Thesis defense presentation

Thesis defense presentation

Can anthropomorphism influence aspects of market

transactions?

A research on the relation between anthropomorphized

products and bargaining in market transactions, explained by

the existence of moral outrage.

Literature review - Bargaining

 2 ways of setting the prices in the marketplace:

 Fixed price  the price is not negotiable, the most common way of setting the prices today (Kotler & Armstrong, 2010)

 Negotiable price bargaining is allowed, common in flea and secondhand markets or markets where the amount of

expenditure is noteworthy (automobiles, houses) (Evans & Beltramini, 1987)

Literature review-Bargaining 2

 During the exchange, the one party makes offers and the other party evaluates them and continues with concessions and

counteroffers (Rubin & Brown, 2013).

 asking price attracts potential customers and is also considered as the first offer of the seller which initiates the negotiation process

(Arnold, 1999)

Literature Review- Anthropomorphism

 Anthropomorphism is defined as the phenomenon where people “imbue the imagined or real behavior of nonhuman agents with humanlike characteristics, motivations, intentions, and emotions.” (Epley, Waytz & Cacioppo, 2007:864)

 People have a tendency to anthropomorphize products (Kiesler, 2006)

Literature review – Anthropomorphism

2

 Product anthropomorphism affects customer’s perceptions about the product and it’s success. (Aggarwal & McGill, 2007)

 Anthropomorphism is widely used in the marketplace non – human brand endorsers that mimic the human form (Pillsbury Dough Boy and the Michelin Man) (Kiesler, 2006)

 Anthropomorphizing inanimate entities “grants nonhuman agents moral regard, conferring rights such as freedom and autonomy” (Waytz, Cacioppo & Epley, 2010)

 Therefore, in the minds of people anthropomorphized products can be treated as humans. So, what happens when an

Literature Review – Taboo trade-offs

and moral outrage

 Taboo trade-offs entail some values that are sacred and cannot follow the pricing fungibility norms (McGraw & Tetlock, 2005)

 Trading these sacred values with secular ones, like money, is considered disgraceful and therefore taboo (Tetlock, 2003)  e.g buying and selling human organs (McGraw, Tetlock, 2005)

 Putting a price on something human or negotiating over the price of an anthropomorphized product could be also considered as taboo trade-off

 People are unwilling to engage in taboo trade-offs (Baron and

Spranca 1997; Fiske and Tetlock 1997; McGraw, Tetlock, and Kristel 2003)

Hypotheses

 H1a: If a product is anthropomorphized, the willingness to bargain will decrease compared to non-anthropomorphized product.

 H1b: Consumers will be more willing to pay the asking price compared if a product is anthropomorphized versus non-anthropomorphized

 H2a: The relationship between product anthropomorphism and willingness to bargain is mediated by moral outrage, such that the more moral outrage people feel, the less consumers are willing to bargain.

Methodology

 157 respondents : 47.1% males, mean age= 28.2 52.9 % females, mean age=29.9  Volunteers found in central spots of the city

 between subjects design

 IV: first language, embedded face (Puzakova et al. 2013)

 DV’s: indicate on a 7 point Likert scale their willingness to accept the asking price and their willingness to bargain

Results- H1a, H1b supported

 A one way ANOVA revealed that there is a significant main effect of anthropomorphism on the willingness to bargain (F(1,155)=18.89, t value= 26.604, p< 0.05)

 the estimated coefficient for the anthropomorphized condition (M=4.3671, SE=0.1962) was smaller than the estimated coefficient for the non-anthropomorphized condition (M=5.5769, SE=0.2784)  Another one way ANOVA showed that there is a significant effect

of anthropomorphism on the acceptance of the asking price (F(1,155)= 9.051,t value= 25.727, p<0.05).

the estimated coefficient of price acceptance in the

Results- H2a, H2b rejected

 The mediation model proposes that product anthropomorphism influences the level of moral outrage that people feel, which in turn influences the willingness to negotiate on the price of the sofa and the willingness to accept the asking price.

Anthropomorphism

Moral outrage

Bargaining-Acceptance of

Results – H2a & H2b rejected

 Bargaining : The mediation analysis revealed that the mediation effect is not significant (ACME= 0.1103, 95% CI [ -0.3114, 0.07], p = 0.25>0.05)

 Asking price acceptance : The mediation analysis showed that the mediation effect is not significant (ACME=0.01191, 95% CI [ -0.05532, 0.10], p = 0.708>0.05)

 Questions 6-10 : PCA revealed that these questions can be

considered as one  appropriateness of bargaining indicator of taboo trade –off  possible second mediator

 ANOVA showed that when a product is anthropomorphized people think it is less appropriate to bargain (M=-0.6984, SE= 0.1662)

Results – new mediator

 The mediation analysis revealed that these beliefs about the

appropriateness of bargaining significantly mediate the relationship

between product anthropomorphism and willingness to bargain (ACME=-0.980, 95% CI [-1.391, -0.59 ], p<0.05)

 the appropriateness of bargaining mediates the 80% of the total effect that anthropomorphism has on the willingness to bargain (Prop. Mediated=0.806)

 The mediation model showed that the beliefs about the

appropriateness of bargaining significantly mediate the relationship

between anthropomorphism and willingness to accept the asking price (ACME= 0.354, 95% CI [0.135, 0.63], p<0.05 )

General Discussion –

Limitations-Implications

 Moral outrage did not work as a mediator possible explanation: moral outrage= subtle feeling

 Maybe the selected feelings that represent moral outrage were not suitable for bargaining process

 Noteworthy findings for market transaction field : anthropomorphism can affect the outcome of negotiations  weapon for sellers

 Culture Important aspect of bargaining process For some