Abstract
This paper aims to analyze the influence sales promotion types have on the relationship between perception of financial risk and perception of utilitarian and hedonic value on consumer purchase intentions. To this end, an experiment was conducted involving 589 participants divided into two groups defined by distinct scenarios in which the sales promotion type (monetary vs. non-monetary) was manipulated. The working hypotheses predicted a direct and positive relationship between the perception of (hedonic and utilitarian) consumption value and purchase intention for a promoted product and a negative relationship between the perception of consumption value and the perception of financial risk. In addition, it was supposed that the sales promotion type would moderate these direct relationships and that a monetary promotion would have a stronger effect on the relationship between purchase intention and perceived product utility, whereas a non-monetary promotion would have a stronger effect on the other relationships (hedonic value and financial risk perceptions). Analysis of the outcomes supported the proposed hypotheses.
sales promotion; hedonic perception; utilitarian perception; financial risk perception
Introduction
Despite being widely used in the management sphere (Bertrand, 1998Bertrand, K. (1998). Premiums prime the market. Advertising Age´s
Business Marketing, 83(5), 6-11.; Wierenga & Soethoudt,
2010Wierenga, B., & Soethoudt, H. (2010). Sales promotions and channel
coordination. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , 38(3), 383-397. doi:
10.1007/s11747-009-0161-1
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-009-0161-...
), sales promotion has scarcely been explored in the academic field (Alvarez & Casielles, 2005Alvarez, B. A., & Casielles, R. V. (2005). Consumer evaluations of
sales promotion: the effect on brand choice. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2),
54-70. doi: 10.1108/03090560510572016
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056051057201...
; D'Astous &
Landreville, 2003).In the business context, Silva (n.d.) indicated that $176 billion
would be invested in such initiatives by the end of 2013, representing an increase of
33% in relation to 2011. Recently, the same organization projected investments of $24
billion in sales promotion activities only on social networks for 2015 (Paglia, 2010Paglia, R. (2010, November 22). Social network marketing spend to reach
$38billion by 2015 [Blog post]. Retrieved from
http://www.automotivedigitalmarketing.com/profiles/blgs/social-media-marketing-3
www.automotivedigitalmarketing.com/profi...
). This projection exceeds the forecast
that advertisement will have investments of $14 billion. In the academic sphere, some
gaps can be observed in the literature, especially regarding the analysis of moderators
that may either enhance or minimize the impact of sales promotion on consumer behavior
(Alvarez & Casielles, 2005Alvarez, B. A., & Casielles, R. V. (2005). Consumer evaluations of
sales promotion: the effect on brand choice. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2),
54-70. doi: 10.1108/03090560510572016
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056051057201...
; Freo, 2005Freo, M. (2005). The impact of sales promotions on store performance: a
structural vector autoregressive approach. Statistical Methods and
Applications,14(2), 271-281. doi: 10.1007/s10260-005-0114-x
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10260-005-0114-...
; Low
& Mohr, 2000Low, G. S., & Mohr, J. J. (2000). Advertising vs sales promotion: a
brand management perspective. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 9(6),
389-414.doi: 10.1108/10610420010356984
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042001035698...
). Therefore, inquiry into how sales promotion type results in
different consumer responses becomes essential (Chandon,Wansink, & Laurent, 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.; Kwok
& Uncles, 2005Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
; Taylor & Neslin,
2005Taylor, G. A., & Neslin, S. A. (2005). The current and future sales
impact of a retail frequency reward program. Journal of Retailing, 81(4),
293-305.doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2004.11.004
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2004.11...
).
Aiming to reduce the aforementioned gap in the literature, this study proposes to examine the moderating effect of sales promotion type (monetary vs. non-monetary) on the relationship between perceived consumption value (hedonic and utilitarian), perceived financial risk and purchase intentions for a promoted product. To this end, an experimental study was conducted involving 589 consumers who were exposed to either monetary or non-monetary product sales promotions.
This study is expected to contribute to the literature in the following ways: (a) to
stimulate discussion of the topic with a view of the scarce literature on the subject
(Alvarez & Casielles, 2005Alvarez, B. A., & Casielles, R. V. (2005). Consumer evaluations of
sales promotion: the effect on brand choice. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2),
54-70. doi: 10.1108/03090560510572016
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056051057201...
; D'Astous &
Landreville, 2003); (b) to deepen understanding of non-monetary sales promotion
techniques, as they have been unsuccessful in relation to monetary promotions (Ailawadi, Beauchamp, Donthu, Gauri, & Shankar,
2009Ailawadi, K. L., Beauchamp, J. P., Donthu, N., Gauri, D. K., &
Shankar, V. (2009). Communication and promotion decisions in retailing: a review and
directions for future research. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 42-55.doi:
10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11...
; Pacheco & Rahman, 2015Pacheco, B. G., & Rahman, A. (2015). Effects of sales promotion type
and promotion depth on consumer perceptions: the moderating role of retailer
reputation. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research,
25(1), 72-86.doi: 10.1080/09593969.2014.918047
https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2014.91...
; Reid,Thompson, Mavondo, & Brunsø,
2015Reid, M., Thompson, P., Mavondo, F., & Brunsø, K. (2015). Economic
and utilitarian benefits of monetary versus non-monetary in-store sales promotions.
Journal of Marketing Management, 31(3/4), 247-268. doi:
10.1080/0267257X.2014.939216
https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2014.93...
); (c) to provide knowledge about consumer responses to two different
sales promotion techniques (Ailawadi et
al., 2009Ailawadi, K. L., Beauchamp, J. P., Donthu, N., Gauri, D. K., &
Shankar, V. (2009). Communication and promotion decisions in retailing: a review and
directions for future research. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 42-55.doi:
10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11...
; Chandon et
al., 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.; Kwok & Uncles,
2005Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
; Taylor & Neslin, 2005Taylor, G. A., & Neslin, S. A. (2005). The current and future sales
impact of a retail frequency reward program. Journal of Retailing, 81(4),
293-305.doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2004.11.004
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2004.11...
); (d)
to provide a better understanding of the relationship between sales promotion and
purchase intention based on the inclusion of moderators (Chandon et al., 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.; Kwok
& Uncles, 2005Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
; Taylor & Neslin,
2005Taylor, G. A., & Neslin, S. A. (2005). The current and future sales
impact of a retail frequency reward program. Journal of Retailing, 81(4),
293-305.doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2004.11.004
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2004.11...
); and (e) to expand on the research of Chandon, Wansink and Laurent (2000)Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81. by including an independent variable
(risk perception).
This study is structured as follows: the article proceeds by presenting the literature review and hypotheses in the next section. The subsequent section describes the methods used, followed by an analysis of the results and final considerations.
Literature Review and Working Hypotheses
Sales promotions are divided into two types: monetary promotions and non-monetary
promotions. Monetary promotions are considered the best alternative for short-term
increased sales, and these promotions play a key role in consumer choices (Alvarez & Casielles, 2005Alvarez, B. A., & Casielles, R. V. (2005). Consumer evaluations of
sales promotion: the effect on brand choice. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2),
54-70. doi: 10.1108/03090560510572016
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056051057201...
). This assumption is
reinforced by Blattberg and Neslin (1990)Blattberg, R. C., & Neslin, S. (1990). Sales promotion concepts,
methods, and strategies.New Jersey: Prentice-Hall., who
argued that this promotion type satisfies consumers' desire for savings. Studies such as
those of Davis, Inman and McAlister (1992)Davis, S., Inman, J. J., & McAlister, L. (1992). Promotion has a
negative effect on brand evaluations: or does it? Additional disconfirming evidence.
Journal of Marketing Research, 29(1), 143-148. doi: 10.2307/3172499
https://doi.org/10.2307/3172499...
and
Taylor and Neslin (2005)Taylor, G. A., & Neslin, S. A. (2005). The current and future sales
impact of a retail frequency reward program. Journal of Retailing, 81(4),
293-305.doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2004.11.004
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2004.11...
indicated that
consumers always respond to monetary promotion campaigns, as this promotion type is
based on a transactional incentive, which provides immediate rewards and utilitarian
benefits (Chandon et al., 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.;
Kwok & Uncles, 2005Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
).
The benefits of non-monetary promotions are not always related to short-term increased
sales (Nbudisi & Moi, 2005Nbudisi, N. O., & Moi, C. T. (2005). Customers behavioural responses
to sales promotion: the role of fear of losing face. Asia Pacific Journal of
Marketing and Logistics, 17(1), 32-49.doi: 10.1108/13555850510672278
https://doi.org/10.1108/1355585051067227...
). These
promotions, such as loyalty programs and prize contests, are related to entertainment
and other actions that aim for long-term effects, such as brand strengthening (Chandon et al., 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.; Kwok & Uncles, 2005Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
).
