속성 유사성이 제품 선택에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구

국문 초록 (Abstract)

소비자 선택모형(consumer choice models) 연구들과 소비자 심리학(consumer psychology) 연구들은 제품의 속성 유사성이 대안 선택에 영향을 미친다는 것을 보여주지만, 그 효과에 대해서는 상반된 결과를 주장한다. 소비자 선택 모형 연구들은 한 대안이 다른 대안들과 속성이 유사할수록, 대안의 선택 확률은 낮아진다는 것을 보여준다. 반면에, 소비자 심리학 연구들은 대안의 속성 유사성이 제품에 대한 선호도를 높인다고 제시한다. 즉, 기존의 문헌은 속성 유사성이 대안의 선택확률에 긍정적, 부정적 영향을 모두 끼칠 수 있다는 것을 제시하고 있다. 본 연구는 이러한 두 개의 다른 연구 흐름을 통합하여, 유사성이 소비자 선택에 미치는 긍정적/부정적 영향은 대안에 대한 소비자의 친숙도에 의해 결정된다는 것을 보여준다. 본 연구는 소비자들이 제품에 친숙할 경우에는 속성 유사성이 대안 선택에 부정적인 영향을 미치나, 소비자들이 제품에 친숙하지 않을 경우에는 속성 유사성이 대안 선택에 긍정적인 영향을 미칠 수 있다는 가설을 제시하였다. 본 연구에서는 소비자의 대안 선택에 관한 이산선택(discrete conjoint choice)자료를 다변량로짓(multinomial logit)모형을 사용하여 가설검증을 실시하였으며, 연구의 결과는 본 연구의 가설을 지지하였다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The current research examines the influence of the attribute similarity among competing brands on consumer`s choice. Attribute similarity is defined as the extent to which a brand has similar with other brands in terms of the attribute levels. Both consumer choice models and consumer behavior studies show that brand preference is affected by attribute similarity. However, the two streams of research emphasize different aspects of the attribute similarity effects. Empirical consumer choice models (e.g., nested logit models and logit models allowing for brand similarity) indicate that the probability that choice probability of a brand decreases as the brand is more similar to others in the choice set due to increased competition and substitutability with other similar brands, resulting in a negative effect on choice (e.g., Manrai 1995). On the contrary, consumer behavior theories suggest that a brand that is more similar to others is preferred to the brands that are less similar (e.g., Loken and Ward 1990). When a brand is more similar to others in attribute levels, the brand is perceived as being a typical brand, and people tend to prefer typical brands to less typical brands. This research attempts to integrate the two streams of research and presents that the influence of attribute similarity on choice is moderated by product familiarity which is defined as the extent to which a set of products are more familiar and easy to evaluate. In general, attribute similarity increases competition and substitutability, resulting in decreased choice probability. However, it is expected that influence will be more positive when products are less familiar, because attribute similarity is more likely to be used as an extrinsic cue. On the other hand, when the product is more familiar, the negative influence of attribute similarity on choice will be more prominent since attribute similarity does not play a role as a decision heuristic. Thus, it is predicted that when products are more familiar, consumers tend to prefer a brand that is more similar to others, whereas when products are less familiar, consumers prefer a more unique alternative. We test the moderating effect of product familiarity on the influence of similarity on choice by analyzing a set of discrete conjoint choice data. The data set includes consumer choice of a film camera out of three familiar products (i.e., 35mm cameras) and three less familiar products (i.e., APS cameras). The data were considered to be appropriate for the study because 35mm cameras are more familiar to consumers than are APS cameras, which were only newly introduced when the main study was conducted. A pretest also supported our conjecture regarding product familiarity showing that 35mm cameras were more familiar than were APS cameras. Thus, it is predicted that the effect on choice of attribute similarity is moderated by the type of camera: Attribute similarity will exert a negative effect on the selection of the 35mm camera, whereas attribute similarity will exert a positive influence on the selection of the APS camera. We tested the influence of attribute similarity by four different models that differ in the manner in which attribute similarity affects choice: The base model, the common attribute model, the interaction model, and the separate similarity model. The Base model assumes that the utility of brand is determined only by the level of attributes and the price. Thus, the model does not incorporate the influence of attribute similarity on choice. The common similarity model assumes that the attribute similarity of a brand with other alternatives in the choice set also influences choice. The Interaction Model includes the interaction between product type and attribute similarity that captures the differential influence of similarity on choice. It is predicted that the interaction term coefficient will be significantly positive, indicating that the influence of attribute similarity on choice is

