Subordinate, Basic, and Superordinate Thinking Structure

Requirement: In your own words, provide a coherent paragraph (180-200 words) for each question answer based on what you have learned in the MKTG 4506 (Consumer Behavior) Class with a coherent paragraph for the following 4 questions
IMPORTANT Reminders:
(1) Posts should have high quality and professional tone in that they a)refer to readings, course
concepts, and materials b) are well written in complete sentences with proper grammar b)
include an opinion, an argument, or a perspective on the content.
（2) Primary responses should be “original”, meaning that they are not the same point or argument
another classmate has made. You may reference a classmate’s response when making your
argument if it is similar in nature.
（3) - Completion of the board each week in line with the expectations above, posts are high
quality and show sound thinking.
Questions:
1 Please give an example of Subordinate, Basic, and Superordinate thinking structure (i.e. remember the dessert example from class) - use another category as an example.
1 One of the examples of a paradigm that tries to understand how the individual’s mind classifies things was proposed by Roger Brown. In his theory, he proposed that the mind tries to classify things into categories in order for it to comprehend, analyze, and predict events in life. One example of a category where this thinking structure is apparent is in the case of animals. In this category, the thinking structure would initially classify animals as either a mammal or an insect. This initial classification is what is referred to as a superordinate hierarchy. Second, the mind would then determine whether the mammal is a cat or a dog and whether the bug is an ant or a ladybug. This subsequent and more specific category is what is called as the ‘basic’ hierarchy. Finally, each of the basic categories would then be specified further into the subordinate category. Thus, a dog could be classified as either a dalmatian or a bulldog, the cat into Siamese or ragdoll, and the ant as bullet ant or Argentine ant, among others.
2 Research supports the argument that the way we pay for a product changes the way we perceive it. More specifically, credit cards prime people to focus less on the costs of the item and more on the benefits. Using plastic decouples the expense of the purchase so we tend to buy more when we can charge it. Newer innovations like digital wallets take this a step further so payment— at least at the time of purchase—is even less painful. Are these formats going to create problems if they prime us to think more about short-term gratification and less about the long-term hit to our budgets? Do marketers have an obligation to try to prevent these problems?
2 Yes, the use of digital or card-based payment systems that decouple the ‘pain of paying’ with the purchase could cause further problems if it focused too much on short-term gratification. On the one hand, this could cause serious repercussions in the individuals’ lives if they spend too much on their ‘wants’ thereby leaving less resource for their ‘needs’. Since people tend to spend more when using an intangible resource (i.e., di...