The Impact of Signaling Product Effectiveness on Purchase Intention and Post-Purchase Consumption

(1)

The Impact of Signaling Product Effectiveness on

Purchase Intention and Post-Purchase Consumption

–

Assessing the Moderating Effects of Product Category and Need for Justification

by Danilo Berg

University of Groningen Faculty of Economics and Business

MSc Marketing

(2)

MASTER THESIS

The Impact of Signaling Product Effectiveness on

Purchase Intention and Post-Purchase Consumption

–

Assessing the Moderating Effects of Product Category and Need for Justification

by Danilo Berg

University of Groningen Faculty of Economics and Business

(3)

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

In markets where product quality is not readily observable, consumers make their buying and consumption decisions under great uncertainty. Research on inference making shows that a consumer’s purchase and consumption behavior is highly constructive in nature and predominantly based on inferences made by exploiting contextual cues rather than guided by well-defined preferences and conscious thoughts. Marketers are well aware of this fact and deliberately employ cues (e.g. pictures, brand name, prices, country of origin or short phrases) in advertising or packaging in order to signal effectiveness of their merchandise. However, research on signaling effectiveness suggests that marketers must carefully consider when and how to use salient marketing cues in order to convey effectiveness. Adding effectiveness cues may increase purchase intention, but it can also curb post-purchase consumption for utilitarian products. As the literature in this domain is rather sparse, the present paper aims to investigate whether the ramifications of effectiveness cues on purchase intention and post-purchase consumption can be generalized across different product categories with regard to their nature (utilitarian vs. hedonic). In contrast to the belief that signaling effectiveness can reduce the consumption level for functional products, it was proposed that the more effective consumers perceive a hedonic product to be due to salient marketing cues, the more inherent satisfaction and immediate gratification they will derive from additional consumption. Furthermore, because consumers may not only form preferences in favor of a specific product based on inferred product effectiveness the relationship between signaling effectiveness, purchase intention and post-purchase consumption may also be influenced by a consumer’s need to justify their choices to themselves or to others. Existing literature shows that it is easier to justify spending money on functional (utilitarian) than on emotional (hedonic) products. Accordingly, when making buying decisions consumers are on a constant quest for compelling reasons, which facilitate justification. Hence it was proposed that consumers with a high need for justification will be less susceptible to the influence of non-diagnostic cues signaling a product’s effectiveness and thus negatively influencing the relationship between the depiction of effectiveness cues, purchase intention and post-purchase consumption.

(4)

subsequently asked different sets of questions in order to measure perceived product effectiveness, purchase intention and consumption volume on a single occasion.

The findings clearly demonstrate that adding effectiveness cues to a mere textual product description increases the perceived efficacy thereof. Furthermore, evidence is provided that salient cues (e.g. a picture and a short phrase) in advertising or packaging can lead to higher purchase intentions, but only for hedonic products. In addition, the outcomes of this study reveal that the impact of effectiveness cues on post-purchase consumption is highly dependent on the product nature (utilitarian vs. hedonic). Hence, in line with prior research, salient cues signaling product effectiveness can reduce product usage for utilitarian products. In contrast, it was demonstrated that adding effectiveness cues can significantly increase usage amount for hedonic products. No significant support for the moderating role of an individual’s need for justification was found. In sum, the results of this study show that promoting effectiveness does not necessarily increase purchase intention but does have the power to influence the consumption level significantly.

(5)

PREFACE

“A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step.” – Lao Tzu

With that in mind I started to tackle the most demanding challenge of my acadamical career in February 2013. From the very beginning I realized that this is not going to be a linear process from start to finish but rather an iterative one. However, building up an academic research like this from scratch and to follow it through requires time, effort, perseverance, patience and passion for the topic at hand.

When I was assigned to the thesis group concerning placebo effects of marketing actions I was instantly psyched. I have always found it quite intriguing how people’s perceptions and inferences can be influenced and guided by creating and shaping an environment of positive expectations. When searching for ideas and topics to write my thesis about the article by Zhu, Billeter and Inman (2012) on signaling product effectiveness cought my attention. Does the simple addition of marketing cues such as pictures and brand names really lead to a different perception of a product’s effectiveness, which in turn has the power to guide a consumer’s buying and consumption behavior? To broaden the examination of effectiveness I immediately started to think of possible moderating effects and underlying psychological mechanisms that are responsible for such a susceptibility. Over the last four month this idea has eventually evolved into a complete master thesis, which I hope you will enjoy reading. Along the way, some people have made a major contribution to this thesis. I would like to take the chance to show my appreciation. First, I want to say thank you to my first supervisor dr. Jia Liu who has been guiding and directing me since the start of my thesis in February. Her constructive feedback and her willingness to provide me with valuable advices whenever I encountered serious obstacles enabled me to push this thesis to its current level. Second, I would also like to thank my second supervisor dr. Marijke Leliveld for her feedback on this thesis.

Furthermore, I would like to give special thanks to my parents. With relentless perserverence and understanding they have been constantly supporting and encouraging me not only through the entire process of my thesis but also throughout my academical career. Hence, I want to dedicate this thesis to them as an acknowledgement of my deep gratitude.

(6)

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND PROBLEM

A close-up of a smiling face with white teeth on the packaging of a teeth-whitening product, a woman at a concert without white marks or yellow stains in a Nivea ad for a new deodorant. These are only two examples of how marketers employ cues in advertising or packaging in order to signal effectiveness of their merchandise. Previous research in this field has shown that marketing cues that highlight a product’s efficacy (i.e. pictures, price, brand name, country of origin, short phrases) can indeed produce a positive impact on consumer demand and especially on initial consumer preferences at the point of choice (e.g., Zhu, Billeter, & Inman 2012; Akdeniz, Calantone, & Voorhees 2013; Carpenter, Glazer, & Nakamoto 1994; Heath, McCarthy, & Mothersbaugh 1994; Miniard et al. 1991).

As the aforementioned findings show, it is a known fact that marketers and practitioners alike can significantly influence and alter consumer purchase behavior. With their work on placebo effects Shiv, Carmon and Ariely (2005) elaborated on the prevailing beliefs and set the cornerstone for valuable and promising future research. The results suggest that marketing actions, such as pricing, can also influence the efficacy perception of products instead of merely influencing the purchase behavior.

(10)

Conley, 2004; Kardes, 1993; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996). In line with Broniarczyk and Alba (1994), if salient cues highlighting product effectiveness are available, this could influence behavior, consequently leading consumers to perceive the featured product as being more effective.

