조절적 적합성과 과도한 적합성이 소비자의 선택 연기에 미치는 영향

Abstract

In this paper we examine the impact of consumers’ regulatory focus on the choice decisions between the alternatives comprised of hedonic and/or utilitarian attributes. Specifically, using choice deferral experiments we investigate the consequences of regulatory fit and too-much-fit on consumers’ choices between the options described by hedonic and/or utilitarian attributes. We expect that when there is fit with just one of the two attributes that characterize the choice option, the option that is stronger along the attribute that fits the decision maker’s regulatory focus will be more likely to be selected. That is, decision makers are expected to choose according to the attribute that they weigh more heavily because the attribute that fits provides a ready solution to the choice problem, which should lead to less choice deferral in the fit conditions(vs. the non-fit condition) (Hypothesis 1). On the other hand, we anticipate that when both of the two attributes and options are compatible with a decision maker’s regulatory focus, the magnitude of choice deferral is greater in the too-much-fit condition (vs. the non-fit conditions) because too-much-fit arouses acute decision conflict (Hypothesis 2). We test Hypotheses 1 and 2 using the deferral paradigm from decision research. Choice deferral experiments typically present respondents with two options that are described as identical on all dimensions except for two attributes. Each option is thus described by a two attribute combination, and a choice between the two options requires the respondent to trade off a high value along one attribute in exchange for a high value along another. In our experiments we evoke regulatory fit (or too-much-fit) by priming respondents with a prevention or promotion regulatory orientation and manipulating the appropriateness of the just one (or both) of the two attributes as a means to fulfill that orientation. For each of the four decision categories, then we ask respondents: 1) to make a choice; 2) to rate their preference to delay the choice and instead continue to search for more information about the options; and, 3) to rate the difficulty of the choice in the event that they were forced to choose between the two options. All ratings were done on seven point scales. The data show that the regulatory fit and too-much-fit concepts can be extended to link respondents’ regulatory focus with the hedonic and utilitarian nature of the attributes describing choice options beyond the promotion and prevention attribute typology. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed. Also, limitations of this study and further research directions are proposed.