||The Effects of Product Scarcity and Consumer's Need for Uniqueness on Purchase Intention
||Institute of International Business
Need for Uniqueness
限量策略是廠商操弄產品的稀少性效果，企圖影響消費者購買決策的一種行銷手法。許多知名品牌像是NIKE、Apple 以及Swatch 等紛紛設計並生產限量產品，藉此來加強產品的不可獲得性，增加消費者擁有該產品的慾望 (Brannon & McCabe, 2001)。因此，對廠商而言，最重要就是將產品限量的訊息正確地告知消費者並使其進而購買產品。
根據本研究結果分析，所得結論如下：(1) 產品稀少性效果可透過中介機制－預期昂貴、知覺品質和知覺獨特性，來影響消費者的知覺價值與購買意願；(2)知覺品質對於知覺犧牲並沒有顯著性負向影響；(3) 知覺獨特性對於知覺犧牲有顯著性正向影響；(4) 消費者獨特性需求對於知覺獨特性與知覺價值間之關係有干擾影響。
Scarcity strategies are employed by marketers in an attempt to influence consumer’s decision-making. Famous brands like NIKE, Apple, and Swatch have designed and produced limited-edition products specifically to stress the unavailability of products, thereby intensifying the desire for owning the products (Brannon & McCabe, 2001). Therefore, as the market environments become more and more dynamic and complex, it is essential for marketers to correctly deliver scarcity messages to consumers and then motivate their purchase intentions.
However, scarcity effects were examined with very limited aspects, very rare studies investigated simultaneously the impacts of multiple mediating and moderating variables that sufficiently explains the value-enhancement of scarcity strategies. For example, based on the need for uniqueness theory, consumers’ need for uniqueness can be viewed as a moderator of scarcity effects on valuation process. The conceptual framework of Lynn’s S-E-D model and Monroe and Krishnan’s price-perceived quality model also try to explain the scarcity effects from the perspectives of expensive-quality-value mechanisms. However, none of the previous studies have integrated these theories into a more comprehensive model to explain the phenomenon of scarcity. This study intends to fill this research gap by integrating relevant theories and developing a more comprehensive research framework to fully understand how scarcity affects consumers’ value perceptions and purchase intents as well as the moderating role of need for uniqueness.
Based on the purpose of this study, the hypotheses are developed to examine. Questionnaires are used to collect data, and 285 completed questionnaires are put into analysis. Statistical methods, including factor analysis, reliability tests, hierarchical regression, analysis of variance (ANOVA) and structure equation model (SEM) are used for further examination.
According to the results of this study, several results are made as follows: (1) The effects of scarcity have significantly positive impacts on perceived value and purchase intention through mediating mechanisms-assumed expensiveness, perceived quality, perceived sacrifice, and perceived uniqueness; (2) The effect of perceived quality has no negative impact on perceived sacrifice; (3) Perceived uniqueness has a significantly positive impact on perceived sacrifice; (4) The moderating effect of need for uniqueness has a significant impact on the relationship between perceived uniqueness and perceived value.
List of Figures IV
List of Tables V
CHAPTER ONE 1
1.1 Research Background and Motivations 1
1.2 Research Objectives 3
1.3 Research Procedure 4
1.4 The Structure of this Study 6
CHAPTER TWO 8
2.1 Definition of Research Constructs 8
2.1.1 Perceived Scarcity 8
2.1.2 Perceived Sacrifice 10
2.1.3 Assumed Expensiveness and S-E-D model 11
220.127.116.11 Assumed Expensiveness 11
18.104.22.168 S-E-D Model 11
2.1.4 Perceived Quality 13
2.1.5 Perceived Value 14
2.1.6 Perceived Uniqueness 16
2.1.7 Need for Uniqueness 17
2.1.8 Purchase Intention 18
2.2 Hypotheses Development 19
2.2.1 Relationship between Perceived Scarcity and Assumed Expensiveness 19
2.2.2 Relationship between Perceived Scarcity and Perceived Uniqueness 20
2.2.3 Relationship between Assumed Expensiveness and Perceived Quality 20
2.2.4 Relationship between Assumed Expensiveness and Perceived Sacrifice 21
2.2.5 Relationship between Perceived Quality and Perceived Sacrifice 22
