바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

Effect of Art Infusion on Consumer Evaluation: Focusing on Product Types

Abstract

The objective of this research is to find out the effect of art infusion on the consumer's evaluation of the product with focus on art and design marketing which is receiving much attention both from the academic field and the industry. The product types were divided into utilitarian products(laptop air/conditioner) and hedonic products(fashion clothing/fashion bags), so the effects of art infusion on the esthetic evaluation and symbolic evaluation of the product design and the will to pay the price premium were examined, and how the effect of art infusion on each product type appears different according to the art familiarity (artist/art image) was investigated. As the result, art infusion drew a more favorable response from esthetic evaluation rather than symbolic evaluation, and the effects of art infusion appeared different according to product types. That is to say that the consumers showed a more positive design evaluation and they demonstrated a greater will to pay the higher price premium for utilitarian products rather than hedonic products. Also, as for the influence of art familiarity on the effects of art infusion by product type, the consumers with higher art familiarity made a more positive design evaluation, and it was found that there was a interactive effect depending on art familiarity and product type. When the art familiarity was low, the art infusion was found to increase the esthetic, symbolic evaluation and the will to pay the price premium more so in utilitarian products compared to hedonic products; however when the familiarity was high, the evaluations for the hedonic products were found to be more favorable.

keywords
art infusion, esthetic evaluation, symbolic evaluation, price premium, product type, art familiarity

Reference

1.

김인섭, 김은정 (1999). 가격 프리미엄과 지각된 품질평가간의 관계에 관한 연구. 산업경제연구, 12(6), 13-30.

2.

김유경 (2000). 브랜드 개성의 유형과 영향요인에 관한 연구. 광고연구, 49호, 29-53.

3.

김화동 (2003). TV 광고에서의 제품 및 상표 친숙도에 따른 정서적 광고태도 차이에 관한 연구. 한국광고홍보학보, 5(2), 7-27.

4.

박찬욱 (2001). 제품지식이 적은 소비자의 원산지 정보 및 광고모델 정보 활용전략. 마케팅연구, 16(2), 49-68.

5.

신수길 (1989). 디자인의 상징기능 고찰. 도예연구, 11, 30-36.

6.

안광호, 이건희 (2004). 소비자 - 기업 동일시가 소비자의 제품평가와 행위적 반응에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구. 마케팅연구, 19(4), 55-78.

7.

안광호, 임미화 (2008). 제품편익이 브랜드 애착과 브랜드 몰입에 미치는 영향: 제품유형과자기감시성의 조절적 효과. 소비자학 연구, 19(1), 169-189.

8.

윤지연 (2007). 아트마케팅이 소비자의 심리적, 행동적 반응에 끼치는 영향에 관한 연구: 순수예술 속성의 응용을 중심으로. 서울대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.

9.

이신화 (2007). Techart제품의 Halo Effect에 관한 연구: SAMSUNG, LG전자제품을 중심으로. 홍익대 산업미술대학원 석사학위논문.

10.

이유재, 이지영 (2004). 브랜드 동일시, 브랜드 감정, 브랜드 로열티의 관계에 관한 연구: 실용적 제품과 쾌락적 제품 간의 비교. 광고연구, 65, 101-125.

11.

이재국 (2001). 디자인 기능에 관한 재해석. 청예논총, 8집, 9-33.

12.

이학식, 최영진, 진선규 (2007). 소비자 만족/불만족 판단과정에서 인지적 반응과 감성적 반응의 효과: 제품성과에 대한 기능적 편익과 심리적 편익의 구분에 따른 연구. 마케팅연구, 22(2), 1-19.

13.

임세정 (2007). 브랜드 개성이 호의적 태도와 가격 프리미엄에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구: 아파트 브랜드를 중심으로. 경희대 경영대학원 석사학위논문.

14.

조선일보 (2008). 아트 마케팅 베스트 & 워스트. 2008.02.22.

15.

최병현 (2004). 프리미엄 제품으로 승부하라. LG주간경제, 766호, 24-29.

16.

최인혁, 박주영, 김은정 (2001). 디자인 전형성이 제품 디자인 평가에 미치는 효과. 소비자학연구, 12(3), 147-169.

17.