In general, sales promotions techniques, regardless of their type (monetary or
non-monetary), constitute significant variables that influence consumers' purchase
intentions. Lee (2002)Lee, C. W. (2002). Sales promotions as strategic communication: the case
of Singapore. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 11(2), 103-114.doi:
10.1108/10610420210423473
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042021042347...
, for instance, found that
sales promotions are more effective than advertising in reaching company sales
objectives. Nevertheless, studies conducted in the 1970s, such as Cotton and Babb (1978)Cotton, B. C., & Babb, E. M. (1978). Consumer response to promotion
deals. Journal of Marketing, 42(3), 109-113., and more recent studies such as Alvarez and Casielles (2005)Alvarez, B. A., & Casielles, R. V. (2005). Consumer evaluations of
sales promotion: the effect on brand choice. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2),
54-70. doi: 10.1108/03090560510572016
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056051057201...
have demonstrated the
effectiveness of both monetary and non-monetary sales promotions in consumers' responses
and attitudes. For this reason, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1:Sales promotions positively influence consumers' purchase intentions.
In relation to the effects of promotions on consumers' purchase intentions, the
effect of monetary campaigns are believed to be even stronger. This assumption is
made based on the results of studies such as Lee
(2002)Lee, C. W. (2002). Sales promotions as strategic communication: the case
of Singapore. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 11(2), 103-114.doi:
10.1108/10610420210423473
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042021042347...
, who found that sales campaigns focused on savings (monetary
promotions) performed better than non-monetary promotions and that monetary
promotions are preferred by consumers over non-monetary promotional actions. Gilbert and Jackaria (2002)Gilbert, D. C., & Jackaria, N. (2002). The efficacy of sales
promotions in UK supermarkets: a consumer view. International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, 30(6), 315-322.doi:
10.1108/09590550210429522
https://doi.org/10.1108/0959055021042952...
found that discount
promotions (monetary) have a greater influence on purchase decisions than do
non-monetary promotions (e.g., prize contests). More recently, Nusair,Yoon, Naipaul and Parsa(2010)Nusair, K., Yoon, H. J., Naipaul, S., & Parsa, H. G. (2010). Effect
of price discount frames and levels on consumers' perceptions in low-end service
industries. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22(6),
814-835.doi: 10.1108/09596111011063106
https://doi.org/10.1108/0959611101106310...
similarly
found that discount promotions (monetary) were more effective than prize campaigns
(non-monetary) when the purpose is to influence service acquisition. Given the above
findings, the following hypothesis will be tested in this study:
H2:The effect of monetary sales promotions on consumers' purchase intentions is stronger than that of non-monetary sales promotions.
Another assumption of the present research is that the type of sales promotion (monetary or non-monetary) influences the perceived value of the product offered.
Individuals' motivation for consumption is generally connected with their attitudes
toward brands and their utilitarian and/or hedonic nature (Crowley,Spangenberg, & Hughes, 1992Crowley, A. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Hughes, K. R. (1992).
Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of attitudes toward product
categories. Marketing Letters, 3(3), 239-249.doi: 10.1007/BF00994132
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994132...
; Voss, Spangenberg, & Grohmann, 2003Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring
the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing
Research, 40(3), 310-320.). This fact is also
considered in studies of sales promotions (Chandon
et al., 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.; Kwok
& Uncles, 2005Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
; Park & Mowen,
2007Park, S., & Mowen, J. C. (2007). Replacement purchase decisions: on
the effects of trade‐ins, hedonic versus utilitarian usage goal, and tightwadism.
Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 6(2/3), 123-131.doi: 10.1002/cb.212
https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.212...
; Shukla & Babin, 2013Shukla, P., & Babin, B. J. (2013). Effects of consumer
psychographics and store characteristics in influencing shopping value and store
switching. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 12(3), 194-203.doi:
10.1002/cb.1411
https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1411...
).
Both the works of Chandon et al.
(2000)Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81. and Kwok and Uncles (2005)Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
have linked the benefits of hedonic and utilitarian value to sales promotions types
(monetary and non-monetary).
Thus, it is believed that both types of promotional campaigns (monetary and non-monetary) will affect perceived value and, as consequence, intentions to purchase a promotional product.
H3:The utilitarian perception of the product influences, in a positive way, the product's purchase intention on sales promotion
H4: The hedonic perception of a product influences, in a positive way, the product's purchase intention on sales promotion.
According to the referenced studies, monetary sales promotions foster the perception
of three utilitarian benefits - savings, increased quantity and enhanced convenience
- whereas non-monetary promotions improve hedonic value perceptions - such as
entertainment, exploration and opportunities for value expression. Thus, it is
suggested that monetary promotions are more suitable for products or services that
have a rather utilitarian nature and that non-monetary promotions are better suited
for hedonic products or services (Chandon et
al., 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.; Kwok & Uncles,
2005Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
).
Purchase intentions and utility value perceptions will have a stronger relationship
with consumers exposed to monetary promotions. This assumption is based on the
following principles: (a) monetary promotions positively affect sensitivity to
perceptions of economic benefits (Ailawadi et
al., 2009Ailawadi, K. L., Beauchamp, J. P., Donthu, N., Gauri, D. K., &
Shankar, V. (2009). Communication and promotion decisions in retailing: a review and
directions for future research. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 42-55.doi:
10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11...
; Chandon et
al., 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.; Kwok & Uncles,
2005Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
); (b) monetary promotions predict short-term effects (Alvarez & Casielles, 2005Alvarez, B. A., & Casielles, R. V. (2005). Consumer evaluations of
sales promotion: the effect on brand choice. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2),
54-70. doi: 10.1108/03090560510572016
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056051057201...
; Nusair, Yoon, Naipaul, & Parsa, 2010Nusair, K., Yoon, H. J., Naipaul, S., & Parsa, H. G. (2010). Effect
of price discount frames and levels on consumers' perceptions in low-end service
industries. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22(6),
814-835.doi: 10.1108/09596111011063106
https://doi.org/10.1108/0959611101106310...
)
associated with purchases by quantity and convenience (Laroche, Pons, Zgolli, Cervellon, & Kim, 2003Laroche, M., Pons, F., Zgolli, N., Cervellon, M. C., & Kim, C.
(2003). A model of consumer response to two retail sales promotion techniques.
Journal of Business Research, 56(7), 513-522.doi:
10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00249-1
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00...
), and these
characteristics are directly related to the characteristics of utilitarian value
(Chandon et al., 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.;
Reidet al., 2015Reid, M., Thompson, P., Mavondo, F., & Brunsø, K. (2015). Economic
and utilitarian benefits of monetary versus non-monetary in-store sales promotions.
Journal of Marketing Management, 31(3/4), 247-268. doi:
10.1080/0267257X.2014.939216
https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2014.93...
); and (c)
monetary promotions induce economic behaviors (Kwok
& Uncles, 2005Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
) and consequently relegate quality perceptions to second
place (Martínez & Montaner, 2006Martínez, E., & Montaner, T. (2006). The effect of consumer's
psychographic variables upon deal-proneness. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 13(3), 157-168.doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2005.08.001
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.200...
), and
such perceptions are associated with hedonic value perceptions (Chandon et al., 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.). Thus, the following is
hypothesized:
H5: The type of sales promotion moderates the relationship between the utilitarian value perceptions and purchase intentions for a promoted product, with the perception of utilitarian value being stronger (weaker) for monetary (non-monetary) promotions.
In the sixth hypothesis, a moderating role of the sales promotion type in the
relationship between hedonic product value perceptions and purchase intentions is
expected. In this case, a stronger relationship is expected for consumers exposed to
non-monetary promotion. This assumption is based on the following arguments: (a)
consumers who are exposed to non-monetary campaigns are less sensitive to price
(Ailawadi et al., 2009Ailawadi, K. L., Beauchamp, J. P., Donthu, N., Gauri, D. K., &
Shankar, V. (2009). Communication and promotion decisions in retailing: a review and
directions for future research. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 42-55.doi:
10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11...
);
(b) non-monetary promotions are effective in evoking long-term behaviors, such as
those related to brand image (Aaker, 1991Aaker, D. A. (1991).Managing brand equity: capitalizing on the value of
a brand name. New York: The Free Press.;
Esteban-Bravo, Mugica,& Vidal-Sanz,
2009Esteban-Bravo, M., Mugica, J. M., & Vidal-Sanz, J. (2009). Magazine
sales promotion. Journal of Advertising, 38(1), 137-146.; Gupta, 1988Gupta, S. (1988). Impact of sales promotions on when, what, and how much
to buy. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(4), 342-355.);(c) non-monetary
promotions stimulate exploration perceptions, self-expression and entertainment
(Schindler, 1989Schindler, R. M. (1989). The excitement of getting a bargain: some
hypotheses concerning the origins and effects of smart-shopper feelings. Advances in
Consumer Research, 16(1), 447-453.), which are related to
hedonic value perceptions (Chandon et
al., 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.; Kwok & Uncles,
2005Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
); and (d) non-monetary promotions are aligned with experiential
purchase orientations, as demonstrated in the results of the recent research (Büttner, Florack, & Göritz, 2015Büttner, O. B., Florack, A., & Göritz, A. S. (2015). How shopping
orientation influences the effectiveness of monetary and nonmonetary promotions.
