Consumer News: Gas prices climb back above $4 as oil-market tensions grow

Why your brain often mistakes a higher price for higher quality

• Shoppers often assume a higher price means better quality, even when the difference is mostly branding, familiarity, or marketing.

• Decision fatigue and fear of buying the wrong product can push consumers toward premium brands because they feel like the safer choice.

• Paying more can make sense when it delivers measurable benefits, such as better warranties, durability, support, or resale value.

Compare similar products in any store aisle, and youre bound to notice that one product costs significantly more than the others. Many shoppers instinctively assume that the more expensive product must be the better choice.

Sometimes they're right. But often, they're falling for one of the oldest tricks in marketing and one that's helped create some of the world's most valuable brands.

According to a recent analysis from OnDeck, companies like Apple, Amazon, Nike, Coca-Cola, and Starbucks have built brands worth hundreds of billions of dollars. But their success isn't based on logos alone. They've spent decades earning consumer trust, creating emotional connections, and making their products feel like the "safe" choice.

Psychologists even have a name for it, price-quality bias, and its our tendency to believe that a higher-priced product must also be a better product.

That mental shortcut can sometimes lead to smart purchases. Other times, it quietly drains your wallet.

Here are five psychological reasons expensive brands often feel superior, and how to avoid paying more when you don't have to.

1. Your brain equates price with quality

If two nearly identical products sit side by side, many shoppers automatically assume the more expensive option is better. It's often seen as an easy mental shortcut.

Higher price suggests better ingredients, perhaps better craftsmanship, or longer durability, even when there's little evidence to support those assumptions.

Retailers absolutely know this. In some cases, premium pricing isn't just about making more money; it actually makes a product appear more desirable.

Products known for this tactic include bottled water, phone charging cables, olive oil, pain relievers, and even laundry detergent.

How to shop smarter: Before automatically choosing the most expensive option, compare objective details like ingredients, warranty length, materials, and independent reviews. If you can't identify any meaningful differences, the higher price may simply be a case of better marketing.

2. Familiar brands feel safer

It makes sense psychologically that buying something you've "heard of" feels less risky.

That's one reason companies spend billions on advertising every year. The more often you see a brand, the more familiar (and trustworthy) it becomes.

That doesn't necessarily mean it's the best product. Sometimes you're simply paying for years of advertising rather than better performance.

Five brands that immediately jump to mind include Nike, Apple, Kleenex, Coca-Cola, and YETI.

How to shop smarter: If you're trying a store brand or lesser-known product for the first time, start with one item instead of stocking up. Try a small experiment on your family by adding one new store branded item per grocery trip and test whether the cheaper option performs just as well or if your family even notices the difference at all.

3. Too many choices make us default to the premium option

Most shoppers would agree that standing in front of 40 different bottles of shampoo, or dozens of coffee makers, can be overwhelming.

Psychologists call this decision fatigue. When consumers become mentally tired from comparing options, they often simplify the decision by assuming the premium brand is the safest bet and throw it in their cart.

In the end, it feels much easier, and less time-consuming, than researching every single feature or option.

How to shop smarter: Narrow down your choices before you shop, especially on a significant purchase. Read the reviews at home and identify two or three products that fit your needs. Then when you get to the store, you'll be less likely to make an expensive impulse decision while standing in the aisle.

4. We worry more about making a bad purchase than overpaying

For many shoppers, paying an extra $20 feels less painful than buying the wrong product altogether.

That fear is powerful thing. Nobody wants to be forced to replace a disappointing purchase or feel like they wasted their hard-earned money.

Brands absolutely understand this phenomenon. This is why they constantly emphasize reliability, customer satisfaction, and decades of experience.

How to shop smarter: Check the return policy before buying. A generous return window lets you make your decision based on value instead of fear, knowing full well you can return the product if it doesn't meet your expectations.

5. Premium brands become part of our identity

Some purchases go beyond function and become part of your look or outward identity.

People don't always buy a particular athletic shoe, smartphone, or coffee because it's objectively better. Sometimes they buy it because it reflects how they see themselves. Or more importantly, how they'd like others to see them.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that. The problem comes when emotional attachment replaces any rational product comparison.

Some popular premium brands that jump to mind include Lululemon, Starbucks, Rolex, Apple, and Patagonia.

