加价还是减量?显性、隐性涨价方式影响的差异

An Experimental Research about the Difference of Price Increase Frame

近年来物价持续上涨,一些快速消费品企业采取了减量不加价的隐性涨价方式引发争议。本文构建了显性、隐性两种涨价框架,通过两个以学生为样本的实验探讨了显性、隐性涨价方式对感知公平和购买意愿的影响的差异。结果表明:(1)与隐性涨价方式相比,消费者面临显性涨价方式时的感知公平和购买意愿更高;(2)涨价幅度与产品价格存在调节作用,当涨价幅度较低或产品价格较低时,显性涨价方式下的购买意愿高于隐性涨价方式;当涨价幅度较高或产品价格较高时,两种涨价方式下的购买意愿无显著差异。

In recent years, price increase problem has triggered widespread concern in domestic and foreign markets. Consumers feel dissatisfied with the price increase frames and price increase magnitude. Overwhelming news coverage of price increase about various products has drawn widespread criticism, especially the hidden price increase frame. Although price increase is pervasive in consumer＇ s daily life, previous behavioral pricing research focused on price decrease or promotion, while few scholars paid close attention to price increase. Numerous studies focused on the various discount promotion strategies and consumers preference, such as quantity/price/percentage discount and integrated/partitioning pricing. Same as the price decease strategies, price increase strategies also de- serve to research meticulously in theory and in practice. Thus, it is necessary to investigate the price frames and its impact on consumers＇ reaction. In the fast moving consumer goods （FMCGs） market,there are two common price increase frames： direct price increase and hidden price increase. Due to reducing the packaged quantity （or size, or weight） instead of open price increase, hidden price increase is easily overlooked, but widely criticized by consumers and medias. There is a gen- eral tendency that, increasing number of companies adopt the hidden price increase. Most works in this field cannot offer a reasonable explanation of consumers＇ lower assessment of hidden price increase than direct price increase, although they belong to the unit price increase essentially. This research aims to imitate and construct direct and hidden price increase frame and distinguish the difference between them. And it is also worthy to help guide enter- prises around problems about price increase strategies by using the result of this research. We investigate the different effect of price increase frame on perceived fairness and buying intention through 2 studies. After the literature review and pretest, the price increase magnitude was confirmed, and the manipulation check was also confirmed successfully. Study 1 employs a sample of 130 undergraduate students in a 2 （price in- crease frame： direct vs. hidden） x 2 （price increase magnitude： high vs. low） between-subjects design experi- ment. Results show that： direct price increase leads higher perceived fairness and purchasing intention than hidden price increase. Meanwhile, the magnitude of price increase has a moderating effect on the relationship between price increase frames and consumer evaluation, only when the magnitude of price increase is low, consumers will perceive the hidden price increase more unacceptable than the direct price increase. Study 2 employs a sample of 122 undergraduate students in a 2 （price increase frame： direct vs. hidden） ~ 2 （product＇ s price： high vs. low ） between-subjects design experiment under the condition of 10% price in- crease. Results of ANOVA analysis repeat the main effect of study 1, and in addition indicate that when the price of product is low, consumers will perceive the hidden price increase more unfairness and lower purchasing intention than the direct price increase. When the price of product is high, the fairness perception and purchasing intention has no significant difference between direct and hidden price increase. In the conclusion, we discussed the theoretical and managerial contribution of this research, and proposed the managerial suggests for manufacturers in the FMCGs market. This paper provides reasonable explanation for the dif- ferent price increase phenomenon. Hidden price increase is not always better than direct price increase, because consumers may evaluate the hidden price increase as more unacceptable when they notice the price increase or con- tent decrease. Limitations of the present article were also discussed sufficiently. Future studies should take into ac- count different products categories, and not be limited in the FMCGs. More specific details about the consumer char- acteristics should be bring into the theoretical model, such as purchasing involvement, promotion persuasion tactics, and price sensitivity. In order to improve external validity, we suggest employing field experiment in the real shop- ping scenario, if condition permission.