If your Buy 3 price lives behind a code, two things happen late: the shopper sees the real price only at checkout, and a code box is on screen while they decide. The research below speaks to both. None of it is about a particular app.
What Baymard says about code fields
Baymard Institute’s checkout guidance says that hidden coupon fields, collapsed by default, “are better than exposed ones, because visible promo fields tempt users to leave checkout and hunt for codes elsewhere.” It goes further: “If discounts can be autoapplied, do it. Users consider this beneficial as it provides both convenience and trustworthiness, yet 83% of sites don’t offer it.”
Two limits. This is usability research and advice, and Baymard gives no conversion figure for removing a code box. The 83% appears in that sentence; the Baymard post it links to for the figure was not read.
What Baymard’s data says about not seeing the total
Baymard’s cart abandonment page reports an average documented abandonment rate of 70.22%, calculated from 50 studies. Setting aside shoppers who were “just browsing” (42% of US online shoppers in its data), it lists reasons for leaving. Among them, 12% said “I couldn’t see / calculate total order cost up-front”, and 40% said “Extra costs too high (shipping, tax, fees).”
Most abandonment has other causes, and this does not show that any change to a product page recovers a share of it. It does show that a total shoppers cannot see in advance is a recorded reason people leave.
A study of shoppers asked for a code they don’t have
In a Vanderbilt University news release, researchers Mikhael Shor and Richard Oliver describe an experiment with 206 participants shopping a fictitious site, ToyMart.com, split into three groups: shoppers given a code, shoppers who were not, and a control group with no code field. They report that “the highest probability of purchase, 76 percent, was for consumers who have a code” and “At 19 percent, the ‘have nots’ were the least likely group to complete the purchase.”
Treat it with care. It is a small experiment on a made-up toy store, and our source is the university news release, which cites no journal. We found a matching paper (Journal of Economic Psychology) but could not read its abstract or text, so we do not rely on it for any figure.
What to take from it
- If a quantity price exists, show it on the product page, with the total.
- Apply it automatically at checkout rather than asking for a code.
- A code box is not harmless: it invites a search, and shoppers without a code may feel they are paying too much.
What we checked
- SourceBaymard Institute, “Payment UX: Research-Backed Standards for Ecommerce Checkouts”, C. MacDonald (full text)Open on baymard.com (opens the source)
- SourceBaymard Institute, “Cart Abandonment Rate Statistics” (full text)Open on baymard.com (opens the source)
- SourceVanderbilt University news release on the Shor and Oliver experiment (release only, not the journal paper)Open on news.vanderbilt.edu (opens the source)
- SourceShor and Oliver, “Price discrimination through online couponing: Impact on likelihood of purchase and profitability”, Journal of Economic Psychology 27(3) (citation only; no abstract available)Open on ideas.repec.org (opens the source)
- Our checkWe have not run this test on any store, so this note makes no first-hand claim.