CAZİBE ETKİSİ VE DÜZENLEYİCİ ODAĞIN TÜKETİCİ SEÇİMİNDEKİ ROLÜ

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2, 71 - 80, 31.12.2020

Hasan Hüseyin Ceylan , Bekir Köse

https://doi.org/10.46482/ebyuiibfdergi.829273

Öz

Tüketicilerin çoklu seçim koşullarında alternatifleri karşılaştırarak seçim yapmaları nedeniyle bir alternatifin değeri diğer alternatiflerden bağımsız değildir. Yeni seçenek ilave edildiği zaman mevcut seçeneklerin göreceli değer değişiminin önemli nedenlerinden biri de cazibe etkisidir. Yapılan çalışmalar cazibe etkisi varlığı yanında, farklı moderatör değişkenlere göre bu etkinin farklılaştığını göstermiştir. Bu bağlamda tüketicilerin düzenleyici odağının cazibe etkisine duyarlılığı etkilediği ileri sürülmektedir. Bu çalışmada farklı ürün gruplarında cazibe etkisi ve düzenleyici odakla etkileşiminin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla seçim koşulu ve düzenleyici odak ile gruplar arası tasarım oluşturulmuş ve araştırma verileri faktöriyel ANOVA ile analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma bulguları market ve meşrubat seçimleri için cazibe etkisi olmadığını gösterirken, buzdolabı ve otel seçimi için cazibe etkisi olduğunu ancak cazibe etkisi ile düzenleyici odak arasında bir etkileşim olmadığını göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Cazibe Etkisi, Düzenleyici Odak, Tüketici Seçimi, Tuzak Etkisi

