DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Does Price Promotion Hurt Products' Perceived Quality? The Role of Attribute Alignability

  • CHAE, Myoung-Jin (Department of Marketing and International Business, Lingnan University)
  • Received : 2020.08.10
  • Accepted : 2020.09.16
  • Published : 2020.09.30

Abstract

Purpose: Previous literature shows that a price promotion serves as a negative cue of product quality especially when consumers have no additional information about the product's other attributes. In this research, we explore how the effect of price promotions on consumers' perceptions of product quality changes depending on their ability to compare promoted product attributes with competitive products' attributes. Research design, data and methodology: Specifically, we use a series of scenario-based lab experiments using different types of products and explore if attribute alignability among competing products in a consumer's choice set influences consumers' ability to compare the product attributes and perceived quality. Results: Our study findings show that high attribute alignability among products makes consumers easier to compare the product attributes and thereby focus more on non-price information than price information. We also show that attribute alignability serves as a moderator and decreases perceived quality when the promotion level is higher. Therefore, the attribute alignability weakens the negative impact of a price promotion on consumers' perceived product quality. Conclusions: Our study findings provide new insights on how to implement price promotion strategies while keeping products' perceived quality, by considering the product's relationships with competing products in a choice set.

Keywords

References

  1. Aaker, D. A. (2009). Managing brand equity. SimonandSchuster. Com.
  2. Blattberg, R. C., & Neslin, S. A. (1990). Sales promotion: Concepts, methods, and strategies. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  3. Davis, S. J., Inman, J., & McAslister, L. (1992). Promotion has a negative effect on brand evaluations: Or does it? Additional disconfirming evidence. Journal of Marketing Research, 29 (February), 143-148. https://doi.org/10.2307/3172499
  4. Dodds, W. B., & Monroe, K. B. (1985). The effect of brand and price information on subjective product evaluations. Advances in Consumer Research, 12(1), 85-90.
  5. Dodson, J. A., Tybout, A. M., & Sternthal, B. (1978). Impact of deals and deal retraction on brand switching. Journal of Marketing Research, 15(February), 72-81. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224377801500109
  6. Erickson, G. M., & Johansson, J. K. (1985). The role of price in multi-attribute product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(September), 195-199. https://doi.org/10.1086/208508
  7. Etgar, M., & Naresh K. Malhotra (1981). Determinants of price dependency: Personal and perceptual factors. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(September), 217-222. https://doi.org/10.1086/208858
  8. Garvin, D. A. (1984). What does "product quality" really mean? Sloan Management Review, 26 (Fall), 25-43.
  9. Gijsbrechts, E. (1993). Prices and pricing research in consumer marketing: Some recent developments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 10(June), 115-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(93)90001-F
  10. Gupta, S. (1988). Impact of sales promotions on when, what, and how much to buy. Journal of Marketing research, 25(4), 342-355. https://doi.org/10.2307/3172945
  11. Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.
  12. Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2014). Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 67 (3), 451-470. https://doi.org/10.1111/bmsp.12028
  13. Hjorth-Andersen, C. (1984). The concept of quality and the efficiency of markets for consumer products. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(September), 708-718. https://doi.org/10.1086/209007
  14. Huber, J., Payne, J. W., & Puto, C. (1982). Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(June), 90-98. https://doi.org/10.1086/208899
  15. Kalwani, M. U., & Yim, C. K. (1992). Consumer price and promotion expectations: an experimental study. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(February), 90-100. https://doi.org/10.2307/3172495
  16. Lichtenstein, D. R., & Burton, S. (1989). The relationship between perceived and objective price-quality. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(November), 429-443. https://doi.org/10.2307/3172763
  17. Lussier, D. A., & Olshavsky. R. W. (1979). Task complexity and contingent processing in brand choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 6(September), 154-165. https://doi.org/10.1086/208758
  18. Medin, D. L., Goldstone, R. L., & Markman, A. B. (1995). Comparison and choice: Relations between similarity processes and decision processes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2 (March), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03214410
  19. Monroe, K. B., & Krishnan, R. (1985). The effect of price on subjective product evaluations. Perceived Quality: How Consumers View Stores and Merchandise, 209-232.
  20. Neslin, S. A. (2002). Sales promotion. Handbook of marketing, 310-338.
  21. Oude Ophuis, P. A., & Van Trijp, H. (1995). Perceived quality: a market driven and consumer oriented approach. Food quality and Preference, 6(3), 177-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/0950-3293(94)00028-T
  22. Payne, J. W. (1976). Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis. Organizational behavior and human performance, 16(August), 366-387. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(76)90022-2
  23. Raghubir, P. J., Inman, J., & Grande, H. (2004). The three faces of consumer promotions. California Management Review, 46(Summer), 23-42. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166273
  24. Raghubir, P. J., & Corfman, K. P. (1995). When do price promotions signal quality? The effect of dealing on perceived service quality. ACR North American Advances.
  25. Raghubir, P. J., & Corfman, K. (1999). When do price promotions affect pretrial brand evaluations? Journal of Marketing Research, 36(May), 211-222. https://doi.org/10.2307/3152094
  26. Shugan, S. M. (1980). The cost of thinking. Journal of consumer Research, 7(September), 99-111. https://doi.org/10.1086/208799
  27. Steenkamp, J. B. E. (1990). Conceptual model of the quality perception process. Journal of Business Research, 21(December), 309-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(90)90019-A
  28. Szybillo, G. J., & Jacoby, J. (1974). Intrinsic versus extrinsic cues as determinants of perceived product quality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(February), 74. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035796
  29. Szymanski, D. M., & Henard, D. H. (2001). Customer satisfaction: a meta-analysis of the empirical evidence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29 (1), 16-35. https://doi.org/10.1177/009207030102900102
  30. Volckner, F., & Hofmann, J. (2007). The price-perceived quality relationship: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its determinants. Marketing Letters, 18(July), 181-196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-007-9013-2
  31. Volckner, F., & Sattler, H. (2005). Separating negative and positive effects of price with choice-based conjoint analyses. Marketing ZFP, 27 (JRM 1), 5-13. https://doi.org/10.15358/0344-1369-2005-JRM-1-5-1
  32. Yan, D., & Sengupta, J. (2011). Effects of construal level on the price-quality relationship. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(August), 376-389. https://doi.org/10.1086/659755
  33. Yan, D., Sengupta, J., & Wyer Jr, R. S. (2014). Package size and perceived quality: The intervening role of unit price perceptions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(1), 4-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2013.08.001
  34. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence," Journal of Marketing, 52(July), 2-22. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251446
  35. Zhang, S., & Markman, A. B. (2001). Processing product unique features: Alignability and involvement in preference construction. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 11(1), 13-27. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1101_2
  36. Zhang, S., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (1999). Choice-process satisfaction: The influence of attribute alignability and option limitation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77(March), 192-214. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1999.2821