Understanding Consumer Reactions to Assortment Unavailability
Understanding Consumer Reactions to Assortment Unavailability
Understanding Consumer Reactions to Assortment Unavailability
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
2.3.3 The interaction of hedonic level and brand equity on OOS reactions<br />
Two main rationales exist for a moderating effect of the hedonic level of a product on the effect<br />
of brand equity in OOS reactions. First, hedonic products offer more opportunities <strong>to</strong><br />
differentiate the brand in consumers’ minds than do utilitarian products (Keller 2002; Rossiter<br />
and Percy 1997). In utilitarian product groups, brands mainly are differentiated by product<br />
quality. In hedonic product groups, however, emotional and symbolic aspects play an important<br />
role in positioning the brand. Strong hedonic brands, such as Coca-Cola, Budweiser, and<br />
Marlboro, have built dominant and relevant association networks in many consumers’ minds.<br />
Due <strong>to</strong> the stronger position of high-equity brands in hedonic product categories, the effect of<br />
brand equity on brand or s<strong>to</strong>re switching should be greater in hedonic categories than in<br />
utilitarian categories.<br />
Second, high-equity brands in hedonic categories usually provide more items on the shelf<br />
relative <strong>to</strong> high-equity brands in utilitarian categories. For example, in a utilitarian category like<br />
milk, there are only a few items for the leading brand, whereas consumers may choose among<br />
many sizes and flavors (e.g., regular, vanilla, cherry) of leading brands in a hedonic product<br />
group like cola. This provides the consumer with more switching alternatives of the same brand,<br />
which may lead <strong>to</strong> increased item switching. In addition, consumers have a greater need for<br />
variety in hedonic categories than in utilitarian categories (Van Trijp, Hoyer, and Inman 1996)<br />
and therefore may be more willing <strong>to</strong> switch <strong>to</strong> another size or flavor. Thus, the probability that<br />
consumers will switch items is higher for high-equity brands in hedonic product groups than for<br />
high-equity brands in utilitarian product groups. In the same fashion, the greater availability of<br />
items of the same brand leads <strong>to</strong> less postponement for high-equity brands in hedonic product<br />
groups than for high-equity brands in utilitarian product groups.<br />
H3a: The hedonic level of a product group increases the negative effect of brand equity on the<br />
probability of brand switching.<br />
H3b: The hedonic level of a product group increases the positive effect of brand equity on the<br />
probability of s<strong>to</strong>re switching.<br />
H3c: The hedonic level of a product group increases the positive effect of brand equity on the<br />
probability of item switching.<br />
H3d: The hedonic level of a product group decreases the positive effect of brand equity on the<br />
probability of postponing.<br />
37