Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2015.16.3.1806

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

Choi, Young-Min (Dept. of Business Administration, Dong-A University)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society / v.16, no.3, 2015 , pp. 1806-1814 More about this Journal
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.
Keywords
Attraction Effect; Compromise Effect; Generic Brand; National Brand; Private Brand;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
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   DOI
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.   DOI
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   DOI
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   DOI
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   DOI
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   DOI
17 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   DOI
18 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   DOI
19 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
20 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
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.