<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:lang="en">
  <teiHeader>
    <fileDesc>
      <titleStmt>
        <title>The Influence of In-Store Music on Wine Selections</title>
        <author>Adrian C. North</author>
        <author>David J. Hargreaves</author>
        <author>Jennifer McKendrick</author>
      </titleStmt>
      <publicationStmt>
        <p>Tag layer of the DHSS Meta-Tagging Project. The article text is reproduced from the
           staged copy named in sourceDesc and is not altered; the tags are held separately in
           standOff so that overlapping and nested spans are preserved.</p>
      </publicationStmt>
      <sourceDesc>
        <bibl>
          <title>The Influence of In-Store Music on Wine Selections</title>
          <date>1999</date>
          <publisher>Journal of Applied Psychology</publisher>
          <idno type="DOI">10.1037/0021-9010.84.2.271</idno>
          
          <idno type="record">north1999-music-priming</idno>
          <note type="staged-file">north1999-music-priming.txt, the project's staged copy</note>
          <note type="text-sha1">dcdcb2a1cdab5338ef7c10645df892dc629997b3</note>
          <note type="rights">personal-copy</note>
        </bibl>
      </sourceDesc>
    </fileDesc>
    <profileDesc>
      <textClass><keywords><term>marketing</term></keywords></textClass>
      <particDesc>
        <person xml:id="paper"><p>the paper's own words</p></person>
        <person xml:id="tagger"><p>the tag layer; a sentence written by the tagger about the
          paper, always anchored to a quotation but not itself a quotation</p></person>
      </particDesc>
    </profileDesc>
    <revisionDesc>
      <change when="2026-10-06"
              who="build_paper_edition.py">0 spans located by searching the stored text for the quote's exact words, allowing any whitespace between them</change>
    </revisionDesc>
  </teiHeader>
  <standOff>
    <spanGrp type="tags">
      <span xml:id="t0" type="claim_type" ana="#claim_type" resp="#paper">
        <label>existence</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t1" type="phenomenon" ana="#phenomenon" resp="#paper">
        <label>musical fit and in-store product choice</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t2" type="method" ana="#method" resp="#paper">
        <label>behavioural-experiment</label>
        <term>behavioural-experiment</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t3" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>Whether shoppers were genuinely unaware of the influence is undetermined; they may have realised it but declined to admit it</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t4" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>The alternative that the music merely attracted already-decided buyers to the display cannot be ruled out</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t5" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>The preference-for-prototypes model invoked to explain the effect was not itself tested</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t6" type="controls" ana="#controls[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.85">
        <label>the French and German wines matched to each other on price and on degree of sweetness</label>
        <note>eliminates: the music effect being a price or taste effect - if the French wine were cheaper or sweeter, the shopper&#x27;s choice would follow the wine rather than the accordion · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t7" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[3]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>musical fit</label>
        <term>musical fit</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t8" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[4]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>knowledge</label>
        <term>knowledge</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t9" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[5]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>uncertainty</label>
        <term>uncertainty</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t10" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[6]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>low involvement</label>
        <term>low involvement</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t11" type="senses" ana="#senses[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>THE AUTHORS TAKE APART THEIR OWN EVIDENCE FOR UNAWARENESS, IN THREE MOVES. First the hedge is built into the report: `Taken purely at face value, the questionnaire data suggest that respondents were largely unaware of the effect that music had on their wine selections.` Then: `it remains to be determined whether customers really were unaware ...: Maybe customers did realize that the music was an attempt to influence their purchasing, but did not like to admit this to researchers.` A self-report of unawareness is treated as evidence about what people will SAY, which is a different quantity from what they knew - and most awareness checks in this corpus are reported as measurements of the second</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t12" type="senses" ana="#senses[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>AND THE THIRD MOVE IS SUBTLER THAN IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT: `customers may not have explained their wine choice in terms of the music simply because this did not seem to them like a rational explanation for their behavior.` Not concealment and not ignorance - a FOLK THEORY OF WHAT COUNTS AS A REASON. A shopper who half-noticed the music may still not offer it, because `the music was playing` is not the kind of thing that explains a purchase. So a null on a `why did you choose this` question is evidence about the respondent&#x27;s model of explanation, and only then about awareness</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t13" type="senses" ana="#senses[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>THE SAME BOUNDARY CONDITION money2013 GIVES, SIXTEEN YEARS EARLIER AND IN A DIFFERENT FIELD. Here: the effect holds `only when there is an element of uncertainty in product choice or when customers are in a state of low involvement with the decision process`. Vohs&#x27;s 2015 reply to a failed replication says priming needs an AMBIGUOUS OUTCOME - `a situation that does not leave much room for interpretation is unlikely to show a consistent or large priming effect`. Marketing in 1999 and social psychology in 2015, arriving independently at the condition that a prime needs somewhere to act, and each citing its own literature (judgmental biases here, Loersch &amp; Payne there)</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t14" type="senses" ana="#senses[3]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>AN ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION THE DATA CANNOT RULE OUT, STATED WITHOUT DEFENCE - AND THEN A REPLY THAT COSTS NOTHING. `Because the music was played from the display containing the wines, it may well have attracted the attention of people who already intended to buy wine from one of the countries in question ... Quotation withheld` The concession is total. The reply is that it does not matter: `even if this alternative explanation is correct ... the fact that music was able to attract them to a specific area of the store still shows that music activated knowledge and was associated with the selection of matching products.` The mechanism claim survives the confound because both routes require the same activation</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t15" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>builds-on → Areni and Kim (1993)</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t16" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>builds-on → Martindale and Moore&#x27;s (1988) preference-for-prototypes model</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t17" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>national background music shifts wine purchases toward the congruent country</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t18" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>shoppers are largely unaware of the musics influence on their choice</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t19" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[0]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>ANOVA</label>
        <term>ANOVA</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t20" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[1]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>chi-square</label>
        <term>chi-square</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t21" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[2]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>p-value</label>
        <term>p-value</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t22" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[3]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>statistical-significance</label>
        <term>statistical-significance</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t23" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[4]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>t-test</label>
        <term>t-test</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t24" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[5]" resp="#tagger">
        <label>variance</label>
        <term>variance</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
    </spanGrp>
  </standOff>
  <text>
    <body>
      <p><note type="rights">The full text of this article is not redistributable, so it is
      not included here. The evidence sentences are withheld with it; the tag layer and its
      grounding status remain. The article itself is at https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.2.271.</note></p>
    </body>
  </text>
</TEI>
