바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

Application of Distinction Bias and Socioemotional Selectivity Theory in Consumer Purchase Decision Making

Abstract

This research is consisted of two empirical studies. In study 1, it examined if consumers differ in their prediction of happiness of purchases depending of their product evaluation mode (i.e., joint evaluation mode vs. single evaluation mode). Study results suggest that under joint evaluation mode the predicted happiness increased as the level of product attributes increased but under single evaluation mode there is no difference of the predicted happiness regardless of the product attribute levels. This is found for both material and experiential products so that distinction bias is supported empirically. In study 2, the study investigated if there is differences in the proportion of the bucket list of material things and experiential things as well as the first bucket list item in line with the suggestion of socioemotional selectivity theory. Study results indicate that people prioritize experiential things compared to material things and list more experiential items in the bucket list when they perceive their time in life is limited.

keywords
Socioemotional Selectivity Theory, Material Purchase, Experiential Purchase, Distinction Bias, Bucket List

Reference

1.

동아일보 (2019). “내 행복은 56점” 어깨 처진 대한민국.http://www.donga.com/news/article/all/20190629/96239079/1.

2.

윤태웅 (2018). 물질적 상품유형과 경험적 상품유형이 소비자 광고태도, 행복감 그리고 재 구매의사에 미치는 영향: 시간인식의 관점에서. 한국심리학회지: 소비자․광고, 19(2), 373-403.

3.

중앙일보 (2019). 베짱이는 재능 기부 개미는 재물 기부, 이솝우화를 바꿔보자. https://news.joins.com/article/23423491.

4.

한겨레 (2019), 아이들 ‘주관적 행복지수’ OECD 꼴찌 수준…언제쯤 오를까? http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/society/society_general/893814.html.

5.

Aaker, J. L., Rudd, M., & Mogilner, C. (2011). If money does not make you happy, consider time. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(2), 126-130.

6.

Adler, M. D., Dolan, P., & Kavetsos, G. (2017). Would you choose to be happy? Tradeoffs between happiness and the other dimensions of life in a large population survey. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 139, 60-73.

7.

Bazerman, M. H., Loewenstein, G. F., & White, S. B. (1992). Reversals of preference in allocation decisions: Judging an alternative versus choosing among alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 220-240.

8.

Bhattacharjee, A., & Mogilner, C. (2014). Happiness from ordinary and extraordinary experiences. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(1), 1-17.

9.

Carstensen, L. L. (2006). The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science, 312(5782), 1913-1915.

10.

Carstensen, L. L., & Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). Influence of HIV status and age on cognitive representations of others. Health Psychology, 17(6), 494-503.

11.

Carstensen, L. L., Isaacowitz, D. M., & Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54(3), 165.

12.

Carter, T. J., & Gilovich, T. (2010). The relative relativity of material and experiential purchases. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(1), 146.

13.

Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 752.

14.

Chang, P. F., Choi, Y. H., Bazarova, N. N., & Lockenhoff, C. E. (2015). Age differences in online social networking: Extending socioemotional selectivity theory to social network sites. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 59(2), 221-239.

15.

Chatterjee, S., Heath, T. B., & Min, J. (2009). The susceptibility of mental accounting principles to evaluation mode effects. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 22(2), 120-137.

16.

Chou, S. M., Two, S. N., & Woodard, B. (2005). Taiwanese undergraduate nursing students’ personal priorities before death. OMEGA- Journal of Death and Dying, 51(1), 53-63.

17.

Chu, Q., Gruhn, D., & Holland, A. M. (2018). Before I die: The impact of time horizon and age on bucket-list goals. GeroPsych: The Journal of Gerontopsychology and Geriatric Psychiatry, 31(3), 151.

18.

Drolet, A., Williams, P., & Lau-Gesk, L. (2007). Age-related differences in responses to affective vs. rational ads for hedonic vs. utilitarian products. Marketing Letters, 18(4), 211-221.

19.

Dunn, E. W., Gilbert, D. T., & Wilson, T. D. (2011). If money doesn’t make you happy, then you probably aren’t spending it right. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(2), 115-125.

20.

Dunn, E., & Norton, M. (2014). Happy money: The science of happier spending. Simon and Schuster.

21.

Dunn, E. W., Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2003). Location, location, location: The misprediction of satisfaction in housing lotteries. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(11), 1421-1432.

22.

Erikson, E. H. (1963). Children and society (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.

23.

Fredrickson, B. L. (2000). Extracting meaning from past affective experiences: The importance of peaks, ends, and specific emotions. Cognition & Emotion, 14(4), 577-606.

24.

Fung, H. H., & Carstensen, L. L. (2006). Goals change when life’s fragility is primed: Lessons learned from older adults, the September 11 attacks and sars. Social Cognition, 24(3), 248-278.

25.

Fung, H. H., Carstensen, L. L., & Lutz, A. M. (1999). Influence of time on social preferences: Implications for life-span development. Psychology and Aging, 14(4), 595.

26.

Gilovich, T., Kumar, A., & Jampol, L. (2015). A wonderful life: Experiential consumption and the pursuit of happiness. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(1), 152-165.

27.

Hsee, C. K., & Hastie, R. (2006). Decision and experience: why don’t we choose what makes us happy?. Trends in cognitive sciences, 10(1), 31-37.

28.

Hsee, C. K., Loewenstein, G. F., Blount, S., & Bazerman, M. H. (1999). Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of options: a review and theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125(5), 576-590.

29.

Hsee, C. K., & Zhang, J. (2004). Distinction bias: Misprediction and mischoice due to joint evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(5), 680-695.

30.

Hsee, C. K., & Zhang, J. (2010). General evaluability theory. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(4), 343-355.

31.

Kahneman, D., & Snell, J. (1992). Predicting a changing taste: Do people know what they will like?. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 5(3), 187-200.

32.

Lockenhoff, C. E., & Carstensen, L. L. (2004). Socioemotional selectivity theory, aging, and health: The increasingly delicate balance between regulating emotions and making tough choices. Journal of Personality, 72(6), 1395-1424.

33.

Loewenstein, G., O’Donoghue, T., & Rabin, M. (2003). Projection bias in predicting future utility. the Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1209-1248.

34.

Micu, C. C., & Chowdhury, T. G. (2010). The effect of ageing and time horizon perspective on consumers’ response to promotion versus prevention focus advertisements. International Journal of Advertising, 29(4), 621-642.

35.

Paharia, N., Kassam, K. S., Greene, J. D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2009). Dirty work, clean hands: The moral psychology of indirect agency. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109(2), 134-141.

36.

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123-205, Academic Press.

37.

Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2013). Principles of Marketing (16th Global Edition).

38.

Williams, P., & Drolet, A. (2005). Age-related differences in responses to emotional advertisements. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(3), 343-354.

39.

Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2013). The impact bias is alive and well. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(5), 740-748.

40.

Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Fagerlin, A., & Ubel, P. A. (2004). “Is 28% good or bad?” Evaluability and preference reversals in health care decisions. Medical Decision Making, 24(2), 142-148.

logo