| 摘要(英) |
Holding special price events is currently adopted by many retailers, but most of them require a certain quantity of purchases to enjoy special discounts. Research on a small number of special discount quantity is rarely conducted. Therefore, this paper decided to explore how a special discount quantity that is lower than the usual purchase quantity of consumers will af-fect the consumers through the anchoring effect. It is hoped that this paper can provide merchants with more information that they have not paid attention to when setting sales ac-tivities in the past. This phenomenon also changes the direction of thinking when making marketing plans. Sometimes just a little quantity of special discount can achieve a higher sales figure without spending too much sales cost.
This paper takes the quantity of special discount (high/low) and discount range (high/low) as independent variables, and adds the consumer’s acceptable range (wide/narrow), the number of anchor points (more/less), the degree of need for cognition (relatively high/relatively low), and product category (tangible /Service) as an moderating variables, observe how they affect the final purchase quantity of consumers.
The research results of this paper found that when consumers encounter a special dis-count quantity that is acceptable but lower than their originally expected purchase quantity, they will indeed be dragged down and reduce their purchase quantity, but this phenomenon will be eliminated when the discount range is increased. This dragging-down effect is more likely to occur when consumers have high degree of need for cognition and when the con-sumer products are service products. Therefore, retailers should take corresponding measures in response to these situations to avoid the dragging-down effect. |
| 參考文獻 |
1.Aggarwal, P., Jun, S. Y., & Huh, J. H. (2011). Scarcity messages: A consumer competition perspective. Journal of Advertising, 40(3), 19–30.
2.Ahlering, R. F., & Parker, L. D. (1989). Need for cognition as a moderator of the primacy effect. Journal of 3.Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Per-sonality and Social Psychology, 4.Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of 5.Cohen, A. R., Stotland, E., & Wolfe, D. M. (1955). An experimental investiga-tion of need for cognition. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(2), 291–294.
• Darke, P. R., Freedman, J. L., & Chaiken, S. (1995). Percentage discounts, ini-tial price, and bargain hunting: A heuristic-systematic approach to price search behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(5), 580–586.
6.Della Bitta, A. J., Monroe, K. B., & McGinnis, J. M. (1981). Consumer percep-tions of comparative price advertisements. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(4), 416–427.
7.Nusair, K., Yoon, H. J., Naipaul, S., & Parsa, H. G. (2010). Effect of price dis-count frames and levels on consumers′ perceptions in low-end service industries. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22(6), 814-835.
• Polyorat, K., & Alden, D. L. (2005). Self-Construal and Need-for-Cognition Effects on Brand Attitudes and Purchase Intentions in Response to Compara-tive Advertising 8.Schweickart, O., Tam, C., & Brown, N. R. (2021). When bad is good: How evaluative judgments eliminate the standard anchoring effect. Canadian Jour-nal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie expéri-mentale, 9.Zhang, S., Sussman, A. B. & Hsee, C. K. (2021). A Dragging-Down Effect: Consumer Decisions in Response to Price Increases. Journal of Consumer Re-search, 47(5), 772–786. |
[Endnote RIS 格式]
[相關文章]
[文章引用]
[完整記錄]
[館藏目錄]
至系統瀏覽論文 (2026-7-31以後開放)
plurk
funp
live
udn
HD
myshare
netvibes
friend
youpush
delicious
baidu
Google bookmarks
del.icio.us
hemidemi
facebook
twitter
google
reddit