Kaynakça

• APPELT, K. C., ZOU, X., ARORA, P., & HIGGINS, E. T. (2009), “Regulatory Fit in Negotiation: Effects of “Prevention-Buyer” And “Promotion-Seller” Fit”, Social Cognition, 27(3), 365-384.
• AVNET, T., & HIGGINS, E. T. (2006), “How Regulatory Fit Affects Value in Consumer Choices and Opinions”, Journal of Marketing research, 43(1), 1-10.
• AVNET, TAMAR AND E. TORY HIGGINS (2003), “Locomotion, Assessment, And Regulatory Fit: Value Transfer from ‘How’ To ‘What”, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 525–530.
• BETTMAN, J. R., LUCE, M. F., & PAYNE, J. W. (1998), “Constructive Consumer Choice Processes”, Journal of Consumer Research, 25(3), 187-217.
• BURTON, S., & ZINKHAN, G. M. (1987), “Changes in Consumer Choice: Further Investigation of Similarity and Attraction Effects”, Psychology & Marketing, 4(3), 255-266.
• CESARIO, J., HIGGINS, E. T., & SCHOLER, A. A. (2008), “Regulatory Fit and Persuasion: Basic Principles and Remaining Questions”, Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(1), 444-463.
• CHATTERJEE, S., ROY, R., & MALSHE, A. V. (2011), “The Role of Regulatory Fit On the Attraction Effect”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(4), 473-481.
• FISKE, S. T., GILBERT, D. T., & LINDZEY, G. (Eds.). (2010), Handbook of Social Psychology (Vol. 2). John Wiley & Sons.
• HALAMISH, V., LIBERMAN, N., HIGGINS, E. T., & IDSON, L. C. (2008), “Regulatory Focus Effects On Discounting Over Uncertainty for Losses Vs. Gains”, Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(5), 654-666.
• HALVORSON, H. G., AND HIGGINS, E. T. (2013), Focus: Use Different Ways of Seeing the World for Success and Influence: Penguin Publishing Group.
• HEDGCOCK, W., & RAO, A. R. (2009), “Trade-Off Aversion as an Explanation for The Attraction Effect: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study”, Journal of Marketing Research, 46(1), 1-13.
• HEDGCOCK, W., RAO, A. R., & CHEN, H. (2009), “Could Ralph Nader's Entrance and Exit Have Helped Al Gore? The Impact of Decoy Dynamics On Consumer Choice”, Journal of Marketing Research, 46(3), 330-343.
• HIGGINS, E. T. (2000), “Making A Good Decision: Value from Fit”, American Psychologist, 55(11), 1217-1230.
• HIGGINS, E. T. Promotion and Prevention: Regulatory Focus as A Motivational Principle in Ed. Zanna, M. P. (1998), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology: Elsevier Science.
• HSU, H. C., & LIU, W. L. (2011), “Using Decoy Effects to Influence an Online Brand Choice: The Role of Price–Quality Trade-Offs”, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, And Social Networking, 14(4), 235-239.
• HUBER, J., PAYNE, J. W., & PUTO, C. (1982), “Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and The Similarity Hypothesis”, Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 90-98.
• LOMI, A., & HARRISON, J. R. (2012), The Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice: Looking Forward at Forty. In The Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice: Looking Forward at Forty (Pp. 3-17). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
• MISHRA, S., UMESH, U. N., & STEM JR, D. E. (1993), “Antecedents of The Attraction Effect: An Information-Processing Approach”, Journal of Marketing Research, 30(3), 331-349.
• MOLDEN, D. C., LEE, A. Y., & HIGGINS, E. T. (2008), Motivations for Promotion and Prevention. Handbook of Motivation Science, 169-187.
• MOURALI, M., BÖCKENHOLT, U., & LAROCHE, M. (2007), “Compromise and Attraction Effects Under Prevention and Promotion Motivations”, Journal of Consumer Research, 34(2), 234-247.
• PLETZ, J. (1999), Being Ethical: Nova Publishers.
• RATNESHWAR, S., SHOCKER, A. D., & STEWART, D. W. (1987), “Toward Understanding the Attraction Effect: The Implications of Product Stimulus Meaningfulness and Familiarity”, Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 520-533.
• RYU, G., SUK, K., YOON, S. O., & PARK, J. (2014), “The Underlying Mechanism of Self- Regulatory Focus Impact On Compromise Choice”, Journal of Business Research, 67(10), 2056-2063.
• SEN, S. (1998), “Knowledge, Information Mode, And The Attraction Effect”, Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 64-77.
• SHAW, C., & HAMILTON, R. (2016), The Intuitive Customer: 7 Imperatives for Moving Your Customer Experience to The Next Level: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
• SIMONSON, I. (1989), “Choice Based On Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects”, Journal of Consumer Research, 16(2), 158-174.
• SIMONSON, I., & TVERSKY, A. (1992), “Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion”, Journal of Marketing Research, 29(3), 281-295.
• SIVAKUMAR, K., & CHERIAN, J. (1995), “Role of Product Entry and Exit On the Attraction Effect”, Marketing Letters, 6(1), 45-51.
• SLAUGHTER, J. E., SINAR, E. F., & HIGHHOUSE, S. (1999), “Decoy Effects and Attribute-Level Inferences”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(5), 823-828.
• SUMMERVILLE, A., & ROESE, N. J. (2008), “Self-Report Measures of Individual Differences in Regulatory Focus: A Cautionary Note”, Journal of Research in Personality, 42(1), 247-254.
• WEDELL, D. H. (1991), “Distinguishing Among Models of Contextually Induced Preference Reversals”, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, And Cognition, 17(4), 767-
• WEDELL, D. H., & PETTIBONE, J. C. (1996), “Using Judgments to Understand Decoy Effects in Choice”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(3), 326-344.
• ZHANG, C., STARCZEWSKI, A.P., LAKENS, D. AND IJSSELSTEINJN, W. (2018), “A Decision-Making Perspective On Coaching Behavior Change: A Field Experiment On Promoting Exercise at Word”, İn (Ed)Ham, J., Karapanos, E., Morita, P. P., & Burns, C. M. (2018), Persuasive Technology: 13th International Conference, Canada, April 18-19, 2018, Proceedings: Springer International Publishing.