global marketing conference singapore 2014発表資料

Copyright (c) 2014 　 Kawakami et al. All Rights Reserved

How Consumers Rely on Substitutes for Haptic Information

under Non-touch Shopping Environment

Tomoko KawakamiMitsuru Kusunoki, Shiori Nishigaki, Akifumi

Shimoi, Moeko Otani, Naoto Yoshimoto, Yusaku Hori,

Chiaki Hoshiyama, Rina Kato, Mako Ochochi

Senior Grade Undergrads at Kawakami Laboratory

Kansai University, Osaka, Japan

2014 Global Marketing Conference at Singapore

1July 17, 2014

Copyright (c) 2014 　 Kawakami et al. All Rights ReservedJuly 17, 2014

1. Research Motivation2. Previous Studies on Haptic Information3. Conceptual model and Hypotheses4. Survey development and results5. Implications and Limitations

2

Contents


3

Brand

Word-of-mouth

Design

There is no information on “touch”.

Research Motivation

Touch


4

Research Motivation

How consumers rely on substitutes for haptic information?

Online Shopping vs.

Store Shopping

Leather bags vs.

Smartphone cases


5

“Touch” plays an important role in consumers’ purchase product evaluation and purchase decisions.

“Haptic Information” Information acquired by touching and handling products with one’s hands. (Peck and Childers 2003)

Previous studies


6

Products categories Settings

Peck and Childers (2003a)

Store shopping

Peck and Childers (2003b)

Store shopping

Peck and Wiggins (2006)

PamphletNo studies on haptic information at online

shopping

Previous studies


7

Stores Launch

Price WOM Desig

nBran

dHapti

c

1997 ○ ○ ○ ○ △

1995 ○ ○ ○ ○ ×

1999 ○ × ○ ○ ×

2007 ○ ○ ○ ○ ×

1999 ○ ○ ○ ○ ×

Source) 　 Company websites as of June 2014.

Haptic Information at Online Stores

Type of Information Provided at Online Stores


Conceptual Model

Purchase Intent

Importance of Brand

Importance of Touch

Importance of Virtual Word-of-

MouthImportance of

Design

Online vs. Store

shopping

Leather bags Smart phone

casesSubstitutes for

Haptic Information


Research Hypotheses

Importance of touch, brand, virtual word-of-mouth, and product design affects consumers’ purchase intent positively. 　

H1

The relationships in H1 differ between online versus store shopping settings. 　H2

The relationships in H2 differ depending on product categories.

H3


10

Concepts and measures

Importance of Touch (3 items).When I purchase (a leather bag/a smart phone case), I would decide based on its touch.Touch of (leather bags/smart phone cases) is important to me.Touch of (leather bags/smart phone cases) is an essential factor for me to decide which one I should purchase.Note) Measured by 5-point Likert scale.


11


Importance of Brand (3 items). I pay attention to brand names of (leather bags/ smart phone cases) I feel relieved when I carry a (leather bag/ smart phone case) with a famous brand name. When I purchase a (leather bag/ smart phone case) , I always check its brand.Note) Measured by 5-point Likert scale.


12

Concepts and measuresImportance of virtual Word-of-mouth(3 items).When I consider buying (a leather bag/a smart phone case), - I refer to online blogs or website articles

written by users whom I have never met.- I refer to chat rooms or forums by users

whom I have never met.- I use the Internet to refer to ratings and

rankings by users.Note) Measured by 5-point Likert scale.


13


Importance of Design (3 items)Product design of (a leather bag/a smart phone case) is important to me.When I purchase (a leather bag/a smart phone case), I would check its design such as color, pattern etc. before checking others features.I always check if the design of (a leather bag/a smart phone case) fits with my taste or not.Note) Measured by 5-point Likert scale.


Purchase intent (1 item)I will purchase (leather bags/smart phone cases) at (online/real) stores in the future.

