• 마케팅과학연구
• /
• 제19권2호
• /
• pp.68-79
• /
• 2009

The interplay between hedonic and utilitarian attributes has assumed special significance in recent years; it has been proposed that consumption offerings should be viewed as experiences that stimulate both cognitions and feelings rather than as mere products or services. This research builds on previous work on hedonic versus utilitarian benefits, regulatory focus theory, customer satisfaction to address two question: (1) Is the shopping goal at the point of purchase different from the shopping value? and (2) Is the customer loyalty after the use different from the shopping value and shopping goal? We surveyed 345 peoples those who have bought the electronic-goods within 6 months. This research dealt with the shopping value which is consisted of 2 types, hedonic and utilitarian. Those who pursue the hedonic shopping value may prefer the pleasure of purchasing experience to the product itself. They tend to prefer atmosphere, arousal of the shopping experience. Consistent with previous research, we use the term "hedonic" to refer to their aesthetic, experiential and enjoyment-related value. On the contrary, Those who pursue the utilitarian shopping value may prefer the reasonable buying. It may be more functional. Consistent with previous research, we use the term "utilitarian" to refer to the functional, instrumental, and practical value of consumption offerings. Holbrook(1999) notes that consumer value is an experience that results from the consumption of such benefits. In the context of cell phones for example, the phone's battery life and sound volume are utilitarian benefits, whereas aesthetic appeal from its shape and color are hedonic benefits. Likewise, in the case of a car, fuel economics and safety are utilitarian benefits whereas the sunroof and the luxurious interior are hedonic benefits. The shopping goals are consisted of the promotion focus goal and the prevention focus goal, based on the self-regulatory focus theory. The promotion focus is characterized into focusing ideal self because they are oriented to wishes and vision. The promotion focused individuals are tend to be more risk taking. They are more sensitive to hope and achievement. On the contrary, the prevention focused individuals are characterized into focusing the responsibilities because they are oriented to safety. The prevention focused individuals are tend to be more risk avoiding. We wanted to test the relation among the shopping value, shopping goal and customer loyalty. Customers show the positive or negative feelings comparing with the expectation level which customers have at the point of the purchase. If the result were bigger than the expectation, customers may feel positive feeling such as delight or satisfaction and they would want to share their feelings with other people. And they want to buy those products again in the future time. There is converging evidence that the types of goals consumers expect to be fulfilled by the utilitarian dimension of a product are different from those they seek from the hedonic dimension (Chernev 2004). Specifically, whereas consumers expect the fulfillment of product prevention goals on the utilitarian dimension, they expect the fulfillment of promotion goals on the hedonic dimension (Chernev 2004; Chitturi, Raghunathan, and Majahan 2007; Higgins 1997, 2001) According to the regulatory focus theory, prevention goals are those that ought to be met. Fulfillment of prevention goals in the context of product consumption eliminates or significantly reduces the probability of a painful experience, thus making consumers experience emotions that result from fulfillment of prevention goals such as confidence and securities. On the contrary, fulfillment of promotion goals are those that a person aspires to meet, such as "looking cool" or "being sophisticated." Fulfillment of promotion goals in the context of product consumption significantly increases the probability of a pleasurable experience, thus enabling