European Journal of Marketing, 49(1/2), 170-189. doi:
10.1108/EJM-01-2012-0044
https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-01-2012-0044...
). Based on
these arguments, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H6: The type of sales promotion moderates the relationship between the hedonic value perceptions and purchase intentions for a promoted product, with hedonic value perceptions being stronger (weaker) for non-monetary (monetary) promotions.
Perceived risk has been proven to be an important construct in explaining consumer
behavior, and its study has been widely discussed (Blackwell,Miniard, & Engel,2005Blackwell, R. D., Miniard, P. W., & Engel, J. F. (2005).
Comportamento do consumidor. São Paulo: Pioneira Thomson Learning.; Solomon, 2011Solomon, M. R. (2011). O comportamento do consumidor. São Paulo:
Bookmann.). This issue has been debated not only in the field of
marketing but also in psychology research (Dholakia,
2000Dholakia, U. M. (2000). Temptation and resistance: an integrated model
of consumption impulse formation and enactment. Psychology & Marketing, 17(11),
955-982.doi:
10.1002/1520-6793(200011)17:11<955::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-J
https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6793(200011...
; Mitchell, 1999Mitchell, V.-W. (1999). Consumer perceived risk: conceptualizations and
models. European Journal of Marketing, 33(1/2), 163-195.doi:
10.1108/03090569910249229
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056991024922...
). Dholakia (2000)Dholakia, U. M. (2000). Temptation and resistance: an integrated model
of consumption impulse formation and enactment. Psychology & Marketing, 17(11),
955-982.doi:
10.1002/1520-6793(200011)17:11<955::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-J
https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6793(200011...
generally defines perceived risk
as a negative feeling that may emerge from the purchase of a product.
Studies such as those conducted by Hisrich,Dornoff
and Kernan (1972)Hisrich, R., Dornoff, R. J.,& Kernan, J. B. (1972). Perceived risk
in store selection. Journal of Marketing Research, 9(4), 435-439. doi:
10.2307/3149311
https://doi.org/10.2307/3149311...
and Choi and Lee
(2003)Choi, J., & Lee, K. H. (2003). Risk perception and e-shopping: a
cross-cultural study. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 7(1), 49-64. doi:
10.1108/13612020310464368
https://doi.org/10.1108/1361202031046436...
have shown that the perception of risk affects a consumer's
propensity to make a buying decision. In this sense, when consumers perceive risks,
they assess those risks before making a decision (Weegels & Kanis, 2000Weegels, M. F., & Kanis, H. (2000). Risk perception in consumer
product use. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 32(3),
365-370.doi:10.1016/S0001-4575(99)00093-7
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4575(99)00...
). These authors also emphasized that the
perception of risk is greater under unusual situations because the lack of prior
knowledge is influenced by a number of factors that strengthen the perception of risk
(Weegels & Kanis, 2000Weegels, M. F., & Kanis, H. (2000). Risk perception in consumer
product use. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 32(3),
365-370.doi:10.1016/S0001-4575(99)00093-7
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4575(99)00...
).
One dimension of perceived risk is financial risk, which occurs when a consumer
perceives a risk of possible monetary loss when buying a product (Dholakia, 2000Dholakia, U. M. (2000). Temptation and resistance: an integrated model
of consumption impulse formation and enactment. Psychology & Marketing, 17(11),
955-982.doi:
10.1002/1520-6793(200011)17:11<955::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-J
https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6793(200011...
). Such a loss could be related to
the depreciation of a product or to potential expenses related to repairs and
maintenance (Mitchell, 1999Mitchell, V.-W. (1999). Consumer perceived risk: conceptualizations and
models. European Journal of Marketing, 33(1/2), 163-195.doi:
10.1108/03090569910249229
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056991024922...
), and it is a
major dimension involved in determining risk perceptions (Agarwal & Teas, 2001Agarwal, S., & Teas, R. K. (2001). Perceived value: mediating role
of perceived risk. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 9(4),
1-14.; Ofir
& Bechtel, 1990Ofir, C., & Bechtel, G. G. (1990). Scaling and dimensionalizing
perceived risk from ratings data: managers´ risk perception of business computers.
Marketing Letters, 1(2), 171-179. doi: 10.1007/BF00435300
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00435300...
).
Simon and Victor (1994)Simon, S. M. H., & Victor, T. F. N.(1994). Customers´ risk
perceptions of electronic payment systems. International Journal of Bank Marketing,
12(8), 26-38.doi: 10.1108/02652329410069029
https://doi.org/10.1108/0265232941006902...
claimed that sales
promotion techniques are effective alternatives for reducing consumer perceptions of
risk. This connection is even clearer in the study by Garretson,Burton and Clow (1999)Garretson, J. A., Burton, S., & Clow, K. E. (1999). The influence of
coupon face value on service quality expectations, risk perceptions and purchase
intentions in the dental industry. The Journal of Services Marketing,13(1),
59-72.doi: 10.1108/08876049910256122
https://doi.org/10.1108/0887604991025612...
, who tested and confirmed the hypothesis
proposing the use of discount coupons (monetary promotion) for reducing perceived
risk associated with service consumption. However, this same study demonstrated that
discount promotions have a negative effect on perceived service quality. Santini (2013)Santini, F. O. (2013). Uma análise da influência da promoção de vendas
de desconto na intenção de compra do consumidor e os efeitos moderadores da
atratividade (Tese de doutorado). Pontifícia Universidade do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto
Alegre, RS, Brasil. tested, among other factors, the
direct effect of perceived financial risk on the intention to purchase a discount
product (monetary promotion). The study confirmed the assumption of a negative
relationship between these two variables. Hence, the following relationship is
expected:
H7:Sales promotions negatively influence the relationship between the financial risk perception of a product and consumer purchase intentions.
Based on the arguments above, promotion that reduces the basic product price can
provoke an attitude of prudence that is related to consumers' cognitive dimensions
and is therefore connected to the utilitarian aspects presumably involved in a
monetary promotion (Chandon et al.,
2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.; Kwok & Uncles, 2005Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
).
Non-monetary promotions, as already mentioned, do not change basic product prices and
are thus expected to have a less harmful effect on the relationship between perceived
financial risk and purchase intentions, as their effect is related to non-functional
benefits.
In addition, unlike monetary promotions that encourage perception of the economic
benefits of a promoted product or service (Ailawadi
et al., 2009Ailawadi, K. L., Beauchamp, J. P., Donthu, N., Gauri, D. K., &
Shankar, V. (2009). Communication and promotion decisions in retailing: a review and
directions for future research. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 42-55.doi:
10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11...
), non-monetary campaigns evoke perceptions
of quality (Chandon et al.,
2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.; Martínez & Montaner,
2006Martínez, E., & Montaner, T. (2006). The effect of consumer's
psychographic variables upon deal-proneness. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 13(3), 157-168.doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2005.08.001
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.200...
). This characteristic aims to combat negative risk perceptions (Apaydin & Koksal, 2011Apaydin, F., & Köksal, M.E. (2011). Turkish consumers´ risk
perception towards global computer brands. International Journal of Marketing
Studies, 3(3), 165-173.doi: 10.5539/ijms.v3n3p165
https://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v3n3p165...
; Shimp & Bearden, 1982Shimp, T. A., & Bearden, W. O. (1982). Warranty and other extrinsic
cue effects on consumers' risk perceptions. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1),
38-46.). Thus, the following hypothesis is
proposed:
H8: The type of sales promotion moderates the relationship between the risk perception and purchase intention of the promoted product, with the perception of risk being stronger (weaker) for monetary (non-monetary) promotions.
Figure 1 shows the antecedents of purchase intentions and the moderating role of promotion type interacting with the direct hypothesized relationships.
Method
Based on the proposed hypotheses, an experimental research design was chosen and was preceded by an exploratory and descriptive step aimed at defining the product, the discount (monetary promotion) and the awards (non-monetary promotion) to be used in the experimental stage.
