Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
Korean Academic Society of Business Administration
[ Article ]
korean management review - Vol. 46, No. 2, pp.343-374
ISSN: 1226-1874 (Print)
Print publication date 30 Apr 2017
Received 23 Nov 2016 Revised 28 Dec 2016 Accepted 09 Jan 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17287/kmr.2017.46.2.343

A Study of the Effects of Product Evaluation from Others on Willingness-to-pay: Dual Process System and Social Influence View

Jae-Do Song*
*(First Author and Corresponding Author) Chonnam National Univeristy, College of Business Administration sjaedo@chonnam.ac.kr
타인들의 지불의사가격이 개인의 제품 평가에 미치는 영향에 대한 연구: 이중정보처리 시스템 및 사회적 영향 관점
송재도*
*전남대학교 경영대학, 주저자, 교신저자

Abstract

This study focuses on the elicitation of willingness-to-pay (WTP) when others provide an evaluation of WTP (WTP information). From an economic rationality perspective, value or WTP should be consistent and independent from others’ evaluation. Even when WTP information affects one’s WTP, it can be interpreted to deliver information about quality and value of the product under uncertainty situation without encroaching on economic rationality. However, preference anomalies, such as the WTP-WTA gap and preference reversal, and cognitive biases caused by such heuristics as anchoring challenges the economic rationality view.

In this background, this study addresses three important issues. First, the effects of WTP information may follow low-elaborative System 1 process rather than high-elaborative System 2 process which economic rationality view assumes. Second, WTP information may function as a type of arbitrary social standard against which individuals feel their responses are being measured, and people may follow this information for social affiliation and/or group acceptance. Then, WTP information works as a kind of social pressure rather than as information. The third question concerns the type of information. WTP information may provide information related to others’ preference or social cost which is different from general product information assumed in the economic rationality view. These questions are theoretically and practically important regarding the stability of preference. If a WTP estimation follows a low-elaborative System 1 process, then WTP is vulnerable to various situational factors. If the WTP information communicates social costs and affects WTP, this means that WTP is dependent upon social factors, and is unstable.

Two studies were conducted to address these questions. In the first study, WTP information was provided after subjects have made initial estimate on their own WTP. In the second, WTP information was provided before initial estimation of WTP. In each study, changes in WTP, explanatory variables of WTP, and level of uncertainty about the estimates were observed.

The results indicate that high WTP information induces high WTP. This effect follows the high-elaborative System 2 process changing explanatory variables of WTP. Further, WTP information does the role of information rather than social pressure. Further, WTP information delivers social information, which is related to others’ preferences as well as social costs, rather than product information. The result that social information affects WTP means that WTP is not independent of social factors, and is unstable. This study also demonstrates how the effect of WTP information relates to perceived uncertainty, which is an important aspect in estimating value and significantly affects the consumer decision process. More changes in WTP and levels of uncertainty are incurred by WTP information when high uncertainty occurs before obtaining WTP information. Further, the effect of WTP information differs according to whether a prior value estimation exists.

초록

본 연구는 타인들의 지불의사가격 정보가 개인의 지불의사가격 추정에 미치는 영향을 분석하였다. 경제학적 합리성 관점 하에서 개인의 지불의사가격은 일관성을 유지하며, 타인들의 지불의사가격에 영향을 받지 않아야 한다. 설사 타인들의 지불의사가격이 영향을 미칠지라도 타인의 지불의사가격은 불완전 정보 하에서 제품의 품질 또는 가치에 대한 정보를 전달하는 역할을 하는 것으로 볼 수 있으며, 이 경우 경제적 합리성 관점 하에서 해석될 수 있다. 그러나 Willingness-to-pay Willingness-to-accept gap,선호역전현상(preference reversal)과 같은 선호이상현상(preference anomaly) 또는 앵커링(anchoring)과 같은 인지적 편향 현상 등 경제적 합리성 개념을 위협하는 현상들이 보고되고 있다.

