MASTER THESIS THE EFFECT OF PERCEIVED UNCERTAINTY ON PRODUCT ENJOYMENT AND CONSUMPTION AND THE MODERATING ROLE OF CONSTRUAL LEVEL

(1)

THE EFFECT OF PERCEIVED UNCERTAINTY ON PRODUCT

ENJOYMENT AND CONSUMPTION AND THE MODERATING

ROLE OF CONSTRUAL LEVEL

June 17th, 2019

MASTER THESIS

EVA VASILEIOU S3732983 e.vasileiou.2@student.rug.nl University of Groningen Faculty of Economics and Business

(2)

1

ABSTRACT

‘Surprise’ is a word often used in marketing actions, incorporated in slogans or product labels. The current study investigates how the perceived uncertainty that the anticipation of a surprise elicits affects consumers’ experience of a product. Based on research in the effects of uncertainty, the current research proposes that the perception of mystery will have a negative impact on consumers’ enjoyment and amount of consumption of the ‘Surprise’ labeled product. Moreover, the effect of the construal level of stimulus is examined, which in turn is considered to influence consumer satiation. Specifically, the current study suggests that a low construal level stimulus will enhance the negative effect of the surprise product label on human satiation. To investigate the above, an online study is conducted. Findings from this study provide evidence that the anticipation of a surprise leads to decrease in enjoyment over time but its effect is insufficient to influence consumption. Finally, findings from the current study provide significant managerial implications regarding the construal level a marketing message is framed in, in order to induce the respective consumer mindset.

(4)

3

INTRODUCTION

he element of uncertainty is commonly used by marketers for the introduction of new products or the creation of mystery about them. For example, the well-known car brand Kia has integrated uncertainty in its slogan ‘Kia – The Power to Surprise’. Interestingly, the word ‘Surprise’ is a common marketing psychological tool to attract attention and provoke the perception of mystery even in cases that there is no subsequent surprise. To illustrate this, another marketing example is Coca Cola, which embraced ‘Surprise’ in its campaign of launching the new Coca Cola refreshment with Stevia in Australia with the slogan ‘Let Life Surprise You’. Both of these examples provoke the anticipation of a surprise when there is actually none. Existing literature suggests that surprise as a disruptive feeling that can easily attract attention (Derbaix and Pham, 1991) and this explains why marketers tend to use it. Moreover, surprise is able to activate positive or negative emotions and amplify subsequent reactions; people can feel more joyful or angrier after a disruption of surprise than they would have been without it when they were feeling happy or angry respectively (Charlesworth, 1969; Desai, 1939). Most importantly, either it is verbally, visually or conceptually used, surprise can induce elaborative thinking (Schmitt, 1999) as a result of discrepancy between expected and actual situation (Ekman and Friesen 1975). However, little research has examined the effects of uncertainty intriguing wordings such as ‘Surprise’ on consumers’ mindset and subsequent behavior when the mystery only holds as the anticipation of a surprise during the consumption experience. The current research fills this gap by investigating the effect of a ‘Surprise’ product label on information processing and subsequent consumer behavior.

(5)

4 affects their evaluations of brand extension. They showed that individuals with high-level construal tend to get influenced by generalized features of the stimuli with a level of abstraction (Ashmore and Del Boca 1981; Fiske and Pavelchak 1986; Hilton and von Hippel 1996) and evaluate the fit between the brand extension and the parent brand more favorably. Furthermore, prior research has indicated the role of the pattern regarding uncertainty creation and resulting individual desire to seek for resolution to be related with more positive hedonic experiences, referred to as the “Teasing effect” (Ruan, Hsee and Lu 2018). There is also existing evidence for the effect of uncertainty on increasing purchase intention (Hill, Fombelle, and Sirianni 2016; Laran and Tsiros 2012; Polman, Ruttan, and Peck 2017). However, Ruan, Hsee and Lu 2018 (2018) suggest that usually people seek uncertainty when they are able to obtain the missing information whenever they want, such as when reading a mystery novel. Indeed, a substantial body of research suggests that people are uncertainty averse and have a tendency to explain the world by giving meaningful sense to it (Gilovich 1991). Ekman and Friesen (1975) support that when the discrepancy between the expected and the actual situation is negative, it signals that people cannot use heuristics any longer and there is a need for deeper processing. If humans manage to explain a novel event, they reach emotional adaptation to it, meaning the decrease of its emotional valence (Wilson and Gilbert 2003; Wilson, Gilbert and Centerbar 2003). If perceived uncertainty is the reason of deeper processing that leads to wearing off of the enjoyment of an experience, should marketers continue incorporating surprise in product campaigns? Research remains equivocal about whether perceived mystery enhances or affects negatively the effectiveness of marketing actions. We examine this question in the context of anticipated surprise during the consumption of a hedonic product, specifically a summer vacation brochure.

(6)

5 uncertain stimulus affects people’s enjoyment and, consequently, the amount of the product they will consume. Particularly, we focus on the variation of enjoyment and consumption when people are triggered to focus on detail as a result of perceived uncertainty induced by the label “Surprise” and depending on the level of construal the respective message is presented in.

Our study has significant theoretical and managerial implications. First, we provide evidence on the effect of a ‘Surprise’ label as an uncertainty triggering feature on information processing and on the way the product is experienced. At the same time, we investigate the influence of the construal level in which the stimulus is framed on people’s mindset and product consumption experience. Existing literature shows that the construal level of stimulus can impact the way people construe information, either in a decontextualized or a concrete way (Wan and Rucker 2012). Our goal is to contribute to literature that supports the negative effect of deeper processing on product enjoyment and satiation. Our contributions will provide valuable guidelines to marketers regarding the usage of the element of uncertainty and how to form consumers’ mindset in order to monitor their enjoyment and consumption behavior. Our findings on these features will help them have an insight on subsequent customer referral value, re-purchase intention and customer engagement and loyalty.

(7)

6

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

In this section, we draw upon existing literature on uncertainty and its effects on humans’ mindset and behavioral responses. We also present prior research on construal level and how it can be monitored to provoke heuristic or systematic processing.

