.png){kind=logo}
open access
메뉴
우리는 종종 완제품과 원재료를 같이 판매하는 음식점을 발견한다. 예를 들어 토마토 주스를 사기 위해 카페에 들렸는데 그 카페에서 토마토도 같이 판매하는 경우이다. 본 연구는 원재료(토마토)를 판매하는 것이 완제품(토마토 주스) 평가에 긍정적인 영향을 미친다는 가설을 설정하고 세 개의 실증연구를 통해 이 주장을 검증하였다. 연구 1에서는 망고 샐러드를 홍보하는 인쇄 광고를 사용하였는데 망고도 판매한다는 메시지가 포함된 조건과 그렇지 않은 조건을 비교하였다. 그 결과 원재료(망고)를 판매할 때 완제품(망고샐러드)에 사용된 원재료의 품질 평가가 향상되는 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 결과의 심리적 기제로 본 연구는 귀인오류를 제시하였다. 즉, 원재료를 판매한다는 메시지에 노출되면 소비자는 판매하는 원재료가 완제품의 재료로 사용되었을 것이라는 잘못된 추론을 하게 된다. 또한 돈을 받고 판매하는 원재료는 그 만큼의 품질이 보장될 것이라는 가격-품질 연상 작용에 의해 판매하는 원재료의 품질을 높이 평가하고 그 결과 그러한 원재료로 만들어졌다고 생각되는 완제품을 긍정적으로 평가하게 되는 것이다. 귀인오류가 심리적 기제임을 확인하기 위해 연구 2에서는 원재료(망고)를 판매하는 조건과 원재료를 판매하되 망고샐러드에 사용되는 망고와는 다르다는 메시지를 보여준 조건을 비교하였다. 그 결과 후자에서 완제품(망고샐러드)에 사용된 원재료 품질 평가가 낮아지는 것을 보였다. 이는 후자의 메시지로 인해 판매하는 원재료로 완제품을 만들었을 것이라는 귀인오류 발생가능성이 차단되었고 그로 인해 완제품을 긍정적으로 평가할 수 있는 근거가 사라진 것이다. 연구 3에서는 딸기 주스 인쇄광고를 사용하여 앞선 연구 1, 2와 동일한 결과를 얻었으며 원재료 판매가 완제품인 딸기 주스 구매의도까지도 높이는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 연구 3에서는 딸기를 판매하는 조건이 그렇지 않은 통제조건보다 품목의 다양성을 높여 매장의 전문성 지각을 향상시키고 그 결과 딸기 주스를 긍정적으로 평가하게 만든다는 대안 가설을 제거하였다.
From time to time, we find that some restaurants sell food products as well as ingredients of them. For example, a cafe selling tomato juice also sells tomatoes. This research investigates whether the sales of ingredients(e.g., tomatoes) affects consumers evaluation of final food products(e.g., tomato juice). Using a print advertising of a mango salad, Study 1 showed that the perceived quality of ingredients used for the mango salad increases when the store also sells ingredients(i.e., mangos) compared with when the store does not. We suggested illusory causation as a psychological mechanism. That is, when consumers are exposed to the message that ingredients is available for purchase, they make an erroneous inference that the ingredients being sold as stand-alone products would be used for a final product. Furthermore, relying on the price-quality association, they believe that the ingredient for sale has good quality worth the money. Consequently, the final product believed to be made of the good ingredient is evaluated more positively. To examine our contention, Study 2 employed two conditions: one is the ingredient(i.e., mangos)-selling condition and the other is the same but with an extra message that the mangos for sale are different from the mangos in the salad. This manipulation prevents consumers from connecting the ingredients for sale with the final product and thus removes the basis on which consumers evaluate the final product positively. As expected, the perceived quality of ingredients used for the mango salad decreases in the latter condition. Aiming to enhance the generalizability of our research, Study 3 used a print ad of a strawberry juice and obtained the same results with Study 1 & 2. Furthermore, the sales of ingredients(i.e, strawberries) also increases the purchase intention of a final product(i.e., strawberry juice). In addition, Study 3 removed the alternative account that ingredient sales increases the perceived variety of selling items and thus the store is perceived as having greater expertise, which in turn leads to the positive evaluation of the final product sold in the store.