이런 배경 하에서 본 연구는 다음의 세 가지 문제들을 다룬다. 첫 번째, 타인들의 지불의사가격 정보의 영향은 경제적 합리성 관점이 가정하는 정교한(high-elaborative) 시스템 2 절차가 아닌 비정교한(low-elaborative) 시스템 1 절차에 의해 발생할 수 있다. 두 번째, 타인들의 지불의사가격 정보는 개인들이 자신의 반응을 비교, 평가하는 사회적 기준의 기능을 수행할 수 있으며, 이런 현상은 개인들이 사회적으로 받아들여지고 소속되고자 하는 기대에 의해 발생한다. 이 경우 타인들의 지불의사가격은 정보로 기능하기 보다 사회적 압력의 역할을 하는 것으로 해석되어야 한다. 세 번째로 타인들의 지불의사가격이 전달하는 정보의 유형을 다룬다. 하나의 가설은 타인들의 선호나 사회적 비용과 관련된 정보를 전달한다는 것이며, 이는 경제적 합리성 관점이 가정하는 제품정보와는 다른 것이다. 이런 이슈들은 선호의 안정성과 관련하여 이론적으로나 실용적으로 중요한 의미를 갖는다. 만약 타인들의 지불의사가격에 대한 영향이 시스템 1 절차를 따른다면 이는 지불의사가격이 다양한 상황적 요인에 영향을 받을 수 있음을 의미한다. 또한 제품정보 보다는 사회적 정보를 전달한다면 이는 지불의사가격이 사회적 요인들에 영향을 받으며 불안정한 특성을 보임을 의미하는 것이다.

이런 문제들을 검토하기 위해 본 연구에서는 두 가지 실험을 수행하였다. 첫 번째 실험에서는 피실험자들이 지불의사가격에 대해 초기 추정을 마친 후에 타인들의 지불의사가격 정보가 제시되었으며, 두 번째 실험에서는 초기 추정 상황에서 타인들의 지불의사가격 정보가 제시되었다. 각 상황에서 개인의 지불의사가격, 지불의사가격에 대한 설명변수들, 그리고 추정치에 대한 불확실성의 인식 수준들이 비교, 분석되었다.

분석 결과 타인들의 높은 지불의사가격이 제시되는 경우 개인들의 지불의사가격이 증가하였다. 또한 이 과정에서 지불의사가격의 설명변수들이 함께 변화하는 현상이 관찰되었으며, 이는 이 과정이 정교한 시스템 2 절차를 따름을 의미한다. 또한 타인들의 지불의사가격은 제품정보와는 달리 타인들의 선호나 사회적 비용을 반영하는 사회적 정보를 전달하는 것으로 나타났다. 이 결과는 개인들의 지불의사가격이 사회적 요인들에 독립적이지 않으며, 불안정한 것임을 의미하는 것으로 해석할 수 있다. 한편 본 연구에서는 타인들의 지불의사가격이 개인들의 추정치에 대한 불확실성 인식에 어떤 영향을 미치는지도 분석되었다. 분석결과 타인들의 지불의사가격 정보 제시 이전에 불확실성을 높게 인식하였던 피실험자들이 지불의사가격과 불확실성 수준에서 더 큰 변화를 보였다. 또한 타인들의 지불의사가격의 영향은 피실험자들이 정보를 제공받기 이전에 지불의사가격을 추정하였는지 여부에 따라 다르게 나타남을 보여주었다.

Keywords:

Willingness-to-pay, uncertainty, dual process system, conformity, social influence

키워드:

지불의사가격, 불확실성, 이중정보처리시스템, 순응, 사회적 영향

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF-2014S1A5A2A03064942).이 논문은 2014년 정부(교육부)의 재원으로 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임 (NRF-2014S1A5A2A03064942)