Uncertainty in Marketing, Emotional Adaptation and Satiation

The Cambridge Dictionary defines uncertainty as ‘a situation in which something is not known or something that is not known or certain’; additionally, it gives a business definition as ‘the feeling of not being sure what will happen in the future’. The principle that humans are naturally uncertainty averse has been discussed a lot in psychology research. According to Gilovich (1991) humans are predisposed to dislike unpredictability and have a tendency to make sense of the world around them, to “see” order and make meaningful patterns where there are none. This process of giving meaning to novel events is called “ordinization” by Wilson and Gilber (2003). Also, Freud (1924/1968, p. 365) suggests the pleasure principle, according to which ‘our entire physical activity is bent upon procuring pleasure and avoiding pain’. Although uncertainty is an unpleasant state that we are trying to avoid, reduce or minimize (Kerren & Gerristsen 1999), it is found in many aspects of our everyday life. Wilson and Gilber (2003) suggests that the uncertainty averse theory may be the other side of the same coin with the pleasure principle.

(8)

7 a smartphone for personal use) (Loewenstein and Elster 1992). When the decision is more cognitive or the product is more utilitarian (e.g. a smartphone for professional use) the consumers will focus more on the product information and it is more likely to be negatively affected by uncertainty (Laran and Tsiros 2012). Contrast theory suggests that individuals will magnify the differences between the expected and the received product (Anderson, 1973). Thus, if the product does not meet their expectations, they will evaluate it even less favorably than if they had no initial expectations for it. Behavioral responses to uncertainty have also been studied. Berlyne (1971) suggest that by giving meaning to novel events, their emotional power may be lowered; consequently, the enjoyment produced by the activity is reduces as well. Of course, that means that in case of negative events, the ‘making sense’ process helps reducing the unpleasant consequences (Wilson et al. 2003). In our research, we test our hypotheses on a hedonic experience such as browsing a summer vacation brochure to have better insights on the negative effect on enjoyment. For this purpose, we make a written and visual usage of the word ‘Surprise’ in a product label, in order to create the anticipation of a surprise and induce deeper processing (Schmitt 1999).

(9)

8 and Rucker 2012). Their findings of a number of experiments indicated that when people felt higher confidence, they tended to construe information in a more abstract, decontextualized way, in contrast to those feeling low confidence who focused more on concrete aspects of the information given (low construal level). These findings may also give additional evidence to the conclusions of past research that supports that the level of confidence (high or low) affects information processing (increases or decreases respectively) (Edwards 2003; Tiedens and Linton 2001; Weary and Jacobson 1997). With the current study, we pursue to test if these theories also apply when consumers are exposed to labels that induce the anticipation of a surprise and thus, the feeling of uncertainty during the consumption experience.

Apart from a decrease in enjoyment, there is evidence that focus on detail may influence consumption negatively as well. In a study about self-control and satiation, Haws and Redden (2012) propose that people with high self-control will pay much more attention in the consumption experience than those with low self-control, leading to faster drop in enjoyment and faster satiation. To illustrate this better, the authors use the example of “mindless” eating and how it leads to higher consumption amounts (Wansink, Painter and North2005). Moreover, Van De Veer, Van Herpen and Trijp (2015) investigated the effect of mindfulness on food intake. Mindfulness is used by the authors to define a state of “enhanced attention to and open awareness of current experience or present reality” (Brown and Ryan 2003, 822). Their results indicate that paying close attention to the subject of the experience can activate compensation behavior and cause better monitoring of consumption. The goal of their research was to investigate if manipulating one’s mindfulness can improve their consciousness of consumption, thus enabling them to better control eating. In our research, we use this concept to test if increased attention, in the format of focus on detail by manipulating the construal level of participants, can be the reason of lower levels of consumption.

(10)

9

Construal Level Theory

Construal level theory (CLT) describes the relation between the way individuals construct their environment and the degree of abstraction of the stimuli (psychological distance; Freitas, Salovey and Liberman 2001; Liberman and Trope 2003; Vallacher and Wegner 1987). Individuals who think in a more abstract way construe stimuli with decontextualized and simple representations, keeping the gist of the available information (high-level construals). Such individuals tend to be influenced by abstract and generalized stimulus (Ashmore and Del Boc, 1981; Fiske and Pavelchak 1986; Hilton and von Hippel 1996), construals that focus on the desirability of the event and the reason why it is happening (Lee, Keller and Sternthal 2009). On the contrary, individuals who think in a more concrete way construe stimuli with relatively complex and contextualized representations (low-level construals). Such individuals are more easily influenced by specific and detailed stimuli (Fiske and Pavelchak 1986) that focus more on the feasibility of the event and the way how it is happening (Lee, Keller and Sternthal 2009).

The psychological distance between the individual and the target is a major factor that affects construal level (CLT; Liberman, Trope and Stephan in press; Trope and Liberman 2003). When people think about events in the near future, they tend to use low-level construals, which means that they use specific mental models. When thinking about distant future events, individuals tend to use high-level construals, meaning more abstract mental models (Liberman, Sagristano and Trope, 2002; Trope & Liberman, 2000). Agrawal, Trope and Liberman (2006) report that individuals tend to prefer distant choices based on their desirability (high-level construal) and near choices based on their feasibility (low-level).

(11)

10 also salient when individuals make predictions. Nussbaum, Trope and Liberman (2003) in their study report that when participants were asked to make predictions about a target for the distant future, they asked for more abstract (high-level) information than when they made predictions for near future events. Kim and John (2008) investigated the role of construal level and brand extension evaluations. Their findings conclude that individuals who construe stimuli at a higher-level base their evaluations more on the perceived fit between the parent brand and its extension; brand extensions that were considered to have high level of fit with the parent brand were evaluated more favorable than those with moderate fit. Individuals who construe stimuli at a lower level were less sensitive to the perceived fit and evaluated extensions with a moderate and high level of fit similarly.

An interesting series of experiments of Wan and Rucker (2012) showed that the interaction between analytical or abstract way of thinking and construal level holds both ways. In other words, as mentioned earlier, they studied the effect of confidence on behavior; higher (lower) confidence leads to higher (lower) level of construing information. Replicating their experiments, Wan and Rucker concluded that the way that confidence affects information processing can be influenced by the way in which the message is framed (abstract or concrete). Therefore, when people feel less confident, they are more likely to process a message more deeply if it is framed in a contextualized way, whereas people who feel high confidence will probably process a message more deeply if the information is presented in an abstract way.

