조절초점(regulatory focus)이 선택대안의 구성에 미치는 영향: 만족/불만족 경험의 조절효과

정유정 ( Yoojeong Jeong ),전선규 ( Sunkyu Jun ),성정연 ( Jungyeon Sung ) 한국소비자학회 2013 소비자학연구 Vol.24 No.3

본 연구에서는 소비자의 조절초점이 선택대안을 구성하는 과정에 미치는 영향은 해당 제품 혹은 관련 제품에 대한 선행 구매의 결과 즉, 만족/불만족 경험에 따라 달라질 수 있다는 점을 주장하고 있다. 기존 연구에서는 일반적으로 열망, 성취의 동기 측면에서 향상초점(promotion focus)을 갖는 소비자가 안전 지향의 동기 측면에서 방어초점(prevention focus)을 갖는 소비자에 비해 고려 상표군(consideration set)의 형성에 있어 더 많은 개수의 대안을 포함할 뿐 아니라 상호 이질적인 대안을 포함한다고 주장하고 있다. 그러나 실제 소비상황에서 벌어지는 소비자의 구매 결정은 선행 구매경험의 결과에 영향을 받는다는 점을 고려해보면, 동일 제품의 재구매 및 관련 제품의 대체구매에 있어서 고려 상표군의 구성은 선행 구매결과의 만족/불만족 경험에 영향을 받을 수 있다. 본 연구에서는 조절초점이 고려 상표군의 구성에 미치는 영향은 선행 구매경험의 만족/불만족에 의해 조절될 수 있다는 점을 제안하며 특히, 불만족 경험을 한 경우에는 방어초점을 갖는 소비자도 풍부하고 이질적인 고려 상표군을 구성하게 된다는 점을 주장한다. 연구 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 선행 구매결과에 대해 만족 경험을 하는 경우, 향상초점의 소비자는 방어초점의 소비자에 비해 더 많은 개수의 대안 및 범주(category)의 개수를 고려대안에 포함하였다. 둘째, 선행 구매결과에 대해 불만족 경험을 한 경우, 고려대안의 구성에 있어서 향상초점을 갖는 소비자와 방어초점을 갖는 소비자 간의 대안의 개수 및 범주의 개수는 차이를 보이지 않았다. 셋째, 불만족 경험 후에 향상초점과 방어초점 간의 대안의 개수 및 범주의 차이가 나타나지 않는 것은 방어초점의 개수 증가에 의한 것으로 나타났다. The past studies that employed experiment to investigate the effect of regulatory focus on consumer decision making were mostly conducted under the assumption that participants did not have pre-purchase experiences for the same or similar ones with the focal product that was used in the experiment. However, we suggest that pre-purchase experience in terms of satisfaction and dissatisfaction is likely to moderate the effect of regulatory focus on the decision making process in the subsequent purchase. Positive and negative post-purchase attitudes are likely to have varying influences on consumers`` information processing, particularly in terms of the construction of consideration set, in the sense that product experience is incorporated into the existing knowledge and in turn influences the subsequent information process for the next purchase (Hoch and Deighton 1989). Furthermore, literature suggests asymmetrical effects of positive versus negative events on cognition such that, compared to positive experiences, negative experiences increase cognitive motivation to learn in order to avoid negative outcomes and lead to narrowing down and focusing attention to features that elicited the negative events(Taylor 1991; Hutchison 2002). This implies that, following dissatisfactory experiences(vs. satisfactory experiences), consumers are more likely to elaborate on searching and evaluating alternatives for the subsequence purchase. Based on the theory of negativity asymmetry, the present study argues that the regulatory focus effect on the construction of consideration set is moderated by the pre-purchase experience of (dis)satisfaction. Specifically, it is suggested that consumers with prevention focus(vs. promotion focus) are more likely to have a large consideration set in terms of number of alternatives and number of product categories when their pre-purchase experiences were dissatisfactory(vs. satisfactory). In line with this reasoning, we develop the following hypotheses. H1a: For satisfactory(vs. dissatisfactory) pre-purchase experience, those with promotion focus(vs. prevention focus) will produce larger numbers of alternatives that are included in the consideration set. H1b: For dissatisfactory (vs. satisfactory) pre-purchase experience, number of alternatives will not different whether between promotion focus and prevention focus. H2a: For satisfactory (vs. dissatisfactory) pre-purchase experience, those with promotion focus(vs. prevention focus) will produce larger numbers of categories that are included in the consideration set. H2b: For dissatisfactory (vs. satisfactory) pre-purchase experience, number of categories will not different whether between promotion focus and prevention focus. The hypotheses were tested through an experiment for 148 college students. We employed 2*2 between-subject factorial design (regulatory focus: promotion(n=72) vs. prevention(n=76), satisfaction(n=74) vs. dissatisfaction(n=74)). For testing H1a and H1b, number of alternatives was subjected to a general linear model that included regulatory focus, (dis)satisfaction, and their interaction as independent variables. The main effect of regulatory focus (F(1, 147)=1.80, ns) and that of (dis)satisfaction(F(1, 147)=0.02, ns) were not significant. However, the interaction effect between regulatory focus and (dis)satisfaction was statistically significant (F(1, 147)= 6.57, p < 0.05). For satisfactory pre-purchase experience, those with promotion focus produced larger numbers of alternatives that are included in the consideration set (13.39 vs. 10.26, t= 2.4, p < 0.05). H1a was supported. On the other hand, for dissatisfactory pre-purchase experience, number of alternatives was not statistically different whether between promotion focus and prevention focus (11.44 vs. 12.42, t=1.03, ns), supporting H1b. For testing H2a and H2b, number of categories was subjected to a general linear model that included regulatory focus, (dis)satisfaction, and their interaction as independent variables. The main effect of regulatory focus (F(1, 147)=1.14, ns) and that of (dis)satisfaction(F(1, 147)= 1.61, ns) were not significant. However, the interaction effect between the two was marginally significant (F(1, 147)=3.28, p< 0.10). For satisfactory (vs. dissatisfactory) pre-purchase experience, those with promotion focus(vs. prevention focus) produced larger numbers of categories that are included in the consideration set(6.81 vs. 5.92, t=1.86, p < 0.10). H2a was supported. On the other hand, for dissatisfactory (vs. satisfactory) pre-purchase experience, number of categories was not statistically different whether between promotion focus and prevention focus (6.64 vs. 6.87, t=0.59, ns), supporting H2b.