References

  • Ariely, D., G. Loewenstein, and D. Prelec(2003), “ ‘Coherent Arbitrainess’: Stable Demand Curves without Stable Preferences,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 73-105. [https://doi.org/10.1162/00335530360535153]
  • Ariely, D., G. Loewenstein, and D. Prelec(2006), “Tom Sawyer and the Construction of Value,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 60(1), 1-10. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2004.10.003]
  • Asch, S. E.(1951), “Effects of Group Pressure upon the Modification and Distortion of Judgments,” Guetzkow, H. (Eds.), Groups, Leadership, and Men (pp. 177-190). Oxford, England: Camegie Press.
  • Asch, S. E.(1956), “Studies of Independence and Conformity: I. A Minority of One against a Unanimous Majority,” Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 70(9), 1-70. [https://doi.org/10.1037/h0093718]
  • Baumeister, R. F., and B. J. Bushman(2008), Social Psychology and Human Nature, Thomson Higher Education.
  • Burnkrant, R. E., and A. Cousineau(1975), “Informational and Normative Social Influence in Buyer Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 2(3), 206-215. [https://doi.org/10.1086/208633]
  • Cameron, T. A., and M. D. James(1987), “Estimating Willingness to Pay from Survey Data: An Alternative Pre-test-market Evaluation Procedure,” Journal of Marketing Research, 24(4), 389-395. [https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378702400406]
  • Chan, T. Y., V. Kadiyali, and Y.-H. Park(2007), “Willingness to Pay and Competition in Online Auctions.” Journal of Marketing Research, 44(2), 324-333. [https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.44.2.324]
  • Chandrashekaran, R.(2001), “The Implications of Individual Differences in Reference Price Utilization for Designing Effective Price Communications,” Journal of Business Research, 53(2), 85-91. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(99)00077-6]
  • Chandrashekaran, R., and H. Jagpal(1995), “Is There a Well-defined Internal Reference Price?” Advances in Consumer Research, 22(1), 230-235.
  • Chapman, G. B., and E. J. Johnson(1994), “The Limits of Anchoring,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7(4), 223-242. [https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.3960070402]
  • Cho, C.-H., J. Kang, and H. J. Cheon(2006), “Online Shopping Hesitation,” CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9(3), 261-274. [https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.261]
  • Cialdini, R. B., and N. J. Goldstein(2004), “Social Influence: Compliance and Conformity,” Annual Review of Psycholology, 55, 591-621. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015]
  • Cialdini, R. B., and M. R. Trost(1998), “Social Influence: Social Norms, Conformity and Compliance,” Gilbert, D. T., S. T. Fiske, and G. Lindzey (Eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology (pp. 151–92). Boston: McGraw-Hill, 4th ed.
  • Cubitt, R. P., D. Navarro-Martinez, and C. Starmer (2015), “On Preference Imprecision,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 50(1), 1-34. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-015-9207-6]
  • DelVecchio, D., and T. Heath(2012), “The Effect of Dual Anchors on Numeric Judgments: The Moderating Effects of Anchor Order and Domain Knowledge,” Advances in Consumer Research, 40, 547-552.
  • Deutsch, M., and H. B. Gerard(1955), “A Study of Normative and Informational Social Influences upon Individual Judgment,” The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 629-636. [https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046408]
  • Dhar, R., and M. Gorlin(2013), “A Dual-system Framework to Understand Preference Construction Processes in Choice,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(4), 528-542. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2013.02.002]
  • Dowling, G. R.(1986), “Perceived Risk: The Concept and Its Measurement,” Psychology & Marketing, 3(3), 193-210. [https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.4220030307]
  • Englich, B., T. Mussweiler, and F. Strack(2005), “The Last Word in Court—A Hidden Disadvantage for the Defense,” Law and Human Behavior, 29(6), 705-722. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-005-8380-7]
  • Englich, B., T. Mussweiler, and F. Strack (2006), “Playing Dice with Criminal Sentences: The Influence of Irrelevant Anchors on Experts’ Judicial Decision Making,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(2), 188-200. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205282152]
