A meta‐analysis on the effects of just‐below versus round prices

Abstract Marketers' proclivity for just‐below prices (e. g. , 9. 99) is rooted in an expected higher demand than for round prices (10. 00). The literature, however, lacks a comprehensive assessment of when and how price endings matter. Three mechanisms might explain price‐ending effects on consumers' purchase decisions: just‐below prices (1) improve price perceptions, but (2) impair perceived product quality, and (3) cause consumers to underestimate prices. A preregistered meta‐analysis (k = 69 studies, m = 362 effect sizes, N = 40, 541) established that just‐below (vs. round) prices tend to increase purchase decisions (g = 0. 13, CI 95% 0. 01, 0. 25), result in an advantageous price image (g = 0. 28, CI 95% 0. 09, 0. 48), have no effect on perceived product quality (g = 0. 00, CI 95% −0. 17, 0. 18, p = 0. 96), and are more often underestimated (g = 0. 67, CI 95% 0. 04, 1. 30). Participant, study, price, and product characteristics moderate the magnitude of these effects. Overall, the effect sizes are small and highly heterogenous, p ‐curve analyses revealed a large proportion of nonsignificant effects, and publication bias corrections suggest smaller and, at times, nonsignificant true effects. We discuss theoretical and applied implications for the pricing literature.