First come, first served versus the draw: Perceived fairness in the new product purchase competition

Jihye Park, Hannah Kwon
{"title":"First come, first served versus the draw: Perceived fairness in the new product purchase competition","authors":"Jihye Park, Hannah Kwon","doi":"10.1002/mar.22007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although new products are not inherently scarce, consumers often display competitive behavior, eagerly queuing up to be among the first to obtain them. To manage the distribution of such sought-after items, retailers determine which consumers get the opportunity to make a purchase. The question of which selection method ensures fair treatment of individual customers and enhances purchase experiences for a new product remains unresolved. Results of three experiments revealed that those in an ordered selection discipline were likely to be more time-sensitive and perceive it as fairer than those in the random selection discipline when purchasing a new product. The difference in perceived fairness between the ordered selection discipline and the random selection discipline was more substantial, when the new product was highly scarce, due to increased selection uncertainty. However, the reverse effect was found when consumers were not selected to purchase a new product. The ordered selection discipline was perceived as less fair than the random selection discipline. The findings provide valuable insights into how selection disciplines shape consumers' perceptions of fairness during the purchase of a new product.","PeriodicalId":501349,"journal":{"name":"Psychology and Marketing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology and Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.22007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although new products are not inherently scarce, consumers often display competitive behavior, eagerly queuing up to be among the first to obtain them. To manage the distribution of such sought-after items, retailers determine which consumers get the opportunity to make a purchase. The question of which selection method ensures fair treatment of individual customers and enhances purchase experiences for a new product remains unresolved. Results of three experiments revealed that those in an ordered selection discipline were likely to be more time-sensitive and perceive it as fairer than those in the random selection discipline when purchasing a new product. The difference in perceived fairness between the ordered selection discipline and the random selection discipline was more substantial, when the new product was highly scarce, due to increased selection uncertainty. However, the reverse effect was found when consumers were not selected to purchase a new product. The ordered selection discipline was perceived as less fair than the random selection discipline. The findings provide valuable insights into how selection disciplines shape consumers' perceptions of fairness during the purchase of a new product.
先到先得与抽签:新产品购买竞争中的公平感
尽管新产品本身并不稀缺,但消费者往往会表现出竞争行为,争先恐后地排队购买。为了管理这些抢手货的分销,零售商决定哪些消费者有机会购买。哪种选择方法既能确保公平对待每一位顾客,又能提高新产品的购买体验,这个问题至今仍未解决。三个实验的结果显示,在购买新产品时,与随机选择法相比,有序选择法的消费者可能对时间更为敏感,并认为随机选择法更为公平。当新产品高度稀缺时,由于选择的不确定性增加,有序选择纪律与随机选择纪律在公平感上的差异更大。然而,当消费者没有被选中购买新产品时,却发现了相反的效果。有序选择规则被认为不如随机选择规则公平。这些研究结果为了解消费者在购买新产品时,选择规则如何影响其对公平性的感知提供了宝贵的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信