How to shop smarter: Before making a purchase, ask yourself one simple question: "Am I paying for better performance, or for how this brand makes me feel?" That answer can help determine whether the extra cost is worth it.

When paying more actually makes sense

None of what Im talking about above means that you should always buy the cheapest product. Sometimes paying more delivers real value and is the smart way to go.

Higher-priced brands may offer:

• Better warranties

• Longer product life

• Superior customer service

• Better software support

• Easier repairs

• Stronger resale value

These advantages often matter for products like electronics, appliances, power tools, and luggage.

The key is making sure you're paying for measurable benefits and not simply assuming a higher price equals higher quality.

How to shop smarter: Think in terms of cost per year of ownership, not just the original purchase price. A product that lasts twice as long may end up being the better bargain by far.

The consumer takeaway

Powerful brands have earned their reputations by building trust over decades, but that trust can also influence how we judge price and quality.

Before assuming the most expensive option is the best one, slow down, compare the facts, and ask what you're really getting for the extra money.

Sometimes a premium product truly earns its price. Other times, the smartest purchase is the one that saves you money with little fanfare and without sacrificing any performance.

Is paying for an empty middle seat actually worth it?

• Airlines are now charging extra for one of the most coveted perks in coach: an empty middle seat.

• The upgrade is most worthwhile on longer flights, but compare the price with Premium Economy or First Class before paying.

• If your travel dates are flexible, choosing off-peak flights may score you an empty middle seat without paying anything extra.

Flying has become a master class in optional fees. Want to check a bag? That'll cost extra. Prefer an aisle seat? Another fee. Need early boarding or more legroom? Those upgrades can quickly add to the price of your ticket.

Now, airlines are finding another way to monetize your comfort by charging passengers for an empty middle seat.

United Airlines recently unveiled a new premium economy-style option on its upcoming Airbus A321XLR aircraft that gives travelers extra space by leaving the middle seat open between two passengers. The new seating also includes a larger shared cocktail table and additional personal space, offering another tier between standard economy and more expensive premium cabins.

For travelers, the announcement raises an important question: Is paying for an empty seat actually worth it?

Here are a few ways to decide.

1. Think about how long you'll actually be in the seat

Flight length should be your biggest consideration.

On a 90-minute or two-hour flight, you're unlikely to spend enough time in your seat to justify paying a significant premium simply to avoid a middle-seat neighbor.

But on flights lasting five hours or more, extra personal space can make a noticeable difference. Having room to spread out, work on a laptop, eat comfortably, or simply avoid shoulder-to-shoulder contact may be worth paying for.

Rule of thumb: The longer the flight, the more valuable comfort becomes.

2. Compare the upgrade not just the ticket price

Many travelers make the mistake of looking only at the upgrade fee.

Instead, compare the total trip cost.

For example, if an empty-middle-seat upgrade costs $80, but Premium Economy is available for $110 more than your original ticket, spending the extra $30 could buy you additional legroom, better reclining, priority boarding, or other perks. Likewise, if First Class is discounted on your travel date, it may provide much better value than purchasing several smaller upgrades individually.

Always compare all available cabin options before clicking "Upgrade."

3. Consider who you're traveling with

Not everyone values extra space equally.

An empty middle seat may be especially appealing if you:

• Need room to work during the flight.

• Have broad shoulders or simply dislike cramped seating.

• Plan to sleep on a long flight.

If you're flying solo on a short trip, however, the extra space may not justify the additional cost.

4. Don't pay for comfort you won't use

Airlines increasingly offer travelers dozens of optional extras. These include priority boarding, seat selection, snacks, and now Starlink Wi-Fi.

Before adding them to your reservation, ask yourself one simple question: Will this noticeably improve my trip?

If the answer is no, keep your money. Skipping just a few unnecessary upgrades over the course of several trips each year can save hundreds of dollars.

Sometimes luck is still free

Many flights still have empty middle seats simply because they don't sell out.

If your schedule is flexible, flying during off-peak days or less popular departure times may improve your odds of enjoying more space without paying anything extra.

It's never guaranteed obviously, but sometimes the best upgrade is simply choosing a less crowded flight.

