Prelec and Loewenstein (1998) suggest that paying in cash leaves a vivid memory trace, so when the money is separated from the consumer, it will cause payment pain, and each transaction will increase the pain of payment. But if it is replaced by a credit card (medium) , purchases only require signatures. It can reduce the pain of payment.
Points (medium) just like virtual currency, some customers only need to pay by mobile phone, such as Line Points, so the author further infers that using medium will reduce the pain of payment and affect the hedonic consumption . This study is based on Hsee
12
(2003) that the medium effect of defining a payment format is: "When using a non-cash payment format, consumers focus on the medium itself, ignoring the effort to obtain the medium; thus reducing the pain of payment." Author has the following assumptions:
H1: Different payment formats (cash vs. gift certificate vs. points) will have a tendency to hedonic consumption; in particular. Consumers are more likely to prefer hedonic consumption in medium (vs. cash).
While previous studies have explored how credit card and pre-commitments affect hedonic consumption. Medium coverage of this study is broader and more consistent.
For example, the points are different from the pre-payment and payment decoupling two types of time payment methods, but are paid as cash immediately; that is, the study believes that whether it is pre-payment, simultaneous payment, or delayed payment, due to the medium (vs. non-medium) will allow consumers to ignore the efforts and reduce the pain of payment. Thus, this study has a more complete discussion of this topic.
In addition, if medium payments (such as credit cards), relative to non-medium payments (such as cash), result in reduced pain due to reduced transparency (Soman, 2003), and reduce guilt, thereby reducing hedonic consumption. Then, we can further infer that payment pain should be a mediator of medium effects on hedonic consumption.
Therefore, the author advocates H2:
H2:Pain of payment intermediary a mediator of medium effects on hedonic consumption.
13
Chapter Three Study1:The Impact of Payment Formats on Hedonic Consumption
3.1 Study One
3.1.1 Study Design
The main purpose of study 1 was to verify H1. Study 1 uses 3 formats of payment (cash vs. points vs. informing points purchased by cash)between subjects design. The situation in which the design " informing points purchased by cash " is to examine the effectiveness of the medium effect and whether it will be different from the consumer's perceived expenditure. In this study, the notebook computer was used as a utility product, and the luxury handbag was used as a hedonic product. The situations are as follows:
【situation－cash】
Imagine that you are an economically independent office worker. Due to the nature of your business, you often need to make briefings or product introductions with manufacturers or customers, and often travel to other places or abroad, so you want to buy a notebook. On the other hand, you often use the holiday to go shopping with friends or go out for a trip. You think that wearing a luxury handbag is not only good-looking, but also a pleasant way. It is also a way to reward yourself for serious work, so you want to buy a luxury handbag. The luxury handbag is used during holidays and leisure. On this day, when you are hanging out in the store, you will find that the store's L-brand luxury handbag and A-brand notebook are in line with your needs; you know that the price of luxury handbag and notebook in the market is about $15,000~25,000.
Your budget is only $35,000, you may not be able to buy it.
【situation－points】
14
Imagine that you are an economically independent office worker. Due to the nature of your business, you often need to make briefings or product introductions with manufacturers or customers, and often travel to other places or abroad, so you want to buy a notebook. On the other hand, you often use the holiday to go shopping with friends or go out for a trip. You think that wearing a luxury handbag is not only good-looking, but also a pleasant way. It is also a way to reward yourself for serious work, so you want to buy a luxury handbag. The luxury handbag is used during holidays and leisure. On this day, when you are hanging out in the store, you will find that the store's L-brand luxury handbag and A-brand notebook are in line with your needs; you know that the price of luxury handbag and notebook in the market is about $15,000~25,000.
You can also redeem the bonus points accumulated in the store.Although your budget is not be able to buy it. However, since you often go to the store to spend, you have accumulated 35,000 bonus points (1 point can be exchanged for NT$1); due to your limited points, you may not be able to redeem them.
