Knowledge Management Research (지식경영연구)

The Knowledge Management Society of Korea (한국지식경영학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Streaming Vs. Download - Are They Similar Digital Goods? The Difference between Access-Based Digital Goods and Ownership-Based Digital Goods

접속 기반 디지털 제품과 소유 기반 디지털 제품의 차이에 관한 연구

  • 이민형 (한국과학기술원 경영대학) ;
  • 최한별 (한국과학기술원 경영대학)
  • Received : 2020.08.21
  • Accepted : 2020.09.18
  • Published : 2020.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Numerous products have been created in a digital format in the era of digitization. At an early stage, such products were provided in the format of individual digital file, requiring the individuals to own products by downloading them on the personal devices. With the development of Internet network, people began to consume digital goods in a new mode called 'streaming.' Streaming is a service provided through access-based consumption mode based on Internet network. Rather than downloading each file, individuals can utilize such product and services by connecting the network to their own devices. Access-based digital goods are distinguished from traditional ownership-based digital goods such as downloaded contents, in that permanent ownership is not allowed. Taken this into account, this study attempts to investigate how individuals' perception toward digital goods, the psychological ownership, differs according to the consumption mode. The results show that individuals feel less psychological ownership toward access-based digital goods than ownership-based digital goods. Our study provides several avenues to both theory and practice.

디지털 시대를 맞아 다양한 제품들이 디지털 형태로 출시되어 왔다. 디지털 제품 등장 초기에는 개별 디지털 파일 형태의 제품들이 등장하였고 사용자들은 각각의 제품을 개인 디바이스에 다운로드하는 방식으로 소비하였다. 네트워크 기술의 발전으로 소비자들은 '스트리밍'이라는 형태의 디지털 제품을 소비하기 시작했다. 스트리밍은 인터넷 네트워크를 통해 소비하는 '접속 기반 소비 형태'로 제공되는 서비스이다. 스트리밍 서비스의 등장으로 소비자들은 개별 파일을 다운로드하지 않고 개인 디바이스에 네트워크를 연결하여 제품과 서비스를 사용할 수 있게 되었다. 영구적인 소유가 불가능하다는 점에서 접속 기반의 디지털 제품들은 다운로드 기반 컨텐츠와 같은 전통적인 소유 기반 디지털 제품과 구별된다. 이에 본 연구에서는 개인들의 디지털 제품에 심리적 소유감이 소비 방식에 따라 어떻게 달라지는지 분석하였다. 분석 결과 개인들은 소유 기반 디지털 제품에 비해 기반 디지털 제품에 더 낮은 심리적 소유감을 느낀다는 사실을 확인하였다. 본 연구는 관련 분야에 이론적 실무적 함의를 제공한다.