In the present study, we suggest that the way people respond to stimuli with a level of uncertainty is affected by how the stimulus is framed (at a low vs. high level of construal). In our research, we test if the negative effect of surprise anticipation on product enjoyment and consumption is moderated by the construal level that the stimulus is framed in. We assume that perceived mystery will cause a greater reduction of product enjoyment and consumption when this relationship is moderated by a low construal level message:

H1a: Perceived uncertainty induced by a surprise product label will have a greater

(12)

11 similarly negatively the product enjoyment with the latter effect when this relationship is moderated by a low construal level stimulus, and more negatively than when it is moderated by a high construal level stimulus.

H1b: Perceived uncertainty induced by a surprise product label will have a greater

negative effect on the amount of consumption of the product when this relationship is moderated by a low construal level stimulus than the effect of the surprise label when moderated by a high construal level stimulus; a regular product label, that does not provoke mystery, will affect similarly negatively the product consumption with the latter effect when this relationship is moderated by a low construal level stimulus, and more negatively than when it is moderated by a high construal level stimulus.

METHODOLOGY

Our study was designed to examine the differential effect of perceived uncertainty on product enjoyment and amount of consumption varying the construal level of the stimulus (high vs. low). We assess if the construal level of a controlled stimulus acts as a moderator on the effect of a surprise anticipation product label on an individual’s enjoyment and consumption of the product (H1a and H1b respectively). In other words, our expected results are that the levels of enjoyment and consumption will be at the lowest levels when participants will have perceived uncertainty about the product due to the surprise product label and will have been exposed to a low construal level stimulus. On the contrary, both enjoyment and consumption levels will be the highest when individuals will have not perceived mystery and will have been exposed to a high construal level stimulus. Respondents exposed to either uncertain high construal level stimulus or regular low construal level stimulus are expected to experience similar levels of enjoyment and consume similar amount of the product, both higher than the uncertain low construal level condition but lower than the regular high level one.

Participants & Design. Two hundred and thirty-three people (137 female, Table 1,

(13)

12 background were recruited for this study in exchange for an experience voucher of an activity related to the ones described in the vacation brochure. Participants who did not reach the end of the survey (N = 24), failed the attention check question (N = 33), had participated in a similar experiment in the past (N = 28) and/or were more than 3 SD away from the mean consumption value in our sample (N = 8) were excluded from the main analysis (see Table 3, Appendix B). The resulting sample consists of 154 participants (105 female, Table 4, Appendix B; Mage = 25.21, SD = 4.6, Table 5, Appendix B; 2 missing

gender responses and 3 missing age responses). The study is a 2 x 2 between-subjects design, crossing Label (Surprise vs. Regular) with level of construal of the stimuli (High vs. Low). Participants were randomly assigned to the four conditions (Table 6, Appendix B).

To analyze our data, we used the PROCESS macro for SPSS (version 3, Hayes 2013) for two-way interactions in moderation models (model 1). Mixed Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to investigate the effects of our two independent variables (Label and construal level) on the change of enjoyment and consumption measures over time. Finally, one-way and two-way ANOVA were also used as a method for manipulation checks and additional findings. The methods above enabled us to gain insight in both the interaction and the main effects of the product label and the construal level of stimulus on the dependent variables, and also make visual representation of the results.

Development of manipulations. This study starts with the manipulation of the

(14)

13 introductory paragraph of instructions, each one of which evoked high or low level of construal to the reader, in addition to perceived uncertainty or not (Figure 3: High construal level and Surprise product label; Figure 4: Low construal level and Surprise product label ; Figure 6: High construal level and Regular product label; Figure 7: Low construal level and Regular product label, Appendix A). The participants in the high construal level condition (N = 84, Table 7, Appendix B) were kindly asked to imagine that they are planning a summer vacation for sometime within the next 12 months, whereas in the low construal level condition (N = 70, Table 7, Appendix B), they would imagine planning a vacation for the coming weekend (psychological distance, distant vs. near future). Moreover, in the high construal level conditions, the participants’ task while browsing the pages of the brochure was to focus on the overarching idea of the vacation and what their dream holiday would be like (decontextualized benefits and desirability of vacation); respondents in the low construal level condition were asked to focus on feasible aspects of the vacation, such as price and location, in addition to how the activities described would actually look like this weekend (contextualized features and feasibility of vacation). The above manipulations are labeled with the respective Figure number in Appendix A, where the entire study as it was presented to the participants can be found, separating the difference conditions with blocks.

Procedure. This experiment is based on the presentation of stimuli and collection of

responses on computer to ensure the unified representation of the stimuli (no mobile devices were allowed). Participants were randomly assigned across the four different conditions, varying the uncertainty and construal level. The four groups were not aware of each other. First, they were exposed to the product label; depending on the condition, they were told that they would browse a “Surprise Vacation Brochure” (surprise label condition) or a “Vacation Brochure” (regular label condition), in exchange for an experience voucher related to the activities they would find included. They were then asked to evaluate their expected enjoyment on a scale from 0 to 100, in addition to the extent to which they think the brochure will include elements of uncertainty.

(15)

14 At the end of the instructions, all respondents were clearly informed that they would have the option to continue or stop browsing the hiking vacation brochure at any time by clicking “Continue browsing current vacation package” or “Stop browsing current vacation package” at the end of every page. To ensure that participants read the instructions carefully, they were asked to choose what their task would be during browsing the brochure among three options; depending on the condition, the options were: (1) “What I generally desire in a summer vacation and the overarching idea of the vacation package” (high construal level condition)/ (1) “The specific summer activities I would like to pursue for the coming weekend” (low construal level condition), (2) “Place, Product, Promotion” and (3) “I don’t know.” The respondents that replied option (2) and (3) were excluded from the analysis (N = 33).

