• Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.89-97
• /
• 2010

This study researches the effects of common features on a no-choice option with respect to regulatory focus theory. The primary interest is in three factors and their interrelationship: common features, no-choice option, and regulatory focus. Prior studies have compiled vast body of research in these areas. First, the "common features effect" has been observed bymany noted marketing researchers. Tversky (1972) proposed the seminal theory, the EBA model: elimination by aspect. According to this theory, consumers are prone to focus only on unique features during comparison processing, thereby dismissing any common features as redundant information. Recently, however, more provocative ideas have attacked the EBA model by asserting that common features really do affect consumer judgment. Chernev (1997) first reported that adding common features mitigates the choice gap because of the increasing perception of similarity among alternatives. Later, however, Chernev (2001) published a critically developed study against his prior perspective with the proposition that common features may be a cognitive load to consumers, and thus consumers are possible that they are prone to prefer the heuristic processing to the systematic processing. This tends to bring one question to the forefront: Do "common features" affect consumer choice? If so, what are the concrete effects? This study tries to answer the question with respect to the "no-choice" option and regulatory focus. Second, some researchers hold that the no-choice option is another best alternative of consumers, who are likely to avoid having to choose in the context of knotty trade-off settings or mental conflicts. Hope for the future also may increase the no-choice option in the context of optimism or the expectancy of a more satisfactory alternative appearing later. Other issues reported in this domain are time pressure, consumer confidence, and alternative numbers (Dhar and Nowlis 1999; Lin and Wu 2005; Zakay and Tsal 1993). This study casts the no-choice option in yet another perspective: the interactive effects between common features and regulatory focus. Third, "regulatory focus theory" is a very popular theme in recent marketing research. It suggests that consumers have two focal goals facing each other: promotion vs. prevention. A promotion focus deals with the concepts of hope, inspiration, achievement, or gain, whereas prevention focus involves duty, responsibility, safety, or loss-aversion. Thus, while consumers with a promotion focus tend to take risks for gain, the same does not hold true for a prevention focus. Regulatory focus theory predicts consumers' emotions, creativity, attitudes, memory, performance, and judgment, as documented in a vast field of marketing and psychology articles. The perspective of the current study in exploring consumer choice and common features is a somewhat creative viewpoint in the area of regulatory focus. These reviews inspire this study of the interaction possibility between regulatory focus and common features with a no-choice option. Specifically, adding common features rather than omitting them may increase the no-choice option ratio in the choice setting only to prevention-focused consumers, but vice versa to promotion-focused consumers. The reasoning is that when prevention-focused consumers come in contact with common features, they may perceive higher similarity among the alternatives. This conflict among similar options would increase the no-choice ratio. Promotion-focused consumers, however, are possible that they perceive common features as a cue of confirmation bias. And thus their confirmation processing would make their prior preference more robust, then the no-choice ratio may shrink. This logic is verified in two experiments. The first is a $2{\times}2$ between-subject design (whether common features or not X regulatory focus) using a digital cameras as the relevant stimulus-a product very familiar to young subjects. Specifically, the regulatory focus variable is median split through a measure of eleven items. Common features included zoom, weight, memory, and battery, whereas the other two attributes (pixel and price) were unique features. Results supported our hypothesis that adding common features enhanced the no-choice ratio only to prevention-focus consumers, not to those with a promotion focus. These results confirm our hypothesis - the interactive effects between a regulatory focus and the common features. Prior research had suggested that including common features had a effect on consumer choice, but this study shows that common features affect choice by consumer segmentation. The second experiment was used to replicate the results of the first experiment. This experimental study is equal to the prior except only two - priming manipulation and another stimulus. For the promotion focus condition, subjects had to write an essay using words such as profit, inspiration, pleasure, achievement, development, hedonic, change, pursuit, etc. For prevention, however, they had to use the words persistence, safety, protection, aversion, loss, responsibility, stability etc. The room for rent had common features (sunshine, facility, ventilation) and unique features (distance time and building state). These attributes implied various levels and valence for replication of the prior experiment. Our hypothesis was supported repeatedly in the results, and the interaction effects were significant between regulatory focus and common features. Thus, these studies showed the dual effects of common features on consumer choice for a no-choice option. Adding common features may enhance or mitigate no-choice, contradictory as it may sound. Under a prevention focus, adding common features is likely to enhance the no-choice ratio because of increasing mental conflict; under the promotion focus, it is prone to shrink the ratio perhaps because of a "confirmation bias." The research has practical and theoretical implications for marketers, who may need to consider common features carefully in a practical display context according to consumer segmentation (i.e., promotion vs. prevention focus.) Theoretically, the results suggest some meaningful moderator variable between common features and no-choice in that the effect on no-choice option is partly dependent on a regulatory focus. This variable corresponds not only to a chronic perspective but also a situational perspective in our hypothesis domain. Finally, in light of some shortcomings in the research, such as overlooked attribute importance, low ratio of no-choice, or the external validity issue, we hope it influences future studies to explore the little-known world of the "no-choice option."

