• Asia Marketing Journal
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.131-157
• /
• 2012

Despite the voluminous research on switching barriers, the notion that they can generate negative responses has not been investigated. Further, a critical question is what determines the strength of such negative responses. To address this question, the classic theory of psychological reactance is briefly reviewed, and the idea of switching barrier is advanced. This study attempts to suggest a model on the negative effects of switching- frustrated situation, based on the studies on psychological reactance. According to psychological reactance theory(Brehm 1966), whenever a freedom is threatened or removed, individuals are motivated, at least temporarily, to restore their freedom. For example, if individuals think they are free to engage in behaviors .v, y, or z, then threatening their freedom to engage in x would cause psychological reactance. This reactance could be reduced by an increase in the perceived attractiveness of engaging in, the threatened behavior(Kivetz 2005). This investigation seeks to extend existing switching barrier research in three important ways. First, while the past research has emphasized only positive role of switching barrier, this study address negative role of it by applying psychological reactance theory. Second, to find negative results of switching barrier, I suggest negative psychological response including regret to the past choice, resentment to the present provider, and strong desire to the alternative provider. Third, I suggest the perceived severity of the switching barriers, the attractiveness of the alternative as switching-frustrated situation which can lead to negative results. And, in addition to these relationships, I added moderated effects of perceived justice for better explanation. So this study includes the following hypotheses. H1-1 ~ H1-3: The attractiveness of the alternative has a positive effect regret to the past choice (h1-1), resentment to the present provider (h1-2), and strong desire to the alternative provider (h1-3). H2-1 ~ H2-3 : The perceived severity of the switching barrier has a positive effect regret to the past choice (h2-1), resentment to the present provider (h2-2), and strong desire to the alternative provider (h2-3). H3-1 ~ H3-3 : The positive relationships between the attractiveness of the alternative and consumer' negative responses will be stronger at low level of perceived justice than at high level of perceived justice. H4-1 ~ H4-3 : The positive relationships between the perceived severity of the switching barrier and consumer' negative responses will be stronger at low level of perceived justice than at high level of perceived justice. Survey research is employed to test hypotheses involving perceived severity of the switching barrier(Hess 2008), attractiveness of the alternative(Anderson and Narus 1990; Ohanian 1990),regret(Glovich and Medvec 1995), resentment, strong desire(Alcohol Urge Questionaire: Bohn et al. 1995), perceived justice(Bies and Moag 1986; Clemmer 1993; Lind and Tyler 1998). Previous researches, such as reactance theory, emotion and service failure, have been referenced to measure constructs. All items were measured on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree". We collected data involving various service field, and used 249 respondents to analyze these data using the moderated regression. The results of our analysis suggest, as expected, that the perceived severity of the switching barrier had positive effects on regret to the past choice(b = .197, p< .01), resentment to the present provider(b = .214, p< .01), and strong desire to the alternative provider(b = .254, p< .001). And the attractiveness of the alternative had positive effects on regret to the past choice(b = .353, p<.001), resentment to the present provider(b = .174, p< .01), and strong desire to the alternative provider(b = .265, p< .001). However, our findings indicate perceived justice partly moderates relationship between switching-frustrated situation and psychological negative response. The study has brought to light a number of insights between switching barriers and consumer' negative responses that have been subject to little prior research. In particular, this study adds to the existing understanding of the psychological responses to switching barriers in switching- frustrated situation. This research therefore has significance to marketers for strategic marketing programs, particularly in terms of customer retention and switching barrier strategies. Since consumers could exhibit negative responses to switching barrier, companies would be able to lose their customer when they thoughtlessly use switching barrier for remaining customer. Although the study has these contributions, there are several limitations including unsupported hypotheses and research method. So, we need to make up for these limitations in the future researches.

• Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.117-134
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study was to identify the stage of concern, the level of use, and the innovation configuration of Home Economics teachers regarding creativity and personality education in Home Economics(HE) classes. The survey questionnaires were sent through mails and e-mails to middle-school HE teachers in the whole country selected by systematic sampling and convenience sampling. Questionnaires of the stages of concern and the levels of use developed by Hall(1987) were used in this study. 187 data were used for the final analysis by using SPSS/window(12.0) program. The results of the study were as following: First, for the stage of concerns of HE teachers on creativity and personality education, the information stage of concerns(85.51) was the one with the highest response rate and the next high in the following order: the management stage of concerns(81.88), the awareness stage of concerns(82.15), the refocusing stage of concerns(68.80), the collaboration stage of concerns(61.97), and the consequence stage of concerns(59.76). Second, the levels of use of HE teachers on creativity and personality education was highest with the mechanical levels(level 3; 21.4%) and the next high in the following order: the orientation levels of use(level 1; 20.9%), the refinement levels(level 5; 17.1%), the non-use levels(level 0; 15.0%), the preparation levels(level 2; 10.2%), the integration levels(level 6; 5.9%), the renewal levels(level 7; 4.8%), the routine levels(level 4; 4.8%). Third, for the innovation configuration of HE teachers on creativity and personality education, more than half of the HE teachers(56.1%) mainly focused on personality education in their HE classes; 31.0% of the HE teachers performed both creativity and personality education; a small number of teachers(6.4%) focused on creativity education; the same number of teachers(6.4%) responded that they do not focus on neither of the two. Examining the level and type of performance HE teachers applied, the average score on the performance of creativity and personality education was 3.76 out of 5.00 and the mean of creativity component was 3.59 and of personality component was 3.94, higher than standard. For the creativity education, openness/sensitivity(3.97) education was performed most and the next most in the following order: problem-solving skill(3.79), curiosity/interest(3.73), critical thinking(3.63), problem-finding skill(3.61), originality(3.57), analogy(3.47), fluency/adaptability(3.46), precision(3.46), imagination(3.37), and focus/sympathy(3.37). For the personality education, the following components were performed in order from most to least: power of execution(4.07), cooperation/consideration/just(4.06), self-management skill(4.04), civic consciousness(4.04), career development ability(4.03), environment adaptability(3.95), responsibility/ownership(3.94), decision making(3.89), trust/honesty/promise(3.88), autonomy(3.86), and global competency(3.55). Regarding what makes performing creativity and personality education difficult, most HE teachers(64.71%) chose the lack of instructional materials and 40.11% of participants chose the lack of seminar and workshop opportunity. 38.5% chose the difficulty of developing an evaluation criteria or an evaluation tool while 25.67% responded that they do not know any means of performing creativity and personality education. Regarding the better way to support for creativity and personality education, the HE teachers chose in order from most to least: 'expansion of hands-on activities for students related to education on creativity and personality'(4.34), 'development of HE classroom culture putting emphasis on creativity and personality'(4.29), 'a proper curriculum on creativity and personality education that goes along with students' developmental stages'(4.27), 'securing enough human resource and number of professors who will conduct creativity and personality education'(4.21), 'establishment of the concept and value of the education on creativity and personality'(4.09), and 'educational promotion on creativity and personality education supported by local communities and companies'(3.94).