In a first attempt to examine the relationship between signaling effectiveness and post-purchase consumption Zhu, Billeter and Inman (2012) conducted four studies in which participants were first given descriptive information about a certain product, such as a new teeth-whitening rinse, while in a second situation a picture (e.g. a smiling face with white teeth) or another salient cue (e.g. brand name) was added. After investigating whether signaling effectiveness by adding a picture or a brand name led to a change in the post-purchase consumption of a certain product, the authors have shown that, in line with the prevalent belief, salient cues in ads or packaging may increase perceived product efficacy and the liklihood of initial purchase but on the other hand may lead to lower consumption rates on a single occasion.

Nevertheless, the results of Zhu, Billeter and Iman’s work (2012) cannot be generalized as the authors put examined effectiveness cues only for functional products (e.g. insect repellent and teeth whitening products). Despite their importance in the field of everyday consumption, product categories in which effectiveness is hedonic (e.g. chocolate, ice cream) have been largely been neglected. Thus, in order to allow for a more comprehensive picture, it is of utmost importance to broaden the examination of effectiveness by investigating the moderating role of different product categories, either utilitarian or hedonic. Based on literature suggesting that utilitarian (functional benefits) and hedonic (affective/sensory gratification) products are consumed for different reasons (Micu & Coulter, 2012), it can be expected that, in contrast to the findings of Zhu, Billeter and Iman (2012) where signaling effectiveness can curb post-purchase consumption, the more effective consumers perceive a hedonic product to be the more inherent satisfaction they will derive from additional consumption.

(11)

self-perception as a rational being (Bem, 1972) people try to construct a compelling rationale either to resolve inherent conflicts and subsequently to justify their decision. The concept of a person’s need for justification is also closely related to different product categories, either hedonic or utilitarian in nature. Accordingly, research on this topic has shown that it is easier to justify spending money on functional products than to justify expenditures with regard to hedonic, sensory products (for a review see Khan, Dhar, & Wertenbroch, 2004).

However, what do all of these findings yield for marketers? Is it possible to circumvent an individual’s occurence of guilt when choosing certain alternatives or even to mitigate their need for justification by delivering compelling cues or reasons? To date, research has focussed on only a few possibilities to facilitate decision making with respect to a consumer’s urge to justify his or her choices. Accordingly, Zheng and Kivetz (2009) found that promotions may serve as external justifications on which people rely, while at the same time reward programs and choices help to justify specifc decisions (Kivetz & Zheng, 2006). This paper thus investigates whether certain marketing cues (e.g. pictures, brand name, phrases), which are salient in the decision and consumption context, can (1) narrow the gap between a consumer’s conflicting short-term and long-term goals (2) serve as a means to construct a compelling rationale for making a buying decision and thus facilitate justification and ultimately (3) mitigate post-decision regret which is likely to lead to higher consumption on a single occasion. However, it can be expected that people with a high need for justification will be less susceptible to nondiagnostic marketing cues (e.g. pictures and brand name) as they exert more cognitive effort and carefully scrutinize the available information, whereas people with a low need for justification are likely to be influenced by salient cues signaling a product’s effectiveness and use these cues as heuristics to make their buying as well as consumption decisions.

(12)

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Even though a vast amount of literature on the impact of effectiveness cues on perceived product efficacy and purchase intention exists, there has been hardly any attempt to show how signaling product effectiveness will ultimately affect post-purchase consumption by distingushing product categories in which effectiveness is either utilitarian or hedonic. Hence in this research, I attempt to broaden the examination of effectiveness by investigating if the impact of effectiveness cues on purchase intention and consequently on post-purchase consumption is moderated by the product category (utilitarian vs. hedonic) and the need for justification. Thus, the problem statement can be formulated as follows:

“How does the product category, either hedonic or utilitarian, and the need for justification moderate the impact of effectiveness cues on purchase intention and consequently on post-purchase consumption?”

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The aforementioned problem statement can be broken down into the following more specific research questions:

1. How does signaling product effectiveness affect post-purchase consumption?

2. Does the effect of signaling product effectiveness on post-purchase consumption differ with respect to the product category (utilitarian vs. hedonic)?

3. What leads to an individual’s need for justification and what are the consequences for the relationship between signaling product effectiveness, a consumer’s purchase intention and post-purchase consumption?

1.4 THEORETICAL AND MANAGERIAL RELEVANCE

When facing the decision on what product to buy and subsequently how much to use in order to reach after the desired end state, consumers often exploit effectiveness cues salient in the decision and consumption context to make inferences about a product’s (not readily observable) effectiveness which will (1) facilitate the formation of preferences and (2) help consumers determine what amount to consume.

(13)

individual need for justification moderate the impact of signaling product effectiveness on purchase intention and post-purchase consumption. More precisely, including of both hedonic and utilitarian product categories will integrate two different motivational orientations of an individual, which in combination with salient marketing cues will be mirrored in the consequences on consumer preferences and behavior (purchase and consumption). Furthermore, the influence of an individual’s need for justification will consequently either lead to rejection or acquisition of the featured product. These considerations are important not only to predict consumer behavior but also for company performance. That is, only a certain combination of effectiveness cues along with a particular product for which the purchase decision can be internally and externally justified will lead to the desired behavior, namely purchase and consumption, and will in turn enhance firm performance by increasing sales.

(14)

Not only does the current paper deal with various aspects of theoretical importance but it also yields first hand knowledge, which will be of high managerial relevance. Generally, marketers and/or brand managers have a vast array of tools to convey and promote product effectiveness. Accordingly, salient marketing cues serving that specific purpose are thus employed in visual ads, on the packaging or through labeling efforts, with the ultimate goal of increasing product purchase and consumption. However, brand managers often fail to understand which combination of marketing cues work most effectively and efficiently in which context (e.g. different product categories). Furthermore, it is not only important to understand what cues work when and where but also to grasp how they work with respect to a consumer’s internal motivations and potential constraints when making buying decisions. Only then can marketers provide those consumers with the necessary means to make coherent choices. In an attempt to resolve this problem, the current research gives marketers first hand insights into how to use which cues when and where in order reinforce purchasing and consumption alike which will consequently lead to long-term higher performance through an increase in sales. Previous research has shown that, for functional products, higher perceived effectiveness can, in fact, curb post-purchase consumption (Zhu et al. 2012), which would initially lead to higher sales through increased purchase intentions but would then level off as consumer’s use less of a given product. Thus, it is of utmost importance to combine cues in such a way that purchase and consumption are stimulated simultaneously.

