- Log In/Sign Up
- P-ISSN1738-3110
- E-ISSN2093-7717
- SCOPUS, ESCI
ISSN : 1738-3110
Effect of Perceived Risk and Psychological Distance on Gift Purchase
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of perceived risk and psychological distance on purchase intention when purchasing a gift. It focuses on social distances and temporal distances, and aims to identify the interactions between these psychological distances and perceived risk. Data were collected through experiments. Research design, data and methodology: The experiment was carried out through the design of 2 (perceived risk: high/low) × 2 (social distance: far / near) × 2 (temporal distance: far / near) between-subjects design. Participants were 241 undergraduates from two universities in Chungnam and Gangwon, and randomly assigned to one of eight groups. Results: It was confirmed that there is a difference in purchase intention according to the risk perceived by consumers when purchasing a gift. In particular, the difference in purchase intention based on the risk perceived by the buyer was found to be greater as the social distance between the gift giver and the recipient is shorter. In addition, it was confirmed that the intention to purchase a gift was simultaneously influenced by three factors: social distance, perceived risk, and time remaining to purchase a gift. In other words, when both temporal distance and social distance were short, the difference in purchase intention according to perceived risk was greatest. Conclusions: The purpose of this study was to examine how the relationship between perceived risk and purchase intention when purchasing a gift varies with psychological distance. This study found that the closer the relationship between the gift purchaser and the beneficiary and the shorter the time remaining before the gift purchase, the greater the difference in the willingness to purchase due to the perceptual risk. In practice, the results of this study can be used to establish sales promotion strategies for various gift products. Above all, the closer the relationship between the gift buyer and the person receiving the gift, the more differentially there should be a guarantee program that can reduce or eliminate the risk perceived by the buyer. There is also a need to use step-by-step product recommendation programs that can reduce perceptual risk depending on the time remaining until a particular season, such as graduation or Christmas.
- keywords
- Gift Purchase, Perceived Risk, Psychological Distance, Social Distance, Temporal Distance
Reference
Bauer, R. (1967). Consumer behavior as risk taking, In D. F. Cox (ed.), Risk taking and information handling in consumer behavior (pp.23-33). Boston, MA: Graduated School of Business Administration, Harvard University.
Beisswanger, A. H., Stone, E. R., Hupp, J. M., & Allgaier, L.(2003). Risk taking in relationships: differences in deciding for oneself versus for a friend. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25(2), 121-135.
Belk, R. W. (1993). Gift giving as agapic Love: An alternative to the exchange paradigm based on dating experiences. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(12), 393-417.
Beneke, J., Greene, A., Lok, I., & Mallett, K. (2012). The influence of perceived risk on purchase intent: the case of premium grocery private label brands in south Africa. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 21(1), 4-14.
Chandran, S., & Menon, G. (2004). When a day means more than a year: Effects of temporal framing on judgments of health risk. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 375-389.
Choi, N. H. (2018). The effects of types of envy and self construal level on indulgence. International Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 9(5), 73-81.
Choi, N. H., & Chen, F. (2020). The effects of goal orientation consciousness versus unconsciousness on consumers‘ choice tendency. International Journal of Industrial Distribution &Business, 11(1), 7-17.
Crowe, E., & Higgins, E. T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: promotion and prevention in decisionmaking. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(2), 117-132.
D'Souza, C. (2003). An inference of gift‐giving within Asian business culture. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 15(1/2), 27-38.
Dowling, G., & Stalein, S. (1994). A model of perceived risk and intended risk-handling activity. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 119-134.
Flynn, F. J., & Adams, G. S. (2009). Money can‘t buy love:Asymmetric beliefs about gift price and feelings of appreciation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(2), 404-409.
Gino, F., & Flynn, F. J. (2011). Give them what they want: The benefits of explicitness in gift exchange. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(5), 915-922.
Han, S. S. (2019). The influence of omni-channel propensity and regulatory focus on consideration set formation. International Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 10(5), 49-58.
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280-1300.
Hooda, A., & Ankur. (2018). Acceptance of social media as a marketing tool: a quantitative study. Journal of Business Economics and Environmental Studies, 8(3), 5-12.
Kim, K., Zhang. M., & Li. X. (2008). Effects of temporal and social distance on consumer evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(4), 706-713.
Kim, M. J., & Kim, E. H. (2017). Differences in perceived risk and product attitudes: focus on Korea and Thailand consumers. International Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 18(6), 41-49.
Kim, P. J., & Lee, J. Y. (2016). A study on the effects of perceived quality on whitening cosmetics‘ satisfaction and repurchase:focused on university student. Journal of Business Economics and Environmental Studies, 6(2), 15-22.
Laroche, M., McDougall, G. H., Bergeron, J., & Yang, Z. (2004). Exploring how intangibility affects perceived risk. Journal of Service Research, 6(4), 373-389.
Lermer, E., Streicher, B., Sachs, R., Raue, M., & Frey, D. (2015). The effect of construal level on risk-taking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(1), 99-109.
Nguyen, P. N. D., Nguyen, V. T., & Vo, N. N. T. (2019). Key determinants of repurchase intention toward organic cosmetics. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 6(3), 205-214.
Park, A. J. (2019). A study on the structural relationship between quality of medical service, perceived risk, reputation and customer satisfaction in small and medium hospitals. International Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 10(4), 67-76.
Parsons, A. (2002). Brand choice in gift‐giving: recipient influence. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 11(4), 237-249.
Polman, E. (2012). Effects of self-other decision making on regulatory focus and choice overload. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(5), 980-993.
Ruth, J. A., Otnes, C. C., & Brunel, F. F. (1999). Gift receipt and the reformulation of interpersonal relationships. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(4), 385-402.
Sherry, J. F. (1983). Gift giving in anthropological perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 157-168.
Sherry, J. F., McGrath, M. A., & Levy, S. J. (1993). The dark side of the gift. Journal of Business Research, 28(3), 225-244.
Sthapit, A., Jo, G. Y., & Hwang, Y. Y. (2016). Construal levels and online shopping: antecedents of visits to and purchases from online retailers‘ websites. International Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 7(3), 19-25.
Tham, K. W., Dastane, O., Johari, Z., & Ismail, N. B. (2019). Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 6(4), 249-260.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440-463.
Trope, Y., Liberman, N, & Wakslak, C. (2007). Construal levels and psychological distance: effects on representation, prediction, evaluation, and behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 83–95.
Waldfogel, J. (1993). The deadweight loss of Christmas. American Economic Review, 83(5), 1328-1336.
Wooten, D. B. (2000). Qualitative steps toward an expanded model of anxiety in gift-giving. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(1), 84-95.
Zhao, M., & Xie, J. (2011). Effects of social and temporal distance on consumers' responses to peer recommendations. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(3), 486-496.
- Downloaded
- Viewed
- 0KCI Citations
- 0WOS Citations