Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society (한국산학기술학회논문지)

The Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society (한국산학기술학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on the Impact of Attraction and Compromise Effects on Choice Probability of Private Brands

유인 및 타협효과가 유통업체 브랜드(PB)의 선택확률에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구

  • Received : 2014.11.10
  • Accepted : 2015.03.12
  • Published : 2015.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The strategy of distributors using a PB(Private Brand) inferior to existing PB to increase choice probability of PB arouses difficulty in terms of cost. Therefore, the aim of this study is to verify incentive and compromise effects of PB using two realistic experimental methods. Looking at the verification results, incentive and compromise effects occurred to show increase in choice probability of PB when a new GB(Generic Brand) was added to NB(National Brand) and PB of a manufacturer. In specific during experiment 1, choice probability of PB, the target, was changed when decoy brand was introduced even if there is a large difference in preference and choice probability of the competitor and target due to characteristics of NB and PB. In experiment 2, incentive effect appeared when PB of competitor was positioned as an inferior alternative to increase choice probability of the company's PB. Strategic implications on the study results, limits of this study, and future directivity were proposed.

유통업체에서 PB(Private Brand)의 선택확률을 높이기 위하여 기존 PB보다 열등한 다른 PB를 사용하는 전략은 비용적인 측면에서 어려운 문제가 있다. 따라서 본 연구는 이를 해결하고자 2개의 현실적인 실험방법을 통해 PB의 유인 및 타협효과를 검증하고자 한다. 검증결과를 살펴보면 제조업체 브랜드(NB; National Brand)와 PB에 새로운 브랜드인 무상표(GB :Generic Brand)를 추가한 경우 유인 및 타협 효과가 발생하여 PB의 선택확률이 높아짐을 발견하였다. 구체적으로 실험 1에서는 NB와 PB의 특성상 경쟁대안과 표적대안의 선호도와 선택확률의 차이가 많은 경우에도 유인브랜드 진입 시 표적대안인 PB의 선택확률 변화를 확인하였다. 실험2에서는 경쟁사 PB를 열등한 대안에 위치시킬 때도 유인효과가 발생하여 자사 PB의 선택확률이 증가한다는 것을 확인하였다. 이러한 연구결과에 대한 전략적 시사점과 연구의 한계 및 향후 방향을 제시하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. C. H. Patti, and R. P. Fisk, "National Advertising, Brand and Channel Control : An Historical Perspective with Contemporary Option," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 10(Winter/Spring), pp. 90-108, 1982. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02721901
  2. M. Levy, and B. A. Weitz, Retailing Management, McGraw-Hill Irwin, 2006.
  3. H. H. Park and G. O. Jung, " The Influence of Private Brand Name Suggestiveness on Product Evaluation in Product Type: The Moderating Effects of Need for Cognition and Product Knowledge", Journal of Channel and Retailing, 19(1), pp. 65-99, 2014.
  4. K. D. Park, J. Y. Park and S. E. Jeon, "Successful Alliance Between Private and National Brands : The Moderating Effect of Price and Quality Sensitivity", Journal of Channel and Retailing, 12(4), pp. 109-125, 2007.
  5. J. Y. Park, "A Study on Brand Alliance between Private Brand and National Brand", Journal of Channel and Retailing, 9(3), pp. 49-68, 2004.
  6. N. Rubio, and M. J. Yague, "Store Brand Management and Channel Dependence: A model from the Manufacturer's Perspective", Journal of Brand Management, 15(4), pp. 272-290, 1987. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.bm.2550118
  7. S. Sayman, S. J. Hoch and J. S. Raju, "Positioning of store Brand," Marketing Science, 21(4) pp. 520-533, 2002.
  8. M .Gomez, and S. Okazaki "Estimating Store Brand Shelf Space: A new Framework Using Neural Networks and Partial Least Squares," International Journal of Market Reserch, 51(2), pp. 243-266, 2009. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2501/S147078530920044X
  9. J. W. Park, "Strategic Application of Attraction Effects in Positioning New products," Korean Management Review, 28(4), pp. 1163-1182.
  10. S. H. Park, "Attraction Effect Depending on Various Positions and Frequencies of Decoy Alternatives", Korean Management Review, 27(4), pp. 955-982, 1998.
  11. Y. J. KIM and H. Y. LEE, "Study on Attraction Effects Base on Consumer Characteristics : A study on tour Packages to China," Korean Journal of Tourism Research, 26(4), pp. 87-106.
  12. J. Huber, J. W. Payne and C. Puto, "Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives; Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis." Journal of Consumer Research, 9(June), pp. 90-98, 1982. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/208899
  13. J. Huber and C. Puto, "Market Boundaries and Product Choice: Illustrating Attraction and Substitution Effects," Journal of Consume Research, 10(June), pp. 31-44, 1983. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/208943
  14. S. H. Park, "The Differential Impact of Extenally Imposed Constraints on the Attraction Effects and the Lone Option Effect,"journal of Consumer Studies, 16(1), 97-118.
  15. R. D. Luce, Individual Choice Behavior, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 1959.
  16. A. Tversky, "Elimination by Aspects: A Theory of Choice," Psychological Review, 79, pp. 281-299, 1972. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0032955
  17. T. Heath and S. Chatterjee, "Asymmetric Decoy Effects on Lower-Quality Versus Higher-Quality Brands: Meta-analytic and Experimental Evidence," Journal of Consumer Research, 22(December), pp. 268-284, 1995 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/209449
  18. S. Ratneshwar, A. D. Shocker, and D. W. Stewart, "Toward Understanding the Attraction Effect: The Implications of Product Stimulus Meaningfulness and Familiarity," Journal of Consumer Research, 13(March), pp. 520-533, 2008. DOI: http://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1086/209085
  19. I. Simonson, "Choice Based on Reason: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," The Journal of Consumer Research, 16(September), pp. 99-111, 1989. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/209205
  20. I. Simonson and T. Amos(1992), "Choice in Context: Trade-off Contrast and Extremeness Aversion," Journal of Marketing Research, 29(August), pp. 281-295, 1992. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3172740
  21. S. L. Han, H. J. Lee, C. K. Kim and Y. T. Kim, "Group Attraction Effect among Consideration Sets", Journal of Consumer Studies, 24(1), pp. 31-49, 2013.
  22. Y. W. Ha, and J. H. Chae, "Attraction Effect : The Influence of Inferior Alternative's Position and Frequency", Korean Management Review, 23(3), pp. 201-232, 1993.
  23. S. H. Kim, "Consumer's choice depends on the presentation formation of alternatives: The fit between the regulatory focus and presentation format influence on compromise effect", Journal of Marketing Management Research, 18(3), 2013.