The real reason for Shein’s success? A cognitive bias known as “temporal discounting”

They don’t do things like they used to. From sweaters to furniture, cheap consumer goods break down quickly and are often discarded. Consumers typically use fast-fashion products for less than a year, part of a 36% reduction in the number of times an item is worn over a decade. People used to consider purchasing a dresser or kitchen table as a once-in-a-lifetime event. Now, with most furniture made from cardboard and plywood, your purchase may only last a few years.

Companies like fast fashion empire Shein or online marketplace Temu are spending millions to highlight impossibly low prices that seem too good to be true. These prices come with their own hidden costs. Consumers may end up spending more to replace mediocre products. The goods end up in landfills. Water and energy are wasted in producing the next batch. The fashion industry alone contributes 10% of global carbon emissions each year.

And yet, consumers appear to be voting with their wallets in favor of cheap products, creating a race to the bottom as companies lower prices and quality to compete. But there is a way to break the cycle. My research suggests that consumers care about durability – but this is rarely top of mind when making a purchase. Better marketing that emphasizes a product’s longevity can unlock latent demand for high-quality products.

A higher price does not always mean a far superior product. The $825 plain white cotton t-shirt from Valentino is probably not 75 times better than the three $11 cotton t-shirts from Hanes. But in general, high-quality products last longer than cheap alternatives. My colleagues and I looked at 20 retailers that sell secondhand goods like shoes and bags. We’ve found that high-quality products are much more likely to be resold than regular products.

Consumer behavior and product quality explain why. Our research found that when consumers buy a lower quality item, they tend to keep it for less time and discard it when it is no longer useful. There is no second life for a pair of shoes whose heels have broken, or for a sofa where the springs are pushing against the bottom.

On the other hand, consumers keep high-quality products longer and are more likely to pass on, donate or resell them than simply throw them away. This is possible because there is demand for prestige luxury goods, even when used – and because used luxury goods retain functional value. Journalist Anna Kramer wrote about the 35-year-old Kitchen Aid passed down to her, who is older than she is.

Despite the benefits of high-quality products, consumers often overlook durability. A survey we conducted found that more than 75% of people prefer to buy multiple lower-quality products rather than a single high-quality product – even if the total cost is the same. Those who preferred cheap products ignored that the product might not last as long.

Consumers’ lack of attention to durability is an example of a cognitive bias known as temporal discounting, in which we prioritize immediate rewards over future value, even if the future value is greater. Consumers immediately benefit from the cheap price or variety of low-quality products. Durability, however, takes time to materialize.

However, our research shows that encouraging customers to think about how higher quality products last longer can reverse this effect. While only 16% of people chose the durable option on their own, when we asked them to consider durability, that number jumped to 27%.

Consumers take the future into account when they are prompted to consider how higher-end goods are more durable. Highlighting durability can also promote sustainability. Our research suggests that consumers care more about how sustainable products benefit them – for example, by lasting longer – than about how they can help the environment or workers.

We are already seeing a wave of products and marketing that focus on quality. Concepts such as “buy less, buy better” and “slow fashion” have emerged in recent years. The Reddit “Buy It for Life” forum has 2.1 million followers. In France, a national anti-counterfeiting campaign partnered with luxury brands like Chanel to educate consumers about how counterfeit products deteriorate more quickly. And here in the USA, how Associated Press recently reported, “retailers like Kohl’s and online shirt retailer Untuckit have recently revamped their marketing campaigns… to focus on durability and versatility.”

Still, there is room for improvement. Marketers of high-quality products should highlight the durability of items as much as features such as style, comfort, and status. They should clearly articulate the product’s useful life – for example, 10 years – rather than using vague descriptions like “long-lasting.” Companies should also consider mentioning “per use pricing” or “per use pricing” to demonstrate how high-quality products can be cheaper in the long run. Spending $200 on a product you use 200 times is better than a $20 purchase that only lasts you five or 10 times.

Companies can also use warranties and guarantees to signal that they guarantee the durability of their products—from Old Navy’s one-year warranty if school uniforms “can’t stand the wear and tear of a school year” to Lodge’s limited lifetime warranty for a Cast Iron Dutch Oven to Patagonia’s “ironclad guarantee” that if a product does not meet standards, it will be repaired, replaced or refunded.

Not every consumer will be convinced to invest more money upfront. However, new financing options could make it viable for more people to access high-quality goods. Buy now, pay later programs have their drawbacks, but they can allow some consumers to avoid the trap of buying cheap products repeatedly because they lack disposable income.

Widespread, long-term purchases of cheap consumer goods are harmful to the environment and consumers. But companies that implement the right marketing and emphasize product durability can reverse the trend and increase their sales in the process.

More must-read reviews published by Fortune:

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com comments are solely the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com