The Journal of the Korea Contents Association (한국콘텐츠학회논문지)

The Korea Contents Association (한국콘텐츠학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Dual Path Impacts of the Consumer Innovativeness in the New Products Adoption Situation

소비자의 감각적 혁신성향과 인지적 혁신성향이 신제품 구매의도에 미치는 이중 경로

  • Received : 2011.06.10
  • Accepted : 2011.08.09
  • Published : 2011.08.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

There are many researches about effects of consumer innovativeness on the new product adoption behavior. However most of these studies regard this construct as one dimensional concept so that the extant studies suggest very ambiguous results about the relationship between consumer innovativeness and adoption behavior. This study subdivides the construct as cognitive innovativeness and sensory one and suggest these two types of consumer innovativeness affect on the risk perception of the potential adopter differently when the consumer adopt new product. In the empirical research through regression analysis and structure equation model with 217 samples, the study shows the consumer who have high level of cognitive innovativeness are more sensitive to functional risk of new products compared to one who have high level of sensory innovativeness. On the other side, sensory innovative consumer perceive social risk more when they adopt new products than cognitive innovator who have higher level of cognitive innovativeness. The result means there are dual paths on the relationship between consumer innovativeness and new products adoption behavior. Unlike the early studies, this study shows that there's dual path in relationship between the consumer's innovativeness and new product adoption. That is the consumer who have higher sensory innovativeness perceive the social risk of new products more sensitively than functional risk but the consumer who have cognitive innovativeness perceive functional risk more. So, new product adoption behavior would be different depending on the sensory or cognitive innovativeness.

연구는 기존 연구들이 단일한 개념으로 인식하고 있던 혁신성향 개념을 인지적 혁신성향과 감각적 혁신성향으로 구분하고 두 유형의 혁신 성향의 정도에 따라 신제품에 대한 소비자의 지각된 위험의 민감성이 다름을 보였다. 이러한 지각된 위험의 유형과 수준의 차이는 각각의 혁신 성향이 소비자의 신제품 구매의도에 있어 서로 다른 영향력이 있음을 보여 줌으로써 혁신성향이 소비자의 신제품 구매의도에 미치는 경로가 이중경로임을 제시하였다. 217명을 대상으로 회귀분석과 공변량 구조 분석을 통하여 실증 분석을 수행한 결과 감각적 혁신성향 보다 인지적 혁신성향이 높을수록 사회적 위험보다 기능적 위험을 더 많이 지각하는 반면 감각적 혁신성향이 높을수록 기능적 위험보다는 사회적 위험을 더 지각하는 것으로 나타났다. 즉, 신제품 구매에 따른 기능적 위험 지각과 사회적 위험 지각이 소비자의 혁신성향의 유형에 따라 다르게 나타남을 제시하였다. 기존 연구에서는 소비자의 혁신성향 개념을 하나의 구성 개념으로 파악하여 신제품 구매의도에 대한 영향 관계를 파악하였으나 본 연구는 감각적 혁신성향과 인지적 혁신성향으로 소비자의 혁신성향을 구분하고 신제품 구매의도와의 관계를 파악하였으며 각각의 혁신성향이 신제품에 대해 인지하는 지각 위험의 경로를 달리함을 밝혔다.

