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. 45, No. 3, pp.829-847
ISSN: 1226-1874 (Print)
Print publication date 30 Jun 2016
Received 20 Apr 2015 Revised 19 Oct 2015 Accepted 21 Feb 2016
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17287/kmr.2016.45.3.829

의사결정 프로세스를 고려한 불확실성의 인지적 차이에 대한 실증 연구

최도영* ; 이건창**
*(주저자) 대전대학교 경영학과 조교수 dychoi96@gmail.com
**(교신저자) 성균관대학교 경영대학/SAIHST 교수 kunchanglee@gmail.com
An Empirical Study on the Cognitive Differentiation of Uncertainty Embedded in the Decision-Making Process of e-Commerce: Mind-Set Theory Perspective
Do Young Choi* ; Kun Chang Lee**
*Assistant Professor, Department of Business Administration, Daejeon University, First Author dychoi96@gmail.com
**Professor, SKK Business School/SAIHST(Samsung Advanced Institute for Health Sciences & Technology), Sungkyunkwan University, Corresponding Author kunchanglee@gmail.com

초록

본 연구에서는 전자상거래를 통한 의사결정 프로세스 전체 관점에서 단계별로 의사결정자의 불확실성을 감소시켜 의사결정의 질(QoD)을 향상시키기 위한 기제를 마련하기 위해 의사결정 이전과 의사결정 이후로 구분하여 인지된 불확실성에 차이가 있는지를 측정하였다. 이를 위해, 기존의 의사결정이론과 마음상태이론의 입장에서 전자상거래 상에서의 의사결정 단계 전체 관점에서 불확실성을 고찰하고, 의사결정 단계에 따라 인지된 불확실성에 차이가 있는지를 실증분석 하였다. 본 연구에서는 전자상거래를 이용한 해외직구 상황에서의 실험연구를 통해 의사결정 이전 그룹과 의사결정 이후 그룹 간의 인지된 불확실성에 차이가 있는 것을 확인하였으며, 의사결정 이전의 인지된 불확실성이 의사결정 이후의 인지된 불확실성 보다 높은 것으로 확인되었다. 구체적으로, 측정된 네 가지 불확실성 – 브랜드에 대한 불확실성, 성능에 대한 불확실성, 행위에 대한 불확실성, 환경에 대한 불확실성 – 중 브랜드에 대한 불확실성과 행위에 대한 불확실성에서 의사결정 이전 그룹의 인지된 불확실성이 의사결정 이후 그룹의 인지된 불확실성 보다 높은 것으로 확인되었다. 이러한 결과는 의사결정 이전의 마음상태인 숙고하는 마음상태에서의 인지적 구조와 행동이 의사결정 이후의 마음상태인 실행하는 마음상태에서의 인지적 구조와 행동과 다르다는 마음상태 이론의 설명을 지지하는 결과라고 할 수 있다.

Abstract

Despite the fact that there exists a great deal of previous studies regarding uncertainty under e-Commerce environment, they seem to simply focus on considering trust as a factor which could reduce uncertainty and its effect. In this respect, previous studies about handling uncertainty issues in the process of e-Commerce seem to be mainly focused on measuring uncertainty about the e-Commerce seller or websites itself. Recently, studies about the uncertainty involved in e-Commerce have started to decompose the uncertainty into two categories such as product uncertainty and seller uncertainty. When the uncertainty is categorized into two types, it became easier for the researchers to identify those factors affecting the uncertainty. However, this study was initiated by the research motivation that it is not sufficient for the uncertainty to be divided into product uncertainty and seller uncertainty. Rather, it seems that we have neglected an important fact how decision makers perceive the uncertainty when they try to make decisions in the process of conducting e-Commerce activities.

In one words, decision makers feel uncertainty throughout the whole phases of making decisions about the e-Commerce transactions, from initial phase to a final phase. Decision makers start to feel uncertainty when they started browsing e-Commerce websites to look for right products and sellers with reasonable price and trustworthy transaction conditions. They also feel uncertainty when they need to pay with credit cards. Even they feel uncertainty, to some degree, after they pay and wait for the arrival of products. However, there are few studies in literature about the uncertainty management in the fields of e-Commerce in which uncertainty is handled throughout the whole phases of decision-making.