In sum, it is important for marketers and researchers alike to know what triggers purchase intention and consumption in different product categories in which effectiveness is either hedonic or functional and to know how to manipulate cues in order to avoid the occurrence of guilt and to allow for the creation of a fit between a consumer’s motivational orientation and the message being conveyed. This may ultimately result in the evolution of a new persuasion technique.

1.5 STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS

(15)

order to test the hypotheses. The paper ends with a discussion of the main results and their theoretical as well as managerial implications. Eventually, the limitations of this research are described and recommandations for further research are given.

2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

In this chapter findings of the existing literature are discussed. The examination of prevalent concepts, options and theories will further serve as a theoretical background from which concise hypotheses will be drawn. Before the actual components of the current research are considered, it is of utmost importance to understand how consumers make inferences when facing buying and consumption decisions. Thus, the chapter starts off with a short overview of consumer judgment and decision making. Subsequently, the two dependent variables are introduced, purchase intention and post-purchase consumption, followed by the independend variable signaling product effectiveness. Afterwards the relationship between signaling product effectiveness and purchase intentions as well as post-purchase consumption is described. Finally, two moderators likely to influence the main effect are presented; the

product category, either utilitarian or hedonic, and a person’s individual need for justification. 2.1 CONSUMER INFERENCE MAKING

(16)

from information but also from choice sets that contain information about preferences of other consumers.

2.2 PURCHASE INTENTION AND POST-PURCHASE CONSUMPTION

Due to its irrefutable importance in the economy, the role of inference making with respect to consumer purchase intentions has been investigated routinely. As mentioned earlier, everything a prospective consumer knows about a certain product is inferred from information explicitly given. Thus, a consumer’s intention to purchase a product or a brand can have various driving forces such as perceived quality and anticipated satisfaction (Dodds, Monroe, & Grewal, 1991; Milgrom & Roberts, 1984; Shiv & Huber , 2000), perceived value (Szybillo & Jacoby 1974) and attitudes towards a brand or an ad (Spears & Singh, 2004). After inferences are made and preferences are constructed, literature cites purchase intentions as an individual’s action tendencies, which are closely related to a product or a brand (Bagozzi et al. 1979; Ostrom 1969). Intentions are further defined as a person’s motivation to deliberately exert effort in order to perform a certain behavior (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993). Accordingly, for the purpose of the present paper an accurate definition of a purchase intention may be formulated as follows:

A purchase intention is an individual’s deliberate plan to make an effort to effectively acquire a particular product or brand based on attitudes towards and perceptions of this particular product or brand.

The reasoning behind the exploitation of purchase intention measures is their predictive success. More specifically, research about the predictive validity of purchase intention measures (Kalwani & Silk, 1982) and the relationship between purchase intention and behavior (Morwitz et al. 2007) illustrates that information obtained from those measures may ultimately indicate a consumer’s probability of buying a particular product.

(17)

With their work on the effects of supply on actual usage, Folkes, Martin and Gupta (1993) were the first to examine how inferences about supply may consequently affect the usage amount on a single occasion. The results indicate that if supply decreases consumers tend to consume less of a given product. Hereinafter, those striking findings gave rise to a vast stream of research in this area. Elaborating on previous work Wansink (1996) found that because of low inferred unit costs, a large package size can, in fact, accelerate usage volume. Seven years later Wansink and Ittersum (2003) built upon prevalent work on the effects of shapes in area perceptions by conducting two experiments. They reported that the elongation of glasses reduces the consumption volume on a single-occasion because participants inferred that the glass capacity increased with the elongation. In addition, research has further shown that smaller sizes (e.g. packaging or food) can (1) lead to inferences about consumption norms, which can subsequently regulate consumption (Geier, Rozin, & Doros 2006), and (2) lead to a reversed effect on self-regulation (e.g. when concerns are being elicited) (Vale, Pieters, & Zeelenberg, 2008). Even though literature regarding the effects of supply on product usage is on the rise, inference making about product effectiveness has been largely omitted. Based on Folkes, Martin and Gupta (1993), who argued that judgement about product effectiveness plays a crucial role when it comes to usage, Zhu, Billeter and Inman (2012) were the first to test the influence of signaling effectiveness on post-purchase consumption. In four studies using functional products, such as teeth-whitening rinse and insect repellent, the authors show that inferences about higher product efficacy lead, in turn, to a lower usage amount on a single occasion. These findings can be explained as consumers may infer that the more effective a product is perceived, the less is required in order to reach a desired end state. However, as aformentioned judgment about effectiveness was only tested for functional products, product categories in which effectiveness is hedonic have received little attention. For the current paper, a concise definition of consumption can be formulated as follows:

The consumption of a product is the amount used on a single-ocassion until an anticipated desired end state is achieved

2.3 SIGNALING PRODUCT EFFECTIVENESS

(18)

make decisions accompanied by feelings of great uncertainty (Erdem & Swait, 1998; Jacoby, Olson, & Haddock, 1971). Therefore, in an attempt to reduce uncertainty and to facilitate inference making about product effectiveness, consumers are constantly on a quest for and process product-related cues, which are provided in ads or on the packaging. Literature on inference making suggests two streams on how to obtain information which a consumer will consequently utilize to make thorough inferences and choices. Whereas some research suggests that information can only serve as a foundation for inference making when it is accessible and available in a certain situation (Wyer & Srull 1989; Feldmann & Lynch 1988), it is further argued that a consumer’s intuitive beliefs may serve as a reliable basis for inference making (Broniarczyk & Alba, 1994). Furthermore, two basic processes of inference making can be distinguished, namely induction and deduction (Beike & Sherman, 1994; Mass, Colombo, Sherman, & Colombo, 2001; Kardes, Posavac and Cronley, 2004). On the one hand, consumers make inductive inferences by exploiting certain attributes, brand names, and other cues in order to conclude what benefits the utilization of certain products might yield. On the other hand, consumers make deductive inferences by drawing specific conclusions, which are based on general principles and arguments.

(19)

a well-known fact that price can have a positive effect on perceived product quality and effectiveness and that by adding a brand name, the relationship between price and quality can be further enhanced (Dodds, Monroe & Grewal, 1991). Similarly, recent work on placebo effects of marketing actions illustrates that marketing cues such as price can also influence actual product efficacy perceptions rather than merely altering purchase behavior (Shiv et al. 2005; Rao, 2005).