consumers to experience emotions that result from the fulfillment of promotion goals. The proposed conceptual framework captures that the relationships among hedonic versus utilitarian shopping values and promotion versus prevention shopping goals respectively. An analysis of the consequence of the fulfillment and frustration of utilitarian and hedonic value is theoretically worthwhile. It is also substantively relevant because it helps predict post-consumption behavior such as the promotion versus prevention shopping goals orientation. Because our primary goal is to understand how the post consumption feelings influence the variable customer loyalty: word of mouth (Jacoby and Chestnut 1978). This research result is that the utilitarian shopping value gives the positive influence to both of the promotion and prevention goal. However the influence to the prevention goal is stronger. On the contrary, hedonic shopping value gives influence to the promotion focus goal only. Additionally, both of the promotion and prevention goal show the positive relation with customer loyalty. However, the positive relation with promotion goal and customer loyalty is much stronger. The promotion focus goal gives the influence to the customer loyalty. On the contrary, the prevention focus goal relates at the low level of relation with customer loyalty than that of the promotion goal. It could be explained that it is apt to get framed the compliment of people into 'gain-non gain' situation. As the result, for those who have the promotion focus are motivated to deliver their own feeling to other people eagerly. Conversely the prevention focused individual are more sensitive to the 'loss-non loss' situation. The research result is consistent with pre-existent researches. There is a conceptual parallel between necessities-needs-utilitarian benefits and luxuries-wants-hedonic benefits (Chernev 2004; Chitturi, Raghunathan and Majaha 2007; Higginns 1997; Kivetz and Simonson 2002b). In addition, Maslow's hierarchy of needs and the precedence principle contends luxuries-wants-hedonic benefits higher than necessities-needs-utilitarian benefits. Chitturi, Raghunathan and Majaha (2007) show that consumers are focused more on the utilitarian benefits than on the hedonic benefits of a product until their minimum expectation of fulfilling prevention goals are met. Furthermore, a utilitarian benefit is a promise of a certain level of functionality by the manufacturer or the retailer. When the promise is not fulfilled, customers blame the retailer and/or the manufacturer. When negative feelings are attributable to an entity, customers feel angry. However in the case of hedonic benefit, the customer, not the manufacturer, determines at the time of purchase whether the product is stylish and attractive. Under such circumstances, customers are more likely to blame themselves than the manufacturer if their friends do not find the product stylish and attractive. Therefore, not meeting minimum utilitarian expectations of functionality generates a much more intense negative feelings, such as anger than a less intense feeling such as disappointment or dissatisfactions. The additional multi group analysis of this research shows the same result. Those who are unsatisfactory customers who have the prevention focused goal shows higher relation with WOM, comparing with satisfactory customers. The research findings in this article could have significant implication for the personal selling fields to increase the effectiveness and the efficiency of the sales such that they can develop the sales presentation strategy for the customers. For those who are the hedonic customers may be apt to show more interest to the promotion goal. Therefore it may work to strengthen the design, style or new technology of the products to the hedonic customers. On the contrary for the utilitarian customers, it may work to strengthen the price competitiveness. On the basis of the result from our studies, we demonstrated a correspondence among