MT459 Unit 9 Post-Purchase Returns Review Example

Course	MT459 Consumer Behavior
Unit	Unit 9
Paper type	Post-purchase behavior review
Length	About 850 words, 6 pages double-spaced
Format	APA 7 student paper
School	Purdue University Global
Program	BS in Business Administration
Updated	October 2026

Free sample paper for MT459 Unit 9

The Second-Week Returns: An MT459 Unit 9 Post-Purchase Behavior Review of a $549 Self-Cleaning Litter Box

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

MT459: Consumer Behavior

Unit 9 Post-Purchase Behavior Review

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

Linwood Pet Supply, the product, its buyers and every figure are composite; the sources cited are real.

What this part is doingLeading with when returns happen, not only how many, shows the review reads timing as evidence of cause.

The Returns Chart

Linwood Pet Supply sold 1,040 units of one self-cleaning litter box model over twelve months, through its stores and website, at $549 with a 30-day return policy. Customers returned 187, 18 percent. Plotted by day since delivery, returns are low in the first week, rise sharply from day 9, peak between days 9 and 16 and fall away after day 20. A return rate alone would hide this shape. The chart shows that dissatisfaction forms at a particular moment, and that moment points to its cause.

Coded Return Reasons

Each return was coded from the reason the customer gave. Cats refusing to use the unit accounted for 71 returns, 38 percent. Owners still having to empty a waste drawer every few days accounted for 48, 26 percent. Noise accounted for 22, rake jams for 19, odor for 15 and other reasons for 12.

The two largest reasons share a timing. Cats often tolerate a new box for a few days, especially if the old box remains, and owners typically remove the old box after the first week, when refusal becomes visible. Similarly, the waste drawer for a two-cat household fills in four to six days, so by the second week owners have emptied it two or three times and realized that the chore they expected to escape has changed form rather than disappeared.

The Framework

Oliver (1980) proposed that satisfaction depends on whether experience confirms or falls short of what a buyer expected. Expectations set before purchase are the standard against which performance is judged, so a product can perform well and still disappoint if it was expected to perform better. The review uses that framework to ask what buyers expected and where experience fell short.

The Survey

A composite follow-up survey reached 120 buyers who kept the unit and 60 who returned it. Each answered matched pairs of seven-point items: how strongly they had expected something before purchase and how well the unit had delivered it.

The disconfirmation table shows the largest gap on the promise of never scooping again. Buyers rated their expectation at 6.4 on average. Keepers rated performance at 4.9; returners at 2.8. Smaller gaps appeared on quiet operation and odor control. The product page's headline, "Never scoop again," appears to have set an expectation the machine could not meet, since emptying a sealed drawer is still a regular task.

The product page promised an end to a chore, and the machine delivered a different chore every four to six days.

What this part is doingLinking the largest gap to the product page's own words locates the cause of returns before the box arrived.

What Keepers Did in the First Week

Keepers did not report fewer problems in the first week; they handled them differently. In open answers, many described rereading positive reviews, watching the manufacturer's setup videos again and calling their cat's refusal an adjustment period. Festinger (1957) described dissonance as the discomfort of holding two conflicting beliefs, such as having made a sensible $549 purchase and watching the cat avoid it, and described how people reduce it by seeking supporting information or reinterpreting events. Keepers' rereading and reframing look like dissonance reduction, and for many it seems to have worked long enough for the cats to adapt.

Complaints Before Returns

Forty-one percent of returners contacted the store or the manufacturer before returning the unit, most often about refusal. Few received specific advice on helping cats adapt, such as keeping the old box beside the new one for a week or leaving the new unit switched off at first. Solomon (2020) notes that how a firm handles complaints can determine whether a dissatisfied customer stays, and these contacts were an opportunity mostly missed.

Recommendation: Reset Expectations at the Register

The review recommends changing expectations at the point of sale rather than changing the product. Every buyer should receive, with the receipt and in the confirmation email, a one-page card with three statements: plan two weeks for your cats to adjust, and keep the old box until they use the new one; you will empty a sealed drawer every four to seven days instead of scooping daily; and call us in the first two weeks if anything goes wrong. Store staff should be trained in the adjustment advice so that a complaint call becomes a solution rather than a return. Linwood should also ask the manufacturer to change "never scoop again" on product pages it controls to a claim the machine meets.

Measures

Linwood will judge the change by two figures: the return rate by day since delivery, watched for a smaller second-week peak, and the share of complaint contacts that end without a return.

Limits

Return reasons are customers' own explanations, which may not capture every cause. The survey asked about expectations after the fact, when experience may have colored memory. And the review covers one model; others may have different patterns.

What this part is doingNaming the after-the-fact survey as a limit shows the review knows its expectation figures are remembered, not measured beforehand.