Followingly, all the respondents were exposed to the same Hiking Vacation Package. The brochure included 20 pages in total and it wasdivided in two equal parts. It is important to note that the respondents were not aware of the total size of the vacation package or its division in parts. After browsing as many pages of the first part each participant wanted, depending on when they decided to stop browsing, they were asked to evaluate how much they enjoyed the brochure and how much they would like to continue browsing on a scale from 0 to 100 (0 = Not at all and 100 = Very much). These questions were followed by an informative message that next, they would have the opportunity to browse additional pages of the hiking vacation brochure, where the option to continue or stop browsing at any time was again applicable. They then were presented with the pages of the second part of the brochure. After they chose to stop browsing, their enjoyment and desire to continue browsing the package were measured as before, on a scale from 0 to 100. Next, they found a question concerning how many additional pages of the hiking vacation package they would like to browse at the present moment, if the duration of the study would be not affected; the available range was from 0 to 15 additional pages. To complete this part of the study, participants had to fill an open question describing what the vacation brochure was about based on memory.

(16)

15 Next, they were kindly asked to choose between two options (a or b) for every of the questions they would see, according to which behavior they personally believed that describes each activity more appropriately. For better understanding, the activity “Attending a class” was given as an example, with the two available options to be (a) “sitting in a chair” and (b) “looking at the blackboard”; the options reflect high and low construal level respectively. The survey ended with some demographic questions, a question concerning participation in a similar experiment in the past and an optional field for further comments on the experiment (see Appendix A for the entire study as it was presented to the participants).

Dependent variables. The option to stop browsing the vacation brochure at any time

and decide how many pages each participant want to see, enabled us to investigate differences in the amount they consumed depending the condition they were assigned to. In combination with the division of the brochure in two parts, these two features let us investigate the assumed satiation from the first to the second part, as a result of the interaction between the product label and the construal level of the stimuli. Therefore, we created two new variables, one for each part of the brochure, with the time in seconds each participant spent browsing the desired number of pages (i.e. browsing time 1 and browsing time 2). A third variable with the sum of the previous two was also created, reflecting the total amount of time browsing (i.e. total consumption).

(17)

16 Endogenous or goal-driven attention can be induced when one is asked to follow a set of rules or instructions (e.g. Stroop 1935), whereas exogenous or stimulus-driven attention is activated by external stimuli such as color or shape (MacLean et al. 2009). Prior research has shown that vigilance decrement is reduced by endogenous attention cues (Hitchcock et al. 1999; Hitchcock et al. 2003; Helton et al. 2005; Scerbo et al. 1987). Therefore, in our brochure we wanted to eliminate any exogenous attention cues that could possible shift the participants’ attention from their task, such as bright colors in the photographs or the size of the text.

After browsing the desired number of pages of each part of the brochure, participants evaluated their enjoyment while browsing and their willingness to view additional pages of it on a scale of 0 to 100 (0 = Not at all and 100 = Very much). Again, this enabled us to compare the two evaluations and note any difference. Enjoyment and desire to browse more pages were highly correlated in both the first and the second part of the brochure (Pearson correlation r1 = .759, p = 0 and Pearson correlation r2 = .715, p = 0; Table 8 and

9 respectively, Appendix B) so we averaged them into a composite measurement of enjoyment for each part and as total (e.g. Haws and Redden 2013). Hereby, when referring to enjoyment we will mean the composite measure of it. The responses to the question regarding how many additional pages between 0 and 15 they would like to browse at the end of both parts of the brochure was analyzed separately as a measure of enjoyment.

RESULTS

Manipulation checks. To assess if the surprise label had the expected effect on

perceived uncertainty, participants were asked to report the extent to which they think the brochure will include elements of uncertainty to a scale of 1 to 7 (1 = Strongly disagree to 7 = Strongly agree). Participants in the mystery conditions reported significantly higher perceived uncertainty compared to those in the regular condition (NMystery = 73, MMystery=

5.51, SDMystery = 1.22 vs. NRegular = 81, MRegular= 4.88, SDRegular = 1.35, Table 10, Appendix

(18)

17 manipulation, participants were asked to complete the 25-item BIF questionnaire (Vallacher and Wegner, 1987), where they had to choose between two available options of 25 questions, one of which always reflect high construal level and the other one low. Our analysis indicated high internal consistency of this scale in our sample (Cronbach’s a = .786, Table 12, Appendix B). As it is used in successful operationalizations in existing literature (e.g. Lee, Keller, and Sternthal, 2009), the options of the 25 questions were subjected to binary recoding: high construal level option was recoded with the value of 1, whereas the low construal level option was recoded with the value of 0. As a result, each participant reached a total score between 0 and 25; the higher the BIF score the higher the level the individual construes information. A two-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) of the surprise label and the construal level of stimuli on the participants’ score to the BIF scale indicated that participants in the low construal level condition reported no significant ,differences with those in the high construal level condition (NLow = 70, MLow = 14.39, SDLow = 4.48; NHigh = 84, MHigh = 14.90, SDHigh = 4.66, Table 13, Appendix B; FInteraction(1, 150)

= .95, p = .33, η2p = .06; FCL(1, 150) = .4, p = .53, η2p = .03; FLabel(1, 150) = .96, p = .33, η2

p = .06, Table 14, Appendix B). We conclude that the construal level manipulation did

not have the expected effect on participants’ level of construing information. In addition, by looking at the insignificant interaction effect between the surprise label and the construal level of the message on BIF score above, we conclude that the two manipulations are highly uncorrelated. Therefore, our analysis face no multicollinearity issues and we can analyze their main effects on our dependent variables.

Effects on product enjoyment. We first examined the effect of the construal level of

(19)

18 Appendix B) or construal level of stimuli (B = -3.65, t(150) = -1.14, p = .255, 95%, CI[-9.97, 2.66], Table 16, Appendix B) was found. These results indicate a need for further investigation in the potential interaction effect of our two independent variables on the total enjoyment of a hedonic product like a vacation package. Currently, the results suggest that the examined effects are marginally significant.

