문화기술의 융합 (The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology)

  • 제10권1호
  • /
  • Pages.253-259
  • /
  • 2024
  • /
  • 2384-0358(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2384-0366(eISSN)
국제문화기술진흥원 (The International Promotion Agency of Culture Technology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

친환경 제품에 대한 소비자의 심리적 불편함이 추가가격 지불 의향에 미치는 영향 및 제품군 관여의 조절효과 연구

A study on the impact of consumers' psychological discomfort regarding eco-friendly products on their willingness to pay additional prices and the moderating effect of category involvement

  • 이은정 (국민대학교 조형대학 의상디자인학과)
  • 투고 : 2023.10.05
  • 심사 : 2023.11.10
  • 발행 : 2024.01.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

소비자 관점에서 친환경 소비는 여전히 다양한 심리적 불편함을 유방할 수 있는 주제로서, 심리적 불현함은 부정적인 소비자 심리 메커니즘을 통해 친환경 소비 의사를 낮추는 작용을 할 수 있다. 본 연구는 친환경 제품에 대한 심리적 불편함이 이들이 해당 친환경 제품에 대해 갖는 추가가격 지불 의향에 미치는 영향력을 분석했다. 또한 이러한 관계에서 소비자의 제품군 관여가 갖는 조절효과를 분석했다. 총 407명의 미국 소비자들을 대상으로 진행된 온라인 설문에 의해 얻어진 소비자 응답 데이터를 바탕으로 한 통계적 분석 결과, 친환경 소비에 대해 갖고 있는 사람들의 심리적 불편함의 정도는 이들이 친환경 제품에 대해 갖는 추가가격 지불 의향에 직접적인 유의한 영향을 미치지는 않으나, 심리적 불편함이 추가가격 지불 의향에 미치는 영향력은 소비자의 제품군 관여 정도에 따라 유의하게 차이가 나는 것으로 확인되었다.