Therefore, this study proposes measuring uncertainty both in the pre-decision stage, and post-decision stage in order to reduce uncertainty and enhance QoD(Quality of Decision) with respect to the e-Commerce activities. Decision here implies an e-Commerce decision. Empirical results with valid 43 participants (21 for the pre-decision stage, and 23 for the post-decision stage) revealed that there exist significant differences in the level of perceived uncertainty between the pre-decision stage and post-decision stage. The level of perceived uncertainty for the pre-decision stage was higher than that of the post-decision stage. To be specific, we divided uncertainty into four dimensions- uncertainty about the brand of e-Commerce sellers (or websites), uncertainty about the product performance, uncertainty about the behavior of e-Commerce sellers (or websites), and uncertainty about the environment of e-Commerce sellers (or websites). Results were that the perceived uncertainty about the brand and behavior of e-Commerce sellers in the pre-decision stage was higher than that in the post-decision stage.

Out of the empirical results like this, we could build a new conceptualization mechanism about uncertainty by using a mind-set theory showing that the cognitive structure and behavior in deliberative mind-set which refers to the state of mind before decision is different from cognitive structure and behavior in implemental mind-set which refers to the state of mind after decision. We hope that our results may be helpful for the researchers to develop a new theory to analyze the uncertainty embedded in e-Commerce activities.

Keywords:

Uncertainty, Purchase decision-making, Mind-set theory

키워드:

인지된 불확실성, 구매의사결정, 마음상태이론

Acknowledgments

이 논문은 2014년 교육부의 재원으로 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임(NRF-2014S1A3A2038108).This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government(NRF-2014S1A3A2038108).