Furthermore, to investigate the assumed enjoyment reduction, we performed a mixed ANOVA, including the measures of enjoyment per part of the vacation package as the two within subjects factors and the Label and the construal level of stimuli as the between subjects factors. The model showed a statistically significant change in enjoyment between the two parts of the vacation package as a result of the interaction between the Label with the construal level (F(1, 150) = 7.65, p = .006, η2

p = .05, Table 17, Appendix B). The

results showed no evidence of main effect of the product label (F(1, 150) = .8, p > .05, η2p

= .00, Table 17, Appendix B) or the construal level of the stimulus (F(1, 150) = .01, p > .05, η2p = .00; Table 17, Appendix B).

(20)

19 the abstract, high construal level task instructions. That is, in the high construal level conditions, participants who encountered with the surprise label enjoyed the second part of the brochure significantly less than the first part, compared to those who encountered with the regular label. We predict that with a bigger sample and more equal participants distribution across the conditions, the results would provide evidence for significance of the moderating role of a low construal level stimulus as well. Figure 1 depicts the relationships discussed.

Figure 1. The interaction effect of Construal Level and the product Label on enjoyment change between the second and the first part of the vacation brochure

Lastly, we analyzed the responses to the question concerning how many additional pages participants would be willing to browse after the end of the brochure, ranging from 0 to 15. As a measure of enjoyment, the responses of this question were tested for correlation with the composite measure of total enjoyment of the brochure; the results showed a positive but relatively weak correlation between the two variables (Pearson correlation r = .49, p = .00, Table 21, Appendix B). A moderation analysis of the effect of

-16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 E n jo y m en t ch a n ge

Enjoyment change between brochure packages

(21)

20 label with the construal level on the measure of number of additional pages participants were willing to browse was performed; the results showed no statistically significant moderation model (R2 = .03, F(3,150) = 1.51, p = .214, Table 22, Appendix B). The construal level did not moderate the main effect statistically significantly (B = -.44, t(150) = -.59, p = .553, 95%, CI[-1.90, 1.02], Table 23, Appendix B). Neither the main effect of Label (B = -.37, t(150) = -1.01, p = .312, 95%, CI[-1.10, .36], Table 23, Appendix B) nor the main effect of construal level (B = -.66, t(150) = -1.79, p = .075, 95%, CI[-1.40, .07], Table 23, Appendix B) were found significant. The findings show that the number of pages that participants desired to browse additionally to the browsed pages was not affected differently by the interaction between the product label and the construal level of stimulus across the conditions. The variable of additional pages at this question were dealt as continuous for sake of the analysis, which is considered a limitation.

Effect on product consumption. In order to find evidence for Hypothesis 1b regarding

the moderating role of construal level in the effect of Label on product consumption, a moderation analysis was conducted on the total browsing time of both the two parts of the brochure. The results showed that the moderation model was not statistically significant (R2 = .001, F(3,150) = .07, p = .975, Table 24, Appendix B). No evidence of statistically significant moderation effect (B = 4.05, t(150) = .18, p = .856, 95%, CI[-41.19, 49.30], Table 25, Appendix B) or main effects of neither the Label (B = -4.26, t(150) = -.37, p = .709, 95%, CI[-26.79, 18.27], Table 25, Appendix B) nor the construal level of stimuli (B = 2.30, t(150) = .20, p = .202, 95%, CI[-20.29, 24.90], Table 25, Appendix B) were found. Participants’ browsing time was not significantly affected by the manipulated variables, thus, the consumption levels did not differ across the four conditions. Notably, although the number of browsed pages per package was not subjected to statistical analysis, the frequencies table can be found in Appendix B for an overview (Table 26).

(22)

21 .002, Table 27, Appendix B). No label or construal level effect was found statistically significant either (F(1, 150) = 1.10, p = .297, η2p = .007; F(1, 150) = 1.16, p = .283, η2p =

.008 respectively, Table 27, Appendix B).

For further investigation, a moderation analysis was also conducted to examine whether the construal level of the stimuli acts as a moderator in the effect of the product Label on the change measure of time browsing between the parts of the brochure (Browsing time of second part – Browsing time of first part). The results showed that the moderation model was not statistically significant (R2 _{= .16, F(3,150) = .08, p = .492, Table 28,}

Appendix B).Opposite to our hypothesis, no moderation effect of the construal level was found on the browsing time change variable (B = -8.03, t(150) = -.49, p = .626, 95%, CI[-40.53, 24.47], Table 29, Appendix B). Neither a Label main effect (B = 8.24, t(150) = 1.007, p = .316, 95%, CI[-7.94, 24.43], Table 29, Appendix B) nor a construal level of stimuli effect (B = 9.06, t(150) = 1.10, p = .272, 95%, CI[-7.17, 25.30], Table 29, Appendix B) were found statistically significant. Our findings do not confirm Hib and suggest that participants’ consumption was not influenced by the interaction effect of product label and construal level of stimulus.

Other findings. In the beginning of our study, the participants were asked to evaluate their

expected enjoyment while browsing the brochure, after they had only been exposed to the surprise or the regular label. The reason behind this question was to investigate whether the triggered perceived uncertainty of the surprise label alone would affect respondents’ expected enjoyment differently than the regular label. A one-way ANOVA of the effect of Label on the measure of expected enjoyment showed no statistically significant effect (F(1,152) = .496, p = .482, Table 30, Appendix B), showing that the respondents across conditions expected to enjoy the brochure with no significant differences.

(23)

CI[-22 19.10, -2.79], Table 31, Appendix B), whereas this was not the case in the surprise label conditions (MDifference = 5.60, p = .198, 95%, CI[-2.95, 14.16], Table 31, Appendix B).

Lastly, the 25-item BIF scale (Vallacher and Wegner, 1987) at the last part of our research is a self-report measure of the level at which one construe information, on a scale from 1 to 25 reflecting low to higher construal level respectively. Earlier in the analysis we used this scale as a check of our construal level manipulation, the results of which did not provide evidence of the expected effect. By looking at the Descriptives of this scale, we see that the mean is higher than the threshold of score 12 between low and high construal level (N = 154, M = 14.67, SD = 4.57, Table 32, Appendix B); indeed, 71.4% of the respondents scored higher than 12 (Table 33, Appendix B) showing that the majority of the respondents tend to use high level of construal.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

(24)

23 construal level in a moderating role. In our research, we successfully manipulated the perceived uncertainty with the use of the ‘Surprise’ label on our product. Nevertheless, our analysis showed that the way we manipulated the construal level of stimulus did not succeed to cause the expected effect on participants’ way of thinking; thus, our results should be interpreted with caution due to the lack of clear evidence of the desired manipulation effect of the construal level.