Exploratory and descriptive stages
In the exploratory stage, data were collected from a secondary source, Groupon, a collective buying site whose products and offered discounts were analyzed over a period of 15 days. From this analysis, it was possible to identify the most common products and the average discounts offered on that group buying site. In the same period, in addition to the referenced site, the most frequent awards granted in prize contests promoted by the Brazilian retail market were surveyed based on information obtained from the National Operations Department of Commercial Promotions, an agency of the Brazilian Federal Savings Bank responsible for the supervision of such promotions.
After identifying the products, discounts and prizes that are most common in the
market, this study conducted descriptive research that culminated in the selection of
the product that was found to be the most familiar and realistic from the view of the
study participants, which is essential to ensure both the internal and external
validity of a laboratory experiment (Wilson,Aronson,
& Carlsmith,2010Wilson, T. D., Aronson, E., & Carlsmith, K. (2010). The art of
laboratory experiment. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey
(Eds.),Handbook of social psychology(Chapter 2, pp. 51-81). doi:
10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy001002
https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470561119.so...
).
For application in the descriptive stage, six different products were selected and
applied individually by means of research instruments with response scales for the
following factors: (a) interest in the product (Bruner & Hensel, 1998Bruner, G. C., & Hensel, P. J. (1998). Marketing scales handbook: a
compilation of multi-items measures(Vol. 2).Chicago: American Marketing
Association.), (b) hedonic or utilitarian value perceptions
(Voss et al., 2003Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring
the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing
Research, 40(3), 310-320.), and
(c) financial risk (Stone & Grønhaug,
1993Stone, R. N., & Grønhaug, K. (1993). Perceived risk: further
considerations for the marketing discipline. European Journal of Marketing, 27(3),
39-50.doi: 10.1108/03090569310026637
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056931002663...
). The questionnaires were administered to 182 business management
students at a higher education institution located in southern Brazil.
This research aimed to analyze a single product from the perspective of the feelings
that the interviewees associated with the product. For this reason, rather than
considering the concepts involved in the research (value and risk perceptions) from
the product perspective, we aimed to address them from the perspective of interviewed
consumers. Accordingly, products that could generate extreme behaviors were excluded,
as such behaviors could affect the results of the survey; for example, a product with
a high perceived financial risk would tend to be associated with weaker purchase
intentions regardless of whether a sales promotion was applied (Chanvarasuth, Sarin, & Sego, 2002Chanvarasuth, N., Sarin, S., & Sego, T. (2002, February). Strategic
use of bundling for marketing new high-tech products: strategies for reducing
consumers' risk perception.Proceedings of AMA Winter Educators' Conference, Austin,
Texas, USA.; Teimoury, Fesharaki, & Bazyar, 2010Teimoury, E., Fesharaki, M.,& Bazyar, A. (2010). The relationship
between mediated power asymmetry, relational risk perception, and governance
mechanism in new product development relationships. Journal of Research in
Interactive Marketing, 4(4), 296-315.doi: 10.1108/17505931011092817
https://doi.org/10.1108/1750593101109281...
).
The selection of the product used in the experimental stage was based on observations of behaviors that are least related to the constructs (purchase intentions, hedonic and utilitarian value perceptions, and financial risk) by analyzing the mean and the variation in participants' responses to each behavior on the basis of standard deviations. Such an analysis identified the netbookas the product that showed the greatest variation in behaviors (purchase intentions, hedonic and utilitarian value perceptions, and financial risk). After the product to be used in the research was identified, the average discount offered for this product by the collective buying site was calculated. This information was obtained during the exploratory stage, as described above. This assessment showed an average discount of 37%, which was used in the monetary promotion experimental scenario. With this same purpose, the campaigns of prize contests authorized by the National Operations Department of Commercial Promotions were examined, revealing the predominance of contests to win brand new cars. Thus, this good was used in manipulating non-monetary sales promotion scenarios.
Experimental stage
The present study was characterized as a laboratory experiment in which two variables were manipulated - the presence of a sales promotion (with or without) and the type of promotion (monetary, discount; non-monetary, prize contests). A within-subjects design was used to analyze the presence of sales promotions, whereas the type of promotion was examined using a between-subjects design.
The participants were randomly assigned to the two possible scenarios. They first received an advertisement for the netbook. The advertisement consisted of a brief description of the product and its stated value, followed by five questions aiming to assess the respondents' purchase intentions. In this scenario, the type of promotion was not manipulated.
Once completed, the questionnaires were collected, and the participants received an advertisement for the same product again with the same features, but in this case, a price discount promotion was included (a monetary promotion). For the non-monetary promotion scenario, the participants received an advertisement for the same product showing the same characteristics and price, but this case featured a prize promotion indicating that those who purchased the product could win a brand new car. In addition to this information, the respondents' purchase intentions, hedonic and utilitarian value perceptions, and financial risk perceptions were measured using the scales mentioned above.
Data collection
The study sample included 600 students selected by quota sampling. It is worth noting that samples of students are recommended when testing the application of a theory in which the homogeneity of respondents is essential (Calder, Philips, & Tybout, 1981Calder, B. J., Philips, L. W., & Tybout, A. M. (1981). Designing research for application. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(2),197-207.). The data were collected in September and October of 2013 in a Higher Education Institute located in Rio Grande do Sul. Only business administration students participated in the research.
Research instrument
The survey instrument was composed of the following constructs: (a) the intention to
purchase the product (both with and without a sales promotion) measured using a
five-item scale (Bruner & Hensel, 1998Bruner, G. C., & Hensel, P. J. (1998). Marketing scales handbook: a
compilation of multi-items measures(Vol. 2).Chicago: American Marketing
Association.),
(b) perceptions of the hedonic (five items) and utilitarian (three items) value of
the product (adapted from Voss et
al., 2003Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring
the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing
Research, 40(3), 310-320.) and (c) the perceived financial risk (three items)
of the promoted product (Stone & Grønhaug,
1993Stone, R. N., & Grønhaug, K. (1993). Perceived risk: further
considerations for the marketing discipline. European Journal of Marketing, 27(3),
39-50.doi: 10.1108/03090569310026637
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056931002663...
). In the Appendix A
Appendix A
Items of the Scales, Averages, Standard Deviation, Factorial Loads, Levels of
Simple Reliability (Alpha) and Composite Reliability
you will
find all the items of the scale used in the study, the average rates, standard
deviations, factor loadings and reliability (simple and composite) and in the
Appendix B
Appendix B
Correlation Matrix
the correlation matrix.
Strange variable control
To control for extraneous variables, none of the offered products were associated
with a brand. This measure aimed to avoid the influence of this variable on the
participants' purchase intentions given that previous studies have reported such a
relationship (Aaker, Kumar, & Day, 1998Aaker, D.A., Kumar, V., & Day, G. (1998).Marketing research. New
York: Wiley & Sons.;
Keller & Lehmann, 2006Keller, K. L., & Lehmann, D. R. (2006). Brands and branding:
research findings and future priorities. Marketing Science,25(6),
740-759.). The
researcher's personal supervision of the administration of questionnaires helped to
control for interactions among respondents, which could be a variable that would
interfere with the results. Another major variable that was controlled because of the
artificiality of the experiment was the financial resources available to
participants, as this variable is an important element of increased purchase
incidence (Hausman, 2000Hausman, A. (2000). A multi-method investigation of consumer motivations
in impulse buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(5) 403-419.doi:
10.1108/07363760010341045
https://doi.org/10.1108/0736376001034104...
; Iyer, 1989Iyer, E. (1989). Unplanned purchasing: knowledge of shopping environment
and time pressure. Journal of Retailing, 65(1), 40-57.). Possible sociodemographic influences
on the research results were also controlled, such as income, sex and age, because
the use of student samples in this type of study allows for homogeneous samples and
enhanced internal validity of the experiment (Peterson, 2001Peterson, R. (2001). On the use of college students in social science
and research: insights from a second-order meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer
Research, 28(3), 450-461.).
Results
The first step before analyzing the results was the purification of the database. At this stage, we excluded outliers from the final sample. For this purpose, the data were scanned to identify questionnaires with a large number of non-responses (4), univariate outliers (5) and multivariate outliers (2). After excluding these questionnaires, the research proceeded with 589 respondents whose incomes were primarily between R$1,000 and R$3,000 (56.4%), whose ages largely ranged from 19 to 25 years (47.4%), and who were primarily female (58.7%). Table 1 presents the demographic information in detail.
Sales promotions and purchase intentions
First, we evaluated the experiment manipulation check. Two variables were manipulated: sales promotion (with or without) and type of sales promotion (monetary vs. non-monetary). Participants were asked if they had noticed differences between the first questionnaire (without promotion) and the second (monetary or non-monetary promotion). Respondents from non-monetary promotion scenarios mentioned that the distribution of the prizes was the discrepant element. Respondents from monetary scenario mentioned that the discount was the discrepant element.