In contrast to the traditional extrinsic marketing cues, such as price and brand name, the literature also demonstrates that even pictures and phrases that highlight a product’s efficacy can have a strong impact on the assessment of quality (Miniard et al. 1991; Mitchell, 1986; Unnava & Burnkrant, 1991). For example, Unnava and Burnkrant (1991) suggest that in order to convey certain information or to strengthen particular arguments of a message, nonverbal stimuli (e.g. pictures) are frequently employed in advertisements. Thus, pictures are often used to bridge the gap between the attribute information explicitly mentioned in the verbal copy of an ad and the processing of this information in a consumers mind. In an earlier attempt to investigate the impact of verbal and visual components on brand attitudes Mitchell (1986) brings forward proof that by using visual elements individuals make inferences about a product’s quality and effectiveness based on the visual information provided in an advertisement.

(20)

This knowledge is crucial because it can be expected that consumers who are inclined to rely mainly on diagnostic cues, that is, reliable predictors of actual product effectiveness will be less vulnerable to the influence of salient nondiagnostic effectiveness cues.

2.4 SIGNALING PRODUCT EFFECTIVENESS AND THE IMPACT ON PURCHASE INTENTION AND POST-PURCHASE CONSUMPTION

During the last three decades, a vast amount of research has investigated the impact of marketing cues on purchase intention and reports that these cues may indeed positively influence initial consumer preferences (e.g. Carpenter, Glazer, & Nakamoto 1994; Heath and McCarthy, & Mothersbaugh 1994; Miniard et al. 1991). Furthermore, it is known that all a prospective consumer knows about a certain product is what he or she infers from information that is explicitly given when facing a purchasing decision. Inferences about effectiveness are made through the utilization of certain marketing cues that are present in the decision context. According to the utilization theory, the extent to which a certain cue is applied in order to infer product effectiveness is based on its respective perceived diagnosticity (Richardson, Dick, & Jain, 1994). In that sense, the literature suggests that two types of cues can be distiguished with respect to their valence, namely high-scope and low-scope cues (e.g. Purohit & Srivastava, 2001; Akdeniz, Calantone, & Voorhees, 2013). In environments where multiple cues are present, the utilization of one cue depends on the presence-valence of other cues. Consequently, high-scope cues, which evolve over time, may have a direct effect on perceived product effectiveness, whereas low-scope cues, which can be changed more easily, are dependent on the valence of low-scope cues (Purohit & Srivastava, 2001).

(21)

show that in addition to product effectiveness several other drivers can play a role when it comes to product choice such as environmental friendliness.

Nevertheless, it can be expected that if salient marketing cues, which highlight product effectiveness (e.g. a picture, price, claim), are added to a mere verbal product description, the perceived product effectiveness will be enhanced. Thus, the first hypothesis on the relationship between the depiction of effectiveness and purchase intention can be formulated as follows:

H1: Adding marketing cues that highlight product effectiveness will positively influence purchase intention.

(22)

Based on the literature on inference making and as Zhu et al. (2012) have shown, consumers are inclined to make inferences about product effectiveness utilizing marketing cues such as pictures, price and brand name that are salient in the consumption process. Consequently, after inferences are formed they are used as a decision-making basis in order to determine the optimal usage amount on a single occasion. Accordingly, cues where salience is high (e.g. pictures) are likely to amplify the effect on consumption, whereas cues where salience is low (e.g. verbal product descriptions) can be expected to mitigate the effect (e.g. Miniard et al. 1991; Mitchell 1986). However, there are still some shortcomings as Zhu et al. (2012) have only examined the impact of product effectiveness on post-purchase consumption for functional (utilitarian) products. That is, it might be assumed that in product categories where effectiveness is hedonic the reversed effect would occur. Nevertheless, starting from the premise that the more effective a consumer assesses a product to be the less he would have to consume in order to achieve a pre-defined goal, the hypothesis for the relationship between the depiction of product effectiveness and post-purchase consumption can be formulated as follows:

H2: Salient marketing cues about a product’s effectiveness will negatively influence usage amount on a single occasion when presented prior to consumption.

2.5 THE MODERATING ROLE OF PRODUCT CATEGORY

As noted previously, the literature on the effects of perceived product effectiveness on puchase intention and especially in association with product usage has made little attempt to broaden the examination of effectiveness in different product categories. As a result, a generalization of current findings in this domain would lead to an incomplete picture with respect to the ramifications of this relationship (e.g. see Zhu et al., 2012). In order to allow for a thorough differentiation between functional effectiveness and hedonic effectiveness, the current section will describe possible moderating effects of hedonic and utilitarian products on the relationship between the depiction of product effectiveness and purchase intention as well as post-purchase consumption. The terms product category ad product nature will be used interchangeably throughout.

(23)

reasons which go along with and are influenced by expectations about consequences and are derived from functional non-sensory attributes (Batra & Ahtola, 1990; Hirschman & Holbrook 1982; Millar & Tesser 1986). Based on the inherently pleasurable and instantly gratifying nature of hedonic consumption experiences Botti and McGill (2011) refer to those experiences as goals in themselves and thus label their intrinsic motivations as being terminal. On the other hand, as utilitarian consumption experiences are described as rather functional and useful, the authors refer to them as a means to achieve a higher-end goal and hence define the pertaining extrinsic motivations as being instrumental in nature.

In addition to the distinction of motives suggested by Batra and Ahtola (1990), existing research in explaining consumer behavior also distinguishes between goods where the process of selection and utilization is influenced by emotional wants (hedonic) rather than those influenced by functional needs (utilitarian) (e.g. see review of Khan, Dhar & Wertenbroch 2004). Accordingly, hedonic goods are defined in this paper as multisensory products whose consumption is characterized by experiential, emotive and pleasurable aspects (e.g. chocolate, ice cream) (Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982). On the other hand, utilitarian goods, whose consumption is rather cognitvely driven, are predominantly instrumental and are characterized by high practicality and functionality (e.g. toothpaste, detergent) (Strahilevitz & Myers 1998). As research on the differentiation between hedonic and utilitrian goods suggests, consumption of either is discretionary because every product has both utilitarian and hedonic attributes. Okada (2005) suggests that compared to utilitarian consumption, hedonic consumption is generally seen as more discretionary. In order to determine whether a product or attribute is hedonic or utilitarian, usage and consumption motives or choice tasks are pivotal (e.g. Pham 1998).