References

  • Akerlof, G.(1970). The Market for ‘Lemons’: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90, 488-500. [https://doi.org/10.2307/1879431]
  • Anderson, B. F., Deane, D. H., Hammond, K. R., McClelland, G. H., and Shanteau, J.C. (1981). Concepts in Judgment and Decision Research: Definitions, Sources, Interrelations, Comments, New York: Praeger Publishers.
  • Bettman, J.R. (1979). An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice, Addison-Wesley Publisher.
  • Chandran, S., and Morwitz, V. G.(2005). Effects of Participative Pricing on Consumer’s Cognitions and Actions: A Goal Theoretic Perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (2), 249-259. [https://doi.org/10.1086/432234]
  • Chatterjee. S., and Datta, P.(2008). Examining Inefficiencies and Consumer Uncertainty in E-Commerce. Communications of Association for Information Systems, 22, 525-546. [https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.02229]
  • Cheema, A., and Patrick, V. M.(2008). Anytime Versus Only: Mindsets Moderate the Effect of Expansive Versus Restrictive Frames on Promotion Evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(4), 462-272. [https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.45.4.462]
  • Davis, S. M., and Dunn, M. (2002). Building Brand-Driven Business: Operationalize Your Brand to Drive Profitable Growth, San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
  • Dhar, R., Huber, J., and Khan, U.(2007). The shopping momentum effect. Journal of Marketing Research, 44, 370-378. [https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.44.3.370]
  • Dimoka, A., and Pavlou, P. A.(2008). Understanding and Mitigating Product Uncertainty in Online Auction Marketplaces. Industry Studies Association Working Paper(WP-2008-16), 1-58.
  • Dimoka, A., Hong, Y., and Pavlou, P. A.(2012). On Product Uncertainty in Online Markets: Theory and Evidence. MIS Quarterly, 36(2), 396-427. [https://doi.org/10.2307/41703461]
  • Downey, H. K., and Slocum, J.(1975). Uncertainty: Measures, Research, and Sources of Variation. Academy of Management Journal, 18, 562-578. [https://doi.org/10.5465/255685]
  • Duncan, R.(1972). Characteristics of Organizational Environments and Perceived Environmental Uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 313-327. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2392145]
  • Engel, J. E., R. D. and Paul, W. M.(1997). Consumer Behavior, 7th Edition, the Dryden Press.
  • Gifford, W. E., Bobbitt. H. R., and Slocum Jr., J. W.(1979) Message Characteristics and Perceptions of Uncertainty by Organizational Decision Makers. Academy of Management Journal, 22(3), 458-481. [https://doi.org/10.5465/255738]
  • Gollwitzer, P. M., and Kinney, R. F.(1989). Effects of Deliberative and Implemental Mind-sets on Illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 531-542. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.4.531]
  • Freitas, A. L., Gollwitzer, P., and Trope, Y.(2004). The Influence of Abstract and Concrete Mindsets on Anticipating and Guiding other’s Self-regulatory Efforts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 739-752. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2004.04.003]
  • Ghose, A., Smith, M. D., and Telang, R.(2006). Internet Exchanges for Used Books: An Empirical Analysis of Product Cannibalization and Welfare Impact. Information System Research, 17(1), 3-19. [https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1050.0072]
  • Heckhausen, H., and Kuhl, J.(1985). From Wishes to Action: The Dead Ends Short Cuts on the Long Way to Action. In Michael Frese and John Sabini(eds.), Goal Directed Behavior: The Concept of Action in Psychology. L. Erlbaum Associates.
  • Humphreys, P., and Berkeley, D.(1985). Handling Uncertainty: Levels of Analysis of Decision Problem. In G. Wright(Ed.), Behavioral Decision-making. New York: Plenum Press. [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-2391-4_12]
  • McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., and Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and Validating Trust Measures for E-Commerce: An Integrative Typology. Information Systems Research, 13(3), 334-359. [https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.3.334.81]
  • Olshavsky, R., and Granbois, D. H.(1979). Consumer Decision-making-fact or Fiction? Journal of Consumer Research, 6(2), 93-100. [https://doi.org/10.1086/208753]
  • Pavlou, P. A., Liang, H., and Xue, Y.(2007). Understanding and Mitigating Uncertainty in Online Exchange Relationships: A Principalagent Perspective. MIS Quarterly, 31(1), 105-136. [https://doi.org/10.2307/25148783]
  • Pfeffer, J., and Salanick, G. R.(1978). A Social Information Processing Approach to Job Attitudes and Task Design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(2), 224-253. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2392563]
  • Simon, H. A.(1957). Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision Making Processes in Administrative Organization, New York: Macmillan.
  • Simon, H. A. (1977). The New Science of Management Decision, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Solomon, M. R. (2001). Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having, Being, 5th Edition, Eaglewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Taylor, E. S., and Gollwitzer, P. M.(1995). Effects of Mindset on Positive Illusions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(2), 213-226. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.2.213]
  • Thompson, J.(1967). Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw Hill.
  • Thompson, Teo, S. H., and Yu, Y. (2005). Online Buying Behavior: A Transaction Cost Economics Perspective. The International Journal of Management Science, 33, 451-465. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2004.06.002]
  • Wilkie, W. L.(1994). Consumer Behavior, 3rd Rdition, Wiley.

·저자 최도영은 현재 대전대학교 경영학과 생산관리 전공 조교수로 재직 중이다. 서울대학교 경영대학을 졸업하였으며, 성균관대학교에서 MIS/생산운영관리로 경영학 박사를 취득하였다. 주요 연구분야는 에이전트기반모델링, 인공신경망, 소셜네트워크, 의사결정, 감성공학, 뉴로사이언스 등이다.

·저자 이건창은 한국과학기술원(KAIST) 경영과학과에서 석사 및 박사를 취득하고 현재 성균관대학교 경영대학과 삼성융합의과학원(SAIHST)에서 교수로 재직중이다. 그는 또한 성균관대학교 창의성과학연구원 (CSRI: Creativity Science Research Institute) 원장으로 재직 중이다. 주요 연구분야는 창의성과학, 뉴로과학을 이용한 의사결정분석, 감성과학, 인공지능 기반 의사결정, 상황인지 및 예측 모델링, 그리고 휴먼-로봇 인터랙션 (HRI) 등이다.