After the manipulation check was confirmed, the first hypothesis predicted that the sales promotion techniques would positively influence consumer purchase intentions and that the discount promotion (monetary) technique would more strongly influence this behavior than the prize promotion (non-monetary) technique.
A t-test was thus performed to evaluate the influence of sales promotions, regardless of type, on consumers' purchase intentions, and an analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to test the hypothesis that predicted a greater and statistically significant difference for the group exposed to a monetary promotion (discount). Figure 2 below presents the results obtained.
First, the results indicate that regardless of the type of sales promotion (monetary or non-monetary), these promotions affected consumers' purchase intentions (mean without promotion = 3.01, SD = 1.18, mean with promotion = 3.38, SD = 1.24, t = -9.346; p <0.001). The results also show that the monetary promotion had a stronger influence on consumer purchase intentions than non-monetary sales promotion (mean monetary promotion = 3.61; SD = 1.26; confidence interval = 3.475 to 3.747; mean non-monetary promotion = 3.15; SD = 1.19; confidence interval = 3.013 to 3.305; F = 5.082; p <0.001), thus confirming H1 and H2. We emphasize that this analysis was conducted using GLM Anova and included gender and age covariates to determine whether they influence the behavior of the effect of sales promotion type on consumer purchase intentions. The results demonstrate that the covariates mentioned did not influence the results, given that their inclusion did not induce a change in behavior (gender : F = 3.406; p= 0.065; income : F= 0.616; p= 0.521; age: F = 2.523; p = 0.113).
This result is consistent with the findings of previous studies demonstrating a
positive effect of sales promotions on consumer behavior (Alvarez & Casielles, 2005Alvarez, B. A., & Casielles, R. V. (2005). Consumer evaluations of
sales promotion: the effect on brand choice. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2),
54-70. doi: 10.1108/03090560510572016
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056051057201...
; Gupta, 1988Gupta, S. (1988). Impact of sales promotions on when, what, and how much
to buy. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(4), 342-355.), and it reinforces the theoretical assumption that sales
promotions are a key strategy for influencing consumer buying behavior (Blattberg & Neslin, 1990Blattberg, R. C., & Neslin, S. (1990). Sales promotion concepts,
methods, and strategies.New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.), stimulating demand
and encouraging brand switching (Davis, Inman, &
McAlister, 1992Davis, S., Inman, J. J., & McAlister, L. (1992). Promotion has a
negative effect on brand evaluations: or does it? Additional disconfirming evidence.
Journal of Marketing Research, 29(1), 143-148. doi: 10.2307/3172499
https://doi.org/10.2307/3172499...
; Gupta, 1988Gupta, S. (1988). Impact of sales promotions on when, what, and how much
to buy. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(4), 342-355.).
Moderating effects of promotion type and the relationship among consumption value, perceived financial risk and purchase intentions
The parameters of the equation model presented appropriate indices: chi-square = 322.489; degrees of freedom = 101; probability level = 0.001; chi-square/degrees of freedom = 3.19; CFI = 0.967; NFI = 0.953; and RMSEA = 0.061.
Multigroup structural equation modeling was used to analyze the hypotheses predicting
moderating effects. This approach allows for categorizing a variable (nominal or
ordinal) into two or more groups to form a moderator hypothesis (Krull & MacKinnon, 2001Krull, J. L.,& Mckinnon, D. P. (2001). Multilevel modelling of
individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36(2),
249-277.doi: 10.1207/S15327906MBR3602_06
https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327906MBR3602...
). In the present
case, the moderator hypothesis suggests a difference in the intention of paths
between the established constructs, given the level of intensity related to the type
of sales promotion. Promotion type (monetary and non-monetary) was manipulated by
applying distinct scenarios in which one group was exposed to a discount (monetary)
promotion and the other to a prize (non-monetary) promotion.
After the groups were separated, to test the moderating effect of promotion type, the parameters were simultaneously estimated for each group.
H3 and H5 predicted a direct relationship between the
perception of utilitarian product value and the intention to buy the promoted product
and a moderating relationship between sales promotion type (monetary
vs. non-monetary) in the relationship between utilitarian value
perceptions and purchase intentions for the promoted product, respectively. The
results from the direct relationship of the two constructs, without the interaction
of sales promotion type, were positive and significant (β = 0.475, p <0.001) and
thus confirm H3. This finding supports the assumptions of Chandonet al. (2000)Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81. and Kwok and Uncles (2005)Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
, who suggested that sales promotions can
be viewed through the lens of visible (extrinsic) utilitarian benefits. Figure 3 shows the findings of the H5 tests.
Figure 3 indicates that the slope is greater
for the monetary promotion (β = 0.712; p <0.001; confidence interval = 0.621 to
0.787) than for the non-monetary promotion (β = 0.310; p <0.001);
i.e., the expected effect is observed. It should be noted that
the chi-square indicator referring to the significant difference between models was
significant (χ2 = 28.260; p <0.001; confidence interval = 0.186 to
0.409), which confirms H5.Considering that monetary promotions are related to price
and, accordingly, to a visible and practical benefit, one could state that this
relationship is associated with the utilitarian rather than hedonic aspects of the
product. This assumption is reinforced when we consider the claims by Hirschman and Holbrook (1982)Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption:
emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92-107.doi:
10.2307/1251707
https://doi.org/10.2307/1251707...
and Ailawadi,Beauchamp, Donthu, Gauri and Shankar
(2009)Ailawadi, K. L., Beauchamp, J. P., Donthu, N., Gauri, D. K., &
Shankar, V. (2009). Communication and promotion decisions in retailing: a review and
directions for future research. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 42-55.doi:
10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.002
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11...
that the price, which is fully linked to the discount (monetary)
promotion, provides a utilitarian benefit composed of the instrumental, functional
and cognitive features that generate a consumer response.
H4 and H6 evaluated the direct effect of hedonic value perceptions and purchase intentions and the moderating effect of sales promotion type on the relationship between hedonic value perceptions and purchase intentions for the promoted product. The direct relationship between the constructs hedonic value perceptions and purchase intentions was confirmed by the findings (β = 0.268; p <0.001), thus supporting H4. Figure 4 presents the testing of H6 to assess the moderating effect of the type of sales promotion on the relationship between hedonic value perceptions and the intention to purchase the promoted product.
Figure 4 shows that the slope was positive and significant for the non-monetary sales
promotion (β = 0.550; p <0.001; confidence interval = 0.457 to 0.653) and not
significant for monetary promotion; i.e., the indices support H6, as there was a
significant difference between the models (χ2 = 32.061; p<0.001). The
results again support the assumptions of Chandon
et al. (2000)Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81. and Kwok
and Uncles (2005)Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
that linked hedonic and utilitarian values to sales
promotion type (monetary and non-monetary). This finding was evidenced by the
confirmation of H6.
The hedonic value dimension is linked to the emotional and experiential aspects, such
that hedonic goods are appreciated without consideration of their practical aspects
(Chandon et al., 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.).
Considering that the monetary promotion is highly connected to price and,
consequently, to a visible and practical benefit of the product, this type of
promotion is related to utilitarian rather than hedonic aspects of the product.
Instead, hedonic perceptions are more strongly related to non-monetary (prize
contest) promotions. Hence, sales promotion technique generates the perception of
exploration and self-expression (Schindler,
1989Schindler, R. M. (1989). The excitement of getting a bargain: some
hypotheses concerning the origins and effects of smart-shopper feelings. Advances in
Consumer Research, 16(1), 447-453.). Research conducted by Büttner,Florack and Göritz (2015)Büttner, O. B., Florack, A., & Göritz, A. S. (2015). How shopping
orientation influences the effectiveness of monetary and nonmonetary promotions.
European Journal of Marketing, 49(1/2), 170-189. doi:
10.1108/EJM-01-2012-0044
https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-01-2012-0044...
showed that consumers with experiential
shopping guidelines choose non-monetary campaigns when compared to task-focused
consumers.
Thus, the discount promotion associated with the perception of hedonic value
generates a state of discomfort in the consumer, leading to an increased sense of
prudence (Davidoff, 1983Davidoff, L. F. (1983). Introdução a psicologia. São Paulo: McGraw-Hill
do Brasil.) and negatively
affecting the hedonic features. Conversely, non-monetary sales promotion, which adds
value rather than decreasing value, is successful by offering a benefit such as a
free gift or the possibility of winning a prize (Apaydin & Koksal, 2011Apaydin, F., & Köksal, M.E. (2011). Turkish consumers´ risk
perception towards global computer brands. International Journal of Marketing
Studies, 3(3), 165-173.doi: 10.5539/ijms.v3n3p165
https://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v3n3p165...