(24)

the immediate consequences of consumption (e.g. gratification) and the risk of delayed negative consequences is minimized. A third concept was developed by Bazerman et al. (1991) and distinguishes between affective preferences, called wants, and cognitive preferences, called shoulds. Consequently, wants can be associated with hedonism (less healthy but more tasty food) and shoulds pertain to the utilitarianism (healthier but less tasty food), whereby research suggests that people make a decision in favor of the immediate gratification impulsively. Shiv and Fedorikhin (1999) demonstrated that people were inclined to choose the hedonic item when cognitive resources were limited because of predominant presence of affective reactions. Surprisingly, though, the reversed effect applied when the availability of cognitive resources was high. Wertenbroch (1998) shows that consumers tend to use self-regulatory strategies such as self-rationing in order to maintain self-control over and to regulate the consumption of hedonic goods. The reason behind that is that consumers try to take care of their long-term interest (e.g. health) by restraining their short-term consumption impulses.

(25)

(2013) describe the concept of imagery as a key determinant of affective decision-making. Accordingly, consumers create an image or a visual representation of an event where they picture themselves using or consuming the product and subsequently use occurring emotions, either positive or negative valenced as a guideline for their decision. Adding information has proven to be beneficial for consumers’ construction of an accurate image. Consumers also tend to focus on vivid attributes when engaging in imagery and rely on those attributes when making judgments. In addition, MacInnis and Price (1987) have found that imagery can even lead to a distorted perception of how satisfied consumers will be with a product, mostly resulting in an overestimation because an evoked vivid mental image of product utilization may cause a positive bias. Therefore, it is proposed that using salient marketing cues which highlight that a product is effective (e.g. picture or brand name) will positively influence a consumer’s perception of the product’s effectiveness by illustrating the sough-after end state and consequently lead to a higher purchase intention for both utilitarian and hedonic products and to higher post-purchase consumption for hedonic products but not for utilitarian products. Accordingly, they hypothesis of the moderating role of the product category can be formulated as follows.

H3: The impact of the depiction of product effectiveness on purchase intention will be positively influenced by both utilitarian and hedonic products, whereas the depiction of product

effectiveness will decrease post-purchase consumption when the product is utilitarian and will increase post-purchase consumption when the product is hedonic.

2.6 THE MODERATING ROLE OF NEED FOR JUSTIFIACTION

(26)

cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957) and a consumer’s rational self-perception (Bem, 1972). On the other hand, external justifications are mainly concerned with the fact that consumers are inclined to choose those alternatives that are most likely to be evaluated positively by his or her reference group. Motives for this kind of justifications can be, for instance, self-presentation (Baumeister, 1982) or conformity behavior (Deutsch and Gerard, 1955). It is further assumed the people with a high need for justification will also be highly motivated to be accurate in their decision making. That is, those people are likely to exert higher cognitive effort when it comes to product-relevant reasoning, will carefully scrutinize relevant information and thus will process the given information more extensively (Kunda, 1990). In line with these ideas, Montgomery (1983) shows that consumers will only make a choice when the information and arguments provided are sufficient and compelling enough in order to make a thorough decision. In the following, two key determinants of an individuals need for justification will be described to provide a complete and comprehensive picture with respect to a possible moderating role of need for justification (NfJ) on the relationship between signaling product effectiveness, purchase intention and consequently post-purchase consumption.

2.6.1 Reason-Based Choice

(27)

2.6.2 Hedonic vs. Utilitarian Consumption

When it comes to decision-making, consumers have to make fundamental trade-offs between investing money in (utilitarian) necessities, such as detergents and ordinary food or on products embodying (hedonic) indulgences or nonessential luxuries, such as chocolate, ice cream or designer clothing. However, literature suggests that consumers tend to have more difficulties in justifying hedonic goods than utilitarian goods (Dhar and Wertenbroch, 2000). Even though people are inclined to enjoy themselves by nature, having fun or making purchases of hedonic goods may be associated with the occurence of guilt and the need for justification (Okada, 2005). This is consistent with the work of Kivetz and Zheng (2006), who state that making trade-offs between vices (hedonic) and virtues (utilitarian) is likely to raise issues of guilt and interpersonal conflicts, which involves gauging immediate temptations on the one hand and long-term goals on the other hand. The reasons behind this are the different benefits each type of goods offers. Whereas utilitarian products offer benefits in terms of practical functionality, hedonic products offer benefits in terms of experiential enjoyment and direct gratification (Batra and Ahtola 1990; Hirschman and Holbrook 1982; Mano and Oliver 1993). This difference, or interpersonal conflict, is responsible for the occurence of guilt which is associated with hedonic consumption. Prelec and Loewenstein (1998) therefore suggest, that it is easier to justify the purchase of utilitarian goods and more difficult to invest in hedonic goods. In sum, (1) the occurence of guilt and (2) difficulties in quantifying respective benefits are the main reason why it is so difficult for consumers to justify hedonic consumption (e.g. Okada 2005).

(28)

Taken together, consumers with a high need for justification may be less susceptible to the influence of nondiagnostic marketing cues signaling a product’s effectiveness (e.g. a picture or brand name), but if the situation allows them to justify the purchase, the ramifications on initial product choice and consequently post-purchase consumption will be enormous. When people can construct a convincing rationale or when justification is facilitated, consumers infer that they have earned the right to indulge and thus the usage amount on a single occasion will be amplified. Accordingly, the hypothesis for the moderating impact of the need for justification on the relationship between the depiction of effectiveness cues on purchase intention and consequently on post-purchase consumption can be formulated as follows:

H4: Compared with consumers with a low need for justification, a high need for justification will negatively influence the impact of depicting product effectiveness on purchase

intention and post-purchase consumption for hedonic products (but not for utilitarian products).

2.7 CONCEPTUAL MODEL

In the current section, all the hypotheses mentioned above will be integrated into a general overview which makes up the conceptual model. In line with the widely held belief that marketing cues, signaling effectiveness, will enhance anticipated satisfaction, a positive relationship between the depiction of product effectiveness and purchase intention is expected for the main effect to occur. On the other hand, however, the relationship between the independent variable and the second dependent variable, namely post-purchase consumption, is expected to be negative. Both effects sound rather straight forward, because the more a product’s effectiveness is made salient in the acquisition context, the easier it will be for consumers to make inferences accordingly and thus it is likely to increase the probability of initial purchase. Furthermore, as evidenced by Zhu et al. (2012) the more effective consumers perceive a product to be, due to salient marketing cues in the consumption context, the less will be required (on a single usage occasion) in order to achieve a desired end-state. However, as existing research has focussed solely on functional products, the current paper investigates whether different product categories, either utilitarian or hedonic in nature, can either amplify or mitigate the main effect. Moreover, it will be tested if an individual’s need for justification has the power to turn the main effect around.