【situation－informing points purchased by cash】
Imagine that you are an economically independent office worker. Due to the nature of your business, you often need to make briefings or product introductions with manufacturers or customers, and often travel to other places or abroad, so you want to buy a notebook. On the other hand, you often use the holiday to go shopping with friends or go out for a trip. You think that wearing a luxury handbag is not only good-looking, but also a pleasant way. It is also a way to reward yourself for serious work, so you want to buy a luxury handbag. The luxury handbag is used during holidays and leisure. On this day, when you are hanging out in the store, you will find that the store's L-brand luxury handbag and A-brand notebook are in line with your needs; you know that the price of luxury handbag and notebook in the market is about $15,000~25,000.
15
You plan to redeem 35,000 points for the purchase (1 point can be exchanged for NT$1);
due to your limited points, you may not be able to redeem them.
After reading the situation, the subject should answer a question about consumer decision (luxury handbag/notebook), the two question the price of the hedonic/utility product you want to pay for (the most you are willing to spend how much (points) in the luxury handbag/notebook?), the two budget allocation ratio of the hedonic/utility product (I would like to ask how much you want to spend the budget (points) in the luxury handbag/notebook are reasonable?___%).
Then the subject fills in the four-question product type operation check (luxury handbag /notebook makes me feel happy and enjoy; luxury handbag/notebook is necessary and practical for me), two questions purchase (redeem) the guilt of hedonic and utility product (buy/redeem a luxury handbag /notebook will make me feel guilty), the medium of payment (cash) is a perceptive effort or unexpected wealth (I think cash/points used are my efforts/windfall gain), two question purchase (redeem) hedonic and utility product painful (cash/points luxury handbag/notebook makes me feel painful.). The measure of all questions is measured using the Likert seven-point scale (1:very disagree/7:very agree). Finally, the subject completes the questionnaire after completing the personal data.
Although this study considers that the effects of medium are generated through the pain of payment, this experiment also measures perceived effort, perceived guilt, and perceived unexpected wealth because past studies have pointed out that these three variables may affect hedonic consumption, so the author at the same time, verifying whether the payment formats affect perceived efforts, perceived guilt and perceived unexpected wealth, and thus affects hedonic consumption.
16
Table 3-1:Study1 Questions
Aspect Questions Reference
Products decision
1. Which product would you choose to buy?
□ luxury handbag □ notebook
(Okada,2005)
Willingness to pay
1. The most you are willing to spend how much (points) in the luxury handbag?
2. The most you are willing to spend how much (points) in the notebook?
(Okada,2005) (points) in the notebook is reasonable?___%
(Okada,2005)
Product type operation check
1. Luxury handbag makes me feel happy and enjoy.
2. Luxury handbag is necessary and practical for me.
3. Notebook makes me feel happy and enjoy.
4. Notebook is necessary and practical for me.
1. Buy luxury handbag makes me feel guilty.
2. Buy notebook makes me feel guilty.
Prelec and
17
Effort/Wind fall
1. I think cash/points get by effort.
2. I think cash/points get by windfall.
Prelec and
2. It is painful to pay (redeem) notebook with cash/points.
In order to control the homogeneity of the subjects, and to avoid the results of the experiment because of the experience and knowledge of the subjects, there are 154 valid questionnaires (33% male, average age 21.5). Each student was randomly assigned to one of the three scenarios described above, and the subject was asked to complete a three-page questionnaire (described in the previous section).
3.1.3
Result
In the manipulation check, the author make hedonic score minus utility score (eg.
“Make me feel happy”) minus (eg. “Must be useful and practical for me”). Define
"relative hedonic score" for the target product. The results of the T test showed that notebook (M=-0.62, t=-9.09) and luxury handbag (M=0.76, t=6.89) were utility product and hedonic product for the subjects. In addition, the consumer's perception of guilty (M=2.49) on the purchase (redeem) of the notebook is less than luxury handbag (M=4.01, t=10.11, p <0.01), which is in line with the product type.
