Journal of Korea Trade

Korea Trade Research Association (한국무역학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of Box Shape and Diverse Components of Large-Sized Products on Consumers' Product Evaluations in Logistic Business

  • Dongkyun Ahn (Yonsei Business Research Institute) ;
  • Seolwoo Park (Department of Business Administration, Jeju National University)
  • Received : 2022.08.29
  • Accepted : 2022.10.07
  • Published : 2022.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose - With the recent spread of COVID-19, U.S. consumers' consumption pattern is changing towards purchasing large-capacity products, as they stay at home longer. Thus, the current research investigates the effects of box shape and component diversity for large-sized products on product evaluation in logistic business. Moreover, this research examines that information-processing fluency mediates the moderating effects of box shape and product components on target evaluations to confirm psychological mechanism for generating this effect. Design/methodology - In order to examine the hypotheses, the current research conducts two online experiments. The 184 participants (Study 1), and 205 participants (Study 2) of U.S. nationality were recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk. This research analyzes the data by using SPSS 25 and PROCESS macro 4.0. Findings - Study 1 demonstrates that when the height of a box is greater than its width, products with single components promote positive target evaluations, while when the width of box is greater than its height, products with a variety of components lead to positive target evaluations. Study 2 shows that the same results are replicated in other product categories and with different box shape ratios. Moreover, Study 2 also finds that the ease of information processing mediates the interaction effects of box shape and component diversity on U.S. consumers' target evaluations. Originality/value - The current research has originality in that it investigates the effect of box shape and product composition diversity on U.S. consumer product evaluation from the perspective of information-processing theory Moreover, this research has practical implications for global traders who prepare for entering the U.S. market.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by the 2022 scientific promotion program funded by Jeju National University.

References

  1. Allik, J. and T. Tuulmets (1991), "Occupancy Model of Perceived Numerosity". Perception & Psychophysics, 49(4), 303-314. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205986
  2. Been, R. T., M. L. Braunstein, and M. H. Piazza (1964), "Judgment of Volume Reduction in Distorted Metal Containers", Journal of Engineering Psychology, 3(1), 23-27.
  3. Danelle, K. (2021, June 9), "NielsenIQ Beverage Alcohol Update for the Week Ending 5/29/21", Advisor Wine Industry Network. Available from http://wineindustryadvisor.com (accessed June 9, 2021)
  4. Dehaene, S. (1992), "Varieties of Numerical Abilities", Cognition, 44(1-2), 1-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(92)90049-N
  5. Hayes, A. F. (2017), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. NY: Guilford Publications.
  6. Holmberg, L. (1975), "The Influence of Elongation on the Perception of Volume of Geometrically Simple Objects", Psychological Research Bulletin, 15, 1-18
  7. Janiszewski, C. and T. Meyvis (2001), "Effects of Brand Logo Complexity, Repetition, and Spacing on Processing Fluency and Judgment", Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 18-32. https://doi.org/10.1086/321945
  8. Kaufman, E. L., M. W. Lord, T. W. Reese and J. Volkmann (1949), "The Discrimination of Visual Number", The American Journal of Psychology, 62(4), 498-525. https://doi.org/10.2307/1418556
  9. Krishna, A. and P. Raghubir (1997), "The Effect of Line Configuration on Perceived Numerosity of Dotted Lines", Memory & Cognition, 25(4), 492-507. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03201125
  10. Krueger, L. E. (1972), "Perceived Numerosity", Perception & Psychophysics, 11(1), 5-9. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212674
  11. Lee, A. Y. and J. L. Aaker (2004), "Bringing the Frame into Focus: The Influence of Regulatory Fit on Processing Fluency and Persuasion", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 205-218. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205
  12. Lee, A. Y. and A. A. Labroo (2004), "The Effect of Conceptual and Perceptual Fluency on Brand Evaluation", Journal of Marketing Research, 41(2), 151-165. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.41.2.151.28665
  13. Mandler, G. and B. J. Shebo (1982), "Subitizing: An Analysis of Its Component Processes", Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.111.1.1
  14. Meyers-Levy, J. and B. Sternthal (1993), "A Two-Factor Explanation of Assimilation and Contrast Effects", Journal of Marketing Research, 30(3), 359-368. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379303000307
  15. Novemsky, N., R. Dhar, N. Schwarz and I. Simonson (2007), "Preference Fluency in Choice", Journal of Marketing Research, 44(3), 347-356. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.44.3.347
  16. Park, Se-Bum and Park, Do-Hyung (2013), "The Effect of Low-versus High-Variance in Product Reviews on Product Evaluation", Psychology & Marketing, 30(7), 543-554. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20626
  17. Pelham, B. W., T. T. Sumarta, & L. Myaskovsky (1994), "The Easy Path from Many to Much: The Numerosity Heuristic", Cognitive Psychology, 26(2), 103-133. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1994.1004
  18. Piaget, J. (1968), "Quantification, Conservation, and Nativism", Science, 162, 976-979. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.162.3857.976
  19. Piaget, J., B. Inhelder and A. Szeminska (1960), Childs Concept of Geometry, NY: Basic Books.
  20. Piazza, M., V. Izard, P. Pinel, D. Le Bihan and S. Dehaene (2004), Tuning Curves for Approximate Numerosity in the Human Intraparietal Sulcus", Neuron, 44(3), 547-555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2004.10.014
  21. Raghubir, P. and A. Krishna (1999), "Vital Dimensions in Volume Perception: Can the Eye Fool the Stomach?", Journal of Marketing Research, 36(3), 313-326. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379903600302
  22. Redden, J. P., and S. J. Hoch (2009), "The Presence of Variety Reduces Perceived Quantity", Journal of Consumer Research, 36(3), 406-417. https://doi.org/10.1086/598971
  23. Schwarz, N., and J. Xu (2011), "Why Don't We Learn from Poor Choices? The Consistency of Expectation, Choice, and Memory Clouds the Lessons of Experience", Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(2), 142-145.
  24. Sherif, M. and C. I. Hovland, (1961), Social Judgment: Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Communication and Attitude Change, CT: Yale University Press.
  25. Thompson, D. V. and R. W. Hamilton (2006), "The Effects of Information Processing Mode on Consumers' Responses to Comparative Advertising", Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 530-540. https://doi.org/10.1086/500483
  26. Vos, P. G., M. P. Van Oeffelen, H. J. Tibosch and J. Allik (1988), "Interactions Between Area and Numerosity", Psychological Research, 50(3), 148-154. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00310175