(29)

3. METHODOLOGY

To provide support for the generated hypothesis summarized in the conceptual model above and for the underlying research questions, a survey of the depiction of effectiveness cues was conducted in which their power to influence (1) purchase intention and (2) post-purchase consumption was investigated. Hence, in the current section the research procedure and the data collection method are described. Accordingly, the methodology part starts off with the general research design, followed by a comprehensive overview of how the different variables involved were manipulated and measured. Furthermore, it outlines how the theory was implemented into the questionnaire and contains information on the execution.

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

According to Malhotra (2010), in the broader sense, marketing research designs can be classified as being either exploratory or conclusive in nature. Whereas the exploratory research design is mainly concerned to provide insights and understanding, conclusive research is aimed to test more specific hypotheses and to scrutinize relationships. For the current study, the latter is chosen leading to a characterisation as a conclusive research. Because the outcomes of this research will be used as input for managerial decision-making, large and thus representative samples are required. Furthermore, the design used in this study can be categorized as causal conclusive research because the specific objective to assess cause-and-effect (causal) relationships will be pursued. In particular, it will be tested whether

Depiction of

Effectiveness Cues Consumer Purchase Intention/Post-Purchase Consumption

Need for Justification Low vs. High

Product Category Utilitarian vs. Hedonic

Figure 1: Conceptual Model

H1

H2

(30)

and how the manipulation of an independent variable (depiction of effectiveness cues) will influence one or more dependent variables (purchase intention and post-purchase consumption), while guaranteeing the control over other moderating variables such as product nature and an individual’s need for justification.

3.2 VARIABLES

The current subsection presents all variables involved in this study along with the reasoning as to how and why the independent variable and the moderators were integrated and manipulated. Afterwards, the experimental design is introduced.

For a first overview, the variables within this study comprise:

• Independent variable: Depiction of Effectiveness Cues

• Dependent variable: Purchase Intention and Post-Purchase Consumption • Moderators: Product Category (utilitarian/hedonic) and Need for Justification

3.2.1 Moderating Variable: Product Category

In order to ease comprehension the variables section starts with the first moderator, product category. The products used in this survey were either utilitarian or hedonic in nature. The moderator was manipulated by assigning participants randomly to one of the two conditions, that is, half were assigned to a product which had been proven to be mainly hedonic, whereas the other half was assigned to a product which is mainly utilitarian. Based on recent work of Zhu et al. (2012), teeth-whitening rinse was used as a proxy for utilitarian products in order to allow for a replication of parts of their studies. Furthermore, chocolate, as used in studies by Micu and Coulter (2012), was selected to represent the hedonic product category. Besides, the aforementioned products were used as they are sufficiently comparable on other dimensions. Accordingly, both products can be classified as low involvement products compared to high involvement products (e.g. washing machine and designer clothing) and do also share a moderately low price level.

As for manipulation checks, the scales developed by Voss, Spangenberg and Grohmann (2003) on hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitudes were used. Accordingly, participants were asked to evaluate the product they had been exposed to using 10 items on a 7-point semantic-differential scale. Consisting of two subscales, five items measure the hedonic dimension (not-fun/fun; dull-exciting; not delightful-delightful; not thrilling-thrilling; enjoyable-unenjoyable) while five items measure the utilitarian dimension

(31)

practical-impractical). To analyse the results a T-test was used to examine whether the group exposed to the hedonic product actually perceived the product as mainly hedonic and whether the group of respondents assigned to the utilitarian product scored higher on the utilitarian dimension compared to the hedonic dimension.

Because people may (1) have already developed a certain mind-set or attitudes towards a particular product, (2) have had prior experience with the product/brand or (3) have been influenced by other extraneous factors, products pertaining to non-existing brands were used in order to prevent a possible bias.

3.2.2 Independent Variable: Depiction of Effectiveness Cues

The depiction of effectiveness cues is used as the independent variable in the current study. Product descriptions as commonly used in ads or on a product’s packaging were presented to the respondents. The independent variable was manipulated by assigning participants to one of two possible conditions. In the control condition respondents were exposed to information containing six mere textual product descriptions based on plain product traits (e.g. “convenient [package] size” or “100% pure and natural”). In the second experimental condition, effectiveness cues were made salient, that is, two of the six product traits provided in the control condition were replaced with (1) a short phrase in bold letters and (2) a picture, both highlighting the product’s effectiveness. The textual information and the pictures provided varied with the product category (utilitarian/hedonic), which will be considered in more detail in section 3.2.4. Accordingly, in the utilitarian condition a close-up of a smiling face with white teeth was shown whereas in the hedonic condition a picture of a woman visibly enjoying a piece of chocolate was included. This manipulation of the independent variable is in line with earlier work on signaling effectiveness. Using different functional products such as teeth-whitening rinse and insect repellent spray, Zhu et al. (2012) augmented mere textual product descriptions, also containing six items, with pictures and phrases in bold letters, in order to investigate whether varying effectiveness perceptions are produced, and if so, how they affect purchase intention and post-purchase consumption.

(32)

assess whether significant differences in the effectiveness scores between the two condition (no cues vs. cues) will occur.

3.2.3 Dependent Variables: Purchase Intention and Post-Purchase Consumption

In the current study there were two dependent variables: purchase intention and post-purchase consumption. For decades researchers and practitioners alike have routinely used the construct of purchase intentions, especially within the domain of advertising (e.g. Broniarczyk & Alba, 1994; Morwitz, Johnson & Schmittlein, 1993). For the case at hand it was interesting to see whether the addition of effectiveness cues in an ad or on the packaging of a certain product had the power to positively influence a consumer’s intention to purchase this product. However, the literature also argues that purchase intentions do not evolve alone, rather they are preceded and determined by attitudes towards the ad or the product in question (Fennis & Stroebe, 2010; Spears & Singh, 2004). That is, even though attitudes and purchase intentions are two separate constructs, they are also correlated. Since participants in this study were exposed to a product description as used in ads or on the packaging, respondents were first asked to indicate their attitudes towards the featured product and also to rate their purchase intention subsequently. To assess both constructs two scales as developed, refined and validated by Spears and Singh (2004) were used. Accordingly, to measure the attitudes towards the featured product, five items were required to be rated on a 7-point semantic differential scale anchored by “unappealing/appealing”, “bad/good”, “unpleasant/pleasant”, “unfavourable/favourable” and “unlikable/likable”. In order for purchase intentions to be assessed, people were also asked to rate five items on a 7-point semantic differential scale containing “never/definitely”, “definitely do not intend to buy it/definitely intend to buy it”, “very low purchase interest/very high purchase interest”, “definitely not buy it/definitely buy it” and “probably buy it/probably not buy it”.