2.2.6 Relationship between Perceived Uniqueness and Perceived Sacrifice 23
2.2.7 Relationship between Perceived Sacrifice, Perceived Quality and Perceived Value 23
2.2.8 Relationship between Perceived Uniqueness and Perceived Value 24
2.2.9 Moderating Effect of Need for Uniqueness on the Relationship between Perceived Uniqueness and Perceived Value 25
2.2.10 Relationship between Perceived Value and Purchase Intention 26
CHAPTER THREE 28
3.1 The Conceptual Model 28
3.2 Hypotheses to Be Tested 29
3.3 Methodology 30
3.3.1 Pretest 30
22.214.171.124 Stage 1 30
126.96.36.199 Stage 2 31
188.8.131.52 Stage 3 32
3.3.2 Stimuli and Manipulations 35
3.3.3 Sampling Design and Procedure 36
3.4 Construct Measurement 36
3.4.1 Perceived Scarcity 36
3.4.2 Assumed Expensiveness 37
3.4.3 Perceived Quality 38
3.4.4 Perceived Sacrifice 38
3.4.5 Perceived Uniqueness 39
3.4.6 Need for Uniqueness 39
3.4.7 Perceived Value 40
3.4.8 Purchase Intention 40
3.5 Questionnaire Design 41
3.6 Data Analysis Procedures 41
3.6.1 Descriptive Statistical Analysis 42
3.6.2 Purification and Reliability of the Measurement Constructs 42
184.108.40.206 Factor Analysis 42
220.127.116.11 Item-to-total Correlation 42
18.104.22.168 Internal Consistency Analysis (Cronbach’s α) 42
3.6.3 Relationships between Research Variables 43
22.214.171.124 Hierarchical Regression Analysis 43
126.96.36.199 Cluster Analysis and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) 43
188.8.131.52 Structure Equation Model (SEM) 43
CHAPTER FOUR 45
4.1 Descriptive Analysis 45
4.1.1 Data Collection 45
4.1.2 Characteristics of Respondents 46
4.2 Measurement Results for Relevant Research Variables 47
4.3 Exploratory Factor Analysis and Reliability Tests 50
4.3.1 Perceived Scarcity 51
4.3.2 Assumed Expensiveness 52
4.3.3 Perceived Sacrifice 53
4.3.4 Perceived Quality 54
4.3.5 Perceived Uniqueness 55
4.3.6 Need for Uniqueness 55
4.3.7 Perceived Value 56
4.3.8 Purchase Intention 57
4.4 Confirmatory Factor Analysis: Construct Validity and Reliability 58
4.4.1 Discriminant Validity Analysis 61
4.5 Manipulation Check 62
4.6 Relationships among Research Variables 63
4.6.1 Relationship between Perceived Scarcity and Assumed Expensiveness 63
4.6.2 Relationship between Perceived Scarcity and Perceived Uniqueness 64
4.6.3 Relationship between Assumed Expensiveness and Perceived Quality 65
4.6.4 Relationship between Assumed Expensiveness and Perceived Sacrifice 66
4.6.5 Relationship between Perceived Quality and Perceived Sacrifice 68
4.6.6 Relationship between Perceived Uniqueness and Perceived Sacrifice 69
4.6.7 Relationship between Perceived Sacrifice, Perceived Quality and Perceived Value 70
4.6.8 Relationship between Perceived Uniqueness and Perceived Value 72
4.6.9 Relationship between Perceived Value and Purchase Intention 73
4.7 Moderating Effect of Need for Uniqueness 74
4.8 Structure Equation Model (SEM) 77
4.8.1 The Full Model 77
4.8.2 The Competing Model 82
CHAPTER FIVE 89
5.1 Research Conclusions 89
5.2 Managerial Implications 94
5.3 Limitations and Future Research Directions 96
APPENDIX A 103
APPENDIX B 109
APPENDIX C 122
APPENDIX D 135
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Amaldoss, W., & Jain, S. (2005). Conspicuous consumption and sophisticated thinking. Management Science, 51(10), 1449-1466.
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139-168.
Brock, T. C. (1968). Implications of commodity theory for value change. In: Greenwald, A. G., Brock, T. C., & Ostrom, T. M. (Eds.), Psychological Foundations of Attitude. New York: Academic Press.
Brannon, L. A., & Brock, T. C. (2001). Limiting time for responding enhances behavior corresponding to the merits of compliance appeals: Refutations of heuristic-cue theory in service and consumer settings. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 10(3), 135-146.
Brannon, L. A., & McCabe, A. E. (2001). Time-restricted sales appeals: The importance of offering real value. Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 42(4), 47-52.