Ares, G., & Deliza, R. (2010). Studying the influence of package shape and colour on consumer expectations of milk desserts using word association and conjoint analysis. Food Quality and Preference, 21(8), 930-937.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
Bauer, R. A. (1960). Consumer behavior as risk taking. Dynamic marketing for a changing world, 389-398.
Berger, J., Draganska, M., & Simonson, I. (2007). The influence of product variety on brand perception and choice. Marketing Science, 26(4), 460-472.
Choe, Y. C., Park, J., Chung, M., & Moon, J. (2009). Effect of the food traceability system for building trust: Price premium and buying behavior. Information Systems Frontiers, 11(2), 167-179.
Cronley, M. L., Posavac, S. S., Meyer, T., Kardes, F. R., & Kellaris, J. J. (2005). A selective hypothesis testing perspective on price-Quality inference and inference-based Choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15(2), 159-169.
Desai, K. K., & Keller, K. L. (2002). The effects of ingredient branding strategies on host brand extendibility. Journal of Marketing, 66(1), 73-93.
Dutton, D. G., & Aron, A. P. (1974). Some evidence for heightened sexual attraction under conditions of high anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30(4), 510-517.
Gneezy, A., Gneezy, U., & Lauga, D. O. (2014). A reference-dependent model of the price-quality heuristic. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(2), 153-164.
Guéguen, N. (2003). The effect of glass colour on the evaluation of a beverage's thirst-quenching quality. Current Psychology Letters, 11(2), 1-6.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
Haws, K. L., Reczek, R. W., & Sample, K. L. (2016). Healthy diets make empty wallets: The healthy=expensive intuition. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(6), 992-1007.
Irmak, C., Vallen, B., & Robinson, S. R.(2011), The impact of product name on dieters' and nondieters' food evaluation and consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(2), 390-405.
Kardes, F. R., Cronley, M. L., Kellaris, J. J., & Posavac, S. S. (2004). The role of selective information processing in price-quality inference. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 368-374.
Lalwani, A. K., & Forcum, L. (2016). Does a dollar get you a dollar’s worth of merchandise? The impact of power distance belief on price-quality judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(2), 317-333.
McArthur, L. Z. (1980). Illusory causation and illusory correlation: Two epistemological accounts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6(4), 507-519.
Norris, D. G. (1992). Ingredient branding: a strategy option with multiple beneficiaries. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 9(3), 19-31.
Pavlou, P. A., Liang, H., & Xue, Y. (2007). Understanding and mitigating uncertainty in online exchange relationships: A principal- agent perspective. MIS quarterly, 31(1), 105- 136.
Ratcliff, J. J., Lassiter, G. D., Schmidt, H. C., & Snyder, C. J. (2006). Camera perspective bias in videotaped confessions: Experimental evidence of its perceptual basis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 12(4), 197-206.
Raghubir, P. (2005). Framing a price bundle: the case of “buy/get” offers. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14(2), 123-128.
Robinson, J., & McArthur, L. Z. (1982). Impact of salient vocal qualities on causal attribution for a speaker's behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(2), 236.
Shiv, B., Carmon, Z., & Ariely, D. (2005). Placebo effects of marketing actions: Consumers may get what they pay for. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(4), 383-393.
Suzuki, M., Kimura, R., Kido, Y., Inoue, T., Moritani, T., & Nagai, N. (2017). Color of hot soup modulates postprandial satiety, thermal sensation, and body temperature in young women. Appetite, 114, 209-216.
Taylor, S. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1975). Point of view and perceptions of causality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(3), 439-445.
Taylor, S. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1978). Salience, attention, and attribution: Top of the head phenomena. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 249-288.
Vaidyanathan, R., & Aggarwal, P. (2000). Strategic brand alliances: implications of ingredient branding for national and private label brands. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 9(4), 214-228.
Verbeke, W., & Ward, R. W. (2006). Consumer interest in information cues denoting quality, traceability and origin: An application of ordered probit models to beef labels. Food Quality and Preference, 17(6), 453-467.
White, G. L., & Kight, T. D. (1984). Misattribution of arousal and attraction: Effects of salience of explanations for arousal. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 20(1), 55-64.
Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197-206.
