SOSYAL GÜÇ VE ANTROPOMORFİZMİN VARLIKLARA VERİLEN DEĞERE ETKİSİ

Abstract

Önceki yazın, sosyal güç deneyiminin kişinin kendisine odaklanmasını artırdığını ve maddiyatçı değerleri teşvik ettiğini belirtmektedir. Antropomorfizm ise sosyal bir ortam sunarak grup odaklılığı artırmaktadır. Bu nedenle, antropomorfizmin sosyal gücün davra¬nışlara etkisindeki rolünü incelemek önemlidir. Bu makalede antropomorfizm ve sosyal güç etkileşiminin varlıklarımıza verdiğimiz değere etkisini açıklamak amaçlanmaktadır. Bu etkileşimin varlıklarımıza verdiğimiz değere etkisinin ayrılma endişesi aracılığıyla olacağı öngörülmüştür. Söz konusu etkileri test etmek için bir arabulucu model uygulan¬mıştır. Araştırma verileri 2018 yılında iki deney aracılığıyla, öğrencilerden oluşan katılım¬cılardan elde edilmiştir. Çalışmanın sonuçları, antropomorfizm olmadığı durumda sosyal gücün ayrılma endişesi aracılığıyla kabul etme isteğine (ürünü satarken) etkisi olduğunu göstermiştir. Ancak, antropomorfizm mevcut olduğu durumda sosyal gücün kabul etme isteğine böyle bir etkisi bulunmamaktadır. Çalışmanın sağladığı bulguların hem antropo¬morfizm hem de sosyal güçle alakalı yazına önemli katkısı bulunmaktadır.

Keywords

• Sosyal güç
• antropomorfizm
• ayrılma endişesi
• varlıklarımız
• kabul etme istekliliği 1

THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL POWER AND ANTHROPOMORPHISM ON VALUATION OF POSSESSIONS

Abstract

Previous literature indicated that experiencing social power increases one’s focus on the self and promotes material values. Anthropomorphism provides a social environment which increases communal orientation. Thus, it is essential to search the role of anthropomorphism in relations between social power and behavior. Therefore, this paper aims to explore the interaction effect of anthropomorphism and social power on our connections with our possessions. It is supposed that the interaction effect on our connections with our possessions, which is measured as willingness to accept (WTA), will be through separation distress. A mediating model was applied to test the supposed effects. Data were gathered in 2018 from a sample of students via 2 experiments. The results of the study have shown that social power influences WTA when there is no anthropomorphism. Nevertheless, when there is anthropomorphism, social power has not such an effect on WTA. The findings of the study have important contributions to the literature on both anthropomorphism and social power.

Keywords

• Social power
• anthropomorphism
• separation distress
• possessions
• willingness to accept

References

1. Aggarwal, P. ve McGill A. (2007). Is That Car Smiling at Me? Schema congruity as a basis for evaluating anthropomorphized products, Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (December), 468-79.
2. Aggarwal, P. ve McGill, A. (2012). When brands seem human, do humans act like brands? Automatic behavioral priming effects of brand anthropomorphism. Journal of Consumer Research, 39, 2, 307-323.
3. Ahn, H. K., Kim, H. J. ve Aggarwal, P. (2014). Helping fellow beings: Anthropomorphized social causes and the role of anticipatory guilt. Psychological Science, 25(1), 224-229.
4. Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: An essay on psychology and religion. Oxford, England: Rand Mcnally.
5. Ball, A. D. ve Tasaki, L. H. (1992). The role and measurement of attachment in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(2), 155-172.
6. Bartz, J. A., Tchalova, K. ve Fenerci, C. (2016). Reminders of social connection can attenuate anthropomorphism: A replication and extension of Epley, Akalis, Waytz, and Cacioppo (2008). Psychological Science, 27 (12), 1644-1650.
7. Baumeister, R. F. ve Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529.
8. Callcott, M. F. ve Phillips, B. J. (1996). Observations: Elves make good cookies: Creating likable spokes-character advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 36(5), 73-79.