언더독(Underdog)에 대한 감성적 반응이 상표태도와 선호도에 미치는 효과

성정연 ( Jungyeon Sung ),정유정 ( Yoojeong Jeong ),전선규 ( Sunkyu Jun ) 한국소비자학회 2013 소비자학연구 Vol.24 No.1

본 연구에서는 승자보다는 패자, 일등보다는 이등에 대해 동정심을 갖거나 그 처지를 공감하면서 심리적으로 지지를 보내는 성향 즉, 언더독 효과(underdog effect)를 탐구하고 있다. 본 연구에서는 상표를 언더독으로 포지셔닝하는 광고가 제시되었을 때 형성되는 소비자의 상표태도 및 시장에 출시되어 있는 언더독 상표에 대한 소비자 선호도 측면에서 나타나는 언더독 효과의 심리적 과정을 언더독에 대한 소비자의 감성적 반응 측면에서 설명하고 있다. <연구 1>에서는 언더독 포지셔닝 광고 효과 측면에서 언더독 효과를 살펴보았는데, 소비자의 감정이입 성향 (empathic concern)이 강할수록 언더독 포지셔닝 상표에 대해 긍정적인 상표태도가 형성된다는 점과 그 효과는 언더독 광고를 통해 경험한 공감적 반응(empathic response)을 통해 매개된다는 점을 주장하고 있다. 가상의 상표를 대상으로 언더독 포지셔닝 광고를 제시한 실험을 수행한 결과, 감정이입 성향이 언더독 상표에 대한 태도에 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났으며, 그 영향은 광고에 대한 공감적 반응에 의해 매개되는 것으로 나타났다. <연구 2>에서는 시장에 출시되어 있는 언더독 상표에 대한 선호도 측면에서 언더독 효과를 살펴보았다. 상표 지명도에 바탕을 두고 경쟁우위에 있는 일등 상표에 비해 경쟁력이 열악한 언더독 상표를 구분했을 때, 감정이입 성향이 강한 응답자일수록 언더독 상표에 대해 선호도가 높은 것으로 나타났으며 그 효과는 사회적 약자에 대한 동정심(sympathy)에 의해 매개되는 것으로 나타났다. 더불어, 물질주의 성향은 언더독 상표에 대한 선호에 부정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 마케팅 영역에서 나타나는 언더독 효과와 관련하여 자아일체감(self-identification) 측면에서 그 심리적 과정을 설명한 기존 연구와 비교하여 감성적 반응 측면에서 언더독 효과를 탐구한 본 연구 결과에 대해 논의하고 시사점을도출하였다. People often distance themselves from losers or those who are viewed negatively and associate with winners or those who are viewed positively, known as the tendency to bask in reflected glory. On the other hand, people tend to support those who are not expected to succeed against advantaged competitors, referred to as the “underdog effect”(Simon 1954). Underdogs are prevalent in the marketplace, as in the examples of mom-and-pop stores competing against huge discount stores. In line with pervasive underdog effects, underdog positioning may be alternative effective appeal to consumers as its potential was evidenced by the well known campaign of Avis: “We are number two. so, we try harder.” The present study examines underdog effect in the consumer context such as in terms of attitude toward and preference for underdog brand, which is less privileged in the market place but is persevering in its efforts. From a traditional perspective, the tendency to associate with a successful group is explained by social identity theory(Tajfel and Turner 1986), which posits that the accomplishments of the groups with which we identify are a crucial source of self-esteem. Corresponding to the social identify theory, recent research that was conducted in the context of marketing suggested self-identification with underdog as a psychological mechanism underlying consumers`` support for underdog brand(Paharia, Keinan, Avery, and Schor 2011). On the other hand, the present study emphasizes consumer``s affective response to underdog as an alternative psychological process to produce underdog effect. We suggest that empathy elicits altruistic motivation to root for underdog effect, resulting in favorable response to underdog-positioning(vs. top-dogpositioning) brand as well as preference for underdog brands in the market. Specifically, we argue that consumer``s personal trait of empathic concern, which refers to the tendency to experience feelings of warmth, compassion, and concern for other people(Davis 1983a), influences the arousal of other-oriented emotion such as empathic response and sympathetic response, which in turn enhances support for underdog brand. We conducted two studies. The first study aims to investigate the underdog effect in terms of consumer attitude toward brand that is positioned as underdog through advertising, with the following hypotheses: H1a: Attitude toward an underdog stimulus is more likely to be positive for consumers who have higher levels of empathic concern. H1b: Enhanced attitude toward an underdog stimulus for consumers who have higher levels of