A Study On The Mechanism Of Medium-Maximization- Induced Consumer Preference Reversals

This dissertation explores the mechanism of medium-maximization-induced consumer preference reversals. It is composed of five chapters, following the frame of research problem, literature review, theoretical analysis, hypothesis development, tools selection, experiment studies and discussions.In many decision-making situations, people do not know their preference exactly and have to construct their preferences according to the context. Preference reversal is a kind of preference construction (Lichtenstein &Slovic 2006). Recent research on medium maximization found that the individual would maximize the medium and make his/her decisions with some illusions, which caused preference reversals (Hsee, et al. 2003). However, a recent review revealed that existing research is scant in explaining the underlying mechanism of medium-maximization-induced preference reversals.Through a brainstorming study and a consumer survey, I find that there are at least two types of medium:"gain-framed"medium (e.g., consumption reward points, Hsee, Yu, et al. 2003) and"reliability-framed"medium (e.g., product attribute specification, Hsee Yang, et al. 2009; number of people who give evaluation). Though both types of medium can lead to medium maximization, to my best knowledge, there is no existing research attempting to explain individual differences in medium maximization and responses to differently framed medium.Drawing on Regulatory Focus theory and Regulatory Fit (Higgins 1997, 2000, 2005, Lee &Higgins 2009), I intend to explore the underlying mechanism of and provide additional perspective on medium maximization. According to abundant previous research findings, different individuals weigh the perceived information differently. For example, individuals with an accessible independent self-view are more persuaded by promotion-focused information that is consistent with an approach goal; in contrast, individuals whose interdependent self-view is more accessible are more persuaded by prevention-focused information that is consistent with an avoidance goal (Aaker and Lee 2001); for promotion-focused adolescents, a promotion-focused positively framed antismoking message is the most effective at persuading them not to smoke; for prevention-focused adolescents, a prevention-focused negatively framed antismoking message is the most effective (Zhao and Pechmann 2007); a person's regulatory focus also determines the salience of self-efficacy (perceived ease) or response efficacy (perceived effectiveness) of health behaviors when self-efficacy features are paired with promotion focus and when response efficacy features are paired with prevention focus (Keller 2006); moreover, the uninvolved research participants rely on their regulatory focus as a filter to process information selectively. Participants pay more attention to and base their product evaluation on product information that is relevant to their regulatory concerns, but only when they are not motivated to process information (Wang and Lee 2006).Based on these prior research findings, I could easily infer and see the linkage between regulatory focus and medium types. So I have the following two general hypotheses:H1: Compared with prevention focused individuals, promotion focused individuals would be more likely to be influenced by gain-framed medium and exhibit greater medium maximization.H2: Compared with promotion focused individuals, prevention focused individuals would be more likely to be influenced by reliability-framed medium and exhibit greater medium maximization.Four experiments were conducted to test the hypotheses. The four studies design used a 2 (regulatory focus: promotion vs. prevention) by 2 (medium: with vs. without) between-subjects factorial. The first two studies tested H1 and studies 3 and 4 tested H2. I primed the participants with either promotion or prevention focus using priming procedures in Higgins, Roney, et al. (1994) and Lockwood, Jordan and Kunda (2002), and then presented the participants with a decision task of choosing one option from two scenarios. The decision task was framed either with medium or without medium.In study 1, participants were asked to choose a store between two options only differing in distance, promotion gift, and the presence or absence of a"gain-framed"medium (e.g., consumption reward points). In study 2, participant were asked to make a choice between two promotions offered in a department store, differing in the degree of certainty as well as the presence and absence of a"gain-framed"medium (e.g., consumption reward points). In study 3, participants were asked to select a digital camera between two options, differing in attribute familiarity as well as the presence and absence of a"reliability-framed"medium (e.g., product attribute specification). In study 4, participants were asked to select an online shop from two options differing in evaluation consistency as well as the presence and absence of a"reliability-framed"medium (e.g., number of the people, who gave evaluation,).Through studies 1 and 2, I find that for promotion-focused subjects, the presence of a"gain-framed"medium can alter what option they choose; for prevention-focused subjects, their choice stays the same. The underlying mechanism can be attributed to that a"gain-framed"medium gives promotion-focused participants the illusions of advantage and certainty respectively in study 1 and study 2. Through studies 3 and 4, I find that for prevention-focused subjects, the presence of a"reliability-framed"medium can change their choices; whereas for promotion-focused subjects, there is no significant influence. That is, a"reliability-framed"medium gives prevention-focused participants the illusions of familiarity and evaluation consistency respectively in study 3 and study 4.Through the four well-designed experiments, this study contributes greatly to the literature through exploring and demonstrating the moderating role of regulatory focus (prevention focus vs. promotion focus) on two types of medium (gain framed-medium vs. reliability-framed medium). There are also important implications for consumer marketing practice. Meanwhile, this study could provide insights for consumer research and emerging regulatory focus research in Mainland China and Taiwan area.