(25)

24 It is worth noting that although the effect of the interaction between the product label or the construal level of stimuli is salient when analyzing the changes in enjoyment, our findings of their effect on the total level of enjoyment showed marginal significance. Participants across the four different conditions enjoyed browsing the two parts of the hiking vacation brochure in similar levels averagely, regardless the label of the vacation package or their task while browsing (high or low construal level). This finding signal need for further analysis in order to investigate in dept if total enjoyment can be influenced by a combination of a surprise label and high or low construal level stimulus. Their similar levels of enjoyment are also reflected in their responses to the opportunity to browse additional pages at the end of the brochure. Regardless the condition, the majority of the participants wanted to browsed less than three of the fifteen additional pages, even if they were informed that the duration of the study would not be affected.

(26)

25 the participants browsed only the first page of the second brochure (Tables 26, Appendix B).

In conclusion, our findings suggest that the perceived uncertainty induced by a ‘Surprise’ product label leads to a greater enjoyment reduction overtime when the stimulus is framed in a decontextualized way than a regular product label. On the other hand, our expected effect of low construal level stimuli on decrease in enjoyment meets our predictions but only when it is interacting with a regular, no surprise anticipation label. Most importantly, our finding suggest that the aforementioned effects on enjoyment are not reflected on participants’ amounts of consumption.

Theoretical Implications

(27)

(28)

27 of consumption or satiation over time, when the product is considered overall hedonic such as a vacation brochure.

Managerial Implications

Our findings have important practical implications for marketers. There are many examples of marketing campaigns that include the word ‘Surprise’, creating the anticipation of uncertainty about the product. However, perceived uncertainty could be interpreted both positively and negatively by someone. The goal of the current research was to investigate the effect of the anticipation of a surprise on people’s responses in terms of enjoyment and amount of consumption of hedonic products. Firstly, our findings provide additional evidence to the successful usage of the word ‘Surprise’ as an uncertainty triggering factor. We show that the mere adding of the element of surprise in the introduction of a generally hedonic product such as vacations indeed create the perception of mystery to the reader. These findings allow marketers to consider the use of the word ‘Surprise’ in text or as text in a relative image, like we did in the introduction of the study and with a picture of a plane wing with the text “Surprise Vacation Package”, in order to attract attention and create the perception of ambiguity. The fact that, in the current study, the expected enjoyment of browsing the vacation brochure was not affected by the perceived mystery is also an important practical implication.

(29)

(30)

29

Limitations and Future Recommendations

The current study has a few limitations which leave room for further future research. Our findings show that the manipulation of construal level with a paragraph of instructions asking participants to imagine themselves planning a vacation focusing on either abstract or concrete features of it may not be sufficient to provoke high or low level of construal respectively. In specific, almost 80% of the respondents to the current study tend to construe information at a higher level in general, which is considered a main limitation for the interpretation of our findings. Notably, by looking at the excluded responses from the main analysis, we find that most of the participants who failed the attention check question were exposed to the low construal level instructions. This allows us to think that the instructions we developed for the low construal level conditions were not as clear and understandable as the ones for the high construal level. Consequently, this also leads to unequal number of participants across the conditions, with 84 in the two high-level conditions but 70 in the low-level ones. We suggest future research to develop a stronger manipulation of low construal level so that the two levels will be equivalent to provoke the desired mindset.

In our research, we study a hiking vacation brochure as a hedonic product which, however, may not be as relatable or may have lower personal relevance to participants than a beach summer vacation package. Future research could examine the effect of a surprise label combined with high or low construal level stimulus varying the personal relevance of respondents to the stimuli and the perceived importance of their task, which are two of many situational features that could either enhance or provoke lower need for systematic processing (e.g. Borgida & Howard-Pitney, 1983; Petty, Cacioppo, & Goldman, 1981; Petty & Cacioppo, 1979a & 1979b). Most importantly, we urge future research to study the effect of these two variables also on utilitarian products, the decision for which is more likely to be cognitive rather than affective (Laran and Tsiros 2012).

(31)

30 the Moderation analysis were not normally distributed, violating one of the assumptions of the analyses. We predict that with a significantly bigger sample and equal sizes of condition participants, our assumption could be possibly confirmed. Lastly, it should be noted that our 25-item BIF scale was missing one of the questions, leaving the maximum achievable score to be 24 instead of 25; however, we do not believe that the results would be much different.

Conclusion

(32)

31

APPENDIX A

DISCLOSURE FORM

This is a disclosure form for research participation. It is standard and contains important information about this study and what to expect if you decide to participate. Please consider the information carefully.

You are being asked to take part in a research study. The information in this form is provided to help you decide whether or not to contribute your opinions as part of this study. The purpose of the study is to understand how consumers describe behavior and perceive vacation brochures. All of the information you will receive in this study is scientifically verified, and you will not receive false feedback of any kind.

Your participation is voluntary. You may refuse to participate in this study. If you begin the study, you may leave the study at any time. There are no known risks involved. There is no direct benefit but you may learn about consumer decision making. We anticipate no costs apart from the time you spend completing the research.

Efforts will be made to keep your study-related information confidential.

If you agree to participate in this study, you will not give up any personal legal rights you may have as a participant in this study.

FILLING OUT THE SURVEY ON A MOBILE DEVICE/TABLET IS NOT ALLOWED.

For questions, concerns, or complaints about the study you may contact e.vasileiou.2@student.rug.nl

Thank you very much for your participation in our study.

(33)

32 Dear Participant,

The following study will be about how consumers perceive vacation brochures. As part of this study, you will participate in a lottery for an experience voucher.

We would like to thank you for participating in our research. Please read all instructions carefully to ensure a smooth process.

1. Do not fill in this survey on your mobile phone, as some items may not be displayed correctly. If you do, you will be automatically excluded from this study.