9. Chandler, J. ve Schwarz, N. (2010). Use does not wear ragged the fabric of friendship: Thinking of objects as alive makes people less willing to replace them. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20 (2), 138-145.
10. Chen, S., Lee-Chai, A.Y. ve Bargh, J.A. (2001). Relationship orientation as a moderator of the effects of social power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 173-187.
11. Chen, R. P., Wen Wan, E. ve Levy, E. (2017). The effect of social exclusion on consumer preference for anthropomorphized brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27 (1), 23-34.
12. Chen, F., Sengupta, J. ve Adaval, R. (2018). Does endowing a product with life make one feel more alive? The effect of product anthropomorphism on consumer vitality. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 3(4),503-513.
13. Choi, C. ve Mattila, A.S. (2014). The effects of promotion framing on consumers’ price perceptions: The moderating role of a personal sense of power. Journal of Service Management, 25 (1), 149-160.
14. Cusick, W. J. (2009). All customers are irrational. New York: AMACOM.
15. DeCelles, K. A., DeRue, D. S., Margolis, J. D. ve Ceranic, T. L. (2012). Does power corrupt or enable? When and why power facilitates self-interested behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 681-689.
16. Delbaere, M., McQuarrie, E. F. ve Phillips, B. J. (2011). Personification in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 40(1), 121-130.
17. Dubois, D., Rucker, D. D. ve Galinsky, A. D. (2015). Social class, power, and selfishness: When and why upper and lower class individuals behave unethically. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(3), 436-449.
18. Epley, N., Akalis, S., Waytz, A. ve Cacioppo, J. T. (2008). Creating social connection through inferential reproduction: Loneliness and perceived agency in gadgets, gods, and greyhounds. Psychological Science, 19, 114-120.
19. Epley, N., Waytz, A. ve Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114, 864-886.
20. Fast, N. J., Gruenfeld, D. H., Sivanathan, N. ve Galinsky, A. D. (2009). Illusory control: A generative force behind power’s far-reaching effects. Psychological Science, 20 (4), 502-508.
21. Feng, W. (2016). When lonely people encounter anthropomorphic products. Social Behavior and Personality An International Journal. 44, 1649-1660.
22. French, J.R., Raven, B. ve Cartwright, D. (1959). The bases of social power. Classics of Organization Theory, 7 (1), 311-320.
23. Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H. ve Magee, J. C. (2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 453-466.
24. Galinsky, A. D., Magee, J. C., Inesi, M. E. ve Gruenfeld, D. H. (2006). Power and perspectives not taken. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1068-1074.
25. Golossenko, A., Pillai, K. G. ve Aroean, L. (2020). Seeing brands as humans: Development and validation of a brand anthropomorphism scale. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 37(4), 737-755.
26. Gruenfeld, D. H., Inesi, M.E., Magee, J.C. ve Galinsky, A.D. (2008). Power and the objectification of social targets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95 (1), 111–127.
27. Guthrie S. E. (1993). Faces in the Clouds. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
28. Hair J.F., Black W.C, Babin B.J. ve Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Seventh Edition. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
29. Han, D., Lalwani, A. K. ve Duhachek, A. (2017). Power distance belief, power, and charitable giving. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(1), 182-195.
30. Hart, Jones, S. R. ve Royne, M. B. (2013). The human lens: How anthropomorphic reasoning varies by product complexity and enhances personal value. Journal of Marketing Management, 29(1-2), 105-121.
31. Hayes, A. (2013). Medication, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York, NY: Guilford.
32. Huang, F., Wong, V.C. ve Wan, E.W. (2019). The influence of product anthropomorphism on comparative judgment. Journal of Consumer Research, 46 (5), 936-955.
33. Jiang, Y., Zhan, L. ve Rucker, D. D. (2014). Power and action orientation: Power as a catalyst for consumer switching behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 41 (1), 183-196.
34. Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H. ve Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110, 265-284.
35. Keltner, D., van Kleef, G. A., Chen, S. ve Kraus, M. W. (2008). A reciprocal influence model of social power: Emerging principles and lines of inquiry. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 151– 192.
36. Khenfer J, Shepherd S. ve Trendel O. (2020). Customer empowerment in the face of perceived Incompetence: Effect on preference for anthropomorphized brands. J Bus Res. 2020; 118: 1-11.
37. Kim, S. ve McGill, A. (2011). Gaming with Mr. Slot or Gaming the sot machine? Power, anthropomorphism, and risk perception. Journal of Consumer Research, 38 (1), 94–107.
38. Lammers, J., Stapel, D. A. ve Galinsky, A. D. (2010). Power increases hypocrisy moralizing in reasoning, immorality in behavior. Psychological Science, 21, 737–744.
39. Landwehr, J. R., McGill, A. L. ve Herrmann, A. (2011). It’s got the look: The effects of friendly and aggressive ‘facial’ expressions on product liking and sales. Journal of Marketing, 75 (May), 132–146.