Burns, D. J., & Warren, H. B. (1995). Need for uniqueness: Shopping mall preference and choice activity. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 23(12), 4-12.
Chien-Huang, L., Pei-Hsun, W., Shih-Chieh, C., & Kao, D. T. (2007). Price as a quality or sacrifice cue: Role of goal orientation. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 10(1), 179-187.
Chu, C. W., & Lu, H. P. (2007). Factors influencing online music purchase intention in Taiwan - an empirical study based on the value-intention framework. Internet Research, 17(2), 139-155.
Cialdini, R. B. (1985). Influence: Science and Practice. Glenview IL: Scott, Foresman.
Couchen, W., & San-san, H. (2006). Less is more: How scarcity influences consumers' value perceptions and purchase intents through mediating variables. Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, 9(2), 125-132.
Curry, D. J., & Riesz, P. C. (1988). Price and price quality relationships- A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Marketing, 52(1), 36-51.
Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers' product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research 28(3), 307-319.
Eisend, M. (2008). Expalining the impact of scarcity appeals in advertising. Journal of Advertising, 37(3), 33-40.
Erickson, G. M., & Johansson, J. K. (1985). The role of price in multi-attribute product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 12(2), 195-199.
Fiore, A. M., Lee, S.-E., & Kunz, G. (2004). Individual differences, motivations, and willingness to use a mass customization option for fashion products. European Journal of Marketing, 38(1), 835-849.
Franke, N., & Schreier, M. (2008). Product uniqueness as a driver of customer utility in mass customization. Marketing Letters, 19(2), 93-107.
Fromkin, H. L. (1970). Effects of experimental aroused feelings of undistinctiveness upon valuation of scarce and novel experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16(3), 521-529.
Fromkin, H. L. (1972). Feelings of interpersonal undistinctiveness- unpleasant affective state. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 6(2-3), 178-185.
Gierl, H., Plantsch, M., & Schweidler, J. (2008). Scarcity effects on sales volume in retail. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 18(1), 45-61.
Grewal, D., Krishnan, R., Baker, J., & Borin, N. (1998). The effects of store name, brand name and price discounts on consumers' evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing, 74(3), 331-352.
Grewal, D., Monroe, K. B., & Krishnan, R. (1998). The effects of price-comparison advertising on buyers' perceptions of acquisition value, transaction value, and behavioral intentions. Journal of Marketing, 62(2), 46-59.
Groth, J. C., & McDaniel, S. W. (1993). The exclusive value principle: The basis for prestige pricing. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 10(1), 10-16.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.
Inman, J. J., Peter, A. C., & Raghubir, P. (1997). Framing the deal: The role of restrictions in accentuating deal value. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(1), 68-79.
Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (1993). Structural equation modeling with the Simplis command language. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
Jung, J. M., & Kellaris, J. J. (2004). Cross-national differences in proneness to scarcity effects: The moderating roles of familiarity, uncertainty avoidance, and need for cognitive closure. Psychology & Marketing, 21(9), 739-753.
Kantamneni, S. P., & Coulson, K. R. (1996). Measuring perceived value: Scale development and research findings from a consumer survey. Journal of Marketing Management 6(2), 72-86.
Koford, K., & Tschoegl, A. E. (1998). The market value of rarity. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 34(3), 445-457.
Kumar, A., Lee, H. J., & Kim, Y. K. (2009, 2006). Indian consumers' purchase intention toward a United States versus local brand. Paper presented at the Fall Conference of the American-Collegiate-Retailling-Association, Charleston, SC.
Lapierre, J. (2000). Customer-perceived value in industrial contexts. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 15(2/3), 122.
Lynn, M. (1989). Scarcity effects on desirability-mediated by assumed expensiveness. Journal of Economic Psychology, 10(2), 257-274.
Lynn, M. (1991). Scarcity effects on value: A quantitative review of the commodity theory literature. Psychology & Marketing, 8(1), 43-57.
Lynn, M. (1992). Scarcity's enhancement of desirability: The role of naïve economic theories. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 67-78.
Lynn, M., & Bogert, P. (1996). The Effect of scarcity on anticipated price appreciation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26(22), 1978-1984.
Lynn, M., & Harris, J. (1997a). The desire for unique consumer products: A new individual differences scale. Psychology & Marketing, 14(6), 601-616.
Lynn, M., & Harris, J. (1997b). Individual differences in the pursuit of self-uniqueness through consumption. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27(21), 1861-1883.