2. Note that this survey will include reading checks to assess if you really read the questions. Therefore, please always read the question first before answering. If you fail the reading checks you cannot participate in the lottery for the voucher anymore.

3. Please do not talk about the content of this study to other people.

We -once again- thank you for your cooperation! Please click on the arrow below to proceed.

(34)

33

End of Block: Default Question Block

Start of Block: Perceived Uncertainty manipulation/ Construal Level High

In the following you will browse a surprise vacation package.

You can browse the surprise vacation package as long as you like and stop at any time.

Note that as part of this study, you will participate in a lottery in which you will receive one experience related to the vacation package you were browsing as a gift.

Page Break

(35)

34 How much do you expect to enjoy browsing the surprise vacation package? Please click and hold the red slider and drag it to the position that best reflects your expected enjoyment.

Not at all Very much

0 100

()

Page Break

(36)

35 Please read the instructions on the following page carefully before proceeding.

Page Break

Now, please imagine that you are planning a fancy summer vacation away from home sometime within the next 12 months. You are wondering: Where would you like to go the most and why is this place on my bucket list? While you are browsing the following pages of the surprise vacation package, please keep in mind the following:

1. What would you generally like to gain from the vacation – e.g., finding relaxation, getting active, or educating yourself?

2. Why is your desired vacation appealing to you?

3. What seems to be the overarching “big” idea and gain of the surprise vacation package you are browsing?

Think about how your most desirable dream holiday!

You will now see pages of the surprise vacation package. You can continue browsing the package or stop doing so at any time. Note that it can take some time for the individual pages to load (depending on your internet speed). Please be patient.

To continue browsing the vacation package, click "CONTINUE BROWSING CURRENT PACKAGE".

To stop browsing the vacation package, click "STOP BROWSING CURRENT PACKAGE"

(37)

36 Page

Break

Please demonstrate that you understood the instructions. My job in the next task is to keep in mind the following when browsing the vacation package:

o

What I generally desire in a summer vacation and the overarching idea of the vacation package.

o

Place, Product, Promotion

o

I don't know.

End of Block: Perceived Uncertainty manipulation / Construal Level High Start of Block: Perceived Uncertainty manipulation/ Construal Level Low

In the following you will browse a surprise vacation package.

You can browse the surprise vacation package as long as you like and stop at any time.

(38)

37 Page

Break

How much do you expect to enjoy browsing the surprise vacation package? Please click and hold the red slider and drag it to the position that best reflects your expected enjoyment.

0 100

(39)

38 Page

Break

Please indicate to what extent you agree to the following statement. Strongly disagree Disagree Somewhat disagree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat agree Agree Strongly agree The vacation package will include elements of uncertainty.

o

Page Break

Please read the instructions on the following page carefully before proceeding.

Page Break

(40)

39 location? While you are browsing the following pages of the surprise vacation package, please keep in mind the following:

1. Where do I want to stay? In a hotel, a cabin, or maybe a tent? 2. In terms of activities: Would I do yoga, hiking, or try out golfing?

3. How would I like to spend my lunch time? Eating at a restaurant or having a picnic? Think about how your specific summer activity this weekend will look like!

You will now see pages of the surprise vacation package. You can continue browsing the surprise vacation package or choose to stop doing so at any time.

Note that it can take some time for the vacation package pages to load (depending on your internet speed). Please be patient.

Figure 4: Low Construal Level manipulation and Surprise product label conditions

Page Break

Please demonstrate that you understood the instructions. My job in the next task is to keep in mind the following when browsing the vacation package:

o

The specific summer activities I would like to pursue for the coming weekend.

o

I don't know.

(41)

40

Start of Block: Regular Label/ Construal Level High

In the following you will browse a vacation package.

You can browse the vacation package as long as you like and stop at any time.

(42)

41 Figure 5: Regular stimulus concerning perceived uncertainty manipulation with regular product label

(43)

42 How much do you expect to enjoy browsing the vacation package? Please click and hold the red slider and drag it to the position that best reflects your expected enjoyment.

0 100

()

Page Break

Please indicate to what extent you agree to the following statement. Strongly disagree Disagree Somewhat disagree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat agree Agree Strongly agree The vacation package will include elements of uncertainty.

o

Page Break

(44)

43 Page

Break

Now, please imagine that you are planning a fancy summer vacation away from home

sometime within the next 12 months. You are wondering: Where would you like to go the most and why is this place on my bucket list? While you are browsing the following pages of the vacation package, please keep in mind the following:

1. What would you generally like to gain from the vacation – e.g., finding relaxation, getting active, or educating yourself?

2. Why is your desired vacation appealing to you?

3. What seems to be the overarching “big” idea and gain of the vacation package you are browsing?

Think about how your most desirable dream holiday!

You will now see pages of the vacation package. You can continue browsing the package or stop doing so at any time. Note that it can take some time for the individual pages to load (depending on your internet speed). Please be patient.

Figure 6: High Construal Level manipulation and Regular product label conditions

(45)

44 Please demonstrate that you understood the instructions. My job in the next task is to keep in mind the following when browsing the vacation package:

o

What I generally desire in a summer vacation and the overarching idea of the vacation package.

o

I don't know.

End of Block: Regular Label/ Construal Level High Start of Block: Regular Label/ Construal Level Low

In the following you will browse a vacation package.

You can browse the vacation package as long as you like and stop at any time.

(46)

45 Page

Break

How much do you expect to enjoy browsing the vacation package? Please click and hold the red slider and drag it to the position that best reflects your expected enjoyment.

0 100

()

(47)

46 Please indicate to what extent you agree to the following statement.

Strongly disagree Disagree Somewhat disagree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat agree Agree Strongly agree The vacation package will include elements of uncertainty.

o

Page Break

Please read the instructions on the following page carefully before proceeding.

(48)

47 Now, please imagine that you are planning some fun summer activities away from home for the coming weekend. You are wondering: What is feasible in terms of budget and location? While you are browsing the following pages of the vacation package, please keep in mind the following:

1. Where do I want to stay? In a hotel, a cabin, or maybe a tent? 2. In terms of activities: Would I do yoga, hiking, or try out golfing?

3. How would I like to spend my lunch time? Eating at a restaurant or having a picnic? Think about how your specific summer activity this weekend will look like!