  • Erb, H.-P., G. Bohner, S. Rank, and S. Einwiller (2002), “Processing Minority and Majority Communications: The Role of Conflict with Prior Attitudes,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(9), 1172-1182. [https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672022812003]
  • Festinger, L.(1962). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Stanford Univ. Pr. [https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1062-93]
  • Furnham, A., and H. C. Boo(2011), “A Literature Review of the Anchoring Effect,” The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40(1), 35-42. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2010.10.008]
  • Grossman, S. J.(1976), “On the Efficiency of Competitive Stock Markets Where Trades Have Diverse Information,” The Journal of Finance, 31(2), 573-585. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1976.tb01907.x]
  • Grossman, S. J.(1977), “The Existence of Future Markets, Noisy Rational Expectations and Information Externalities,” Review of Economic Studies, 44(3), 431-449. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2296900]
  • Homburg, C., N. Koschate, and W. D. Hoyer(2005), “Do Satisfied Customers Really Pay More? A Study of the Relationship between Customer Satisfaction and Willingness to Pay,” Journal of Marketing, 69(2), 84-96. [https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.69.2.84.60760]
  • Horowitz, J. K., and K. E. McConnell(2002), “A Review of WTA/WTP Studies,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 44(3), 426-447. [https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.2001.1215]
  • Howard, J. A. S., and N. Jagdish(1969), The Theory of Buyer Behavior, New York: Wiley.
  • Kahneman, D.(2003), “Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics. The American Economic Review, 93(5), 1449-1475. [https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803322655392]
  • Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky(1972), “Subjective Probability: A Judgment of Representativeness,” Cognitive psychology, 3(3), 430-454. [https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(72)90016-3]
  • Kelley, H. H., and M. M. Shapiro(1954), “An Experiment on Conformity to Group Norms Where Conformity Is Detrimental to Group Achievement,” American Sociological Review, 19(6), 667-677. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2087913]
  • Khan, U., and R. Dhar(2010), “Price-framing Effects on the Purchase of Hedonic and Utilitarian Bundles,” Journal of Marketing Research, 47(6), 1090-1099. [https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.47.6.1090]
  • Kogler, C., and A. Kühberger(2007), “Dual Process Theories: A Key for Understanding the Diversification Bias?” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 34(2), 145-154. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-007-9008-7]
  • Krishna, A.(1991), “Effect of Dealing Patterns on Consumer Perceptions of Deal Frequency and Willingness to Pay,” Journal of Marketing Research, 441-451. [https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379102800406]
  • List, J. A.(2011), “Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies? The Case of Exogenous Market Experience,” The American Economic Review, 101(3), 313-317. [https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.3.313]
  • Lord, K. R., M.-S. Lee, and P. Choong(2001), “Differences in Normative and Informational Social Influence,” Advances in Consumer Research, 28(1), 280-285.
  • Mazumdar, T., S. Raj, and I. Sinha(2005), “Reference Price Research: Review and Propositions,” Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 84-102. [https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.84]
  • Miller, K. M., R. Hofstetter, H. Krohmer, and Z. J. Zhang(2011), “How Should Consumers' Willingness to Pay Be Measured? An Empirical Comparison of State-of-the-art Approaches,” Journal of Marketing Research, 48(1), 172-184. [https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.48.1.172]
  • Monroe, K. B.(1973), “Buyers' Subjective Perceptions of Price,” Journal of Marketing Research, 10(1), 70-80. [https://doi.org/10.1177/002224377301000110]
  • Mussweiler, T., F. Strack, and T. Pfeiffer(2000), “Overcoming the Inevitable Anchoring Effect: Considering the Opposite Compensates for Selective Accessibility,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(9), 1142-1150. [https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672002611010]
  • Nickerson, R. S.(1998), “Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises,” Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175-220. [https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175]