; Shimp &
Bearden, 1982Shimp, T. A., & Bearden, W. O. (1982). Warranty and other extrinsic
cue effects on consumers' risk perceptions. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1),
38-46.), raising the purchase stimulus through the sense of
entertainment (Chandon et al.,
2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.), a characteristic associated with hedonic perception (Voss et al., 2003Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring
the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing
Research, 40(3), 310-320.).
Moreover, a large discount (monetary promotion) may dampen a major feature of hedonic
products, which is the exclusivity associated with such products (Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption:
emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92-107.doi:
10.2307/1251707
https://doi.org/10.2307/1251707...
; Spangenberg,Voss, & Crowley,1997Spangenberg, E. R., Voss, K. E., & Crowley, A. E. (1997). Measuring
the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of attitude: a generally applicable scale.
Advances in Consumer Research, 24(1), 235-241.).
Furthermore, this negative effect may represent a significant obstacle to generating
the need for pleasure and excitement that is essential to encouraging hedonic
consumption (Dhar & Wertenbroch, 2000Dhar, R., & Wertenbroch, K. (2000). Customer choice between hedonic
and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(1), 60-71.doi:
10.1509/jmkr.37.1.60.18718
https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.37.1.60.187...
;
Ramanathan & Menon, 2006Ramanathan, S., & Menon, G. (2006). Time-varying effects of chronic
hedonic goals on impulsive behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), 628-641.
doi: 10.1509/jmkr.43.4.628
https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.43.4.628...
). Finally, the
findings presented in the present study allow us to suggest that monetary promotions
weaken the dimensions of hedonic behavior highlighted by Arnold and Reynolds (2003)Arnold, M. J., & Reynolds, K. E. (2003). Hedonic shopping
motivations. Journal of Retailing, 79(2),
77-95.doi:10.1016/S0022-4359(03)00007-1
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(03)00...
, including the sense of belonging to
certain groups and adherence to innovative styles. This effect occurs because a
substantial rebate on the basic price of a product may facilitate and increase its
appeal to a variety of social groups and classes. This is reduced in monetary sales
promotions since the benefits offered don't have direct benefits on the price (Alvarez & Casielles, 2005Alvarez, B. A., & Casielles, R. V. (2005). Consumer evaluations of
sales promotion: the effect on brand choice. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2),
54-70. doi: 10.1108/03090560510572016
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056051057201...
; Büttner et
al., 2015).
H7 and H8 proposed a direct and negative effect from sales promotions on the relationship between the risk perception and purchase intention of the promoted product and a moderating effect from the type of sales promotion on the relationship between risk perception and purchase intentions, with monetary promotions having a stronger effect on risk perceptions. The direct relationship of these constructs was negative and significant.
The findings support H7 (β = -0.149; p <0.001), reinforcing previous observations
that this perception is negatively associated with consumer purchase intentions.
Similarly, the fear of monetary loss linked to the perception of financial risk is
reinforced, even under the effects of sales promotions (Dholakia, 2000Dholakia, U. M. (2000). Temptation and resistance: an integrated model
of consumption impulse formation and enactment. Psychology & Marketing, 17(11),
955-982.doi:
10.1002/1520-6793(200011)17:11<955::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-J
https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6793(200011...
; Huang,Schrank,
& Dubinsky, 2004Huang, W. Y., Schrank, H., & Dubinsky, A. J. (2004). Effect of brand
name on consumers' risk perceptions of online shopping. Journal of Consumer
Behaviour, 4(1), 40-50.doi:10.1002/cb.156
https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.156...
).
Finally, Figure 5 presents the testing of H8, which predicted a more positive relationship between perceived financial risk and consumer purchase intentions for non-monetary promotions.
A significant and negative relationship between financial risk and purchase intention was observed for the group exposed to a monetary promotion (β = -0.158; p = 0.36; confidence interval = -0.264 to -0.068), whereas the relationship was not significant for the group exposed to a non-monetary promotion (β = -0.028; p >0.05; confidence interval = -0.117 to 0.047). It is worth noting that there was a significant difference between the groups (χ2 = 4.395; p<0.05), thus confirming what was suggested in H8.
The results found for H8 reinforce the assumption that a discount (monetary)
promotion can encourage perceptions of psychological risk and social risk (Jacoby & Kaplan, 1972Jacoby, J., & Kaplan, L. B. (1972). The components of perceived
risk. Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference of the Association for Consumer
Research, Chicago, IL, USA, 3.), corroborating the
proposal by Garretson et al.
(1999)Garretson, J. A., Burton, S., & Clow, K. E. (1999). The influence of
coupon face value on service quality expectations, risk perceptions and purchase
intentions in the dental industry. The Journal of Services Marketing,13(1),
59-72.doi: 10.1108/08876049910256122
https://doi.org/10.1108/0887604991025612...
, who claimed that the perception of product or service quality
should always come first and that promotional tools should be secondary. This study
also found that the discount attached to a service is negatively associated with
perceptions of quality, suggesting that this finding may also apply to a discounted
product.
Final Remarks
The present study aimed to analyze consumer behavior in relation to sales promotions by examining the positive or negative relationships that could explain such behavior and by evaluating the moderating effect of promotion type (either monetary or non-monetary) on this process.
In the academic sphere, this study offers a contribution from at least three
perspectives. First, the literature on sales promotions seeks works
investigating moderators that may either enhance or minimize the impact of these
promotions on consumer behavior (Alvarez &
Casielles, 2005Alvarez, B. A., & Casielles, R. V. (2005). Consumer evaluations of
sales promotion: the effect on brand choice. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2),
54-70. doi: 10.1108/03090560510572016
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056051057201...
; Low & Mohr, 2000Low, G. S., & Mohr, J. J. (2000). Advertising vs sales promotion: a
brand management perspective. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 9(6),
389-414.doi: 10.1108/10610420010356984
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042001035698...
).
Second, there is an academic demand to examine marketing actions that
may be positively related to hedonic and utilitarian product value perceptions (Alzate & Guilhermo, 2003Alzate, W., & Guilhermo, G. A. (2003). The influence of positive
reinforcement and discriminative stimuli on impulsive buying behavior: a behavioural
perspective model(Doctoral dissertation). The University of Guelph, Ontario,
Canada.; Hightower, Brady, & Baker, 2002Hightower, R., Brady, M. K., & Baker, T. L. (2002). Investigating
the role of the physical environment in hedonic service consumption: an exploratory
study of sporting events. Journal of Business Research, 55(9) 697-707.doi:
10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00211-3
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00...
).Third, this study
contributes to filling the gaps in the literature requiring analyses of the potential
effects on the perception of risk associated with a product or service (Garretson,Burton,& Clow, 1999Garretson, J. A., Burton, S., & Clow, K. E. (1999). The influence of
coupon face value on service quality expectations, risk perceptions and purchase
intentions in the dental industry. The Journal of Services Marketing,13(1),
59-72.doi: 10.1108/08876049910256122
https://doi.org/10.1108/0887604991025612...
; Simon & Victor, 1994Simon, S. M. H., & Victor, T. F. N.(1994). Customers´ risk
perceptions of electronic payment systems. International Journal of Bank Marketing,
12(8), 26-38.doi: 10.1108/02652329410069029
https://doi.org/10.1108/0265232941006902...
).
For the business context, the findings point to important guidelines for business
managers. (a) The results show that sales promotions, especially monetary
promotions, can be a key element in inducing the sales of stocked products as
well as a tool for differentiation among highly competitive product categories (Jones, 2008Jones,J. M. (2008). An exploratory study on attitude persistence using
sales promotion. Journal of Managerial Issues, 20(3), 401-416.). Thus, managers can consider the use of
this promotional tool for encouraging consumers to try new products (Nbudisi & Moi, 2005Nbudisi, N. O., & Moi, C. T. (2005). Customers behavioural responses
to sales promotion: the role of fear of losing face. Asia Pacific Journal of
Marketing and Logistics, 17(1), 32-49.doi: 10.1108/13555850510672278
https://doi.org/10.1108/1355585051067227...
), increasing the purchase of
promoted goods (Cotton & Babb, 1978Cotton, B. C., & Babb, E. M. (1978). Consumer response to promotion
deals. Journal of Marketing, 42(3), 109-113.) and
boosting short-term sales volume (Blattberg &
Neslin, 1990Blattberg, R. C., & Neslin, S. (1990). Sales promotion concepts,
methods, and strategies.New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.). (b) The results indicate that a monetary promotion is
more suitable for products that carry utilitarian value because this type of
promotion establishes consistent linkages between the product and offer (Chandon et al., 2000Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency
framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4),
65-81.; Kwok & Uncles, 2005Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the
impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
https://doi.org/10.1108/1061042051060104...