18
(一)First part (situation－cash vs. situation－points) Main effect
In the first part, the payment formats (cash vs. points) are the independent variables and the gender is covariance. The general linear model (GLM) results are as follows：
(1) Non-medium and medium have significant differences in luxury handbag's willingness to pay (Mcash =8877.18 vs. Mpoints=13404.69, F(1；103)=6.04, p＜0.05)，
The subject's willingness to pay for luxury handbag in the points situation is significantly higher than the cash situation.；(2) Non-medium and medium have no significant differences in notebook's willingness to pay (Mcash =25397.93 vs. Mpoints
=24648.30, F(1；103)=0.17, p＞0.1).；(3) Non-medium and medium are significant marginal in luxury handbag's proportion of budget allocation (M cash =22.6% vs.
Mpoints=32.0%, F(1；103)=3.58, p=0.06)，the ratio of the budget allocation of luxury
handbag in the points situation is significant marginal higher than cash.；(4) Non-medium and Non-medium have no significant differences in notebook's proportion of budget allocation (Mcash =72.5% vs. Mpoints =73.0%, F(1；103)=0.01, p＞0.1). Finally, logistic regression analysis shows that the choice of non-medium and medium are significant marginal (the proportion of choice hedonic product: Mcash=5.5% vs. M points=15.7%, χ 2 (1) = 2.77, p=0.10). The results show that the impact of the medium is mainly on hedonic consumption (not on utility consumption).
Mediator analysis
The authors discuss their effects on possible mediator with the same independent variables and covariance. The GLM results show that: (1) Non-medium and medium are significant differences in windfall (Mcash=2.82 vs. Mpoints=3.63, F(1；103)=7.13, p
＜0.01)，windfall in points situation is significantly higher than cash situation; (2) Non-medium and Non-medium are nonsignificant in efforts (Mcash =5.74 vs. Mpoints =5.36, F(1；
103)=2.21, p＞0.1).；(3) Non-medium and medium have significant differences in pain
19
of paying in luxury handbag (Mcash = 4.32 vs. Mpoints=3.59, F(1；103)=5.1, p＜0.05)，
subjects’ pain of paying of luxury handbag in the cash situation is significantly higher than the points；(4) Non-medium and medium are nonsignificant in notebook's pain of paying (Mcash =2.81 vs. Mpoints=2.57, F(1；103)=0.7, p＞0.1).；(5) Non-medium and medium are nonsignificant in luxury handbag of guilt (Mcash =4.06 vs. Mpoints =4.03, F(1；
103)=0.01, p＞0.1)；(6) Non-medium and medium are nonsignificant in notebook (Mcash
=2.41 vs. Mpoints=2.49, F(1；103)=0.12, p＞0.1).
The authors used the same independent variables and covariance, and incorporated the two variables of windfall and hedonic product’s pain of paying into the model. The results showed: (1) Non-medium and medium have significant difference in luxury handbag's willingness to pay (p <0.05), but when pain of paying and windfall added to the model become significant marginal (p<0.1). Windfall is not a mediator, there is no significant difference in luxury handbag's willingness to pay (p>0.1). Therefore, hedonic product’s pain of paying is a mediator, because its willingness to pay for the hedonic product reaches significant marginal (F(1；101)=12.28, p＜0.1).；(2) Non-medium and Non-medium have significant difference in luxury handbag's proportion of budget allocation (p < 0.1), but when pain of paying and windfall added to the model become nosignificant (F(1;101)= 0.97, p>0.1). Windfall is not a mediator, there is nosignificant in budget allocation of the hedonic product (luxury handbag) (p
>0.1).However, pain of paying is a mediator (F(1；101)=17.25, p＜0.01)，because it affects the impact of different payment formats on the proportion of hedonic product (F(1；101)=12.28, p＜0.1).；(3) Non-medium and medium are significant marginal in choice (p<0.1), but when pain of paying and windfall added to the model become nosignificant (p＞0.1). Windfall is not a mediator, because it does not affect hedonic
20
consumption (p >0.1), but pain of paying is a mediator which affects the choice of products (χ2(1)=5.42, p <0.05 ).
