SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 3

THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL POWER AND ANTHROPOMORPHISM ON VALUATION OF POSSESSIONS

SOSYAL GÜÇ VE ANTROPOMORFİZMİN VARLIKLARA VERİLEN DEĞERE ETKİSİ

Umut KUBAT DOKUMACI
Pages
747–772
Publication Date
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings of the study have important contributions to the literature on both anthropomorphism and social power.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Previous literature indicated that experiencing social power increases one’s focus on the self and promotes material values.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Anthropomorphism provides a social environment which increases communal orientation.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings of the study have important contributions to the literature on both anthropomorphism and social power.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Sosyal güç · antropomorfizm · ayrılma endişesi

Abstract

Previous literature indicated that experiencing social power increases one’s focus on the self and promotes material values. Anthropomorphism provides a social environment which increases communal orientation. Thus, it is essential to search the role of anthropomorphism in relations between social power and behavior. Therefore, this paper aims to explore the interaction effect of anthropomorphism and social power on our connections with our possessions. It is supposed that the interaction effect on our connections with our possessions, which is measured as willingness to accept (WTA), will be through separation distress. A mediating model was applied to test the supposed effects. Data were gathered in 2018 from a sample of students via 2 experiments. The results of the study have shown that social power influences WTA when there is no anthropomorphism. Nevertheless, when there is anthropomorphism, social power has not such an effect on WTA. The findings of the study have important contributions to the literature on both anthropomorphism and social power.

Özet

Önceki yazın, sosyal güç deneyiminin kişinin kendisine odaklanmasını artırdığını ve maddiyatçı değerleri teşvik ettiğini belirtmektedir. Antropomorfizm ise sosyal bir ortam sunarak grup odaklılığı artırmaktadır. Bu nedenle, antropomorfizmin sosyal gücün davra¬nışlara etkisindeki rolünü incelemek önemlidir. Bu makalede antropomorfizm ve sosyal güç etkileşiminin varlıklarımıza verdiğimiz değere etkisini açıklamak amaçlanmaktadır. Bu etkileşimin varlıklarımıza verdiğimiz değere etkisinin ayrılma endişesi aracılığıyla olacağı öngörülmüştür. Söz konusu etkileri test etmek için bir arabulucu model uygulan¬mıştır. Araştırma verileri 2018 yılında iki deney aracılığıyla, öğrencilerden oluşan katılım¬cılardan elde edilmiştir. Çalışmanın sonuçları, antropomorfizm olmadığı durumda sosyal gücün ayrılma endişesi aracılığıyla kabul etme isteğine (ürünü satarken) etkisi olduğunu göstermiştir. Ancak, antropomorfizm mevcut olduğu durumda sosyal gücün kabul etme isteğine böyle bir etkisi bulunmamaktadır. Çalışmanın sağladığı bulguların hem antropo¬morfizm hem de sosyal güçle alakalı yazına önemli katkısı bulunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

DOKUMACI, U. K. (2022). THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL POWER AND ANTHROPOMORPHISM ON VALUATION OF POSSESSIONS. Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 3, 747–772. https://ajindex.com/articles/587872

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Aggarwal, P. ve McGill A. (2007). Is That Car Smiling at Me? Schema congruity as a basis for evaluating anthropomorphized products, Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (December), 468-79.
  2. Aggarwal, P. ve McGill, A. (2012). When brands seem human, do humans act like brands? Automatic behavioral priming effects of brand anthropomorphism. Journal of Consumer Research, 39, 2, 307-323.
  3. Ahn, H. K., Kim, H. J. ve Aggarwal, P. (2014). Helping fellow beings: Anthropomorphized social causes and the role of anticipatory guilt. Psychological Science, 25(1), 224-229.
  4. Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: An essay on psychology and religion. Oxford, England: Rand Mcnally. Ball, A. D. ve Tasaki, L. H. (1992). The role and measurement of attachment in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(2), 155-172.
  5. Bartz, J. A., Tchalova, K. ve Fenerci, C. (2016). Reminders of social connection can attenuate anthropomorphism: A replication and extension of Epley, Akalis, Waytz, and Cacioppo (2008). Psychological Science, 27 (12), 1644-1650.
  6. Baumeister, R. F. ve Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529.
  7. Callcott, M. F. ve Phillips, B. J. (1996). Observations: Elves make good cookies: Creating likable spokes-character advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 36(5), 73-79.
  8. Chandler, J. ve Schwarz, N. (2010). Use does not wear ragged the fabric of friendship: Thinking of objects as alive makes people less willing to replace them. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20 (2), 138-145.
  9. Chen, S., Lee-Chai, A.Y. ve Bargh, J.A. (2001). Relationship orientation as a moderator of the effects of social power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 173-187.
  10. Chen, R. P., Wen Wan, E. ve Levy, E. (2017). The effect of social exclusion on consumer preference for anthropomorphized brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27 (1), 23-34.
  11. Chen, F., Sengupta, J. ve Adaval, R. (2018). Does endowing a product with life make one feel more alive? The effect of product anthropomorphism on consumer vitality. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 3(4),503-513.
  12. Choi, C. ve Mattila, A.S. (2014). The effects of promotion framing on consumers’ price perceptions: The moderating role of a personal sense of power. Journal of Service Management, 25 (1), 149-160.
  13. Cusick, W. J. (2009). All customers are irrational. New York: AMACOM. DeCelles, K. A., DeRue, D. S., Margolis,