  • Northcraft, G. B., and M. A. Neale(1987), “Experts, Amateurs, and Real Estate: An Anchoring-and-adjustment Perspective on Property Pricing Decisions,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39(1), 84-97. [https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(87)90046-X]
  • Pennebaker, J. W., and J. A. Skelton(1978), “Psychological Parameters of Physical Symptoms,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4(4), 524-530. [https://doi.org/10.1177/014616727800400405]
  • Plott, C. R., and K. Zeiler(2005), “The Willingness to Pay–Willingness to Accept Gap, the Endowment Effect, Subject Misconceptions, and Experimental Procedures for Eliciting Valuations: Reply,” American Economic Review, 101(2), 1012-1028. [https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.2.1012]
  • Raju, P. S.(1977), “Product Familiarity, Brand Name, and Price Influences on Product Evaluation,” Advances in Consumer Research, 4(1), 64-71.
  • Rao, A. R., and K. B. Monroe(1988), “The Moderating Effect of Prior Knowledge on Cue Utilization in Product Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 253-264. [https://doi.org/10.1086/209162]
  • Rao, A. R., and K. B. Monroe(1989), “The Effect of Price, Brand Name, and Store Name on Buyers' Perceptions of Product Quality: An Integrative Review,” Journal of Marketing Research, 26(3), 351-357. [https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378902600309]
  • Scitovszky, T.(1944), “Some Consequences of the Habit of Judging Quality by Price,” The Review of Economic Studies, 12(2), 100-105. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2296093]
  • Skewes, J. C., L. Skewes, A. Roepstorff, and C. D. Frith(2013), “Doing What Others See: Visuomotor Conversion to Informational Social Influence,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(5), 1291-1303. [https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031572]
  • Stafford, J. E.(1966), “Effects of Group Influences on Consumer Brand Preferences,” Journal of Marketing Research, 3(1), 68-75. [https://doi.org/10.1177/002224376600300108]
  • Strahilevitz, M., and J. G. Myers(1998), “Donations to Charity as Purchase Incentives: How Well They Work May Depend on What You Are Trying to Sell,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 434-446. [https://doi.org/10.1086/209519]
  • Thaler, R.(1985), “Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice,” Marketing Science, 4(3), 199-214. [https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.4.3.199]
  • Tirole, J.(1988). The Theory of Industrial Organization: MIT press.
  • Tversky, A., and R. H. Thaler(1990), “Anomalies: Preference Reversals,” The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 4(2), 201-211. [https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.4.2.201]
  • Venkatesan, M.(1966), “Experimental Study of Consumer Behavior Conformity and Independence,” Journal of Marketing Research, 3(4), 384-387. [https://doi.org/10.1177/002224376600300407]
  • Viscusi, W. K., and J. Huber(2012), “Reference-dependent Valuations of Risk: Why Willingness-to-accept Exceeds Willingness-to-pay,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 44(1), 19-44. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-011-9132-2]
  • Wagner, W., E. Kirchler, and H. Brandstätter(1984), “Marital Relationships and Purchasing Decisions―to Buy or Not to Buy, That Is the Question,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 5(2), 139-157. [https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-4870(84)90003-5]
  • Wegener, D. T., R. E. Petty, K. L. Blankenship, and B. Detweiler-Bedell(2010a), “Elaboration and Numerical Anchoring: Breadth, Depth, and the Role of (non-) Thoughtful Processes in Anchoring Theories,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(1), 28-32. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.12.007]
  • Wegener, D. T., R. E. Petty, K. L. Blankenship, and B. Detweiler-Bedell(2010b),” Elaboration and Numerical Anchoring: Implications of Attitude Theories for Consumer Judgment and Decision Making,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(1), 5-16. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.12.003]
  • Wood, W., and T. Hayes(2012), “Social Influence on Consumer Decisions: Motives, Modes, and Consequences,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 324-328. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2012.05.003]

• 저자 송재도는 현재 전남대학교 경영대학에서 마케팅 전공 부교수로 재직 중이다. 한국과학기술원 경영정책학과에서 학사, 산업경영학과에서 석사과정을 마쳤으며, 경영공학과에서 박사를 취득하였다. 박사 학위 취득 이후 SK텔레콤에서 6년여를 근무하였으며, 동양미래대학에서 강의를 한 바 있다. 주요 연구분야는 가격을 중심으로 한 마케팅 이론이다.