期刊文献+

企业劣势地位感知对消费者购买意愿的影响

The Impact of Perceived Firm Disadvantage on Consumer Purchase Intention
下载PDF
导出
摘要 在既往认知中,消费者在进行购买决策时更倾向于选择头部企业与强势品牌。通过近期事件发现,在竞争中处于劣势地位但具有社会责任感的企业更易获得消费者的购买支持。但现有研究中较少有学者对此展开研究。因此,本文以竞争中处于劣势地位但具有社会责任感的企业更易获得消费者的购买支持的现象为切入点,以劣势者效应为抓手,探寻企业劣势地位感知对消费者购买意愿的影响机制,发现企业劣势地位感知能正向影响消费者的购买意愿,自我投射在其中发挥中介作用,而企业社会责任能够正向调节该效应。表明,具有强社会责任感但处于劣势地位的企业,可以通过劣势者效应,赢得消费者的购买支持。由此,处于劣势地位的企业不应固步自封,应保持积极向上的态度,树立正向且坚定的品牌形象并有效传递给消费者,同时积极承担社会责任,扭转劣势局面。 Consumers have been known to favour headline companies and strong brands in their purchasing decisions. Recent events have shown that socially responsible companies that are at a competitive disadvantage are more likely to gain consumer support for their purchases. However, few scholars have studied this issue in existing research. Therefore, this paper takes the phenomenon of competitively disadvantaged but socially responsible enterprises are more likely to obtain consumers’ purchase support as the entry point, and takes the underdog effect as the starting point to explore the mechanism of the influence of the perception of corporate disadvantage on consumers’ purchase intention, and finds that the perception of corporate disadvantage positively affects consumers’ purchase intention, with self-projection playing a mediator role, and that corporate social responsibility positively regulates this effect. The mechanism of the effect of perceived corporate disadvantage on consumers’ purchase intention suggests that firms with a strong sense of social responsibility but in a disadvantaged position can win consumers’ purchase support through the underdog effect. As a result, disadvantaged companies should not be complacent, but should maintain a positive attitude, establish a positive and firm brand image and effectively communicate it to consumers, and actively undertake social responsibility to reverse the disadvantageous situation.
出处 《现代市场营销》 2024年第3期47-57,共11页 Modern Marketing
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献158

  • 1陈虎强.论面子观念──一种中国人典型社会心理现象的分析[J].湖南师范大学社会科学学报,1999,28(1):111-115. 被引量:31
  • 2金立印.基于品牌个性及品牌认同的品牌资产驱动模型研究[J].北京工商大学学报(社会科学版),2006,21(1):38-43. 被引量:79
  • 3ABC News. President Obama:America "not better off" today than four years ago[EB/OL], http://abcnews.go, com/Politics/presi dent-obama-calls-underdog-2012-race-white-house/story? id=14656286c.UIY4am Mhe8, 2011-10-03.
  • 4Ceci S J and Kain E L. Jumping on the bandwagon with the underdog.. The impact of attitude polls on polling behavior[J]. Public O pinion Quarterly, 1982, 46(2)..228 242.
  • 5Fehr E and Fischbacher U. The nature of human altruism[J]. Nature, 2003, 425(6960):785--791.
  • 6Fleitas D W. Bandwagon and underdog effects in minimal-Information eleetions[J]. American Political Science Review, 1971,65(2) : 434--438.
  • 7Frazier J A and Snyder E E. The underdog concept in sport[J]. Sociology of Sport Journal, 1991, 8(4) :380--388.
  • 8Gallup G and Rae S F. Is there a bandwagon vote? [J]. Public Opinion Quarterly, 1940, 4(2) :244--249.
  • 9Goldschmied N. The underdog effect: Definition, limitations, and motivations. Why do we support those at a competitive disadvantage? [D]. University of South Florida, Los Angeles, 2005.
  • 10GoldschmiedNandVandello J A. The advantage of disadvantageUnderdogs in the political arena[J]. Basic and AppliedSocial Psy- chology, 2009, 31(1):24--31.

共引文献49

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部