hedonic versus utilitarian and promotion versus prevention goal, WOM. Similarly, we also found evidence of the moderator effects of satisfaction after use, between the prevention goal and WOM. Even though the prevention goal has the low level of relation to WOM, those who are not satisfied show higher relation to WOM. The relation between the prevention goal and WOM is significantly different according to the satisfaction versus unsatisfaction. In addition, improving the promotion emotions of cheerfulness and excitement and the prevention emotion of confidence and security will further improve customer loyalty. A related potential further research could be to examine whether hedonic versus utilitarian, promotion versus prevention goals improve customer loyalty for services as well. Under the budget and time constraints, designers and managers are often compelling to choose among various attributes. If there is no budget or time constraints, perhaps the best solution is to maximize both hedonic and utilitarian dimension of benefits. However, they have to make trad-off process between various attributes. For the designers and managers have to keep in mind that without hedonic benefit satisfaction of the product it may hard to lead the customers to the customer loyalty.

• 한국식품영양과학회지
• /
• 제42권12호
• /
• pp.2068-2075
• /
• 2013

본 연구에서 외식 시 식품영양표시에 대한 이용실태, 인지여부 및 활용도를 조사하고 이들 요인간의 관련성을 분석한 결과는 다음과 같다. 조사대상자는 영양교육을 받은 경험이 없는 대학생들로 패밀리 레스토랑의 자율영양표시제도가 활성화되기 전인 2006년과 활성화된 2011년 설문조사를 통해 자료를 수집하였다. 2006년 110명, 2011년 176명으로 총 286명이 조사에 참여하였으며 남자는 108명, 여자 178명으로 연령은 20살 전후였다. 건강에 대한 인식은 2006년 63.6%가 '건강하지 못하다'고 하였고 6.4%는 '건강한 편'이라고 답하였으며, 2011년 조사결과 54%가 '건강하지 못하다'고 하였고 13.6%가 '건강한 편'이라고 답하였다. 체중 관리에 대한 관심도는 2006년 10%, 2011년 9.1%가 '매우 관심이 많다'라고 하였다. 하루 평균 외식 횟수는 2006년 82.7%, 2011년 87.4%가 하루 1회 이상 외식을 한다고 하였다. 패밀리 레스토랑 이용실태를 살펴보면 2006년에는 패밀리 레스토랑 이용 시 75.5%가 주변의 권유로 방문하였으나 2011년 57.4%로 감소하였으며, 과거 경험에 의해 방문하는 경우는 12.7%에서 23.9%로 약 2배 증가하였고 컴퓨터나 스마트폰을 이용하는 비율이 6.4%에서 15.3%로 2배이상 증가하였다. 매장에서 보내는 시간을 살펴보면 2006년 2시간 이상 시간을 보내는 비율이 17.3%인 반면 2011년에는 35.8%로 패밀리 레스토랑에서 머무는 시간이 더 길어졌으며, 외식비용과 패밀리 레스토랑 1회 이용 시 1인당 평균 외식비용도 증가하였다. 메뉴 이용 시 관심도를 살펴보면 맛, 영양, 신메뉴, 외형에 관한 관심도는 유의적인 차이가 없었으나 가격에 있어서는 2006년 $3.94{\pm}0.71$, 2011년 $4.10{\pm}0.66$으로 유의적인 차이를 보여 메뉴 선택 시 가격을 중요하게 생각하는 것으로 나타났다. 패밀리 레스토랑의 충분한 영양정보 제공 여부에 대해 2006년 $2.52{\pm}0.93$, 2011년 $3.30{\pm}0.77$로 유의적으로 증가하였으며, 패밀리 레스토랑의 메뉴판에 제시된 영양정보 활용에 관한 질문에 2006년에 비해 2011년에 활용도가 증가했다고 응답하였다. 맛이 좋은 음식이 영양가가 풍부하다고 생각하느냐는 문항 또한 2006년 $2.45{\pm}0.82$, 2011년 $3.51{\pm}0.91$로 유의적으로 증가한 것을 볼 수 있었다. 메뉴 영양표시 활용도에 관한 인식에서는 2006년, 2011년 각각 26.1%, 23.9%가 메뉴의 영양가를 중요하게 생각한다고 답했으며 고려하는 영양성분표시로는 총열량을 전후 각각 39.4%, 35.6%로 가장 많이 고려하였다. 고려하지 않는다는 응답자 중 각각 68.2%, 59.7%가 영양성분 이외의 다른 요인을 더 중요시하기 때문이라고 답했다. 영양정보가 지속적으로 제공되길 바라냐는 질문에 2006년, 2011년 각각 82.4%, 86.9%가 지속되길 바란다고 답했으며, 지속적으로 제공되길 바라는 영양성분표시로는 총 열량이 2006년, 2011년 각각 46.6%, 34.2%로 가장 높았고 나트륨의 경우 2006년 6.8%에서 2011년 17.3%로 요구도가 가장 증가하였다. 메뉴 영양표시의 만족도는 현재의 영양표시제를 이해하느냐는 질문에 2006년엔 $2.87{\pm}0.99$이며, 2011년엔 $3.35{\pm}0.84$로 영양표시 이해도는 유의적으로 증가함을 보였다. 영양성분표시가 필요하다고 생각하는가에 대한 질문에는 2006년에는 $3.68{\pm}0.9$, 2011년도엔 $4.32{\pm}0.61$로 필요성에 대한 인식도 유의적으로 상승함을 알 수 있었다. 영양정보 요구에 대한 충족도는 2006년 $2.85{\pm}0.66$, 2011년 $3.06{\pm}0.65$로 유의적으로 증가함을 보였다. 영양표시에 대한 이해도, 필요도, 유용도, 충족도 간의 상관계수는 이해도와 필요도의 상관계수는 0.513, 이해도와 유용도의 상관계수는 0.420으로 상관이 있는 것으로 나타났으며 필요도와 유용도 사이의 상관계수는 0.641로 높은 상관을 보였다. 이해도와 만족도의 상관계수는 0.190, 필요도와 만족도의 상관계수는 0.173으로 상관이 매우 낮았으며, 유용도와 만족도의 상관계수는 0.335로 상관이 낮은 편이었다. 연구 결과, 패밀리 레스토랑의 자율영양표시제도가 적극적으로 시행된 후에도 메뉴 선택 시 영양적인 면에 대한 고려는 낮게 나타났다. 그러나 2006년에 비해 외식업체에서 충분한 영양정보를 제공하고 있으며, 이를 사용하는 횟수도 증가하고 있다. 소비자들의 인식 또한 지속적으로 영양정보가 제공되길 바라고 있으며 특히 만성질환과 관련이 깊은 열량, 지방, 나트륨에 대한 요구도가 증가한 것으로 나타났다. 그리고 영양정보를 활용하는 소비자들의 만족도도 증가하고 있으며 이에 대한 필요성도 높아지고 있다. 따라서 지속적인 자율영양표시제도가 확대되어야 하며 영양권장량에 대한 비율도 함께 제시함으로써 지속적인 건강식을 할 수 있도록 해야 한다. 또한 영양표시에 대한 올바른 이해는 이에 대한 필요도를 증가시키고 유용도도 함께 증가시키므로 식생활이 형성되는 시기부터 영양표시를 접할 수 있도록 해야 한다. 향후 영양교육을 받은 경험이 있는 대상자의 영양표시에 대한 인식과 활용도에 대한 연구가 이루어진다면 영양표시제도에 대한 영양교육의 필요성을 알아볼 수 있으므로 이에 대한 연구가 수행되어야할 것으로 생각된다.