최혜미, 김나민, 이문규, 김해룡 (2007). 제품개성과 소비자 자아이미지의 상호일치성이 디자인 가치 및 제품애착에 미치는 영향. 대한경영학회, 20(1), 265-288.

18.

황혜정 (2007). 심리로 풀어보는 소비자행동. LG주간경제, 946호, 5-9.

19.

허원무, 이완수, 황용희, 황미진 (2006). 이동통신 서비스 고객의 충성도 제고를 위한 편익 및 결속관리전략. 광고연구, 70호, 229-255.

20.

홍경희 (2008). 사례분석을 통한 프리미엄 브랜드의 패키지디자인 차별화 방안 연구: 국내 제과시장을 중심으로. 한양대학교 산업경영디자인대학원 석사학위논문.

21.

Aaker, D. A., Batra, R., & Meyers, J. G. (1992). Advertising management. New Jersey: Prentice- Hall International.

22.

Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1987). Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(2), 411-454.

23.

Arched, L. B. (1974). Design awareness and planned creativity in industry. Ottawa, London: Office of Design, Design Council of Great Britain.

24.

Balzer, W. K., & Sulsky, L. M.. (1992). Halo and performance appraisal research: A critical examination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 975-985.

25.

Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surrounding on customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56(April), 57-71.

26.

Bloch, P. H. (1995). Seeking the ideal form: Product design and consumer responses. Journal of Marketing, 59(July), 16-29.

27.

Borja de Mozota, B. (2003). Design management: Using design to build brand value and corporate innovation. New York: Allworth Press.

28.

Buzzell, R. D., & Gale, B. T. (1987). The PIMS principles: Linking strategy to performance. New York: The Free Press.

29.

Calder, B., & Stemthal, B. (1980). Television commercial wearout: An information processing view. Journal of Marketing Research. 16(May), 173-86.

30.

Chaudhuri, A., & Holbrook, M. B. (2001). The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: The role of brand loyalty. Journal of Marketing, 65(2), 81-93.

31.

Chandon, P., Wansink, B. & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4), 65-81.

32.

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

33.

Coupey, E., Irwin, J. R., & Payne, J. W. (1998). Product familiarity and the expression of preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 459-468.

34.

Crader, S., & Zaichkowsky, J. L. (2007). The art of marketing in bricks and mortar retailing in the 21st century. Tina M. Lowrey, ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

35.

Craig, C. S., Stemthal, B., & Leavitt, C. (1976). Advertising wearout: An experimental analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 13, 365-72.

36.

Dahl, D., Chattopadhyay, A., & Gorn, G. J. (1999). The use of visual mental imagery in new product design. Journal of Marketing Research, 36, 18-28.

37.

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

38.

Dillon, W. R., Thomas, J. M., Amna, K., & Soumen, M. (2001). Understanding what’s in a brand rating: A model for assessing brand and attribute effects and their relationship to brand equity. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(November), 415-429.

39.

Dumaine, B. (1991). Design that sells and sells and..... Fortune, March II, 86-94.

40.

Hagtvedt, H., & Patrick, V. (2008). Art infusion: The influence of visual art on the perception and evaluation of consumer products. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(3), 379-389.

41.

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

42.

Holbrook, M. B. (1980). Some preliminary notes on research in consumer esthetics. in Advances in Consumer Research, 7, Jerry C. Olson, ed. Ann Arbor: Association for Consumer Research, 104-108.

43.

Holbrook, M. B., & Zirlin, R. B. (1985). Artistic creation, artworks and a aesthetic appreciation. In R. W. Belk, (Ed.), Advances in nonprofit marketing, 1, 1-54. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

44.

Johnson, E. J., & Russo, J. E. (1984). Product familarity and learning new information. Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 542-550.

45.

Joy, A., & Sherry, J. F. (2003). Speaking of art as embodied imagination: A multisensory approach to understanding aesthetic experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(September), 259–282.

46.

Kreuzbauer, R., & Malter, A. J. (2005). Embodied cognition and new product design: Changing product form to influence brand categorization. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22, 65-76.

47.

Laurent, G., & Kapferer, J. N. (1985). Measuring consumer involvement profiles. Journal of Marketing Research, 22(February), 41-53.