(二)Second part (situation－cash vs. situation－informing points purchased by cash)
Main effect
In the second part, the payment formats (cash vs. informing points purchased by cash) is the independent variable and the gender is covariance. GLM results are as follows：(1) Non-medium and medium have significant differences in luxury handbag's willingness to pay (Mcash =8317.82 vs. Mpoints=15550.68, F(1；100)=21.9, p＜0.05)，
The subject's willingness to pay for luxury handbag in the points situation is significantly higher than the cash situation.；(2)Non-medium and medium have no significant differences in notebook's willingness to pay (Mcash =25562.86 vs. Mpoints
=23740.47, F(1；100)=1.914, p＞0.1).；(3)Non-medium and medium are significant marginal in luxury handbag's proportion of budget allocation (Mcash =21.4% vs.
Mpoints=38.6%, F(1；100)=15.45, p＜0.01)，the ratio of the budget allocation of luxury
handbag in the points situation is significan marginal t higher than cash.；(4) Non-medium and Non-medium have no significant differences in notebook's proportion of budget allocation (Mcash =73.3% vs. Mpoints =70.1%, F(1；100)=0.59, p＞0.1).；(5) Non-medium and medium have significant differences in product's choice (the proportion of choice hedonic product: Mcash=5.5% vs. M points=16.7%, χ 2 (1)=3.90, p＜0.05). This result shows that even if the subject knows that points are purchased from cash, it will still be affected by the medium effect, which is different from the cash payment in the hedonic consumption tendency.
Mediator analysis
In the second part, the payment formats (cash vs. informing points purchased by cash) is the independent variable and the gender is covariance. GLM results are as
21
follows：(1)Non-medium and medium are nosignificant differences in windfall (Mcash
=2.89 vs. Mpoints=3.06, F(1；100)=0.45, p＞0.1).；(2) Non-medium and medium are nosignificant differences in effort (Mcash=5.67 vs. Mpoints=5.55, F(1；100)=0.26, p＞0.1).；
(3) Non-medium and medium are significant differences in handbag's pain of paying (Mcash=4.23 vs. Mpoints=3.35, F(1；100)=9.42, p＜0.01) , handbag's pain of paying in the points situation is significant higher than cash.；(4) Non-medium and medium are significant differences in notebook's pain of paying (Mcash=2.90 vs. Mpoints=2.25, F(1；
100)=6.77, p＜0.05) , notebook's pain of paying in the points situation is significant higher than cash.；(5) Non-medium and medium are nosignificant in handbag's guilt (Mcash=4.01 vs. Mpoints=3.85, F(1；100)=0.27, p＞0.1).；(6) Non-medium and medium are nosignificant in notebook's guilt (Mcash=2.38 vs. Mpoints=2.61, F(1；100)=0.81, p＞
0.1).
The authors incorporated the two variables of handbag's pain of paying and notebook's pain of paying into the model. The results showed: (1) Non-medium and medium have significant difference in luxury handbag's willingness to pay (p<0.01), but when two pain of paying added to the model still have significant difference (Mcash=8193.02 vs. Mpoints =15665.25, F(1；98)=23.97, p＜0.01)；(2) Non-medium and medium have significant difference in luxury handbag's proportion of budget allocation (F(1 ； 100)=15.45, p ＜ 0.01), when two pain of paying added to the model have nosignificant difference (F(1；98)=1.98, p＞0.1). , then luxury handbag's pain of paying (F(1；98)=3.89, p=0.05) and notebook's pain of paying (F(1；98)=6.78, p=0.01) to hedonic product's budget allocation is significant. Therefore, hedonic product's pain of paying and utility product's pain of paying are mediators for payment formats to hedonic product's budget allocation.；(3) Non-medium and medium are significant marginal in choice (p<0.1), but when hedonic product's pain of paying and utility product's pain of
22
paying added to the model become significant (χ²(1)=6.70, p＜0.01). Therefore, hedonic product's pain of paying and utility product's pain of paying are not mediators.