), thus enhancing the
effectiveness of this promotional tool in increasing product sales. (c)
Non-monetary promotions are more appropriate for products with hedonic
value. Therefore, we suggest that for products carrying largely hedonic
attributes, monetary promotions should be avoided while non-monetary actions are
encouraged. Another interesting assumption is linked to the use of this tool to launch
new products, given that this feeling is related to hedonic value perceptions (Kim, 2008Kim, Y.-H. (2008). An empirical examination of consumers innovation
adoption: the role of innovativeness, fashion orientation, and utilitarian and
hedonic consumers attitudes(Master`s thesis). University of North Carolina,
Greensboro, USA. Retrieved from
http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/KIM_uncg_0154M_10046.pdf
libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/KIM_uncg_0154M...
; Venkatraman & Price, 1990Venkatraman, M. P., & Price, L. P. (1990). Differentiating between
cognitive and sensory innovativeness: concepts, measurement and their implications.
Journal of Business Research, 20(4),
293-315.doi:10.1016/0148-2963(90)90008-2
https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(90)900...
), and the findings revealed a positive
relationship between this perception and the intention to purchase a promoted product.
(d) Non-monetary promotions are more effective for reducing the perception of
financial risk; i.e., discount promotions are not the most
appropriate tools for encouraging the purchase of a product that evokes the perception
of financial risk. It is emphasized that such an initiative should be considered based
on the assessment of other variables related to the segment in which a company operates
and the level of competitiveness of the product category, in addition to the profile of
consumers served.
The subject of sales promotions and its investigation still have extensive room for
debate because, despite being a widespread and important management technique, this
subject has scarcely been studied in the academic context (Alvarez & Casielles, 2005Alvarez, B. A., & Casielles, R. V. (2005). Consumer evaluations of
sales promotion: the effect on brand choice. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2),
54-70. doi: 10.1108/03090560510572016
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056051057201...
; D'Astous & Landreville, 2003D´Astous, A., & Landreville, L. (2003). An experimental
investigation of factors affecting consumers' perceptions of sales promotions.
European Journal of Marketing, 37(11/12), 1746-1761.doi:
10.1108/03090560310495447
https://doi.org/10.1108/0309056031049544...
; Jones,
2008Jones,J. M. (2008). An exploratory study on attitude persistence using
sales promotion. Journal of Managerial Issues, 20(3), 401-416.). From this perspective, the current study seeks to contribute to a
better understanding of behaviors related to sales promotions and their relationship
with consumer purchase intentions. Nevertheless, the study has methodological
limitations that must be considered. The analysis of risk perception was restricted to
the dimension of financial risk. It is suggested that future studies evaluate other
dimensions of risk within the proposed relationships. Similarly, as noted earlier, the
interaction between products and services and their relationships with sales promotion
techniques and perceived risk should be analyzed to verify possible differences in these
relationships. It would also be interesting to evaluate other samples and sales
promotion techniques (monetary and non-monetary) to assess the consolidation of the
results found here. In this sense, based on the findings of this study, it would be
worth analyzing and comparing how these constructs are affected by both sales promotions
and advertising actions.
References
- Aaker, D. A. (1991).Managing brand equity: capitalizing on the value of a brand name. New York: The Free Press.
- Aaker, D.A., Kumar, V., & Day, G. (1998).Marketing research. New York: Wiley & Sons.
- Agarwal, S., & Teas, R. K. (2001). Perceived value: mediating role of perceived risk. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 9(4), 1-14.
- Ailawadi, K. L., Beauchamp, J. P., Donthu, N., Gauri, D. K., & Shankar, V. (2009). Communication and promotion decisions in retailing: a review and directions for future research. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 42-55.doi: 10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.002
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.002 - Alvarez, B. A., & Casielles, R. V. (2005). Consumer evaluations of sales promotion: the effect on brand choice. European Journal of Marketing, 39(1/2), 54-70. doi: 10.1108/03090560510572016
» https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560510572016 - Alzate, W., & Guilhermo, G. A. (2003). The influence of positive reinforcement and discriminative stimuli on impulsive buying behavior: a behavioural perspective model(Doctoral dissertation). The University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
- Apaydin, F., & Köksal, M.E. (2011). Turkish consumers´ risk perception towards global computer brands. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 3(3), 165-173.doi: 10.5539/ijms.v3n3p165
» https://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v3n3p165 - Arnold, M. J., & Reynolds, K. E. (2003). Hedonic shopping motivations. Journal of Retailing, 79(2), 77-95.doi:10.1016/S0022-4359(03)00007-1
» https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(03)00007-1 - Bertrand, K. (1998). Premiums prime the market. Advertising Age´s Business Marketing, 83(5), 6-11.
- Blackwell, R. D., Miniard, P. W., & Engel, J. F. (2005). Comportamento do consumidor. São Paulo: Pioneira Thomson Learning.
- Blattberg, R. C., & Neslin, S. (1990). Sales promotion concepts, methods, and strategies.New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
- Bruner, G. C., & Hensel, P. J. (1998). Marketing scales handbook: a compilation of multi-items measures(Vol. 2).Chicago: American Marketing Association.
- Büttner, O. B., Florack, A., & Göritz, A. S. (2015). How shopping orientation influences the effectiveness of monetary and nonmonetary promotions. European Journal of Marketing, 49(1/2), 170-189. doi: 10.1108/EJM-01-2012-0044
» https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-01-2012-0044 - Calder, B. J., Philips, L. W., & Tybout, A. M. (1981). Designing research for application. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(2),197-207.
- Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4), 65-81.
- Chanvarasuth, N., Sarin, S., & Sego, T. (2002, February). Strategic use of bundling for marketing new high-tech products: strategies for reducing consumers' risk perception.Proceedings of AMA Winter Educators' Conference, Austin, Texas, USA.
- Choi, J., & Lee, K. H. (2003). Risk perception and e-shopping: a cross-cultural study. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 7(1), 49-64. doi: 10.1108/13612020310464368
» https://doi.org/10.1108/13612020310464368 - Cotton, B. C., & Babb, E. M. (1978). Consumer response to promotion deals. Journal of Marketing, 42(3), 109-113.
- Crowley, A. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Hughes, K. R. (1992). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of attitudes toward product categories. Marketing Letters, 3(3), 239-249.doi: 10.1007/BF00994132
» https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994132 - D´Astous, A., & Landreville, L. (2003). An experimental investigation of factors affecting consumers' perceptions of sales promotions. European Journal of Marketing, 37(11/12), 1746-1761.doi: 10.1108/03090560310495447
» https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560310495447 - Davidoff, L. F. (1983). Introdução a psicologia. São Paulo: McGraw-Hill do Brasil.
- Davis, S., Inman, J. J., & McAlister, L. (1992). Promotion has a negative effect on brand evaluations: or does it? Additional disconfirming evidence. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(1), 143-148. doi: 10.2307/3172499
» https://doi.org/10.2307/3172499 - Dhar, R., & Wertenbroch, K. (2000). Customer choice between hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(1), 60-71.doi: 10.1509/jmkr.37.1.60.18718
» https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.37.1.60.18718 - Dholakia, U. M. (2000). Temptation and resistance: an integrated model of consumption impulse formation and enactment. Psychology & Marketing, 17(11), 955-982.doi: 10.1002/1520-6793(200011)17:11<955::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-J
» https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6793(200011)17:11<955::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-J - Esteban-Bravo, M., Mugica, J. M., & Vidal-Sanz, J. (2009). Magazine sales promotion. Journal of Advertising, 38(1), 137-146.
- Freo, M. (2005). The impact of sales promotions on store performance: a structural vector autoregressive approach. Statistical Methods and Applications,14(2), 271-281. doi: 10.1007/s10260-005-0114-x
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s10260-005-0114-x - Garretson, J. A., Burton, S., & Clow, K. E. (1999). The influence of coupon face value on service quality expectations, risk perceptions and purchase intentions in the dental industry. The Journal of Services Marketing,13(1), 59-72.doi: 10.1108/08876049910256122
» https://doi.org/10.1108/08876049910256122 - Gilbert, D. C., & Jackaria, N. (2002). The efficacy of sales promotions in UK supermarkets: a consumer view. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 30(6), 315-322.doi: 10.1108/09590550210429522
» https://doi.org/10.1108/09590550210429522 - Gupta, S. (1988). Impact of sales promotions on when, what, and how much to buy. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(4), 342-355.
