Journals / Tüketici ve Tüketim Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 1

The Effects of Product Scarcity Messages, Perceived Quality and Perceived Value on Purchase Intention

Satın Alma Niyeti Üzerinde Ürün Kıtlık Mesajları, Algılanan Kalite ve Algılanan Değerin Etkisi

Pages
157–177
Publication Date
2022-11-03
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)

As a result of the research, messages in web pages having scarcity appeals are more effective than the control group web sites in terms of perceived product value and per- ceived product quality and it also affects the purchase intention.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Marketing managers use scarcity appeals to influence the consumer de- cision making process.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Marketers try to increase purchase intention of consumers to sell their products by arguments such as limited quantity and time.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of the research, messages in web pages having scarcity appeals are more effective than the control group web sites in terms of perceived product value and per- ceived product quality and it also affects the purchase intention.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Marketing managers use scarcity appeals to influence the consumer de- cision making process. Marketers try to increase purchase intention of consumers to sell their products by arguments such as limited quantity and time. In spite of the importance of the issue, the number of studies on the use of variables describing the impact of scarcity appeals is quite limited. This study investigates how different scarcity message effects consumer perceived value, perceived quality and purchase intention. The printed images of a website with three different scarcity messages were examined under this investigation. The different messages consumer as- sesses are a) for a limited time (e.g. available only April 28-29-30), b) for a limited quantity of product (e.g. last two items for this price), and c) control group (there is no scarcity appeal). As a result of the research, messages in web pages having scarcity appeals are more effective than the control group web sites in terms of perceived product value and per- ceived product quality and it also affects the purchase intention.

Özet

Tüketici karar süreçlerini etkilemek için pazarlama yöneticileri kıtlık çe- kiciliklerini kullanırlar. Pazarlamacılar ürünlerini satabilmek için sınırlı miktar ve süreyi kullanarak tüketicilerin satın alma niyetini arttırmaya çabalar. Konunun önemine karşılık, kıtlık mesajlarının etkisini açıklayan değişkenlerin kullanıldığı çalışma sayısı oldukça az miktardadır. Bu ça- lışma ile farklı kıtlık mesajlarının algılanan ürün değeri, algılanan ürün kalitesi ve satın alma niyeti üzerindeki etkisi araştırılmıştır. Araştırma kapsamında üç farklı kıtlık mesajının yer aldığı web sitesinin basılı ekran görüntüsü kullanılmıştır. Tüketicinin değerlendirdiği etkinliklerdeki fark- lı mesajlar a) sınırlı süredeki ürün için (Bu fiyat 28-29-30 Nisan 2015 tarihleri arasında geçerlidir), b) sınırlı miktarda ürün için (bu fiyata son iki ürün) ve c) kontrol grubu (herhangi bir kıtlık mesajı yok) şeklindedir. Araştırmanın sonucunda, kıtlık mesajlarının yer aldığı web sayfası me- sajlarının algılanan ürün değeri ve algılanan ürün kalitesi bakımından kontrol grubundan daha etkili olduğu ve satın alma niyetini etkilediği bulunmuştur. Bulgular, tartışma, sonuç ve öneriler ayrıca verilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

USTAAHMETOĞLU, E. (2022). The Effects of Product Scarcity Messages, Perceived Quality and Perceived Value on Purchase Intention. Tüketici ve Tüketim Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 1, 157–177. https://ajindex.com/articles/619655

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Aggarwal, P., Jun, S. Y. ve Huh, J. H. (2011). “Scarcity messages: A consumer competition perspective”, Journal of Advertising, 40(3), 19-30.
  2. Aguirre-Rodriguez, A. (2013). “The effect of consumer persuasion knowledge on scarcity appeal persuasiveness”, Journal of Adverti- sing, 42(4), 371-379.
  3. Ahmetoglu, G., Furnham, A. ve Fagan, P. (2014). “Pricing practices: A critical review of their effects on consumer perceptions and be- havior”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(5), 696- 707. Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. New York. Burke, W. W., Lake, D. G. & Paine, J. W. (Eds.). (2008). Organi- zation change: A comprehensive reader (Vol. 155). John Wiley & Sons.pp.377-390.
  4. Cialdini, R.B. (2012). İknanın psikolojisi (çev. Yasemin Fletceher) Me- diacat, İstanbul.
  5. Clow, K., E. ve Baack, D. (2005). Concise encyclopedia of advertising. The Haworth Press, NY, p145-145. Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B. ve Grewal, D. (1991). “Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations”, Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 307-319.
  6. Eisend, M. (2008). “Explaining the impact of scarcity appeals in adverti- sing: The mediating role of perceptions of susceptibility”, Journal of Advertising, 37(3), 33-40.
  7. Gierl, H. ve Huettl, V. (2010). “Are scarce products always more attra- ctive? The interaction of different types of scarcity signals with products’ suitability for conspicuous consumption” International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27(3), 225-235.
  8. Jeong, H.J. ve Kwon, K.N. (2012). “The effectiveness of two online per- suasion claims: Limited product availability and product popula- rity”, Journal of Promotion Management, 18(1), 83-99.
  9. Kahneman, D. ve Tversky, A. (1984). “Choices, values and frames”, American Psychologist, 39(4), 341-350.
  10. Kantamneni, S. P. ve Coulson, K. R. (1996). “Measuring perceived value: Findings from preliminary research”, Journal of Marketing Mana- gement, 6(2), 72-86.
  11. Ku, H.H., Kuo, C.C. ve Kuo, T. W. (2012). “The effect of scarcity on the purchase intentions of prevention and promotion motivated consu- mers”, Psychology & Marketing, 29(8), 541-548.
  12. Ku, H.H., Kuo, C.C., Yang, Y.T. ve Chung, T. S. (2013). “Decision-con- textual and individual influences on scarcity effects”, European Journal of Marketing, 47(8), 1314-1332.
  13. Lynn, M. (1991). “Scarcity effects on value: A quantitative review of the commodity theory literature”, Psychology & Marketing, 8(1), 43-57.
  14. Lynn, M. (1992). “Scarcity’s enha