社會價值導向與消費者出價行為之關係

The Social Value Orientation and Consumer Behavior in Prices Setting

林鴻銘(Hung-Ming Lin)

指導教授 ： 林建煌

國立中央大學/管理學院/企業管理學系/博士(2006年)

摘要

本研究主要目的是要探討個別差異對於消費者出價(賣價與買價)行為之影響，運用社會價值導向的概念加以探討此問題。社會價值導向是說明人們對於自己和他人之間報酬配置偏好的一種人格特質，可分成競爭型者、個人主義者與利他型者三種人，本研究主張消費者的出價行為亦是一種貨幣報酬配置的行為，賣方(買方)所決定的賣價(買價)，將決定賣方的貨幣獲得，亦決定了買方的貨幣損失，因此，透過社會價值導向的觀念，藉以瞭解個別差異對於消費者出價行為的影響。換言之，本研究主要目的是要檢視這三種人在出價行為上的差異。本篇論文共有六個研究假設，利用三個實驗設計加以檢驗。
實驗一透過3 (社會價值導向) × 2 (角色) 獨立因子變異數分析分析，結果指出，當身為賣方時，競爭型的賣價大於個人主義者，進而大於利他型者；但身為買方時，利他型者的買價比個人主義者還高，進而高於競爭型者，此研究結果一方面支持了個別差異會影響消費者決定賣價和買價的行為，另一方面也發現當面對損失(買方)時，這三者的報酬配置的偏好恰為相反；本實驗也利用其結果檢視稟賦效果，發現稟賦效果對於競爭型者最大，其次是個人主義者與利他主義者，因此，說明了社會價值導向對稟賦效果會產生干擾作用。
實驗二的目的在於瞭解當面對多重外部參考價格時，三種不同導向的人在決定賣價的差異，同時也將考慮賣方與買方的關係。結果顯示，不管哪種導向的人，如果買方是朋友時的賣價會比是陌生人時的賣價還低；此外，當面對多重參考價格時，競爭型者的賣價仍然高於個人主義者，進而高於利他型者，而分析結果也間接支持了競爭型者與個人主義者對於賣價的決定，最大的差異在於個人主義者比較會考慮到賣價的實現性。
實驗三的目的在於檢視不對稱資訊是否會影響不同價值導向者的賣價。結果指出，競爭型者與個人主義者會在自利動機的驅使下，使得在不對稱資訊下的賣價高於對稱資訊下的賣價，而利他型者，其賣價在不對稱與對稱資訊下則無差異。

關鍵字

社會價值導向 ； 出價行為 ； 稟賦效果 ； 參考價格 ； 不對稱資訊

並列摘要

The major purpose of this dissertation is to explore the impact of individual difference on the consumer behavior in selling prices and buying prices. We em-ploy the concept of social value orientation to probe this issue. Social value orien-tation is a relatively stable personality trait, which is distinct from people’s specific and variable preferences for outcome distributions. In the current research, we fo-cus on an empirically established typology that distinguishes among three orienta-tions: competitive, individualistic and prosocial. We argue that consumer behavior in prices setting is a kind of monetary outcomes setting. Sellers’ selling prices (Buyers’ buying prices) determine how much they could get (should loss), and how much prospective buyers (sellers) should pay (could get). Thus, the principle of this dissertation is to explore the varieties of decisions in selling prices and buying prices among competitors, individualists and prosocials.
A 3 (social value orientation) × 2 (role: seller vs. buyer) analysis of variance is employed in the STDUY 1. The results indicate that competitors charge higher prices than individualists, whose selling prices in turn are higher than those of pro-socials. In the self-as-buyer condition, prosocials are more willing to pay higher prices than individualists, whose buying prices in turn are higher than those of competitors. The findings support that individual difference affects consumer de-cisions on the selling prices and buying prices. And, in the loss condition, the preference for outcome distributions among three orientations is reversed. The STUDY 1 is also to examine the role of social value orientation on the endowment effect. The results also indicate that the magnitude of endowment effect is greater for competitors than that for individualists, whose magnitude in turn is greater than that for prosocials.
The purpose of the STUDY 2 is to probe the decisions in selling prices among three orientations when individuals face the multiple reference prices. The results show that individuals charge significantly lower price if the buyer is a friend rather than an unknown person for each orientation. And, competitors'' selling prices is higher than those of individualists, and whose asking prices in turn is higher than those of prosocials, when they face the multiple reference prices. In addition, the indirect evidence support that individualists are more concern the realization of out-comes than competitors.
The principle of STUDY 3 is to examine the influence of asymmetric infor-mation on the selling prices. The findings illustrate that the self-interest motiva-tion derive competitors and individualists to decide higher selling prices under asymmetric information condition. Participants with prosocial orientation are not affected by the manipulation of information.

並列關鍵字

Social Value Orientation ； Prices Setting ； Endowment Effect ； Reference Price ； Asymmetric Information

參考文獻

Bar-Hillel, Maya and Efrat Neter (1996), “Why Are People Reluctant to Exchange Lottery Ticket?,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70 (January), 17-27.

Carmon, Ziv and Dan Ariely (2000), “Focusing on the Foregone: How Value Can Appear so Different to Buyers and Sellers,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (December), 360-70.

Carnevale, Peter J. and Tahira M. Probst (1997), Using Conflict in Organizations, London: Sage.

Chandrashekaran, R. (2001), “The Implications of Individual Differences in Refer-ence Price Utilization for Designing Effective Price Communications,” Jour-nal of Business Research, 53 (August), 85-91.

Ciarrochi, Joseph and Joseph P. Forgas (2000), “The Pleasure of Possessions: Af-fective Influences and Personality in the Evaluation of Consumer Items,” European Journal of Social Psychology, 30 (September), 631–49.