27.10.2012 Views

Analysis of Sales Promotion Effects on Household Purchase Behavior

Analysis of Sales Promotion Effects on Household Purchase Behavior

Analysis of Sales Promotion Effects on Household Purchase Behavior

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

48<br />

Thus the three models <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> c<strong>on</strong>sumer behavior treated in this chapter focus <strong>on</strong><br />

different aspects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> c<strong>on</strong>sumer behavior. Interesting to notice is that these theories can<br />

predict the same, but also different effects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> promoti<strong>on</strong>s. It is interesting to menti<strong>on</strong> that<br />

two theories that do predict a similar promoti<strong>on</strong>al effect <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ten use entirely different<br />

arguments. Take, for example, the effect <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> price promoti<strong>on</strong>s in the l<strong>on</strong>g run. Selfpercepti<strong>on</strong><br />

theory (based <strong>on</strong> the stimulus-organism-resp<strong>on</strong>se model) suggests that repeat<br />

purchase probabilities <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a brand after a promoti<strong>on</strong>al purchase are lower than the<br />

corresp<strong>on</strong>ding values after a n<strong>on</strong>-promoti<strong>on</strong>al purchase. At the same time, c<strong>on</strong>sumers form<br />

expectati<strong>on</strong>s <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a brand’s price <strong>on</strong> the basis <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>, am<strong>on</strong>g other things, its past prices and the<br />

frequency with which it is price promoted (reference pricing, prospect theory, both based<br />

<strong>on</strong> the stimulus-organism-resp<strong>on</strong>se model)), which would also lead to lower repeat<br />

purchase rates after deal retracti<strong>on</strong>. Both self-percepti<strong>on</strong> theory and reference pricing<br />

theory would therefore predict the same c<strong>on</strong>sequences <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> a promoti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> purchase<br />

probabilities, but based <strong>on</strong> different arguments.<br />

An example <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> theories predicting different effects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> promoti<strong>on</strong>s is the following.<br />

Self-percepti<strong>on</strong> theory implies that c<strong>on</strong>sumers who buy <strong>on</strong> promoti<strong>on</strong> are likely to attribute<br />

their behavior to the presence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the promoti<strong>on</strong> and not to their pers<strong>on</strong>al preference for the<br />

brand. Therefore, after retracti<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the promoti<strong>on</strong>, leading to lower repeat purchase<br />

probabilities. Learning theory (based <strong>on</strong> the stimulus-resp<strong>on</strong>se-model) suggests that<br />

promoti<strong>on</strong>s can help a brand through increased familiarity and experience, which would<br />

lead to bigger repeat purchase probabilities. Ec<strong>on</strong>omic theory, <strong>on</strong> the other hand, would<br />

predict that the repeat purchase probabilities (after promoti<strong>on</strong>) would return to the same<br />

level as before the promoti<strong>on</strong>. The utility <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the brand is the same as before the promoti<strong>on</strong>.<br />

There can also be interplay between the theories menti<strong>on</strong>ed above. For example,<br />

purchase accelerati<strong>on</strong> is most comm<strong>on</strong>ly explained by ec<strong>on</strong>omic models focusing <strong>on</strong><br />

household inventory and resource variables. The c<strong>on</strong>sumer decisi<strong>on</strong>-making framework<br />

explains purchase accelerati<strong>on</strong> as resulting from the timely stimulati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> problem<br />

recogniti<strong>on</strong>. There may even be a deeper psychological explanati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> why c<strong>on</strong>sumers are<br />

willing to accelerate purchases.<br />

The fourth type <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> theory dealt with in this chapter is trait theory. Where the three<br />

other models <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> c<strong>on</strong>sumer behavior (ec<strong>on</strong>omic model, stimulus-resp<strong>on</strong>se model, and

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!