Keywords

References

  1. D. F. Midgley and G. R. Dowling, "Innovativeness: The Concept and Its Measurement," Journal of Consumer Research, Mar. Vol.4, Issue.4, pp.229-242, 1978. https://doi.org/10.1086/208701
  2. E. C. Hirschman, "Experience seeking: a subjectivist perspective of consumption," Journal of Business Research, Vol.12, No.1, pp.115-36, 1984. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(84)90042-0
  3. R. E. Goldsmith and C, F. Hofacker, "Measuring consumer innovativeness," Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, Vol.19, No.3, pp.209-21, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02726497
  4. P. S. Raju, "Optimum stimulation level: its relationship to personality, demographics, and exploratory behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.7, No.3, pp.272-82, 1980. https://doi.org/10.1086/208815
  5. E. M. Steenkamp and H. Baumgartner, "The Role of Optimum Stimulation Level in Exploratory Consumer Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.19, Issue 3, p434-448, 1992(12). https://doi.org/10.1086/209313
  6. M. Schreier, S. Oberhauser, and R. Prügl, "Lead users and the adoption and diffusion of new products: Insights from two extreme sports communities," Marketing Letters, Vol.18, Issue 1/2, p.15-30, 2007(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-006-9009-3
  7. P. H. Pearson, "Relationship Between Global and Specific Measures of Novelty Seeking," Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, vol.34, pp.199-204. 1970. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029010
  8. S. L. Wood, J. Swait, "Psychological Indicators of Innovation Adoption: Cross-Classification Based on Need for Cognition and Need for Change," Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol.12, Issue.1, pp.1-13, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327663JCP1201_01
  9. M. P. Venkatraman, and L. L. Price, "Differentiating Between Cognitive and Sensory Innovativeness: Concepts, Measurement, and Implications," Journal of Business Research, Vol.20, Issue,4, pp.293-315, 1990(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(90)90008-2
  10. C. P. Haugtvedt and R. E, "Personality and Persuasion: Need for Cognition Moderates the Persistence and Resistance of Attitude Changes," .Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, Vol.63, pp.308-319, 1992(8). https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.2.308
  11. M. Zuckerman, Sensation Seeking: Beyond the Optimal Level of Arousal, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1979.
  12. R. A. Mittelstaedt, S. L. Grossbart, W. W. Curtis, and S. P. Devere, "Optimal Stimulation Level and the Adoption Decision Process," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.3, pp.84-94, 1976(9). https://doi.org/10.1086/208655
  13. S. Ram and J. N. Sheth, "Consumer resistance to innovations: the marketing problem and its solutions," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.6, No.2, pp.5-14, 1989.
  14. V. Mitchell, F. Davies, L. Moutinho, and V. Vassos, "Using neural networks to understand service risk in the holiday product," Journal of Business Research, Vol.46, No.2, pp.167-80, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(98)00020-4
  15. G. R. Dowling and R. Staelin, "A model of perceived risk and intended risk-handling activity," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.21, No.1, pp.119-34, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1086/209386
  16. E. U. Weber and C. Hsee, "Cross-cultural Differences in Risk Perception, but Cross-cultural Similarities in Attitudes Towards Perceived Risk," Management Science, Vol.44, pp.1205-1217, 1998(9). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.44.9.1205
  17. J. Cherry and J. Fraedrich, "Perceived risk, moral philosophy and marketing ethics: mediating influences on sales managers' ethical decision-making," Journal of Business Research, Vol.55 No.12, pp.951-62, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00215-0
  18. J. Jacoby and L. B. Kaplan, "The components of perceived risk," in Venkatesan, M. (Eds), Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference, Iowa City, 1972.
  19. U. M. Dholakia, "A motivational process model of product involvement and consumer risk perception," European Journal of Marketing, Vol.35, No.11/12, pp.1340-60, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006479
  20. S. Ram and J. N. Sheth, "Consumer resistance to innovations: the marketing problem and its solutions," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.6, No.2, pp.5-14, 1989.
  21. M. Perry and B. C. Hamm, "Canonical Analysis of Relations between Socioeconomic Risk and Personal Influence in Purchase Decisions," Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.6, pp.351-354, 1969(8). https://doi.org/10.2307/3150142
  22. R. J. Lutz and P. J. Reilly, "An Exploration of the Effects of Perceived Social and Performance Risk on Consumer Information," Advances in Consumer Research, Vol.1, pp.393-405, 1974.
  23. F. M. Bass, "A New product Growth for Model Consumer Durables," Management Science, Vol.15, pp.215-227, 1969(1). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.15.5.215
  24. E. Martinez, Y. Polo, and C. Flavian, "The acceptance and diffusion of new consumer durables: differences between first and last adopters," Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol.15, pp.319-342, 1998.
  25. S. Im, B. L. Bayus, and C. H. Mason, "An empirical study of global consumer innovativeness, personal characteristics, and new-product adoption behavior," Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, Vol.31, No.1, pp.61-73, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070302238602
  26. H. Gatignon, and T. S, "A Propositional Inventory for New Diffusion Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.11, pp.849-867, 1985(3). https://doi.org/10.1086/209021
  27. N. Venlcatraman, IT Induced Business Reconfiguration, in the corporation of the 1990s, M.S.Scott Morton(ed). Oxford University Press. New York, 1991.
  28. Hoeffler and Steve, Measuring Performances for Really New Products, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.40, pp.406-420, 2003(11). https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.40.4.406.19394
  29. J. P. Peter and Tarpey, L. Z.sr, A Comparative analysis of three consumer decision strategies. Journal of consumer research, pp.29-37, 1975.
  30. R. W. Mitchell and P. Baustarti, A Preliminary investigation into pre- and post-purchase risk perception and reduction, European Journal of Marketing, Vol.28, pp.56-71.
  31. M. Schreier and R. Prugl, Exteding leading user theory : Antecedents and consequences of consumer`s lead userness, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2006.
  32. Tietz, Robert, D. Pameda, Morrison, C. Luthje, and C. Herstatt, The Process of user innovation : A case study in a Consumer Goods Setting, International Journal of Product Development, Vol.2, No.4, pp.321-338, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPD.2005.008005

Cited by

  1. A study on consumer attitudes and purchase intentions for 3D printed products in the fashion industry vol.26, pp.6, 2018, https://doi.org/10.29049/rjcc.2018.26.6.919