14



Time: October 2013

Age:　 Undergraduate students (mainly early 20’s) Place: Kansai UniversitySample size: N=380

FemaleN=221(58.2%)

Male N=159(41.8%)

Gender

15

Survey Overview


16

Validity Test

Construct Item

Square root of AVE CR

BO BS SO SS BO BS SO SSTouch 3 .72 .68 .81 .71 .76 .72 .85 .74Brand 3 .77 .80 .84 .80 .81 .84 .88 .85vWOM 3 .81 .77 .88 .86 .85 .82 .91 .89Design 3 .72 .65 .77 .78 .76 .69 .82 .82Highest

Correlation

.33 .46 .28 .47 - - - -Note: Chi-square(192) = 457.42, GFI=.95, AGFI=.92, CFI=.96, NFI=.94, IFI=.96, and RMSEA = 0.03.

AVE denotes “Average Variance Extracted.” CR denotes “Composite Reliability.” BO: Leather bags/online, BS: Leather bags/at stores

SO: Smart phone cases/ online, SS: Smart phone cases at stores


Leather bags Smart phone cases

Online

Store

Dif. Online

Store

Dif.

Touch .04 .29*

** -.20* .23*

n.s.

Brand .20* .24*

n.s.

.15* .04 *

Vwom .10 -.24 ** .27* -.11 *

Design

-.12 -.05 n.s.

.00 .26*

**

Note) Chi-square=515.65, d.f.=224, GFI=0.95, AGFI=0.92, CFI=0.96, RMSEA=0.029, Dif. denotes Results of Chi=square difference test. *p<0.05 **p<0.01.

17

Results of Structural Equation Modeling


18

Results of Structural Equation Modeling

Note) Chi-square=515.65, d.f.=224, GFI=0.95, AGFI=0.92, CFI=0.96, RMSEA=0.029, Dif. denotes Results of Chi=square difference test. *p<0.05 **p<0.01.

Online Shopping Store ShoppingLeather

BagsSmart Phone Cases

Dif. Leather Bags

Smart Phone Cases

Dif.

Touch .04 -.20*

* .29* .23*

n.s.

Brand .20* .15*

n.s.

.24* .04 *

Vwom .10 .27*

n.s -.24* -.11 *

Design

-.12 -.05 n.s.

-.05 .26*

**


19

Summary of the Results

Purchase Intent

Brand

Touch

vWOM

Design

Purchase Intent

Brand

Touch

vWOM

Design

Online Shopping

Purchase Intent

Brand

Touch

vWOM

Design

Purchase Intent

Brand

Touch

vWOM

Design

Shopping at Stores


Results of hypotheses Testing

Importance of touch, brand, virtual word-of-mouth, and product design affects consumers’ purchase intent positively. 　

H1

The relationships in H1 differ between online versus store shopping settings. 　H2

The relationships in H2 differ depending on product categories.

H3

Partially supported

Supported

Supported


Previous Studies Our StudySweater, Tennis racket,

Cell phoneLeather bags,

Smart phone casesStore shopping Store& Online shopping

U.S. Japan1. Touch plays an

important role in consumers’

purchase decisions2. Preferences for touch information

differ depending on individual consumers.

1. Consumers rely on other information than

touch for online shopping.

2. The substitute information for touch

differs depending on product categories.

21

Academic Implications


1. Firms should carefully select and design appropriate marketing channel for those products which consumers put high value on haptic information.

2. Firms also need to provide substitute information for touch so that consumers won’t get frustrated.

3. Firms should design website or promotion strategies for online shopping with deep understanding for these differences depending on product categories.

22

Practical Implications


1. The respondents of the survey are only undergraduate students.

2. Besides the survey in Japan, future research need to study in the other countries.

3. The result of this research is limited the products which consumers put high value on haptic information.

23

Limitations


24

Thank you for your attention!

AcknowledgmentsThe authors thank to Ms. Kanako Matsuo and Ms. Harumi Nishiuchi for their contribution to this research. The authors also acknowledge financial support by MEXT KAKENHI Grant-in-aid for Scientific Research (B) #23330142 (2011-2014) of Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology.

global marketing conference singapore 2014発表資料

Data & Analytics