(33)

would consume on a single occasion by counting the pieces of a stylized chocolate drawn to scale (24 pieces, 100g).

Due to prior use or other factors not attributable to this study, it could be possible that consumers had already formed well-defined usage patterns with regard to familiar products. Thus, in an effort to avoid a bias in the analysis, a general check question was included. Accordingly, participants were asked to indicate whether they consumed or purchased items like those featured in the product description “never”, “occasionally” or “frequently”.

3.2.4 Moderating Variable: Need for Justification

The second moderator in this experiment is an individual’s need for justification. The literature suggests that several factors such as the enhancement of one’s self-esteem (Hall & Lindzey, 1987), cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957) and a person’s idealized self as a rational being (Bem, 1972) can lead to inter-individual differences with regard to the level of a person’s need for justification. Thus, starting from the premise that every person has an intrinsic need for justification, which might vary across a continuum from low to high, this moderator was not manipulated but rather measured. However, to date, there is no integrated and validated scale to determine an individual’s overall need for justification. For the current experiment, a set of four questions was constructed based on the most important underlying factors and psychological mechanisms. In general, the need for justification can be conceptualized as the degree to which people have to justify their choices or decisions to themselves or to others (e.g. Simonson, 1989). Using literature on task fulfillment and “lay rationalism” (Hsee et al. 2003), reason-based choice (Shafir et al., 1993), shopping motivations (Chiou & Ting, 2011) and an individual’s self perception (Bem, 1972) the four questions were constructed as follows:

• “When making buying decisions I always have the tendency to justify my choices to

myself and to others!“

• “There must always be strong and sound reasons when I am facing buying decisions!“ • “When making buying decisions I always choose the option which is easiest to

justify!“

• „Each of my buying decisions needs to be pragmatic and has to contribute to the goal

of task fulfillment!“

(34)

conduct a pre-test. However, for the purpose of the current study the degree of reliability and the test for internal consistency of the scale was determined within the post-test analysis using Cronbach’s alpha. When all four statements reach an alpha of 0.6 or higher, the scale can be considered internally consistent.

As for the implementation, the set of questions which tested an individual’s need for justification were placed directly after the introduction of the questionnaire. This block was followed by a filler task, involving general questions about the participant’s demographics, which prevented people from becoming too involved in deep issue-related thinking.

3.2.5 Experimental Design

The current study used a 2 (mere verbal product description vs. depiction of effectiveness cues) x 2 (product category: hedonic vs. utilitarian) x 2 (need for justification: high vs. low) between-subjects design with the second moderator being measured instead of manipulated. This led to four different experimental conditions. A general overview of the different settings is given in Table1 below. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the 4 conditions.

Condition Product Description Product Category Set-Up

1 Product description

without effectiveness

cues

Utilitarian Teeth-Whitening Rinse + 6 items (plain product traits)

2 Product description with

effectiveness cues

Utilitarian Teeth-Whitening Rinse + 4 items +picture condition + phrase signaling effectiveness 3 Product description without effectiveness cues

Hedonic Milk Chocolate + 6 items (plain product traits)

4 Product description with

effectiveness cues

Hedonic Milk Chocolate + 4 items + picture condition + phrase signaling effectiveness

Table 1: Experimental Design

3.3 QUESTIONNAIRE STRUCTURE AND PROCEDURE

(35)

(36)

3.4 PARTICIPANTS AND SAMPLE

To ensure a high degree of representativeness certain conditions need to be met. To meet academic standards and to obtain reliable data it is desirable to have a sample which is composed of (1) participants of different age, gender, level of education, occupation and nationality and (2) given the 2x2x2 between-subject design of the current study, a sufficient number of participants. The first point was realized through the use of a snowball dissemination tactic as described above and the second point stipulated that between 150 and 200 respondents (approx. 30 per scenario = 180) would be necessary (Malhotra, 2010).

4. RESULTS

In the following section, the results derived from the survey described in chapter 3, are presented, assessed and analysed in a comprehensive fashion. The section starts with a general description of the original data set. It describes how inconsistencies such as misentries and missing values were dealt with and what other reasons led to the final sample size. The next subsection is entirely devoted to the composition of the sample, assessing demographics such as age, gender, education, occupation and nationality. This is followed by an outline of how manipulation checks included in the survey were assessed with respect to the focal variables, followed by an evaluation of the scales used in the underlying survey with respect to their internal consistency. Finally, the actual results are presented and the implications for the hypotheses of this paper are examined.

4.1 DATA SET

After the survey was closed, the raw data set consisted of 268 respondents. The sample was divided over the four conditional groups as described in chapter 3:

1. Utilitarian, product description without effectiveness cues 2. Utilitarian, product description with effectiveness cues 3. Hedonic, product description without effectiveness cues 4. Hedonic, product description with effectiveness cues

(37)

number of 221 respondents. In a quest for further inconsistencies five respondents were excluded from the analysis. When asked to indicate how many pieces of the featured product (chocolate) they would consume, participants entered “0” or nothing even though a pre-defined range between “1” and “24” had been set in Qualtrics. Moreover, three respondents appeared to cause a bias within the analysis. Indicating that they had only negative attitudes towards the featured product and no purchase intention whatsoever by choosing “1” on the semantic differential scale throughout, these respondents, in contrast, entered the highest possible number when asked about usage on a single occasion with respect to the advertised product. Thus, those cases were deleted at the outset.

In sum, the sample for the underlying statistical analysis is composed of a total of n=213 participants. Drawing on the premise that at least 45 participants per condition (180 in total) are needed for the results to be representative, the aforementioned sample size can generally be considered as sufficient.

