The ‘darker side’ of salience and the mediating effect of embarrassment on willingness to buy.

The ‘darker side’ of salience and the

mediating effect of embarrassment on

Problem statement

To what extent does salience influence willingness to buy in an offline, public setting, and to what extent is this association mediated through

Table of Contents

• Theoretical framework (+ Background) • Research design

• Data analysis

• Results & Implications

Theoretical Framework

• WTB embarrassing products in private settings is larger than in public settings (Blair & Roese, 2013; Dahl et al., 2001; Krishna et al., 2015). • Spotlight effect: consumer tendency to believe others pay attention to

them  especially when there’s potential to signal undesired identity

Theoretical Framework

• Product packaging is one of the first factors to grab attention (Kauppinen-Räisänen, 2014).

• Rebollar et al. (2012) show the importance of the colour in packaging • In online retail, discrete packaging of embarrassing products is

preferred (Krishna et al., 2015).

Methodological Framework

• Research Design: Between-subjects 2 x 2 x 2 • Sample: Online Survey

• 153 women, 84 men (237), average age of 28

• WTB: three-item seven-point scale (Wang et al., 2017): α = 0.916

• Salience: two-item seven-point scale (Blair & Roese, 2013): α = 0.780 • Embarrassment: initially three-item seven-point (Dahl et al.,

2001): α = 0.018

 two-item seven-point: α = 0.913

Results & Implications

• Managers/Marketers must consider the amount of attention they want to and need to grab  there is a thing such as too much attention.

• This research focuses on healthcare products  FR: examine when this effect takes place

Salience Willingness to

buy

Results & Discussion

Hypothesis 2: A notable purchase situation for a product results in higher perceived salience than a less notable purchase situation.

Not supported (p=0.998) Independent Sample T-Test:

Hypothesis 3: The notability of the packaging of a product results in higher perceived salience than a less notable packaging.

 Not supported (p=0.068) borderline

If FR shows a significant difference, then marketers must adapt their marketing strategies. For instance, because neutral packaging might be harder to grab

Results & Implications

• Privacy bags or baskets

• FR: what influences perceived salience?

• Endcap locations could be more salient, does this have an effect?

• As salience does influence embarrassment: lowering salience could also be beneficial.

Results & Implications

• There is no mediating effect of Embarrassment when all variables are

Salience Willingness to

buy

Embarrassment

H6: -0.084

Limitations

• Two embarrassment items scored high for both own factor and the one with perceived salience  These two variables might explain the same variance within WTB

 Possibly why there is no mediation effect

• Adjustment of the embarrassment scale • Confusion resulting from survey

• WTB items too similar

• “Why ask about embarrassment when it concerns nasal spray?”

• Small sample size for pre-tests  H2 and H3 not supported

• Pre-test allowed for comparison

• Self-reported research

Problem statement

To what extent does salience influence willingness to buy in an offline, public setting, and to what extent is this association mediated through

Conclusion

• Awareness of the ‘darker side’ of salience with some product categories • Important to reduce both perceived salience and perceived embarrassment

• Use of privacy bags/baskets • De-stigmatizing products

• Future research: what influences perceived salience?

• Packaging – colour, size, material • Location of embarrassing products

References

Blair, S., & Roese, N. J. (2013). Balancing the basket: the role of shopping basket composition in embarrassment. Journal of

Consumer Research, 40(4), 676-691.

Dahl, D. W., Manchanda, R. V., & Argo, J. J. (2001). Embarrassment in consumer purchase: The roles of social presence and purchase familiarity. Journal of consumer research, 28(3), 473-481.

References

Kauppinen-Räisänen, H., & Luomala, H. T. (2010). Exploring

consumers‘ product-specific colour meanings. Qualitative Market

Research: An International Journal, 13(3), 287-308.

Krishna, A., Herd, K. B., & Aydınoğlu, N. Z. (2015). Wetting the bed at twenty-one: Embarrassment as a private emotion. Journal of

Consumer Psychology, 25(3), 473-486

Lau-Gesk, L., & Drolet, A. (2008). The publicly self-consciousness consumer: Prepared to be embarrassed. Journal of Consumer

References

Moore, S. G., Dahl, D. W., Gorn, G. J., & Weinberg, C. B. (2006). Coping with condom embarrassment. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 11(1), 70-79.

Raheem, A. R., Vishnu, P. A. R. M. A. R., & Ahmed, A. M. (2014). Impact of product packaging on consumer’s buying behavior. European journal

of scientific research, 122(2), 125-134.

Rebollar, R., Lidón, I., Serrano, A., Martín, J., & Fernández, M. J. (2012). Influence of chewing gum packaging design on consumer

References

Wang, D., Oppewal, H., & Thomas, D. (2017). Anticipated

embarrassment due to social presence withholds consumers from purchasing products that feature a lucky charm. European