 1” or clean %-off) and avoid bundle/quantity bonuses that look more complex than they are.
https://isracenter.com/same-discount-different-trust-why-mechanics-matter-2025/
