Journal of Wellbeing Management and Applied Psychology (웰빙융합연구)

Korea Wellbeing Convergence Association (한국웰빙융합학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on the Post-brand Attachment Pressure Reception Behavior of Consumers

  • LEE, Jaemin (College of Business, SungKyunKwan University)
  • Received : 2019.11.01
  • Accepted : 2019.12.05
  • Published : 2019.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study is about pressure-accepting behavior of consumers attached to brands. Previous studies of the situation focused on time pressure and scarcity pressure, focusing on scarcity. The results of the study are as follows. First, consumers attached to brands were found to be relatively blunt in time pressures. This indicates that brands of consumers are attached to do not buy on impulse because of time pressure. Second, consumers attached to brands were found to be relatively under social pressure. This indicates that consumers who are attached to the brand do not buy with social pressures such as quasi-family groups. Third, consumers attached to brands were found to be relatively sensitive to scarcity pressures. Thus, a quantity-limited marketing strategy is generally more effective for consumers with high marketing effectiveness but high brand attachment. Fourth, unlike the one presented, consumers attached to the brand were found to be relatively insensitive to place pressure.

Keywords

References

  1. Ackerman, D. S., & Gross, B. L. (2003). So Many Choices, So Little Time: Measuring the Effects of Free Choice and Enjoyment on Perception of Free Time, Time Pressure and Time Deprivation. Advances in Consumer Research, 30(207), 291-292.
  2. Bettman, J. R. (1998). Constructive Consumer Choice Processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(3), 190-213. https://doi.org/10.1086/209535
  3. Carlson, K. A., & Meloy, M. G., & Miller, E. G. (2013). Goal Reversion in Consumer Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(5), 921-927.
  4. Carlson, K. A., & Meloy, M. G., & Russo, J. E. (2006). Leader-Driven Primacy: Using Attribute Order to Affect Consumer Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 515-516.
  5. Chartrand, T. L., & Huber, J., & Shiv, B., & Tanner, R. J. (2008). Nonconscious Goals and Consumer Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(2), 192-199.
  6. Chernev, A. (2007). Jack of All Trades or Master of One? Product Differentiation and Compensatory Reasoning in Consumer Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(4), 433-441. https://doi.org/10.1086/510217
  7. Cherney, A. (2003). Reverse Pricing and Online Price Elicitation Strategies in Consumer Choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(1-2), 54-58. https://doi.org/10.1207/153276603768344780
  8. Coleman, N. V., & Williams, P., & Morales, A. C. (2017). Whit, Attention, Attitudes, and Action: When and Why Incidental Fear Increases Consumer Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(2), 286-308.
  9. Chan, & Eugene, Y., & Saqib, Najam. U. (2013). Loss Aversion Attenuates Under Time Pressure. Advances in Consumer Research, 41(-), 426-427.
  10. Chernev, A. (2004). Goal-Attribute Compatibility in Consumer Choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1-2), 143-148. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1401&2_16
  11. Chernev, A. (2009). Self-Expression and Brand Identity in Consumer Choice. Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 91.
  12. Dhar, R. (1999). The Effect of Time Pressure on Consumer Choice Deferral. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(4), 372-381. https://doi.org/10.1086/209545
  13. Elliott, R., & Leonard, C. (2004). Peer pressure and poverty: Exploring fashion brands and consumption symbolism among children of the 'British poor'. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 3(4), 349-356.
  14. Ge, X., & Haubl, G., & Elrod, T. (2012). What to Say When: Influencing Consumer Choice by Delaying the Presentation of Favorable Information. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(6), 1007-1018.
  15. Gross, B. L. (1993). Consumer Responses to Time Pressure: A Qualitative Study with Homeowners in Foreclosure. Advances in Consumer Research, 21(-), 122-123.