• Korean Journal of Soil Science and Fertilizer
• /
• v.21 no.4
• /
• pp.386-408
• /
• 1988

A study was conducted to develop a model for estimating evapotranspiration and yield of Chinese cabbages from meteorological factors from 1981 to 1986 in Suweon, Korea. Lysimeters with water table maintained at 50cm depth were used to measure the potential evapotranspiration and the maximum evapotranspiration in situ. The actual evapotranspiration and the yield were measured in the field plots irrigated with different soil moisture regimes of -0.2, -0.5, and -1.0 bars, respectively. The soil water content throughout the profile was monitored by a neutron moisture depth gauge and the soil water potentials were measured using gypsum block and tensiometer. The fresh weight of Chinese cabbages at harvest was measured as yield. The data collected in situ were analyzed to obtain parameters related to modeling. The results were summarized as followings: 1. The 5-year mean of potential evapotranspiration (PET) gradually increased from 2.38 mm/day in early April to 3.98 mm/day in mid-June, and thereafter, decreased to 1.06 mm/day in mid-November. The estimated PET by Penman, Radiation or Blanney-Criddle methods were overestimated in comparison with the measured PET, while those by Pan-evaporation method were underestimated. The correlation between the estimated and the measured PET, however, showed high significance except for July and August by Blanney-Criddle method, which implied that the coefficients should be adjusted to the Korean conditions. 2. The meteorological factors which showed hgih correlation with the measured PET were temperature, vapour pressure deficit, sunshine hours, solar radiation and pan-evaporation. Several multiple regression equations using meteorological factors were formulated to estimate PET. The equation with pan-evaporation (Eo) was the simplest but highly accurate. PET = 0.712 + 0.705Eo 3. The crop coefficient of Chinese cabbages (Kc), the ratio of the maximum evapotranspiration (ETm) to PET, ranged from 0.5 to 0.7 at early growth stage and from 0.9 to 1.2 at mid and late growth stages. The regression equation with respect to the growth progress degree (G), ranging from 0.0 at transplanting day to 1.0 at the harvesting day, were: $$Kc=0.598+0.959G-0.501G^2$$ for spring cabbages $$Kc=0.402+1.887G-1.432G^2$$ for autumn cabbages 4. The soil factor (Kf), the ratio of the actual evapotranspiration to the maximum evapotranspiration, showed 1.0 when the available soil water fraction (f) was higher than a threshold value (fp) and decreased linearly with decreasing f below fp. The relationships were: Kf=1.0 for $$f{\geq}fp$$ Kf=a+bf for f$$I{\leq}Esm$$ Es = Esm for I > Esm 6. The model for estimating actual evapotranspiration (ETa) was based on the water balance neglecting capillary rise as: ETa=PET. Kc. Kf+Es 7. The model for estimating relative yield (Y/Ym) was selected among the regression equations with the measured ETa as: Y/Ym=a+bln(ETa) The coefficients and b were 0.07 and 0.73 for spring Chinese cabbages and 0.37 and 0.66 for autumn Chinese cabbages, respectively. 8. The estimated ETa and Y/Ym were compared with the measured values to verify the model established above. The estimated ETa showed disparities within 0.29mm/day for spring Chinese cabbages and 0.19mm/day for autumn Chinese cabbages. The average deviation of the estimated relative yield were 0.14 and 0.09, respectively. 9. The deviations between the estimated values by the model and the actual values obtained from three cropping field experiments after the completion of the model calibration were within reasonable confidence range. Therefore, this model was validated to be used in practical purpose.