Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Marketing Letters 2/2016

01.06.2016

The influence of hedonic versus utilitarian consumption situations on the compromise effect

verfasst von: Sungeun (Ange) Kim, Jungkeun Kim

Erschienen in: Marketing Letters | Ausgabe 2/2016

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This article reports the influence of two specific consumption situations—hedonic and utilitarian—on the magnitude of the compromise effect. Based on the literatures of different valuation processes (valuation by calculation vs. valuation by feeling) and hedonic versus utilitarian consumption, the authors suggest that the compromise effect will be stronger under the utilitarian (vs. hedonic) consumption situation due to different valuation processes. Three experimental studies were conducted, and the results have supported the prediction. In addition, the authors successfully excluded alternative explanations such as differences in willingness to pay, justification, and attribute importance. The authors concluded with a discussion of the theoretical and managerial implication of this research.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
Three participants did not answer this question. However, other results were not changed by the inclusion/exclusion of three cases.
 
2
The authors thank anonymous reviewers for suggesting this alternative explanation.
 
3
This strategy was based on a similar procedure of Lee et al. (2008) and Kim et al. (2012), based on Spencer et al. (2005). Specifically, if the compromise effect under utilitarian consumption is mediated by different types of valuation, direct manipulation of different types of valuation should influence the magnitude of the compromise effect. If different types of valuation are not related to the compromise effect, then direct manipulation of different types of valuation should have no impact on the compromise effect.
 
4
Five participants did not answer this question. However, other results were not changed by the inclusion/exclusion of three cases.
 