From the consumer's perspective, eco-friendly consumption is still a topic that can cause various psychological discomforts, and psychological discomfort can lower the intention to consume eco-friendly products through negative consumer psychological mechanisms. This study analyzed the influence of psychological discomfort regarding eco-friendly consumption on people's willingness to pay additional prices for eco-friendly products. In addition, we examined the moderating effect of consumers' involvement in the product family in this relationship. As a result of a statistical analysis based on consumer response data obtained from an online survey conducted with 407 American consumers, the level of people's psychological discomfort with eco-friendly consumption is directly related to their willingness to pay additional prices for eco-friendly products. Although it did not have a significant effect, it was confirmed that the influence of psychological discomfort on willingness to pay premium price was significantly different depending on the consumer's level of involvement.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Fabian Echegaray, F., & Hansstein, F.V. (2017). Assessing the intention-behavior gap in electronic waste recycling: the case of Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142(20), 180-190.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.064
  2. Biswas, A. and Roy, M. (2015) Green Products: An Exploratory Study on the Consumer Behaviour in Emerging Economies of the East. Journal of Cleaner Production, 87, 463-468.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.075
  3. Ojea, E. and Loureiro, M.L. (2007) Altruistic, Egoistic and Biospheric Values in Willingness to Pay (WTP) for Wildlife. Ecological Economics, 63, 807-814.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.02.003
  4. Sun, Y., & Xing, J. (2022). The Impact of Social Media Information Sharing on the Green Purchase Intention among Generation Z. Sustainability, 14(11), 6879. 
  5. Huang, G., Korfiatis, N., & Chang, C.T. (2018). Mobile shopping cart abandonment: The roles of conflicts, ambivalence, and hesitation. Journal of Business Research, 85(April), 165-174. 
  6. Bee, C.C., and Madrigal, R. (2013). Consumer uncertainty: The influence of anticipatory emotions on ambivalence, attitudes, and intentions. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 12(5), 370-381.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1435
  7. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson
  8. Harmon-Jones, E., & Mills, J. (2019). An introduction to cognitive dissonance theory and an overview of current perspectives on the theory. In E. Harmon-Jones (Ed.), Cognitive dissonance: Reexamining a pivotal theory in psychology (pp. 3-24). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000135-001 
  9. Elliot, A.J., & Devine, P.G. (1994). On the motivational nature of cognitive dissonance: Dissonance as psychological discomfort. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(3), 382-394.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.382
  10. Gregory-Smith, D., Smith, A., & Winklhofer, H. (2013). Emotions and dissonance in 'ethical' consumption choices. Journal of Marketing Management, 29(11/12), 1201-1223. 
  11. Van Herpen, E., & De Hooge, I.E. (2019). When product attitudes go to waste: Wasting products with remaining utility decreases consumers' product attitudes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 210(10), 
  12. (MacDonald, J., & She, J. (2015). Seven cognitive concepts for successful eco-design. Journal of Cleaner Production, 92(1), 23-36.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.096
  13. Chang, C. (2011). Feeling ambivalent about going green: Implications for green advertising processing. Journal of Advertising, 40(4), 19-31.  https://doi.org/10.2753/JOA0091-3367400402
  14. Rao, A.R., & Bergen, M.E. (1992). Price premium variations as a consequence of buyers' lack of information, Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 412-423. 
  15. Dwivedi, Y.K., Rana, N.P., Jeyaraj, A. et al. (2019). Re-examining the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT): Towards a Revised Theoretical Model. Information System Frontiers, 21, 719-734.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-017-9774-y
  16. Wang, L., Zi-Xu Wang, Z.X., Qi Zhang, Q., Jebbouri, A., & Wong, P. (2022). Consumers' intention to visit green hotels - a goal-framing theory perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 30(8), 1837-1857. 
  17. Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280-1300.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280
  18. Huang, G., Korfiatis, N., & Chang, C.T. (2018). Mobile shopping cart abandonment: The roles of conflicts, ambivalence, and hesitation. Journal of Business Research, 85(April), 165-174. 
  19. Jonas, K., M Diehl, M., & Bromer,ｐ. (1997). Effects of attitudinal ambivalence on information processing and attitude-intention consistency. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(2), 190-210. 
  20. Huber, F., Eisele, A., & Meyer, F. (2018). The role of actual, ideal, and ought self-congruence in the consumption of hedonic versus utilitarian brands. Psychology & Marketing, 35(1), 47-63.  https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21070
  21. Kureshi, S., & Thomas, S. (2020). Testing the influence of message framing, donation magnitude, and product category in a cause-related marketing context. Journal of Marketing Communications, 26(3), 268-289.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2018.1528475
  22. Cojuharenco, I., Cornelissen, G., & Karelaia, N. (2016). Yes, I can: Feeling connected to others increases perceived effectiveness and socially responsible behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 48, 75-86. 
  23. Otterbring, T., Wu, F., & Kristensson, P. (2021). Too close for comfort? The impact of salesperson-customer proximity on consumers' purchase behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 38(9), 1576-1590.  https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21519
  24. Itzchakov, G., & Van Harreveld, F. (2018). Feeling torn and fearing rue: Attitude ambivalence and anticipated regret as antecedents of biased information seeking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 75, 19-26.
  25. Molinillo,　S., Japutra, A., & Ekinci, Y. (2022)　Building brand credibility: The role of involvement, identification, reputation and attachment. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 64(January), 102819. 
  26. Podsakoff, P.M., SB MacKenzie, S.B., & Lee, J.Y. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
  27. Van Herpen, E., & De Hooge,I.E. (2019). When product attitudes go to waste: Wasting products with remaining utility decreases consumers' product attitudes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 210(1), 410-418.
  28. Cao, C., & Xu, Q. (2023). A new perspective on extra consumer costs for green parcel packaging - An exploration of signal theory and green values. Journal of Cleaner Production, 38(1), 135361. 
  29. Mukherjee, S., & Pandelaere, M. (2023). The influence of self-decided prices on expected quality. Journal of Business Research, 160(May), 113769. 
  30. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-423.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
  31. Browne, M.W., & Cudeck, R. (1993).Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In (K.A. Bollen, J.S. Long Eds.), Testing structural equation models. Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 136-162. 
  32. Nunnally, J.C. (1978). An overview of psychological measurement. In: Wolman, B.B. (eds) Clinical Diagnosis of Mental Disorders. Springer, Boston, MA. 
  33. Bagozzi, R. and Yi, Y. (1988) On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sciences, 16, 74-94.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327
  34. Hair Jr., J. F. et al. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 
  35. Byrne, B.M. (2009). Testing for multigroup invariance using AMOS graphics: A road less traveled. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,11(2), 272-300.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1102_8
  36. Bamberg, S. (2003). How does environmental concern influence specific environmentally related behaviors? A new answer to an old question. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23(1), 21-32.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(02)00078-6
  37. Ashfaq, M., Zhang, Q., Ali, F., Waheed, A., & Nawaz, S. (2021). You plant a virtual tree, we'll plant a real tree: Understanding users' adoption of the Ant Forest mobile gaming application from a behavioral reasoning theory perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 310(10), 127394. 
  38. Onwezen, M.C., Machiel J. Reinders, M.J., & Sijtsema, S.J. (2017). Understanding intentions to purchase bio-based products: The role of subjective ambivalence. J ournal of Environmental Psychology, 52(Oct), 26-36.