nach oben

Marketing Letters

Erschienen in:

01.03.2016

Speaking to the mind or the heart: effects of matching hedonic versus utilitarian arguments and products

verfasst von: Kristina Klein, Valentyna Melnyk

Erschienen in: Marketing Letters | Ausgabe 1/2016

Einloggen

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

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Message arguments influence beliefs about product benefits which influence overall product evaluations. Three studies show that matching hedonic versus utilitarian arguments and products enhance evaluations of utilitarian products, but not hedonic products. The results generalize across several argument manipulations and several product categories.

Vorheriger Artikel Assessing the enduring impact of influential papers

Nächster Artikel Death-related publicity as informational advertising: evidence from the music industry

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren

As quality perceptions differed between the two stimuli (M _hedonic = 4.64, M _utilitarian = 4.14; t[162] = −2.76, p < 0.01), we controlled for this difference in the ANOVA and used marginal means in the further analyses (Tukey’s HSD test).

Aaker, J. L., & Lee, A. Y. (2001). “I” seek pleasures and “we” avoid pains: the role of self-regulatory goals in information processing and persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 33–49.CrossRef

Ahluwalia, R., & Gürhan-Canli, Z. (2000). The effects of extensions on the family brand name: an accessibility-diagnosticity perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(3), 371–81.CrossRef

Baker, M. J., & Churchill, M. J., Jr. (1977). The impact of physically attractive models on advertising evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(4), 538–55.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), 1065–78.CrossRef

Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 752–56.CrossRef

Chandon, P., & Wansink, B. (2007). The biasing health halos of fast-food restaurant health claims: lower calorie estimates and higher side-dish consumption intentions. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(3), 301–14.CrossRef

Chernev, A. (2004). The goal-attribute compatibility in consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1&2), 141–50.CrossRef

Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V. (2008). Delight by design: the role of hedonic versus utilitarian benefits. Journal of Marketing, 72(3), 48–63.CrossRef

Dhar, R., & Wertenbroch, K. (2000). Consumer choice between hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(1), 60–71.CrossRef

Gill, T. (2008). Convergent products: what functionalities add more value to the base? Journal of Marketing, 72(2), 46–62.CrossRef

Goodstein, R. C. (1993). Category-based applications and extensions in advertising: motivating more extensive ad processing. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(1), 87–99.CrossRef

Gürhan-Canli, Z., & Maheswaran, D. (1998). The effects of extensions on brand name dilution and enhancement. Journal of Marketing Research, 35(4), 464–73.CrossRef

Hayes, A.F. (2012). PROCESS: a versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. White paper. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/

Heckler, S. E., & Childers, T. L. (1992). The role of expectancy and relevancy in memory for verbal and visual information: what is incongruency? Journal of Consumer Research, 18(4), 475–92.CrossRef

Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92–101.CrossRef

Homburg, C., Koschate, N., & Hoyer, W. D. (2006). The role of cognition and affect in the formation of customer satisfaction: a dynamic perspective. Journal of Marketing, 70(3), 21–31.CrossRef

Johar, J. S., & Sirgy, M. J. (1991). Value-expressive versus utilitarian advertising appeals: when and why to use which appeal. Journal of Advertising, 20(3), 23–33.CrossRef

Labroo, A. A., & Kim, S. (2009). The “instrumentality” heuristic: why metacognitive difficulty is desirable during goal pursuit. Psychological Science, 20(1), 127–34.CrossRef

Landwehr, J. R., Wentzel, D., & Herrmann, A. (2013). Product design for the long run: consumer responses to typical and atypical designs at different stages of exposure. Journal of Marketing, 77(5), 92–107.CrossRef

Lavine, H., & Snyder, M. (1996). Cognitive processing and the functional matching effect in persuasion: the mediating role of subjective perceptions of message quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32(6), 580–604.CrossRef

Lee, A. Y., & Labroo, A. A. (2004). The effect of conceptual and perceptual fluency on brand evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(2), 151–65.CrossRef

Lim, E. A. C., & Ang, S. H. (2008). Hedonic vs. utilitarian consumption: a cross-cultural perspective based on cultural conditioning. Journal of Business Research, 61(3), 225–32.CrossRef

MacInnis, D. J., & Jaworski, B. J. (1989). Information processing from advertisements: toward an integrative framework. Journal of Marketing, 53(4), 1–23.CrossRef

MacInnis, D. J., & Price, L. L. (1987). The role of in information processing: review and extensions. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 473–91.CrossRef

Maheswaran, D., Mackie, D. M., & Chaiken, S. (1992). Brand names as a heuristic cue: the effects of task importance and expectancy confirmation on consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(4), 317–36.CrossRef

Maio, G. R., & Haddock, G. (2007). Attitude change. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 565–86). New York: Guilford.