5
The authors thank anonymous reviewers for suggesting these alternative explanations.
 
6
We do not argue that the different valuation processes are the only underlying mechanism for the strong compromise effect. Actually, part of the results of our study could be explained by other mechanisms, such as a self-regulatory focus. For example, the marginally significant compromise effect in the printer condition and valuation-by-feeling condition in study 2 could be driven by other mechanisms. However, we want to emphasize that the different valuation processes is one underlying mechanism for explaining all three empirical studies.
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Batra, R., & Ahtola, O. (1990). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes. Marketing Letters, 2(2), 159–170.CrossRef Batra, R., & Ahtola, O. (1990). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes. Marketing Letters, 2(2), 159–170.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Botti, S., & McGill, A. L. (2011). The locus of choice: personal causality and satisfaction with hedonic and utilitarian decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(6), 1065–1078.CrossRef Botti, S., & McGill, A. L. (2011). The locus of choice: personal causality and satisfaction with hedonic and utilitarian decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(6), 1065–1078.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Chernev, A. (2004). Goal–attribute compatibility in consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1), 141–150.CrossRef Chernev, A. (2004). Goal–attribute compatibility in consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1), 141–150.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Chernev, A. (2005). Context effects without a context: attribute balance as a reason for choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(2), 213–223.CrossRef Chernev, A. (2005). Context effects without a context: attribute balance as a reason for choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(2), 213–223.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Devouges, W. H., Johnson, F. R., Dunford, R. W., Boyle, K. J., Hudson, S. P., & Wilson, K. N. (1992). Measuring nonuse damages using contingent valuation: an experimental evaluation of accuracy. Monograph 92–01, NC: Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park Devouges, W. H., Johnson, F. R., Dunford, R. W., Boyle, K. J., Hudson, S. P., & Wilson, K. N. (1992). Measuring nonuse damages using contingent valuation: an experimental evaluation of accuracy. Monograph 92–01, NC: Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park
Zurück zum Zitat Dhar, R., & Nowlis, S. M. (1999). The effect of time pressure on consumer choice deferral. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(4), 369–384.CrossRef Dhar, R., & Nowlis, S. M. (1999). The effect of time pressure on consumer choice deferral. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(4), 369–384.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dhar, R., & Simonson, I. (2003). The effect of forced choice on choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(2), 146–160.CrossRef Dhar, R., & Simonson, I. (2003). The effect of forced choice on choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(2), 146–160.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dhar, R., Nowlis, S. M., & Sherman, S. J. (2000). Trying hard or hardly trying: an analysis of context effects in choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(4), 189–200.CrossRef Dhar, R., Nowlis, S. M., & Sherman, S. J. (2000). Trying hard or hardly trying: an analysis of context effects in choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(4), 189–200.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92–101.CrossRef Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92–101.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hsee, C. K., & Rottenstreich, Y. (2004). Music, pandas, and muggers: on the affective psychology of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology-General, 133(1), 23–30.CrossRef Hsee, C. K., & Rottenstreich, Y. (2004). Music, pandas, and muggers: on the affective psychology of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology-General, 133(1), 23–30.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kahneman, D., & Ritov, I. (1999). Economic preferences or attitude expressions?: an analysis of dollar responses to public issues. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19(1/3), 203–235.CrossRef Kahneman, D., & Ritov, I. (1999). Economic preferences or attitude expressions?: an analysis of dollar responses to public issues. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19(1/3), 203–235.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Khan, U., & Dhar, R. (2010). Price-framing effects on the purchase of hedonic and utilitarian bundles. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(6), 1090–1099.CrossRef Khan, U., & Dhar, R. (2010). Price-framing effects on the purchase of hedonic and utilitarian bundles. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(6), 1090–1099.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kim, J., Kim, J., & Park, J. (2012). Effects of cognitive resource availability on consumer decisions involving counterfeit products: the role of perceived justification. Marketing Letters, 23(3), 869–881.CrossRef Kim, J., Kim, J., & Park, J. (2012). Effects of cognitive resource availability on consumer decisions involving counterfeit products: the role of perceived justification. Marketing Letters, 23(3), 869–881.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kivetz, R., & Simonson, I. (2002a). Earning the right to indulge: effort as a determinant of customer preferences toward frequency program rewards. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(2), 155–170.CrossRef Kivetz, R., & Simonson, I. (2002a). Earning the right to indulge: effort as a determinant of customer preferences toward frequency program rewards. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(2), 155–170.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kivetz, R., & Simonson, I. (2002b). Self-control for the righteous: toward a theory of precommitment to indulgence. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(2), 199–217.CrossRef Kivetz, R., & Simonson, I. (2002b). Self-control for the righteous: toward a theory of precommitment to indulgence. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(2), 199–217.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Larson, J. S., & Billeter, D. M. (2013). Consumer behavior in “equilibrium”: how experiencing physical balance increases compromise choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 50(4), 535–547.CrossRef Larson, J. S., & Billeter, D. M. (2013). Consumer behavior in “equilibrium”: how experiencing physical balance increases compromise choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 50(4), 535–547.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Lee, H. J., Park, J., Lee, J. Y., & Wyer, R. S., Jr. (2008). Disposition effects and underlying mechanisms in e-trading of stocks. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(3), 362–378.CrossRef Lee, H. J., Park, J., Lee, J. Y., & Wyer, R. S., Jr. (2008). Disposition effects and underlying mechanisms in e-trading of stocks. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(3), 362–378.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Levav, J., Kivetz, R., & Cho, C. K. (2010). Motivational compatibility and choice conflict. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 429–442.CrossRef Levav, J., Kivetz, R., & Cho, C. K. (2010). Motivational compatibility and choice conflict. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(3), 429–442.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Lin, C. H., Sun, Y. C., Chuang, S. C., & Su, H. J. (2008). Time pressure and the compromise and attraction effects in choice. Advances in Consumer Research, 35(3), 348–352. Lin, C. H., Sun, Y. C., Chuang, S. C., & Su, H. J. (2008). Time pressure and the compromise and attraction effects in choice. Advances in Consumer Research, 35(3), 348–352.
Zurück zum Zitat Mourali, M., Böckenholt, U., & Laroche, M. (2007). Compromise and attraction effects under prevention and promotion motivations. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(2), 234–247.CrossRef Mourali, M., Böckenholt, U., & Laroche, M. (2007). Compromise and attraction effects under prevention and promotion motivations. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(2), 234–247.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Okada, E. M. (2005). Justification effects on consumer choice of hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(1), 43–53.CrossRef Okada, E. M. (2005). Justification effects on consumer choice of hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(1), 43–53.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Pham, M. (1998). Representativeness, relevance, and the use of feelings in decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(2), 144–159.CrossRef Pham, M. (1998). Representativeness, relevance, and the use of feelings in decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(2), 144–159.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Pocheptsova, A., Amir, O., Dhar, R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2009). Deciding without resources: psychological depletion and choice in context. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(3), 344–355.CrossRef Pocheptsova, A., Amir, O., Dhar, R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2009). Deciding without resources: psychological depletion and choice in context. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(3), 344–355.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Roy, R., & Ng, S. (2012). Regulatory focus and preference reversal between hedonic and utilitarian consumption. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 11(1), 81–88.CrossRef Roy, R., & Ng, S. (2012). Regulatory focus and preference reversal between hedonic and utilitarian consumption. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 11(1), 81–88.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Simonson, I. (1989). Choice based on reasons: the case of attraction and compromise effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(2), 158–174.CrossRef Simonson, I. (1989). Choice based on reasons: the case of attraction and compromise effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(2), 158–174.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Simonson, I., & Nowlis, S. M. (2000). The role of explanations and need for uniqueness in consumer decision making: unconventional choices based on reasons. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(1), 49–68.CrossRef Simonson, I., & Nowlis, S. M. (2000). The role of explanations and need for uniqueness in consumer decision making: unconventional choices based on reasons. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(1), 49–68.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Simonson, I., & Tversky, A. (1992). Choice in context: tradeoffs contrast and extremeness aversion. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(3), 281–295.CrossRef Simonson, I., & Tversky, A. (1992). Choice in context: tradeoffs contrast and extremeness aversion. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(3), 281–295.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Spencer, S., Zanna, M., & Fong, G. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 845–851.CrossRef Spencer, S., Zanna, M., & Fong, G. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 845–851.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Strahilevitz, M., & Myers, J. (1998). Donations to charity as purchase incentives: how well they work may depend on what you are trying to sell. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 434–446.CrossRef Strahilevitz, M., & Myers, J. (1998). Donations to charity as purchase incentives: how well they work may depend on what you are trying to sell. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 434–446.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310–320. Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310–320.
Metadaten
Titel
The influence of hedonic versus utilitarian consumption situations on the compromise effect
verfasst von
Sungeun (Ange) Kim
Jungkeun Kim
Publikationsdatum
01.06.2016
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Marketing Letters / Ausgabe 2/2016
Print ISSN: 0923-0645
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-059X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-014-9331-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2016

Marketing Letters 2/2016 Zur Ausgabe