权力与冲动购买:权力感与购买冲动特质对冲动购买的影响

Having or Lacking Power Leads to Impulse Buying?The Influence of Power and Buying Impulsiveness Trait on Impulse Buying

本文通过三个研究探讨了权力感对消费者冲动购买的影响。无论是测量特质权力感(研究1)还是启动状态权力感(研究2),结果均显示低权力感个体冲动购买水平更高。在考虑了购买冲动特质与权力感共同作用后(研究3),即使对于低冲动特质者,低权力感仍能使其产生与高冲动特质者相当的冲动购买水平;而高权力感个体的购买冲动特质能显著预测其冲动购买水平。研究结果表明,低权力感会导致个体冲动购买,而高权力感会促进消费者的高购买冲动特质转化为具体的冲动购买行为。

The approach-inhibition theory and the social distance theory of power support different predictions on the question of how power affects impulse buying.However,there is no empirical research directly testing the above two theories thus far.Therefore,the present research aimed to explore the influence of power and buying impulsiveness trait on impulse buying to answer the basic research question of“Having or Lacking Power Leads to Impulse Buying?”.From the perspective of self-control,we hypothesize that lacking power would lead to impulse buying,even for the individuals with low buying impulsiveness trait.Furthermore,based on the approach-inhibition theory of power,we hypothesize that although having power is not directly related to impulse buying,it can facilitate the conversion of consumers’buying impulsiveness trait into real impulse buying behavior.That is,when having power,the consumers with high buying impulsiveness trait would show more impulse buying behaviors than the consumers with low buying impulsiveness trait.Three studies were conducted to test our hypotheses.Study 1 explored the correlation between individuals’trait sense of power and willingness to make impulse buying.A total of 106 college students participated in the study,and the results showed a negative correlation between participants’scores on the sense of power scale and their willingness to purchase in an impulse buying situation(r=-.23,p<.05).The results of the regression analysis showed that,after controlling for the effect of cost of living and gender,the results remained significant(β=-.237,SE=.10,p<.05,95%CI=[-.43,-.04]).In Study 2,we manipulated the power(high vs.baseline vs.low)by the recalling method,measuring the number of products bought and money spent by participants in a more implicit impulse buying scenario.After controlling the potential influences of the trait sense of power and cost of living and gender,the results for 173 participants showed that the low-power participants spent more money,F(2,167)=2.88,p=.059,η_(p)^(2)=.033,and bought more products,F(2,167)=5.55,p<.01,η_(p)^(2)=.062.The results of study 1 and 2 showed that low power promotes consumers’impulse buying.Study 3 introduced buying impulsiveness trait to explore its interaction with power on impulse buying.Power was manipulated through the role-play imagination.Consistent with Study 2,the results showed that the low-power group spent more money(β=-14.793,SE=4.13,p<.001,95%CI=[-22.96,-6.62])and bought more products(β=-2.002,SE=.53,p<.001,95%CI=[-3.04,-.96])than the high-power group.In addition,the interaction between power and buying impulsiveness trait was significant on the quantity of purchase indicator(β=1.917,SE=.83,p<.05,95%CI=[.27,3.56]),low-power individuals regardless of buying impulsiveness traits made more impulse buying(β=-.398,SE=.62,p>.05,95%CI=[-1.63,.83]);impulsive buying traits of high-powered individuals can predict impulse buying(β=1.518,SE=.56,p<.01,95%CI=[.41,2.67]).Our hypotheses were supported.The current research clarifies,for the first time,that it is low power that leads to impulse buying,which demonstrates that the social distance theory of power has more explanatory power on the directional issue of power affecting impulse buying.Furthermore,from the perspective of approach-inhibition theory,although the findings showed that high power does not promote impulse buying,it can facilitate the conversion of consumers’buying impulsiveness trait into real impulse buying behavior.That is,when having power,the consumers with high buying impulsiveness trait would show more impulse buying behaviors than the consumers with low buying impulsiveness trait.