You will now see pages of the vacation package. You can continue browsing the vacation package or choose to stop doing so at any time.

Note that it can take some time for the vacation package pages to load (depending on your internet speed). Please be patient.

To stop browsing the vacation package, click "STOP BROWSING CURRENT PACKAGE"

Figure 7: Low Construal Level manipulation and Regular product label conditions

(49)

48 Please demonstrate that you understood the instructions. My job in the next task is to keep in mind the following when browsing the vacation package:

o

The specific summer activities I would like to pursue for the coming weekend.

o

I don't know.

End of Block: Regular Label/ Construal Level Low

Start of Block: Hiking Vacation Brochure (1st Package) and Enjoyment measurement

(50)

49

o

CONTINUE BROWSING CURRENT HIKING PACKAGE

o

STOP BROWSING CURRENT HIKING PACKAGE Page

(51)

50

o

(52)

51

o

(53)

52

o

(54)

53

o

(55)

54

o

(56)

55

o

(57)

56

o

(58)

57

o

(59)

58

o

(60)

59 How much did you enjoy browsing this hiking vacation package? Please click and hold the red slider and drag it to the position that best reflects your enjoyment.

0 100

()

How much would you like to continue browsing this hiking vacation package? Please click and hold the red slider and drag it to the position that best reflects your desire to continue browsing this package.

0 100

()

(61)

60 In the following you have the opportunity to browse additional pages of the hiking vacation brochure. Again, you can stop browsing at any time. Click on the arrow to continue browsing the hiking vacation brochure.

End of Block: Hiking Vacation Brochure (1st Package) and Enjoyment measurement Start of Block: Hiking Vacation Brochure (2nd Package) and Enjoyment measurement

o

(62)

61

o

(63)

62

o

(64)

63

o

(65)

64

o

(66)

65

o

(67)

66

o

(68)

67

o

(69)

68

o

(70)

69

o

(71)

70 How much did you enjoy browsing this hiking vacation package right now? Please click and hold the red slider and drag it to the position that best reflects your enjoyment.

0 100

How much would you like to continue browsing this hiking vacation package right now? Please click and hold the red slider and drag it to the position that best reflects your desire to continue browsing this package.

0 100

How many additional pages of the hiking vacation package would you like to browse right now? Mind that your choice does not affect the total duration of this study.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

(72)

71 Please describe below what the vacation package was about. Please write down everything you remember. ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ Page Break

Thank you for completing this task. Please click on the arrow to proceed to the next part.

End of Block: Hiking Vacation Brochure (2nd Package) and Enjoyment measurement Start of Block: Construal level Vallacher & Wegener (1987)

Please read the following instructions carefully:

Behavior can be described in multiple ways. For example, one person might describe a behavior as "typing a paper", while another might describe the behavior as "pushing keys". Yet another person may describe it as " expressing thoughts". On the following pages, you will find several different behaviors listed. After each behavior will be two choices of different ways in which the behavior might be described. Here is an example:

1. Attending class

a. sitting in a chair

b. looking at the blackboard

(73)

72 there are no right or wrong answers. Choose the description that you personally believe is more appropriate in each pair.

Click on the arrow below once you have thoroughly read the instructions.

Page Break

Please choose only one of the two alternatives as a meaning of each behavior

1. Make a list

o

Getting organized

o

Writing things down

2. Reading

o

Following lines of print

o

Gaining knowledge 3. Joining the army

o

Helping the Nation's defense

(74)

73 4. Washing clothes

o

Removing odors from clothes

o

Putting clothes into the machine

5. Picking an apple

o

Getting something to eat

o

Pulling an apple off a branch Page

Break

Please choose only one of the two alternatives as a meaning of each behavior

6. Chopping down a tree

o

Wielding an axe

(75)

74 7. Measuring a room for carpeting

o

Getting ready to remodel

o

Using a yardstick 8. Cleaning the house

o

Showing one's cleanliness

o

Vacuuming the floor

9. Painting a room

o

Applying brush strokes

o

Making the room look nice 10. Paying the rent

o

Maintaining a place to live

o

Transferring money Page

Break

(76)

75 12. Locking a door

o

Putting a key in the lock

o

Securing the house

13. Voting

o

Influencing the elections

o

Marking a ballot 14. Climbing a tree

o

Getting a good view

o

Holding on to branches 15. Filling out a personality test

o

Answering questions

o

Revealing what you like Page

(77)

76 Please choose only one of the two alternatives as a meaning of each behavior

16. Tooth-brushing

o

Preventing tooth decay

o

Moving a brush around in one's mouth

17. Taking a test

o

Answering questions

o

Showing one's knowledge

18. Greeting someone

o

Saying hello

o

Showing friendliness 19. Resisting temptation

o

Saying "no"

(78)

77 20. Eating

o

Getting nutrition

o

Chewing and swallowing Page

Break

Please choose only one of the two alternatives as a meaning of each behavior

21. Growing a garden

o

Planting seeds

o

Getting fresh vegetables 22. Traveling by car

o

Following a map

o

Seeing countryside

23. Having a cavity filled

o

Protecting your teeth

(79)

78 24. Talking to a child

o

Teaching the child something

o

Using simple words

25. Pushing a doorbell

o

Moving a finger

o

Seeing if someone's home Page

Break

End of Block: Construal level Vallacher & Wegener (1987) Start of Block: Controls

What is your age? Please type a number in the box below.

(80)

79 What is your gender?

o

Male

o

Female

o

Other/decline to state_______________________________________________ Page

Break

Do you have any comments about this survey? (optional)

MASTER THESIS THE EFFECT OF PERCEIVED UNCERTAINTY ON PRODUCT ENJOYMENT AND CONSUMPTION AND THE MODERATING ROLE OF CONSTRUAL LEVEL

THE EFFECT OF PERCEIVED UNCERTAINTY ON PRODUCT

ENJOYMENT AND CONSUMPTION AND THE MODERATING

ROLE OF CONSTRUAL LEVEL

MASTER THESIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

METHODOLOGY

RESULTS

Enjoyment change between brochure packages

GENERAL DISCUSSION

APPENDIX A

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o

o