4.2 SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS

In this subsection the characteristics of the final sample are described based on the demographics such as age, gender, education, occupation and nationality. To test whether respondents were randomly assigned and thus evenly distributed across all conditions, Chi-square analyses for age, gender, education, occupation andnationality were executed. The frequency tables as well as the Chi-square analysis output as derived from SPSS can be examined in Appendix 3.1.

4.2.1 Age

The sample of 213 participants, can be divided into four large age segments. The first segment and simultaneously the smallest covered the age group from 15-20 years (Frequency=5; 2.3%). The second and also the largest group ranged from 21-30 years (Frequency=99; 46.5%) followed by participants aged between 31-50 years (frequency=82; 38.5%). A total of 12.7% ranged further between the age of 51-62 years (frequency=27). The overall mean of the sample was 35.07 years. A random assignment across all conditions was confirmed after performing a Chi-square analysis (value=15.928, p>.05, sig.=.774) (for the orginal SPSS output regarding Chi-square and distribution see Appendix 3.1.1).

4.2.2 Gender

(38)

sig.=.634) indicates that all respondents were evenly distributed across all conditions (see also Appendix 3.1.2).

4.2.3 Education

Over half the 213 participants had obtained an academic degree (frequency=120; 56.3%) being either Bachelor, Master or PhD accounting for 16.9%, 36.2% and 3.3% of the total sample size respectively (frequency=36; 77; 7). A group of 50 respondents had achieved a high school diploma (23.5%), whereas 24 participants had obtained degrees less than a high school diploma (11.3%). Furthermore, 8.9% (frequency=19) had achieved degrees other than the choices available. An insignigficant Chi-square (value=47.173, p>.05, sig.=.082) provides evidence that there is an even distribution across all condition (for an overview of the different levels of and the distributiom across all conditions see Appendix 3.1.3).

4.2.4 Occupation

Two large groups emerged following the question as to respondents’ current occupation. Most of the participants were employees with 67.6% (frequency=144). The second largest group, though still far from the majority, were students with 25.8% (frequency=55). Furthermore, 3.8% (frequency=8) reported being self-employed while others indicated they were either retired (frequency=2; 0.9%), unemployed (frequency=1; 0.5%), or stated that none of the choices available could be applied to their current status of occupation (frequency=3; 1.4%). Within insignificant Chi-square (Value=27.092, p>.05, Sig.=.828) all participants are evenly distributed across all conditions. The distribution of different occupations among the sample is shown in Appendix 3.1.4.

4.2.5 Nationality

(39)

4.3 MANIPULATION AND OTHER CHECKS

To determine whether the manipulations of different stimuli had worked as planned, the outcomes of the manipulation check questions were assessed performing independent sample T-tests. Using this procedure allows one to ensure that all manipulations have been successful and conceived by the respondent as intended. In addition, further checks were conducted (e.g. frequency of buying and consumption), which could help to prevent causes of a possible bias at the outset. Those causes might be well-defined consumption patterns due to prior experiences with the featured product. In the current section the results are presented and described (for the original SPSS output, see Appendix 3.2).

4.3.1 Depiction of Effectiveness

It has already been extensively described in chapter 3 that respondents were exposed to either a mere textual product description (control group) or to a product description incorporating effectiveness cues such as a picture and a phrase in bold letters signaling effectiveness (manipulation).

As for manipulation checks and to assess whether respondents actually perceive the product to be more effective in the manipulated condition, they were subsequently asked to rate the featured product on a 7-point Likert scale anchored by “very ineffective/very effective“ and “much less effective than average/much more effective than average“ (Boulding & Kirmani, 1993). Subsequently, a new aggregate variable “effectiveness perception” was created by determining the mean score. With a Cronbach’s alpha of .862 (α>.6) the scale can be considered as being internally consistent.

The result of the T-test was highly significant (t=-3.985, df=211, p<.05) and indicated that simply adding a picture which signals effectiveness and a phrase in bold letters emphasizing a product’s effectiveness significantly increases the efficacy perception of the featured product. In particular, the control condition provided a significantly lower score (M=3.9151; SD=1.17407) than compared to the condition where effectiveness cues were made salient (M=4.6075; SD=1.35464).

(40)

4.3.2 Product Nature

Used as a moderator in the underlying survey, the product nature was also manipulated. Hence, respondents were either exposed to a utilitarian product (teeth-whitening rinse) or to a hedonic product (chocolate). In order to test whether participants actually perceived the featured product to be utilitarian or hedonic in nature, they were asked to rate the product on different items expressing utilitarian or hedonic characteristics. For the manipulation check the scale developed by Voss, Spangenberg and Grohmann (2003) was used. Accordingly, the scale consisted of five items pertaining to aspects of utilitarianism and five items expressing characteristics of hedonism.

After forming total scores representing the aggregate level of utilitarianism (α=.920) on the one hand and the level of hedonism (α=.897) on the other hand, a T-test was performed. The outcomes of this test were highly significant with p<.05 for the level of utilitarianism (t=4.664, df=211) and the level of hedonism (t=-7.145, df=211), respectively. In particular, respondents exposed to the teeth-whitening rinse (utilitarian) rated the product significantly higher on the utilitarian items (M=4.4679; SD=1.49294) than people exposed to chocolate (hedonic) (M=3.5703; SD=1.29472). In contrast, participants, who were exposed to chocolate (hedonic), rated the product significantly higher on hedonic aspects (M=4.0554; SD=.92525) than people presented with the utilitarian product (M=3.1589; SD=.90450).

In conclusion, the results show that both products can unambiguously be assigned to one of the two groups (utilitarian vs. hedonic) and hence the manipulation has worked in the right way.

4.3.3 Other Checks: Frequency of Buying and Usage

In addition, another check was performed which was mainly concerned with the frequency of buying and usage. As respondents had to rate their purchase intentions towards the featured product as well as the estimated usage amount on a single occasion, it was considered worthwhile to test whether consumption or purchase patterns may already have emerged due to previous experiences with the product, which in turn could distort the results. Accordingly, respondents were asked to indicate whether they had ever bought or used items like those featured in the survey and to state whether they do so “never”, “occasionally” or “frequently”.

The Impact of Signaling Product Effectiveness on Purchase Intention and Post-Purchase Consumption

The Impact of Signaling Product Effectiveness on

Purchase Intention and Post-Purchase Consumption

MASTER THESIS

The Impact of Signaling Product Effectiveness on

Purchase Intention and Post-Purchase Consumption

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

3. METHODOLOGY

4. RESULTS