- Hausman, A. (2000). A multi-method investigation of consumer motivations in impulse buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(5) 403-419.doi: 10.1108/07363760010341045
» https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760010341045 - Hightower, R., Brady, M. K., & Baker, T. L. (2002). Investigating the role of the physical environment in hedonic service consumption: an exploratory study of sporting events. Journal of Business Research, 55(9) 697-707.doi: 10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00211-3
» https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00211-3 - Hirschman, E. C., & Holbrook, M. B. (1982). Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 92-107.doi: 10.2307/1251707
» https://doi.org/10.2307/1251707 - Hisrich, R., Dornoff, R. J.,& Kernan, J. B. (1972). Perceived risk in store selection. Journal of Marketing Research, 9(4), 435-439. doi: 10.2307/3149311
» https://doi.org/10.2307/3149311 - Huang, W. Y., Schrank, H., & Dubinsky, A. J. (2004). Effect of brand name on consumers' risk perceptions of online shopping. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 4(1), 40-50.doi:10.1002/cb.156
» https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.156 - Iyer, E. (1989). Unplanned purchasing: knowledge of shopping environment and time pressure. Journal of Retailing, 65(1), 40-57.
- Jacoby, J., & Kaplan, L. B. (1972). The components of perceived risk. Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference of the Association for Consumer Research, Chicago, IL, USA, 3.
- Jones,J. M. (2008). An exploratory study on attitude persistence using sales promotion. Journal of Managerial Issues, 20(3), 401-416.
- Keller, K. L., & Lehmann, D. R. (2006). Brands and branding: research findings and future priorities. Marketing Science,25(6), 740-759.
- Kim, Y.-H. (2008). An empirical examination of consumers innovation adoption: the role of innovativeness, fashion orientation, and utilitarian and hedonic consumers attitudes(Master`s thesis). University of North Carolina, Greensboro, USA. Retrieved from http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/KIM_uncg_0154M_10046.pdf
» libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/KIM_uncg_0154M_10046.pdf - Krull, J. L.,& Mckinnon, D. P. (2001). Multilevel modelling of individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36(2), 249-277.doi: 10.1207/S15327906MBR3602_06
» https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327906MBR3602_06 - Kwok, S., & Uncles, M. (2005). Sales promotion effectiveness: the impact of consumer differences at an ethnic-group level. The Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14(3), 170-186.doi: 10.1108/10610420510601049
» https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420510601049 - Laroche, M., Pons, F., Zgolli, N., Cervellon, M. C., & Kim, C. (2003). A model of consumer response to two retail sales promotion techniques. Journal of Business Research, 56(7), 513-522.doi: 10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00249-1
» https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00249-1 - Lee, C. W. (2002). Sales promotions as strategic communication: the case of Singapore. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 11(2), 103-114.doi: 10.1108/10610420210423473
» https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420210423473 - Low, G. S., & Mohr, J. J. (2000). Advertising vs sales promotion: a brand management perspective. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 9(6), 389-414.doi: 10.1108/10610420010356984
» https://doi.org/10.1108/10610420010356984 - Martínez, E., & Montaner, T. (2006). The effect of consumer's psychographic variables upon deal-proneness. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 13(3), 157-168.doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2005.08.001
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2005.08.001 - Mitchell, V.-W. (1999). Consumer perceived risk: conceptualizations and models. European Journal of Marketing, 33(1/2), 163-195.doi: 10.1108/03090569910249229
» https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569910249229 - Nbudisi, N. O., & Moi, C. T. (2005). Customers behavioural responses to sales promotion: the role of fear of losing face. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 17(1), 32-49.doi: 10.1108/13555850510672278
» https://doi.org/10.1108/13555850510672278 - Nusair, K., Yoon, H. J., Naipaul, S., & Parsa, H. G. (2010). Effect of price discount frames and levels on consumers' perceptions in low-end service industries. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22(6), 814-835.doi: 10.1108/09596111011063106
» https://doi.org/10.1108/09596111011063106 - Ofir, C., & Bechtel, G. G. (1990). Scaling and dimensionalizing perceived risk from ratings data: managers´ risk perception of business computers. Marketing Letters, 1(2), 171-179. doi: 10.1007/BF00435300
» https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00435300 - Pacheco, B. G., & Rahman, A. (2015). Effects of sales promotion type and promotion depth on consumer perceptions: the moderating role of retailer reputation. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 25(1), 72-86.doi: 10.1080/09593969.2014.918047
» https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2014.918047 - Paglia, R. (2010, November 22). Social network marketing spend to reach $38billion by 2015 [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.automotivedigitalmarketing.com/profiles/blgs/social-media-marketing-3
» www.automotivedigitalmarketing.com/profiles/blgs/social-media-marketing-3 - Park, S., & Mowen, J. C. (2007). Replacement purchase decisions: on the effects of trade‐ins, hedonic versus utilitarian usage goal, and tightwadism. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 6(2/3), 123-131.doi: 10.1002/cb.212
» https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.212 - Peterson, R. (2001). On the use of college students in social science and research: insights from a second-order meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 450-461.
- Ramanathan, S., & Menon, G. (2006). Time-varying effects of chronic hedonic goals on impulsive behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), 628-641. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.43.4.628
» https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.43.4.628 - Reid, M., Thompson, P., Mavondo, F., & Brunsø, K. (2015). Economic and utilitarian benefits of monetary versus non-monetary in-store sales promotions. Journal of Marketing Management, 31(3/4), 247-268. doi: 10.1080/0267257X.2014.939216
» https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2014.939216 - Santini, F. O. (2013). Uma análise da influência da promoção de vendas de desconto na intenção de compra do consumidor e os efeitos moderadores da atratividade (Tese de doutorado). Pontifícia Universidade do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil.
- Schindler, R. M. (1989). The excitement of getting a bargain: some hypotheses concerning the origins and effects of smart-shopper feelings. Advances in Consumer Research, 16(1), 447-453.
- Shimp, T. A., & Bearden, W. O. (1982). Warranty and other extrinsic cue effects on consumers' risk perceptions. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 38-46.
- Shukla, P., & Babin, B. J. (2013). Effects of consumer psychographics and store characteristics in influencing shopping value and store switching. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 12(3), 194-203.doi: 10.1002/cb.1411
» https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1411 - Silva, C. (n.d.). Investimento em promoções superam gastos com anúncios locais.Tigre Net Marketing e Negócios Online. Recuperado dehttp://tigrenet.com.br/investimento-em-promocoes-superam-gastos-com-anuncios/
» tigrenet.com.br/investimento-em-promocoes-superam-gastos-com-anuncios/ - Simon, S. M. H., & Victor, T. F. N.(1994). Customers´ risk perceptions of electronic payment systems. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 12(8), 26-38.doi: 10.1108/02652329410069029
» https://doi.org/10.1108/02652329410069029 - Solomon, M. R. (2011). O comportamento do consumidor. São Paulo: Bookmann.
- Spangenberg, E. R., Voss, K. E., & Crowley, A. E. (1997). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of attitude: a generally applicable scale. Advances in Consumer Research, 24(1), 235-241.
- Stone, R. N., & Grønhaug, K. (1993). Perceived risk: further considerations for the marketing discipline. European Journal of Marketing, 27(3), 39-50.doi: 10.1108/03090569310026637
» https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569310026637 - Taylor, G. A., & Neslin, S. A. (2005). The current and future sales impact of a retail frequency reward program. Journal of Retailing, 81(4), 293-305.doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2004.11.004
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2004.11.004 - Teimoury, E., Fesharaki, M.,& Bazyar, A. (2010). The relationship between mediated power asymmetry, relational risk perception, and governance mechanism in new product development relationships. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 4(4), 296-315.doi: 10.1108/17505931011092817
» https://doi.org/10.1108/17505931011092817 - Venkatraman, M. P., & Price, L. P. (1990). Differentiating between cognitive and sensory innovativeness: concepts, measurement and their implications. Journal of Business Research, 20(4), 293-315.doi:10.1016/0148-2963(90)90008-2
» https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(90)90008-2 - Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310-320.
- Weegels, M. F., & Kanis, H. (2000). Risk perception in consumer product use. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 32(3), 365-370.doi:10.1016/S0001-4575(99)00093-7
» https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4575(99)00093-7 - Wierenga, B., & Soethoudt, H. (2010). Sales promotions and channel coordination. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , 38(3), 383-397. doi: 10.1007/s11747-009-0161-1
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-009-0161-1 - Wilson, T. D., Aronson, E., & Carlsmith, K. (2010). The art of laboratory experiment. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.),Handbook of social psychology(Chapter 2, pp. 51-81). doi: 10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy001002
» https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy001002
Appendix A Items of the Scales, Averages, Standard Deviation, Factorial Loads, Levels of Simple Reliability (Alpha) and Composite Reliability
Appendix B Correlation Matrix
Publication Dates
-
Publication in this collection
Apr-Jun 2015