Research explores how veterinarians may motivate smokers to kick the habit

• A new pilot study explored whether veterinarians can encourage pet owners to quit smoking during routine visits.

• Researchers surveyed smokers before and after conversations with veterinary professionals about secondhand smoke and pet health.

• The findings suggest these discussions may boost motivation to quit, although larger studies are needed.

Most people know smoking is harmful to their own health, but many may not realize that secondhand smoke can also affect the animals they share their homes with. Dogs, cats and other pets can be exposed to tobacco smoke through the air and from smoke particles that settle on their fur, bedding and other household surfaces.

Researchers wondered whether learning more about these risks from a trusted veterinarian could give smokers an extra push toward quitting.

To find out, researchers at Tufts University conducted a small pilot study examining whether a brief conversation with a veterinarian could influence smokers' attitudes about quitting. The idea builds on the close relationship many people have with their pets, suggesting concern for an animal's health could become another source of motivation alongside the well-known benefits for the smoker and their family.

There have been a number of studies trying to parse out what's bad for [pets], researcher Elizabeth Rozanski, D.V.M., DACVIM (SAIM), DACVECC, said in a news release. It's clearly better not to be exposed to smoke, but we don't have any evidence to say that if you smoke around your dog, they're more likely to get this disease or that disease.

How the researchers studied the idea

The researchers recruited pet owners who smoked and were visiting a veterinary clinic.

Before speaking with a veterinarian, participants completed a survey measuring their smoking habits, knowledge about the effects of secondhand smoke on pets, and their readiness to quit smoking.

Veterinarians then had a brief conversation with participants about how tobacco smoke can affect companion animals. Afterward, participants completed another survey to see whether the discussion had changed their knowledge, concern, or motivation to quit.

Because this was a pilot study, the goal was not to prove that veterinary counseling causes people to stop smoking, but rather to see whether this type of conversation is practical and shows enough promise to justify larger studies in the future.

What the results mean for consumers

The researchers found that participants generally responded positively to receiving smoking cessation information from their veterinarian.

After the discussion, many reported greater awareness of the risks secondhand smoke poses to pets and showed increased interest in quitting smoking. The study also suggested that these conversations were acceptable to both pet owners and veterinary professionals, indicating they could fit naturally into routine veterinary care.

For consumers, the findings highlight an unexpected source of encouragement for quitting smoking. While the study was small and cannot show that veterinarian conversations directly lead to long-term smoking cessation, it suggests that concern for a beloved pet may provide an additional reason to consider quitting.

Researchers say larger studies are needed to determine whether this approach ultimately helps more smokers quit successfully, but the early results indicate veterinary clinics could become another valuable setting for tobacco cessation education.

Your dog wants you to be around as long as possible, Dr. Rozanski said. We know that smoking will limit your lifespanIm sure nobody wants to do that to their dog.

Researchers say the overall risk remains low, but patients should know the warning signs

• A new study found a small increase in the risk of a rare type of sudden vision loss among adults taking GLP-1 medications for type 2 diabetes.

• Researchers estimate the increase amounts to about three to four additional cases for every 10,000 patients treated over 18 months.

• The study found an association not proof that the medications directly caused the eye condition and researchers say more studies are needed.

GLP-1 medications have become some of the most widely used drugs for treating type 2 diabetes and obesity. Medications such as semaglutide and tirzepatide are known for helping lower blood sugar, promoting weight loss, and reducing the risk of certain heart and kidney complications. But as more people take these medications, researchers are continuing to investigate their long-term safety.

A new study from Rutgers University has identified a possible link between GLP-1 medications and a rare eye condition called ischemic optic neuropathy, which occurs when blood flow to the optic nerve is reduced.

The condition can cause sudden vision loss, typically affecting one eye. While the findings suggest the risk is slightly higher among people taking GLP-1 medications, researchers emphasized that the condition remains uncommon.

Although ischemic optic neuropathy was rare, it is clinically important because it can involve sudden vision loss, researcher Chintan Dave said in a news release. The increase in risk was small approximately three to four additional cases per 10,000 patients treated with GLP-1s over 18 months, but clinicians and patients should be aware of this potential association.

The study

For the study, researchers examined data from a large U.S. health care database that included adults between the ages of 18 and 65 with type 2 diabetes who were starting medication to manage their condition.