empathic concern will be mediated by the empathic response to the underdog positioning advertisement. An experiment was designed to test the hypotheses for 85 Korean college students. Two print advertisements for a fictitious dental clinic were created such that one is an underdog positioning ad and the other one is a top-dog positioning advertisement. The participants were randomly assigned to either the underdog or top-dog group, resulting in 45 students in the top-dog group and 40 students in the underdog group. Band attitude was subjected to a general linear model with independent variables of ad type, empathic concern, and their interaction. The main effect of ad type was marginally significant(F(1, 81)=3.94, p < 0.10), and that of empathic concern was significant(F(1, 81)=4.94, p<0.05). However, the main effects are qualified by the significant interaction effect(F(1, 81)=4.44, p < 0.05). Empathic concern was correlated with brand attitude in the positive direction for underdog positioning(r=0.40, p < 0.01), whereas it was not for top-dog positioning. The result supports H1a. Further analyses showed that the interaction effect of empathic concern and ad type on empathic response was significant(F(1, 81)=4.33, p < 0.05). Empathic response was significantly correlated with brand attitude (r=0.41, p < 0.001). When empathic response was included in the general linear model in addition to empathic concern, ad type, and their interaction effect on brand attitude, the effect of empathic response was significant(F(1, 80)= 12.17, p < 0.001), whereas the interaction effect of empathic concern and ad type was not significant(F(1, 80)=2.26, p > 0.10). These results support H1b. The second study aims to investigate the underdog effect stemming from empathic concern with respect to consumer preference for underdog brands in the marketplace, with the following hypotheses: H2a: Empathic concern has a positive effect on the preference for underdog brands, but the effect is mediated by sympathetic response to the minority in society. H2b: Materialism has a negative effect on the preference for underdog brands, but the effect is mediated by brand loyalty in terms of repetitive purchase tendency. We conducted a field survey for 166 Korean adult consumers who were enrolled at the evening MBA programs of two private universities in Seoul. Hypotheses were tested with a structural equation modeling as is shown in Figure 2. The structural model fits at a moderate level of acceptance in overall such as χ2 of 50.9(d.f.=49, p=0.40), GFI of 0.95, AGFI of 0.93, and RMSR of 0.08, which is slightly higher than the traditional level of acceptance. Given this structural model, each hypothesis was tested with the path coefficient using one-tailed t-test. Empathic concern had a positive relationship with the sympathetic response to the minority in the society(β=0.45, t=2.78, p < 0.01), which in turn had a positive relationship with the preference for the underdog brand(β=0.19, t=1.98, p < 0.05). When the direct path from empathic concern to the preference for the underdog brand was added to the model, the goodness-of-fit of the model was not improved(Δχ2 =-0.16, d.f.=1, ns) nor the coefficient was significant(t=0.41, ns). This results provide support for H2a, predicting the indirect effect of empathic concern on the preference for the underdog brand. The path coefficient between materialism and loyalty in terms of repetitive purchase was 0.47(t=3.96, p<0.01), but the one between loyalty and preference for the underdog brand was not significant(β=-0.09, t=0.91, ns). Thus, H2b is not supported. On the other hand, the direct effect of materialism on the preference for the underdog brand was significant in the negative direction(β=-0.22, t=1.81, p < 0.05).