Overall, the main effect shows that even if the subject knows that the points are purchased from cash, it still shows a tendency to differ from cash payments in hedonic consumption. However, mediator analysis shows that the mediator process seems to be different from when the subject is not told that the points are purchased from cash.
3.1.4
Summary
The results of study 1 show that consumers who pay in cash and points (not told to buy) will have different hedonic consumption tendencies. Because the different feelings of hedonic product's pain of paying (mediator). In particular, different payment formats will affect the consumer's product choice, hedonic product's willingness to pay , and the budget allocation of the hedonic product, but will not affect utility product's willingness to pay and budget allocation. Study 1 also echoes Soman's (2003) claim that the relative significance of medium (vs. cash) is low, leading to a painful decline in perceived payments, which in turn affects the impact of subsequent hedonic consumption.
When it is told that the points are purchased from cash, different payment formats still have an impact on the hedonic consumption tendency (product choice, hedonic product's willingness to pay and the budget allocation of the hedonic product), but through different Mediator processes. Hedonic product's pain of paying and utility product's pain of paying only have effect in the budget allocation of the hedonic product.
Therefore, the author suggest that follow-up studies can explore how the impact of different payment formats on hedonic consumption can be further explored through different mediator.
23
Finally, the author confirms that effort, guilt, and windfall are not mediators.Only the pain of paying is mediate. This result is consistent with the hypothesis of this study, and it is further clarified that although many variables affect the hedonic consumption, the impact of the payment formats on hedonic consumption is mainly caused by the pain of paying from different medium. Overall, H1 & H2 received support.
Chapter Four Study2:Simulation of Company System
4.1 Study Two
In real life, many companies offer Welfare points depending on the position and level of their employees redeem for many benefits, which may include utility products (such as pots) and hedonic products (such as travel products). The author believes that when a company gives employee welfare points, consumers should be more likely to redeem hedonic products because the Welfare points are more like medium. The purpose of study 2 is to simulate and verify the welfare system of the enterprise organization, and give a variety of options for hedonic products and utility products, and not forced to choose one, so it can simulate the real environment. The subjects in study 2 were taken from consumers with many years of work experience to reflect the choice of the real environment and to verify H1 again.
4.1.1 Study Design
Study 2 uses 2 formats of payment (bonus vs. welfare points)between subjects design.
In this study, dehumidifier and ASUS notebook wewe used as utility products, and the luxury handbag and SONY 50-inch television were used as hedonic products. The situations are as follows:
24
【situation－bonus】
Imagine that you are an office worker working in an e-commerce company. At the end of this season, you received a project bonus $NT60,000 according to the performance of the department. Although you can save this money, because the company's cooperative manufacturers often have preferential products on the company's website.You also want to buy some daily necessities or buy something good to comfort yourself.
When you browse the company's shopping website, you see that the company's partner has many good products. For example, weather is humid recently, Hitachi dehumidifier (NT$15000), which can prevent the mold and reduce moisture, or luxury handbag (NT$15000) that can be carried on holidays and at work. Attracting the envious eyes of friends.
SONY 50-inch TV (NT$22,000) that allows you to watch TV on the big screen during holidays. It is more enjoyable. ASUS notebook (NT$22,000) can use on business trips and carry with customers. The specifications are good and convenient.
Since your project bonus (NT$60,000) can only buy some products, of course you can save some or all of the money without buying it, or use the previous deposit to buy products beyond bonus. You are considering your purchase decision now...
【situation－welfare points】
Imagine that you are an office worker working in an e-commerce company. At the
Imagine that you are an office worker working in an e-commerce company. At the