Keywords

References

  1. 박경자 (2016). 디지털콘텐츠 불법 파일공유에 관한 사회문화적 접근. 지식경영연구, 17(1), 113-133.
  2. 서봉군, 박도형 (2018). 심리적 소유감에 따른 메시지 프레이밍 효과: 온라인 서비스에서의 사용자 정보보안 행동을 중심으로. 지식경영연구, 19(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.15813/kmr.2018.19.1.001
  3. 신용재, 이동현 (2016). 디지털 문화 콘텐츠 산업이 지식경제사회에 미치는 파급효과 분석. 지식경영연구, 17(1), 73-89.
  4. Atasoy, O., & Morewedge, C. K. (2018). Digital goods are valued less than physical goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(6), 1343-1357. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucx102
  5. Bardhi, F., & Eckhardt, G. M. (2012). Access-based consumption: The case of car sharing. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(4), 881-898. https://doi.org/10.1086/666376
  6. Beggan, J. K. (1992). On the social nature of nonsocial perception: The mere ownership effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(2), 229-237. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.229
  7. Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139-168. https://doi.org/10.1086/209154
  8. Belk, R. W. (2013). Extended self in a digital world. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 477-500. https://doi.org/10.1086/671052
  9. Bhattacharjee, S., Gopal, R. D., Marsden, J. R., & Sankaranarayanan, R. (2011). Digital goods and markets: Emerging issues and challenges. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS), 2(2), 1-14.
  10. Calvo-Porral, C., & Levy-Mangin, J. P. (2015). Switching behavior and customer satisfaction in mobile services: Analyzing virtual and traditional operators. Computers in Human Behavior, (49), 532-540.
  11. Chen, Y. (2009). Possession and access: Consumer desires and value perceptions regarding contemporary art collection and exhibit visits. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(6), 925-940. https://doi.org/10.1086/593699
  12. Cram, F., & Paton, H. (1993). Personal possessions and self-Identity: The experiences of elderly women in three residential settings. Australian Journal on Ageing, 12(1), 19-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-6612.1993.tb00579.x
  13. Digital Entertainment Group, D. E. (2016). Second quarter 2016 home entertainment report.
  14. Doerr, J., Benlian, A., Vetter, J., & Hess, T. (2010). Pricing of content services-an empirical investigation of music as a service. SIGeBIZ Track of the Americas Conference on Information Systems: Springer, 13-24.
  15. Dommer, S. L., & Swaminathan, V. (2013). Explaining the endowment effect through ownership: The role of identity, gender, and self-threat. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(5), 1034-1050. https://doi.org/10.1086/666737
  16. Giles, D. C., Pietrzykowski, S., & Clark, K. E. (2007). The psychological meaning of personal record collections and the impact of changing technological forms. Journal of Economic Psychology, 28(4), 429-443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2006.08.002
  17. Hulten, B. (2011). Sensory marketing: The multi-sensory brand-experience concept. European Business Review, 23(3), 256-273. https://doi.org/10.1108/09555341111130245
  18. IFPI (2017). Global music report 2017. London, UK, Retrieved April 2017, from https://www.musikindustrie.de/fileadmin/bvmi/upload/06_Publikationen/GMR/GMR2017_press.pdf
  19. Lee, M., Choi, H. S., Cho, D., & Lee, H. (2020). Can digital consumption boost physical consumption? The effect of online music streaming on record sales. Decision Support Systems, Forthcoming.
  20. Lin, T. C., Hsu, J. S. C., & Chen, H. C. (2013). Customer willingness to pay for online music: The role of free mentality. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 14(4), 315-333.
  21. Liu, J., Wang, H., Hui, C., & Lee, C. (2012). Psychological ownership: How having control matters. Journal of Management Studies, 49(5), 869-895. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2011.01028.x
  22. Marzilli-Ericson, K. M., & Fuster, A. (2011). Expectations as endowments: Evidence on reference-dependent preferences from exchange and valuation experiments. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(4), 1879-1907. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjr034
  23. Morewedge, C. K., & Giblin, C. E. (2015). Explanations of the endowment effect: An integrative review. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(6), 339-348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.04.004
  24. Nguyen, G. D., Dejean, S., & Moreau, F. (2014). On the complementarity between online and offline music consumption: The case of free streaming. Journal of Cultural Economics, 38(4), 315-330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-013-9208-8
  25. Ozanne, L. K., & Ballantine, P. W. (2010). Sharing as a form of anti-consumption? An examination of toy library users. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 9(6), 485-498. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.334
  26. Peck, J., Barger, V. A., & Webb, A. (2013). In search of a surrogate for touch: The effect of haptic imagery on perceived ownership. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(2), 189-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2012.09.001
  27. Peck, J., & Shu, S. B. (2009). The effect of mere touch on perceived ownership. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(3), 434-447. https://doi.org/10.1086/598614
  28. Peck, J., & Shu, S. B. (2018). Psychological ownership and consumer behavior. New York: Springer.
  29. Pena-Marin, J., & Bhargave, R. (2016). Lasting performance: Round numbers activate associations of stability and increase perceived length of product benefits. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26(3), 410-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2015.11.004
  30. Petit, O., Velasco, C., & Spence, C. (2019). Digital sensory marketing: Integrating new technologies into multisensory online experience. Journal of Interactive Marketing, (45), 42-61.
  31. Petrelli, D., & Whittaker, S. (2010). Family memories in the home: Contrasting physical and digital mementos. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 14(2), 153-169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-009-0279-7
  32. Pew Research Center, P. R. (2016). Book reading 2016.
  33. Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2003). The state of psychological ownership: Integrating and extending a century of research. Review of General Psychology, 7(1), 84-107. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.7.1.84
  34. Reb, J., & Connolly, T. (2007). Possession, feelings of ownership, and the endowment effect. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(2), 107-114.
  35. Ronald, R. (2008). The ideology of home ownership: Homeowner societies and the role of housing. New York: Macmillan.
  36. Shu, S. B., & Peck, J. (2011). Psychological ownership and affective reaction: Emotional attachment process variables and the endowment effect. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(4), 439-452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.01.002
  37. Siddiqui, S., & Turley, D. (2006). Extending the self in a virtual world. In P. Connine & P. Linda (Eds.), Advanced in consumer research (Vol. 33, pp. 647-648). Duluth, MN: Association for Consumer Research.
  38. Sinclair, G., & Tinson, J. (2017). Psychological ownership and music streaming consumption. Journal of Business Research, (71), 1-9.
  39. Watkins, R., & Molesworth, M. (2012). Attachment to digital virtual possessions in videogames. In B. Russell, A. Soren & S. Linda (Eds.), Research in consumer behavior (Vol. 14, pp. 153-170), Bingley: Emerald Group.
  40. Weiss, L., & Johar, G. V. (2013). Egocentric categorization and product judgment: Seeing your traits in what you own (and their opposite in what you don't). Journal of Consumer Research, 40(1), 185-201. https://doi.org/10.1086/669330