DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on the Choice Attribute of Chocolate according to the Purchasing Purpose - Focused on Self-gift and Interpersonal Gift -

구매 목적에 따른 초콜릿 선택속성에 관한 연구 - 본인선물과 타인선물 중심으로 -

  • Jeon, Do-Hyun (Department of Hotel Culinary & Bakery, Seoyeong University) ;
  • Kim, Seon-Hee (Department of Culinary & Food Service Management, Sejong University) ;
  • Jeon, Hyeon-Mo (Department of Hotel, Tourism, and Foodservice Management, Dongguk University-Gyeongju)
  • 전도현 (서영대학교 호텔조리제빵과) ;
  • 김선희 (세종대학교 조리외식경영학과) ;
  • 전현모 (동국대학교 경주캠퍼스 호텔관광외식경영학부)
  • Received : 2019.10.29
  • Accepted : 2020.03.25
  • Published : 2020.04.30

Abstract

This study was conducted to identify the choice attributes in the purchase of chocolate and to identify differences between the choices, by considering the purpose of purchase being self-gift or interpersonal gift. The preferred optional attributes considered and assessed were capacity, package, product composition, brand reputation, and sensuality. The survey included customers who purchased chocolates from June 1, 2017 to August 31, 2017. T-test was applied to verify the difference in optional attributes depending on the purpose of purchase. Our results indicate that people consider packages, product composition, and reputation for interpersonal gifts, and that Valentine's Day purchases are frequently for themselves and others' gifts. Our results will help to identify chocolate consumption behavior, and will facilitate in establishing chocolate product composition and development as well as brand positioning strategies, through factors affecting preferences based on the purpose of purchase.

References

  1. Baskin E, Wakslak CJ, Trope Y, Novemsky N. 2014. Why feasibility matters more to gift receivers than to givers: a construal-level approach to gift giving. J. Consum. Res., 41(1):169-182 https://doi.org/10.1086/675737
  2. Kang SH, Lee YM. 2013. Menstruation and the variability of food intake in female college students. Korean J. commun. Nutrit., 18(6):577-587 https://doi.org/10.5720/kjcn.2013.18.6.577
  3. Kang YH, Kim JH. 2018. A study on consumers preferences according to the role of gift giving: focused on regulatory mode. J. Consum. Studies, 29(3):1-16
  4. Kim DY, Park SB. 2015. Category vs. ranking effect: influence of construal level on the decision making difference between gift giving and self use. J. Consum. Studies, 26(5):23-49
  5. Kim HS, Lee WS, Cho WC. 2013. Study on importance and preference of female university students for bakery products. Foodservice Indus. J., 9(1):111-125 https://doi.org/10.22509/kfsa.2013.9.1.009
  6. Kim SH, Jeon HM. 2018a. Consumer behavior on the purchase intention of luxury chocolate: moderating effects of gender. J. Foodservice Manag. Soc. Korea, 21(5):97-120
  7. Kim SH, Jeon HM. 2018b. The effect of chocolate consumption motivation on satisfaction and repurchase intention: focusing on hedonic and functional motive. J. Foodservice Manag. Soc. Korea, 21(3):97-120
  8. Kim SH, Lee AJ. 2016. A study of an analysis of perceived gift values of luxury chocolate and the relevant relationship between repurchase intention. J. Hosp. Tour. Studies, 18(4):248-266
  9. Kim SH, Lee AJ. 2017. The effect that chocolate food choice motive influences on a purchasing intention and the moderating effect of purchasing purpose: focused on manufacturer brands chocolate. Foodservice Indus. J., 13(4):47-63 https://doi.org/10.22509/kfsa.2017.13.4.003
  10. Kim YI, Nam JH.2015. A study on market segmentation by the selection attribute of dessert cafe. J. Hosp. Tour. Studies, 17(5):188-203
  11. Korea Agro-Fisheries & Food Trade Corporation. 2016. 2016 Processed Food Market Status Chocolate Market
  12. Kuikka A, Laukkanen, T. 2012. Brand loyalty and the role of hedonic value. J. Product & Brand Manag., 21(7):529-537 https://doi.org/10.1108/10610421211276277
  13. Lee YS. 2017. Dessert consumption as leisure: hanging out at dessert cafes. Instit. Cross-Cult. Studies, 23(1):165-218 https://doi.org/10.17249/CCS.2017.01.23.1.165
  14. Liang XY. 2018. The effect of social distance on purchasing intermediation: based on the effect of adjusting product attribute. Department of Advertising and Public Relations, Graduate School, Silla University
  15. Luomala HT, Laaksonen M. 1999. A qualitative exploration of mood-regulatory self-gift behaviors. J. Economic Psy., 20(2):147-182 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(99)00003-3
  16. Mick DG, DeMoss M. 1990. Self-gifts: phenomenological insights from four contexts. J. Consum. Res., 17(3):322-332 https://doi.org/10.1086/208560
  17. Ministry of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs. 2016. A survey on the domestic and foreign dessert food market in 2016
  18. Moon KM. 2005. Captivate self-centered consumerism. LG Economic Researcher
  19. Park JY, Cho SG. 2019. The effects of franchise bakery employees' protean career on job satisfaction and turnover intention. Culinary Sci. Hosp. Res., 25(3):164-172 https://doi.org/10.20878/cshr.2019.25.3.016
  20. Woo SK, Seol SC, Jung SG. 2013. Effects of place of origin and brand awareness on purchase intention-centered on the moderating effect of the purchase purpose. J. Consump. Cult., 16(3):99-117 https://doi.org/10.17053/jcc.2013.16.3.005
  21. You IS, Lee DM. 2019. Study of how the relationship and type of receiver influence the preference on brand benefit and package design. J. Consum. Studies, 30(1):21-42
  22. Youn SH. 2016. World Chocolate Industry Trends. 189:117-139
  23. Yu GB, Lee HM. 2015. The impact of store consumer image congruity on experiential value and store loyalty: focusing on leisure dining consumers. J. Chann. Retail., 20(2):139-159