References

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.

Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460-469. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378001700405

Solomon, M. R. (2020). Consumer behavior: Buying, having, and being (13th ed.). Pearson.

MT459 Unit 9 instructions, in plain terms

MT459 Unit 9 asks for a review of what happens after consumers buy, including satisfaction, dissonance, complaints and returns. Return or complaint data by timing are especially useful, because when dissatisfaction appears often points to its cause. Code reasons for returns or complaints with stated categories. Use Oliver's expectation-disconfirmation model to compare what buyers expected with what they experienced, ideally on matched items. Describe how buyers who kept the product handled early doubts, using dissonance theory where it fits. Examine whether complaints were an opportunity to prevent returns. Recommend a change aimed at the cause you identified, with measures to show whether it works. Be clear about limits, especially expectations recalled after the fact. About seven pages opening with a returns chart is common, though one detailed purchase can work when no return data exist.

How the MT 459 Unit 9 example is put together

Linwood's review opens with the returns chart and explains why the day-by-day shape matters more than the 18 percent rate. Coded reasons follow, and a section explains why refusal and drawer emptying both surface in the second week. Oliver's model is introduced, and the survey of keepers and returners reports matched expectation and performance items, with the largest gap on never scooping again, under a highlighted line on a promised end to a chore replaced by a different one. Festinger's dissonance theory explains keepers' rereading and reframing in the first week. A section on complaints finds 41 percent of returners called first and few received adjustment advice, citing Solomon on complaint handling. The recommendation is a register card, staff training and a request to change the product claim, followed by two measures and limits.

Where the points sit in the MT459 Unit 9 rubric

Post-purchase reviews are marked on connecting timing, expectation and cause. Instructors credit reviews that use the timing of returns or complaints as evidence rather than reporting a single rate. Coded reasons with clear categories show method. Applying expectation-disconfirmation with matched items, and locating the largest gap, is the central analytical marking point. Dissonance theory is rewarded when it explains specific behaviors of buyers who kept the product. Treating complaints as a missed opportunity to prevent returns shows practical insight. Recommendations aimed at the identified cause, such as resetting expectations, earn more than general calls for better service. Measures that would show whether the change worked make the review testable. Limits about recalled expectations show critical awareness. A clear chart and table help the grader see the argument.

Common MT459 Unit 9 mistakes, and how to avoid them

The most frequent Unit 9 weakness is reporting a return rate and listing reasons without asking when returns happened or why. Another is describing satisfaction theory without measuring expectations at all. Students often recommend improving the product when the evidence points to the promise made about it. Dissonance is sometimes confused with regret and used to describe any unhappy buyer. Complaints are frequently ignored. Measures are rarely included. Before submitting, plot or list your returns or complaints by time since purchase and look for a peak. Then ask what changes in a buyer's experience at that moment. If your recommendation does not address that moment, reconsider it. Finally, check whether the largest expectation gap traces back to something the seller said before the sale.

Get an MT459 Unit 9 example written to your instructions

Choose the costly purchase for Unit 9, your own or one you witnessed, and send along anything showing what the seller promised, plus your prompt and its rubric. A free first review returns within 24-48h, expectations traced to their source and compared with performance, and dissonance shown through what the buyer did afterward. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.

More MT459 papers and BS in Business Administration samples

MT459 Unit 9 questions, answered

What is expectation-disconfirmation?

It is the idea, associated with Richard Oliver's 1980 work, that satisfaction depends on how performance compares with what the buyer expected. Performance above expectations produces positive disconfirmation; below produces negative disconfirmation. The same product can satisfy one buyer and disappoint another if their expectations differed, which is why tracing where expectations came from matters so much.

How is cognitive dissonance different from regret?

Regret is a feeling about a choice. Dissonance, in Festinger's theory, is discomfort from holding conflicting beliefs, such as I made a good decision and this product disappoints me, and it motivates actions to reduce the conflict. Seeking positive reviews, downplaying rejected alternatives and reinterpreting problems are typical responses, so describe those behaviors rather than just the feeling.

Do I need return data for this unit?

Not necessarily. One detailed purchase can work, especially your own, if you document expectations, experience and what you did afterward. Retail return figures, review timelines or a few interviews add breadth where available. Check whether your prompt asks for a single case or a pattern across buyers, and choose evidence accordingly.

Where can I find a free MT459 Unit 9 sample paper?

The whole MT459 Unit 9 review is on this page, tracing second-week returns of a $549 self-cleaning litter box to expectations set by its product page.

Why do returns peak in the second week in the MT459 Unit 9 sample?

Owners usually remove the old box after a week, when cats' refusal becomes visible, and by then they have emptied the waste drawer two or three times.