4.2 Article

Decision-contextual and individual influences on scarcity effects

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MARKETING
卷 47, 期 8, 页码 1314-1332

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LIMITED
DOI: 10.1108/03090561311324345

关键词

Scarcity effects; Utilitarian and hedonic products; Public versus private consumption; Self-monitoring; Demand management; Product planning; Buying behaviour

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose - This study aims to examine the relative effectiveness of demand-related and supply-related explanations of the scarcity of a product, and specifically the extent to which decision context and individual factors moderate purchase intention in response to those explanations. Design/methodology/approach - The first of two formal experiments examines the effects of the two kinds of scarcity on participants' purchase intentions with respect to utilitarian and hedonic product types. The second tests for self-monitoring differences in participants' relative susceptibility to scenarios characterizing scarcity as either demand-generated or supply-generated, when their decisions are either private or subject to third-party scrutiny. Findings - Experiment 1 shows that participants shopping for a utilitarian product are more inclined to respond positively to what they understand to be demand-generated scarcity, and less inclined to do so if the scarcity was attributed to limited supply; whereas the converse holds true for a hedonic product. Experiment 2 shows that for high self-monitors, increased purchase intention was the outcome of matching the alleged reason for scarcity to the demands of the decision context; low self-monitors were ready to consider demand-scarce products regardless of whether they knew that their consumption decisions would be subject to third-party scrutiny or private. Originality/value - The paper identifies contextual and individual factors that explain and predict the extent to which one type of scarcity appeal may be more effective than another in influencing consumers' purchasing decisions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据