Melnyk, V., Klein, K., & Völckner, F. (2012). The double-edged sword of foreign brand names for companies from emerging countries. Journal of Marketing, 76(6), 21–37.CrossRef

Meyers-Levy, J., & Malaviya, P. (1999). Consumers’ processing of persuasive advertisements: an integrative framework of persuasion theories. Journal of Marketing, 63(4), 45–60.CrossRef

Meyers-Levy, J., & Tybout, A. M. (1989). Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(1), 39–54.CrossRef

Millar, M. J., & Millar, K. U. (1992). Attitude change as a function of attitude type and argument type. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(2), 217–28.CrossRef

Mittal, B. (1989). The role of affective choice mode in the consumer purchase of expressive products. Journal of Economic Psychology, 9(4), 499–524.CrossRef

Noseworthy, T. J., & Trudel, R. (2011). Looks interesting but what does it do? Evaluation of incongruent product form depends on positioning. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(6), 1008–19.CrossRef

Okada, E. M. (2005). Justification effects on consumer choice of hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(1), 43–55.CrossRef

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123–205.CrossRef

Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1998). Matching versus mismatching attitude functions: implications for scrutiny of persuasive message. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(3), 227–40.CrossRef

Rucker, D. D., & Petty, R. E. (2006). Increasing the effectiveness of communications to consumers: recommendations based on elaboration likelihood and attitude certainty perspectives. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 25(1), 39–52.CrossRef

Shavitt, S. (1990). The role of attitude objects in attitude functions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26(2), 124–48.CrossRef

Shavitt, S. (1992). Evidence for predicting the effectiveness of value expressive versus utilitarian appeals: a reply to Johar and Sirgy. Journal of Advertising, 21(2), 47–51.CrossRef

Shavitt, S., Lowrey, T. M., & Han, S. (1992). Attitude functions in advertising: the interactive role of products and self-monitoring. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(4), 337–64.CrossRef

Shiv, B., & Fedorikhin, A. (1999). Heart and mind in conflict: the interplay of affect and cognition in consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(3), 278–92.CrossRef

Sirgy, J. M. (1982). Self-concept in consumer behavior: a critical review. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 287–300.CrossRef

Sprotta, D. E., & Shimp, T. A. (2004). Using product sampling to augment the perceived quality of store brands. Journal of Retailing, 80(4), 305–15.CrossRef

Thompson, D. V., & Hamilton, R. W. (2006). The effects of information processing mode on consumers’ responses to comparative advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 530–40.CrossRef

Van Osselaer, S. M. J., & Janiszewski, C. (2012). A goal-based model of product evaluation and choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(2), 260–92.CrossRef

Van Osselaer, S. M. J., Ramanathan, S., Campbell, M. C., Cohen, J. B., Dale, J. K., Herr, P. M., Janiszewski, C., Kruglanski, A. W., Lee, A. Y., Read, S. J., Russo, J. E., & Tavassoli, N. T. (2005). Choice based on goals. Marketing Letters, 16(3/4), 335–46.CrossRef

Wang, J., & Lee, A. Y. (2006). The role of regulatory focus in preference construction. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(1), 28–38.CrossRef

Wheeler, S. C., Petty, R. E., & Bizer, G. Y. (2005). Self-schema matching and attitude change: situational and dispositional determinants of message elaboration. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 787–97.CrossRef

Wheeler, S. C., DeMarree, K. G., & Petty, R. E. (2008). A match made in the laboratory: persuasion and matches to primed traits and stereotypes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(4), 1035–47.CrossRef

Wilcox, K., Vallen, B., Block, L., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2009). Vicarious goal fulfillment: when the mere presence of a healthy option leads to an ironically indulgent decision. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(3), 380–93.CrossRef

Yeung, C. W. M., & Wyer, R. S., Jr. (2004). Affect, appraisal, and consumer judgment. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 412–24.CrossRef

Titel: Speaking to the mind or the heart: effects of matching hedonic versus utilitarian arguments and products
verfasst von: Kristina Klein
Valentyna Melnyk
Publikationsdatum: 01.03.2016
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Marketing Letters / Ausgabe 1/2016
Print ISSN: 0923-0645
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-059X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-014-9320-3

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

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

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2016

Death-related publicity as informational advertising: evidence from the music industry

“Top 10” reasons: When adding persuasive arguments reduces persuasion

The moderating role of construal level on the evaluation of emotional appeal vs. cognitive appeal advertisements

Brand-embedded interaction: a dynamic and personalized interaction for co-creation

Predicting new service adoption with conjoint analysis: external validity of BDM-based incentive-aligned and dual-response choice designs

Effects of personalized e-mail messages on privacy risk: Moderating roles of control and intimacy