Mackenzie, S. B., Lutz, R. J., & Belch, G. E. (1986). The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness-a test of competing explanations. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(2), 130-143.
Monroe, K. B. (1973). Buyers subjective perceptions of price. Journal of Marketing Research, 10(1), 70-80.
Monroe, K. B., & Krishnan, R. (1985). The effect of price on subjective product evaluations, in: perceived quality: How consumers view stores and merchandise: Lexington Books.
Olaru, D., Purchase, S., & Peterson, N. (2008). From customer value to repurchase intentions and recommendations. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 23(7-8), 554-564.
Rao, A. R., & Monroe, K. B. (1989). The effect of price, brand name, and store name buyers perceptions of product quality- an integrative review Journal of Marketing Research, 26(3), 351-357.
Robinson, J. P., & Shaver, P. R. (1973). Measures and psychological attitudes: University of Michigan.
Siems, F., Mitter, C., & Kraus, S. (2008). Customer satisfaction models and the integration of price perceptions-a new managerial approach and an empirical demonstration. International Journal of Business Research, 8(1), 146-157.
Simonson, I. (2005). Determinants of customers' responses to customized offers: Conceptual framework and research propositions. Journal of Marketing, 69(1), 32-45.
Snoj, B., Korda, A. P., & Mumel, D. (2004). The relationships among perceived quality, perceived risk and perceived product value. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 13(3), 156-167.
Snyder, C. R. (1992). Product scarcity by need for uniqueness interaction: A consumer catch-22 carousel? Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 9-24.
Snyder, C. R., & Fromkin, H. L. (1977). Abnormality as a positive characteristic- development and validation of a scale measuring need for uniqueness. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 86(5), 518-527.
Snyder, C. R., & Fromkin, H. L. (1980). Uniqueness: The human pursuit of difference. New York: Plenum.
Suri, R., & Monroe, K. B. (2003). The effects of time constraints on consumers' judgments of prices and products. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(1), 92-104.
Swami, S., & Khairnar, P. J. (2003). Diffusion of products with limited supply and known expiration date. Marketing Letters, 14(1), 33-46.
Sweeney, J. C., Soutar, G. N., & Johnson, L. W. (1999). The role of perceived risk in the quality-value relationship: A study in a retail environment. Journal of Retailing, 75(1), 77-105.
Szybillo, G. J., & Jacoby, J. (1974). Intrinsic versus extrinsic cues as determinants of perceived product quality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(1), 74-78.
Tam, J. L. M. (2004). Customer satisfaction, service quality and perceived value: AniIntegrative model. Journal of Marketing Management, 20(1), 897-917.
Teas, R. K., & Agarwal, S. (2000). The effects of extrinsic product cues on consumers' perceptions of quality, sacrifice, and value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 278-290.
Tian, K. T., Bearden, W. O., & Hunter, G. L. (2001). Consumers' need for uniqueness: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 50-66.
Veblen, T. (1965). The theory of the leisure class. New York: Kelly.
Verhallen, T. M. M. & Robben, H. S. J. (1994). Scarcity and preference-an experiment on unavailability and product evaluation. Journal of Economic Psychology, 15(2), 315-331.
Verhallen, T. M. M. (1982). Scarcity and consumer choice behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 2(4), 299-322.
Wang, Y. G., Lo, H. P., & Yang, Y. H. (2004). An integrated framework for service quality, customer value, satisfaction: Evidence from China's telecommunication industry. Information Systems Frontiers, 6(4), 325-340.
Wood, C. M., & Scheer, L. K. (1996). Incorporating perceived risk into models of consumer deal assessment and purchase intent. Advances in Consumer Research, 23(1), 399-404.
Woodruff, R. B. (1997). Customer value: The next source for competitive advantage. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(2), 139-153.
Worchel, S., Lee, J., & Adewole, A. (1975). Effects of supply and demand on ratings of object value. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(5), 906-914.
Wright, R. A. (1992). Desire for outcomes that are more and less difficult to attain: Analysis in terms of energization theory. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 25-45.
Wright, R. A., Greenberg, J., & Brehm, S. S. (2004). Motivational analyses of social behavior: Building on Jack Brehm's contributions to psychology: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Zeithaml, V. A. (1982). Consumer response to in-store price information environments. Journal of Consumer Research, 8(4), 357-369.
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price,quality, and value-a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2-22.