48.

Lewalski, Z. M. (1988). Product aesthetics: An interpretation for designers. Carson City, NV: Design & Developmetit Engineering Press.

49.

Machleit, K. A., Allen, C. T., & Madden, T. J. (1993). The mature brand and brand interest: An alternative consequence of Ad-evoked affect. Journal of Marketing, 57(October), 72- 82.

50.

MacInnis, D. J., & Jaworski, B. J. (1989). Information processing from advertisements: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Marketing, 53(October), 1-23.

51.

Mano, H., & Oliver, R. L. (1993). Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the consumption experience: Evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 20, 451-466.

52.

Margolin, V. (1992). Product appeal and the aura of art in objects and images: Studies in design and advertising. Susann Vihma, ed. Helsinki: University of Industrial Arts.

53.

Mariëlle, E. H. C., & Schoorsmans, J. P. L. (2005). The different roles of product appearance in consumer choice. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(1), 63–81.

54.

Martorella, R. (1996). Art and business: An international perspective on sponsorship. Westport, Conneticut: Praeger.

55.

Mittal, B. (1989). Must consumer involvement always imply more information search? Advances in Consumer Research, Thomas K. Srull (ed.), 16, 167-172.

56.

Nueno, J. L. & Quelch, J. A. (1998). The mass marketing of luxury. Business Horizons, November-December, 61-68.

57.

Oliver, R. L., Thomas S. R., & Mitchell, D. J. (1993). Imaging and analyzing in response to new product advertising. Journal of Advertising, 22(4), 35-50.

58.

Perkins, W. S., & Reyna, V. F. (1990). The effects of expertise on preference and typicality in investment decision making. Advances in Consumer Research, 17, 355-360.

59.

Roth, S. (1991). Pricing, profit, and equity(3rd ed). Annual Advertising and Promotion Workshop, February: New York.

60.

Schmitt, B. H., & Simonson, A. (1997). Marketing aesthetics: The strategic management of brands, identity, and image. New York: The Free Press.

61.

Schmitt, B. H., Leclerc, F., & Dube, L. (1996). Intrusions into waiting lines: Does the queue constitute a social system? Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 63, 806-815.

62.

Sirgy, M. J., Johar, J. S., Samli, A. C., & Claiborne, C. B. (1991). Self-congruity versus functional congruity: Predictors of consumer behavior. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 19(4), 363-375.

63.

Silverstein, M. J., Fiske, N. I, & Butman, J. (2004). Trading up: Why consumers want new luxury goods... And how companies create them. Rev Upd edition, Portfolio Hardcover.

64.

Sporre, D. J. (2008). Perceiving the arts: An introduction to the humanities.(9th ed), Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

65.

Tansey, R. G., & Kleiner, F. S. (1996). Gardner’s art through the ages. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace.

66.

Tellis, G. J. (1988). Advertising exposure, loyalty and brand purchase: A two stage model of choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(2), 134-144.

67.

Tellis, G. J. (1997). Effective frequency: One exposure or three factors? Journal of Advertising Research, 37, 75-80.

68.

Thompson, D. V., & Hamilton, R. W. (2006). The effect of information processing mode on consumer’s responses to comparative advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 530-540.

69.

Vaughn, R. (1986). How advertising works: A planning model revisited. Journal of Advertising Research, 26(1), 57-66.

70.

Veryzer, R. W. (1993). Aesthetic response and the influence of design principles on product preferences. Advances in Consumer Research, 20(1), 224-228.

71.

Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R. & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude, Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310-320.

72.

Zaichkowsky, J. L. (1987). The emotional aspect of product involvement. in Advances in Consumer Research, 14, Melanie Wallendorf and Paul Anderson, eds., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 32-35.

73.

Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 60(2), 31-46.

74.

Zinkhan, G. M., & Muderrisoglu, A. (1985). Involvement, familiarity, cognitive differentiation and advertising recall: A Test of convergent and discriminant validity. Advances in Consumer Research, 12, 3560-361.

75.

Zissman, A. & Neimark, E. (1990). The influence of familiarity on evaluations of linking and goodness of several types of music. The Psychological Record, 40, 481-490.

logo