Araştırma Makalesi

Materialism Domains and Perceived Risk Effects on Consumer Boycott Effectiveness

Cilt: 10 Sayı: 17 31 Mart 2019
PDF İndir
EN TR

Materialism Domains and Perceived Risk Effects on Consumer Boycott Effectiveness

Abstract

As markets for goods and services become global, competition among companies becomes more intense. Companies’ success is strongly influenced by consumer needs and expectations. To successfully compete, firms must meet or exceed these expectations. In addition to that understanding consumers’ boycotting behavior has emerged as an integral part of firms’ competitive advantage building. Even though consumer boycott has become a subject of increasing concern in recent years, to academics and practitioners, to date, consumer behavior literature provides little help in understanding the factors affecting consumer boycott effectiveness. Good management requires not only a clearer understanding of the consumers’ purchase behavior, but also an understanding of boycotting behavior and how it may be reduced. In order to expand the knowledge on boycotting behavior, this study examines the relationship between consumers’ boycotting effectiveness and perceived risk, and success, centrality, happiness domains of materialism. The results show that an increase in perceived risk leads to an increase in boycotting effectiveness and there is a negative correlation between boycotting effectiveness and centrality domain of materialism.

Keywords

Boycott effectiveness,Perceived risk,Materialism

Kaynakça

  1. Belk, R. W. (1985). Materialism: Trait aspects of living in the material world. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(3), 265-280.
  2. Braunsberger, K. and Buckler, B. (2009). Consumers on a mission to force a change in public policy: A qualitative study of the ongoing Canadian seafood boycott. Business and Society Review, 114(4), 457-489.
  3. Campbell, M. C. and Goodstein, R. C. (2001). The moderating effect of perceived risk on consumers' evaluations of product incongruity: Preference for the norm. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 439-449.
  4. DeVellis F. R. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  5. Dowling, G. R. and Staelin, R., (1994). A model of perceived risk and intended risk-handling activity. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 119-134.
  6. Farah, M. F. and Newman, A. J. (2010). Exploring consumer boycott intelligence using a socio-cognitive approach. Journal of Business Research, 63(4), 347-355.
  7. Friedman, M. (1985). Consumer boycotts in the United States, 1970–1980: Contemporary events in historical perspective. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 19(1), 96-117.
  8. Friedman, M. (1995). American consumer boycotts in response to rising food prices: Housewives' protests at the grassroots level, Journal of Consumer Policy, 18(1), 55-72.
  9. Friedman, M. (1996). A positive approach to organized consumer action: The “buycott” as an alternative to the boycott. Journal of Consumer Policy, 19(4), 439-451.
  10. Jost, J. T., Langer, M., Singh, V., (2017). The Politics of Buying, Boycotting, Complaining, and Disputing: An Extension of the Research Program by Jung, Garbarino, Briley, and Wynhausen. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(3), 503-510.

Kaynak Göster

APA
Taşçıoğlu, M., & Yener, D. (2019). Materialism Domains and Perceived Risk Effects on Consumer Boycott Effectiveness. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 10(17), 355-369. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.516401