40. Lee, S. ve Oh, H. (2021). Anthropomorphism and its implications for advertising hotel brands. Journal of Business Research, 129, 455-464.
41. Liu, S. Q. ve Mattila, A. S. (2017). Airbnb: Online targeted advertising, sense of power, and consumer decisions. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 60, 33-41.
42. Magee, J. C. ve Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self‐reinforcing nature of power and status. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351-398.
43. May, F. ve Monga, A. (2014). When time has a will of its own, the powerless don't have the will to wait: Anthropomorphism of time can decrease patience. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(5), 924-942.
44. Morewedge, C. K. ve Giblin, C.E. (2015). Explanations of the endowment effect: An integrative review. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19, (6), 339-48.
45. Mourey, J. A., Olson, J. G. ve Yoon, C. (2017). Products as pals: Engaging with anthropomorphic products mitigates the effects of social exclusion. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(2), 414–431.
46. Newton, F. J., Newton, J. D. ve Wong, J. (2017). This is your stomach speaking: Anthropomorphized health messages reduce portion size preferences among the powerless. Journal of Business Research, 75, 229–239.
47. Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T. ve Dirks, K. T. (2001). Towards a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26, 298–310.
48. Popelnukha, A., Weng, Q., Ali, A. ve Atamba, C. (2021). When do low-power customers complain? The joint effects of chronic sense of personal power and complaint success on complaining intentions. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 20 (1), 101-118.
49. Rauschnabel, P.A. ve Ahuvia, A.C. (2014). You’re so lovable: anthropomorphism and brand love. Journal of Brand Management, 21(5), 372-395.
50. Raven, B.H., Schwarzwald, J. ve Koslowsky, M. (1998). Conceptualizing and measuring a power/interaction model of interpersonal influence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(4), 307-332.
51. Rucker, D. D. ve Galinsky, A. D. (2009). Conspicuous consumption versus utilitarian ideals: How different levels of power shape consumer behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(3), 549-555.
52. Rucker, D. D. ve Galinsky, A. D. (2016). An agentic-communal model of power: Implications for consumer behavior, Current Opinions in Psychology, 10, 1–5.
53. Rucker, D. D., Dubois, D. ve Galinsky, A. D. (2011). Generous paupers and stingy princes: Power drives consumer spending on self versus others. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(6), 1015-1029.
54. Rucker, D. D., Galinsky, A. D. ve Dubois, D. (2012). Power and consumer behavior: How power shapes who and what consumers value. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 352-368.
55. Rucker, D.D., Hu, M. ve Galinsky, A. D. (2014). The experience versus the expectations of power: A recipe for altering the effects of power on behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(2), 381-396.
56. Tassiello, V., Tillotson, J. S. ve Rome, A. S. (2021). “Alexa, order me a pizza!”: The mediating role ofpsychological power in the consumer–voiceassistant interaction. Psychology & Marketing, 38, 1069–1080.
57. Thomson, M., MacInnis, D. J. ve Park, C. W. (2005). The ties that bind: measuring the strength of consumers’ emotional attachments to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15(1), 77-91.
58. Triantos, A., Plakoyiannaki, E., Outra, E. ve Petridis, N. (2016). Anthropomorphic packaging: is there life on Mars? European Journal of Marketing, 50 (1/2), 260-275.
59. Uysal, E., Bezençon, V. ve Alavi S. (2020). Facing Alexa, the powerful lower their guard: anthropomorphization of smart personal assistants decreases privacy concerns for people with high sense of power. Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy, 49th, (64283).
60. Van den Hende, E.A. ve Mugge, R. (2014). Investigating gender‐schema congruity effects on consumers’ evaluation of anthropomorphized products. Psychology & Marketing, 31 (4), 264-277.
61. Wallendoff, M. ve Arnould, E. (1988). These are a few of my favorite things: A cross-cultural inquiry into object attachment, possessiveness, and social linkage. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 531-547.
62. Wang, C. X., Minton, E. A. ve Zhang, J. (2020). Sense of power: Policy insights for encouraging consumers’ healthy food choice. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 39 (2), 188-204.
63. Waytz, A., Cacioppo, J. T. ve Epley, N. (2010). Who sees human? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 219-232.
64. Waytz, A. ve Epley, N. (2012). Social connection enables dehumanization. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 70-76.
65. Wu, L., Mattila, A.S., Wang, C.Y. ve Hanks, L. (2016). The impact of power on service customers’ willingness to post online reviews. Journal of Service Research, 29 (2), 224-238.
66. Zhou, X., Kim, S. ve Wang, L. (2018). Money helps when money feels: Money anthropomorphism increases charitable giving. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(5), 953-972.
67. Zhu, H., Wong, N. ve Huang, M. (2019). Does relationship matter? How social distance influences perceptions of responsibility on anthropomorphized environmental objects and conservation intentions. Journal of Business Research, 95, 62-70.