성공 혹은 실패한 구매경험이 관련성 없는 제품의 후속 구매결정에 미치는 영향

이세나(Sena Lee),정지윤(Jeeyoon Jeong),김은혜(Eun Hye Kime),전선규(Sunkyu Jun) 한국경영학회 2017 經營學硏究 Vol.46 No.4

The present study investigates the influence of recollecting a successful versus an unsuccessful purchase experience on consumer self-efficacy and willingness-to-pay amount in the subsequent purchase decision for an unrelated product. The present study suggests that activation of the temporal-self during the recollection of purchase experience serves as a moderator that determines the spill-over effect of (un)successful purchase experience on self-efficacy for the subsequent purchase and willingness-to-pay amount for the chosen alternative in the subsequent purchase decision across purchase domains. Specifically, it is predicted that the recollection of successful (vs. unsuccessful) purchase experience improves self-efficacy for the subsequent purchase decision and increases willingness-to-pay amount for the chosen alternative in the subsequent decision, particularly when the future-self (vs. past-self) is activated and thus is used as a referent for processing the purchase experience. Study one was conducted for testing H1 suggesting the moderating effect of the activation of future-self (vs. activation of past-self vs. non-activation of temporal-self) for the spill-over effect of recollecting a successful (vs. an unsuccessful) purchase experience on self-efficacy in the subsequent purchase decision for an unrelated product. Study two was conducted for testing H2 suggesting the moderating effect of the activation of future-self (vs. activation of past-self) on the willingness-to-pay amount for the chosen alternative in the subsequent purchase decision for an unrelated service. Study one showed that the participants who recollected successful (vs. unsuccessful) purchase experiences reported higher levels of self-efficacy in the subsequent purchase decision for a laundry detergent when they activated future-selves (vs. when they activated past-selves or when they did not activate the temporal-self) during the recollection of purchase experience. Study two showed that the participants who recollected successful (vs. unsuccessful) purchase experiences reported a greater amount of willingnessto- pay for the alternative they chose in the subsequent purchase decision for a prix fix menu when they activated future-selves (vs. when they activated past-selves).

Heritage Associations of the Corporate Brand: Compensating Effect for Weakness in Brand Credibility

Hyerin Ryu(류혜린),Jaewook Jo(조재욱),Hwa-jin Lee(이화진),Sunkyu Jun(전선규) 한국경영학회 2021 經營學硏究 Vol.50 No.5

Firms increasingly employ heritage-related marketing activities to associate heritage to an individual or a corporate brand to enhance consumer support. However, establishing the heritage association demands much effort and costs despite the uncertainty of success, opening up when and how the benefits of heritage association are augmented. We suggest that the effect of heritage association on the consumer’s purchase behavior is more significant for a brand suffering a lower level of credibility. In a study conducted in the Korean context, we found that the effect of heritage association compensated for low brand credibility in increasing purchase intention. In another study conducted in the American context, we replicated the previous findings. Further, the compensatory effect of heritage association was indirect through the consumer’s self-identification with the corporate brand associated with heritage.

EVOLUTION OF TRUST IN EXCHANGE RELATIONSHIP

全仙圭 弘益大學校 經營硏究所 2005 경영연구 Vol.30 No.-