The team compared more than 480,000 people who began taking a GLP-1 medication with a matched group of patients who started other diabetes medications. Participants were followed for up to 18 months to see whether they developed ischemic optic neuropathy.

The researchers focused on newly diagnosed cases of the condition after patients started treatment.

Because this was an observational study based on medical records, it was designed to identify whether an association existed between GLP-1 medications and the eye condition rather than determine whether the drugs directly caused it. The authors noted that differences in patients' underlying health could also help explain the findings.

What the findings mean for patients

Overall, the researchers found that people taking GLP-1 medications had a higher risk of developing ischemic optic neuropathy than those taking other diabetes medications.

Even so, the increase was small in absolute terms about three to four additional cases for every 10,000 patients treated over an 18-month period.

The researchers noted that most people in the study who developed the condition were men or adults between the ages of 50 and 65.

Because ischemic optic neuropathy can present with sudden vision loss, which may be permanent, early recognition of symptoms and prompt ophthalmologic evaluation may be especially important for patients at higher baseline risk, Dave said.

For consumers, the findings are not a reason to stop taking a prescribed GLP-1 medication, according to the study. Instead, they highlight the importance of being aware of symptoms such as sudden blurring, dimming or partial vision loss in one eye and seeking prompt evaluation if they occur.

Because the study found an association rather than a cause-and-effect relationship, the researchers say additional studies are needed to better understand whether the medications themselves contribute to the increased risk.

New research suggests every family's screen-time story looks different

• A new study found that using screens to calm children doesn't affect every family in the same way.

• Researchers followed children for years to better understand the relationship between screen use and cognitive development.

• The findings suggest supporting parents especially their mental health may be just as important as focusing on screen time itself.

If you've ever seen a parent hand a phone or tablet to a fussy toddler in a grocery store or waiting room, you're not alone. Many parents use screens to help calm an upset child, especially during stressful moments. But is that habit harmful in the long run?

According to a new study from researchers at The Ohio State University, the answer isn't as straightforward as many people assume.

Instead of finding one clear pattern, researchers discovered that the relationship between using screens to regulate a child's emotions and their cognitive development differs from child to child.

The study focused on executive functions mental abilities that help children control impulses, solve problems, adapt to new situations, and make thoughtful decisions. These skills play an important role in school success, social relationships and everyday behavior.

Rather than asking whether screens are simply "good" or "bad," the researchers wanted to better understand how children's development and parents' screen use influence one another over time.

Its not just that the effects are larger or smaller for some kids the underlying pattern is different for different kids, researcher Jane Shawcroft said in a news release.

Following families over several years

To explore those connections, researchers analyzed data from Project M.E.D.I.A., a long-term study conducted by Brigham Young University. The project followed children across six different points in time, beginning around age 2.5 and continuing until they were about 7.5 years old.

The team tested three possible explanations:

• First, they examined whether using screens to calm children influenced the development of executive function skills.

• Second, they looked at whether children's existing cognitive abilities affected how often parents relied on screens for comfort.

• Finally, they explored whether both processes happened simultaneously, with each influencing the other over time.

Researchers paid particular attention to two executive function skills: cognitive flexibility, which helps children adjust to changing situations and think through problems, and inhibitory control, which helps them resist impulsive reactions.

What the findings could mean for parents

For most families, researchers found that the relationship worked both ways. Children's behavior influenced how often parents used screens to soothe them, and that screen use was linked with changes in executive function over time, creating an ongoing cycle.

However, not every child fit that pattern. A small group of children showed different developmental relationships that researchers could not fully explain.

Another small group stood out because parents' use of screens appeared to influence cognitive development, but the children's cognitive skills did not predict parents' screen use. Parents in this group were also more likely to report higher levels of depression.

The researchers say these findings suggest that conversations about children's screen use shouldn't focus only on parents' choices. Families may also benefit from broader support, including resources that promote children's emotional development and services that support parents' mental health.

Rather than offering a one-size-fits-all answer about screens, the study highlights that every family's circumstances can be different and those differences matter.

I really wish the narrative around children and tech would be less about its just a parents job, and more about this shared responsibility we have as a society to support children in this context weve built for them, Shawcroft said. If we want kids to be OK, part of that is helping their parents to be OK.