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 Nedungadi, Prakash, "The Prototypicality of Brands: Relationships with Brand Awareness, Preference and Usage, in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 12" Association for Consumer Research 498-503, 1985
• 2 Rao, Akshay A., "The Moderating Effect of Prior Knowledge on Cue Utilization in Product Evaluations" 15 : 253-263, 1988
• 3 Campbell, Margaret C., "The Moderating Effect of Perceived Risk on Consumers’ Evaluation of Product Incongruity: Preference for the Norm" 28 : 439-449, 2001
• 4 Veryzer, Robert W., Jr., "The Influence of Unity and Prototypicality on Aesthetic Responses to New Product Designs" 24 : 374-394, 1998
• 5 Ward, James, "The Generality of Typicality Effects on Preference and Comparison: An Exploratory Test, in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 15" Association for Consumer Research 55-61, 1988
• 6 Saunders, Don, "The Family Resemblance Approach to Understanding Categorization of Products: measurement Problems, Alternative Solutions, and Their assessment, in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 18" Association for Consumer Research 84-89, 1991
• 7 Petty, Richard E., "The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion, in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 19" Academic Press 123-205, 1986
• 8 Sujan, Mita, "The Effects of Brand Positioning Strategies on Consumers’ Brand and Category Perceptions: Some Insights from Schema Research" 26 : 454-467, 1989
• 9 Ratneshwar, S., "Substitution in Use and the Role of Usage context in Product Category Structures" 28 : 281-295, 1991
• 10 Nosofsky, Robert M., "Similarity, Frequency, and Category Representations" 14 (14): 54-65, 1988
• 11 Meyers-Levy, Joan, "Schema Congruity as a Basis for Product Evaluation" 16 : 39-54, 1989
• 12 Martindale, Colin, "Relationship of Preference Judgments to Typicality, Novelty, and Mere Exposure" 6 (6): 79-96, 1988
• 13 Martindale, Colin, "Priming, Prototypicality, and Preference" 14 (14): 661-670, 1988
• 14 Tversky, Amos, "Preference Trees" 86 (86): 542-573, 1979
• 15 Currim, Imran S., "Predictive Testing of Consumer Choice Models not Subject to Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives" 19 : 208-222, 1982
• 16 Kannan, P. K., "Modeling and Testing Structured Markets: A Nested Logit Approach" 10 (10): 58-82, 1991
• 17 Manrai, Ajay K., "Mathematical-Models of Brand Choice Behavior" 82 (82): 1-17, 1995
• 18 Burnkrant, Robert E., "Information and Normative Social Influence in Buyer Behavior" 2 : 206-215, 1975
• 19 Chaiken, Shelly, "Heuristic versus Systematic Information Processing and the Use of Source versus Message Cues in Persuasion" 39 (39): 752-766, 1980
• 20 Tversky, Amos, "Features of Similarity" 84 (84): 327-352, 1977
• 21 Rosch, Eleanor, "Family resemblances: Studies in the Internal Structure of Categories" 7 : 573-603, 1975
• 22 Winer, Russell S., "Experimentation in the 21st Century: The Importance of External Validity" 27 (27): 349-358, 1999
• 23 Venkatesan, M., "Experimental Study of Consumer Behavior, Conformity and Independence" 3 : 384-387, 1966
• 24 Chintagunta, Pradeep K., "Estimating a Multinomial Probit Model of Brand Choice Using the Method of Simulated Moments" 11 (11): 386-407, 1992
• 25 Manrai, Ajay K., "Eliminationby-Cutoffs" 8 (8): 133-152, 1989
• 26 Gensch, Dennis H., "Elimination by Dimensions" 29 : 417-429, 1992
• 27 Tversky, Amos, "Elimination by Aspects: A Theory and Choice" 79 (79): 281-299, 1972
• 28 Allenby, Greg M., "Distinguishing Likelihoods, Loss Functions, and Heterogeneity in the Evaluation of Marketing Models" 20 : 44-59, 2002
• 29 Alba, Joseph W., "Dimensions of Consumer Expertise" 13 : 411-454, 1987
• 30 Hauser, John R., "Defensive Marketing Strategies" 2 (2): 319-360, 1983
• 31 Meyer, Robert J., "Context-Induced Parameter Instability in a Disaggregate-Stochastic Model of Store Choice" 19 : 39-54, 1982
• 32 Carpenter, Gregory S., "Consumer Preference Formation and Pioneering Advantage" 26 : 285-298, 1989
• 33 Sujan, Mita, "Consumer Knowledge: Effects of Evaluation Strategies Mediating Consumer Judgment" 12 : 31-46, 1985
• 34 Schaefer, Anja, "Consumer Knowledge and Country of Origin Effects" 31 (31): 56-72, 1997
• 35 Park, C. Whan, "Consumer Knowledge Assessment" 21 : 71-82, 1994
• 36 McFadden, Daniel, "Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior, In Frontiers of Econometrics" Academic Press 105-142, 1974
• 37 Ratneshwar, S., "Comprehension’s Role in Persuasion: The Case of Moderating Effect on the Persuasive Impact of Source Cues" 18 : 52-62, 1991
• 38 Cattin, Philippe, "Commercial Use of Conjoint Analysis: A Survey" 46 : 44-53, 1982
• 39 Lefkoff-Hagius, Roxanne, "Characteristic, Beneficial, and Image Attributes in Consumer Judgment of Similarity and Preference" 20 : 100-110, 1993
• 40 Loken, Barbara, "Categorization Theory and Research in Consumer Psychology: Category Representation and Category-Based Inference, in Handbook of Consumer Psychology" Erlbaum 133-163, 2008
• 41 Fader, Peter S., "An Elimination by Aspect Model of Consumer Response to Promotion Calibrated on UPC Scanner Data" 27 : 322-332, 1990
• 42 Loken, Barbara, "Alternative Approaches to Understanding the Determinants of Typicality" 17 : 111-126, 1990
• 43 Bijmolt, Tammo H. A., "A Multidimensional Scaling Model Accommodating differential Stimulus Familiarity" 33 (33): 41-63, 1998
• 44 Batsell, Richard R., "A Multiattribute Extension of the Luce Model Which Simultaneously Scales Utility and Substitutability, in The Effect of Item Similarity on Choice Probabilities" Fuqua School of Business, Duke University 4-23, 1982
• 45 Gilbride, Timothy J., "A Choice Model with Conjunctive, Disjunctive, and Compensatory Screening Rules" 23 (23): 391-406, 2004
• 46 Fishbein, Martin, "A Behavioral Theory Approach to the Relationship between Beliefs about an Object and the Attitude Toward the Object, in Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement" Wiley 389-400, 1967