본 연구는 미래에 발생할 소비를 위해 소비자들이 한 제품군 내 여러 대안들(즉, 쾌락적 대안들과 실용적 대안들)로 구성된 폭넓은 구색으로부터 다수의 품목들을 선택하여 구매하고자 할 때, 소비자들이 사용하는 선택 전략의 유형(동시 선택 전략 vs. 연속 선택 전략)에 따라 이들이 최종적으로 선택하게 되는 실용적 대안 대비 쾌락적 대안의 선택 점유율이 어떻게 달라지는지를 살펴보고자 한다. 또한 이때 소비자의 정당화 필요성(이유제시 과업 없음 vs. 이유제시 과업 있음)과 조절초점(향상초점 vs. 방어초점)이 선택 전략 유형에 따른 소비자의 쾌락적 또는 실용적 대안 선택에 있어서 각각 어떠한 역할을 하는지에 대해서도 살펴볼 것이다. 본 연구에서는 구체적으로 다음과 같은 가설들이 설정되었다. 첫째, 연속 선택 전략을 사용하는 소비자보다 동시 선택 전략을 사용하는 소비자에게서 쾌락적(vs. 실용적) 대안의 선택 점유율이 더 크게 나타날 것이다(가설 1). 둘째, 연속 선택 전략을 사용한 소비자보다 동시 선택 전략을 사용한 소비자에게 선택을 정당화하는 이유를 제시하라는 과업이 요구되면, 이유제시 과업이 요구되지 않은 경우에 비해 쾌락적(vs. 실용적) 대안의 선택 점유율이 더 많이 감소할 것이다(가설 2). 셋째, 동시 선택 전략을 사용하는 소비자에게 예열방법을 사용하여 방어초점이 강하게 형성되면 예열방법을 사용하여 향상초점이 강하게 형성된 경우보다 쾌락적(vs. 실용적) 대안의 선택 점유율이 더 적게 나타나는 반면, 이러한 조절초점의 효과는 연속 선택 전략을 사용하는 소비자에게는 나타나지 않을 것이다(가설 3). 본 연구에서 설정한 가설들을 검증하기 위해 각 제품군(우유, 음료수, 과자)마다 총 4개의 대안들(쾌락적 대안 2개, 실용적 대안 2개)을 선정하여 이들을 대상으로 선택 전략에 따른 피험자의 선택 행동을 분석한 결과, (1)동시 선택 전략(vs. 연속 선택 전략) 조건의 피험자 집단에서 쾌락적(vs. 실용적) 대안의 선택 점유율이 보다 크게 나타났으며, (2)동시 선택 전략(vs. 연속 선택 전략) 조건의 피험자 집단에게 선택을 정당화하는 이유를 제시하라는 과업이 요구(정당화 조건)되었을 때 이유제시 과업이 요구되지 않은 경우(통제 조건)에 비해 쾌락적(vs. 실용적) 대안의 선택 점유율이 더 많이 감소하는 것으로 나타났고, (3)동시 선택 전략(vs. 연속 선택 전략) 조건의 피험자 집단에게 예열방법을 사용하여 방어초점이 강하게 형성(방어초점 조건)되면 예열방법을 사용하여 향상초점이 강하게 형성(향상초점 조건)된 경우보다 쾌락적(vs. 실용적) 대안의 선택 점유율이 더 적게 나타난 것으로 확인되었다. 따라서 종합적으로 본 연구에서 설정한 가설 1, 2, 3은 모두 지지되었다. 마지막으로 본 연구결과가 제시하는 이론적․관리적 시사점을 제시하고, 연구의 한계와 미래의 연구 방향에 대해서도 논의하였다.

Many of the most significant choices that people make are between hedonic and utilitarian options. In choosing between hedonic and utilitarian options, we sometimes have the option of choosing a series ahead of time. At other times we make each decision singly, usually just before it is to take effect. Thus, consumers can use two choice strategies for the purchase of multiple items from a product class. In one strategy (i.e., simultaneous choices/sequential consumption), the consumer buys several items on one shopping trip and consumes the items over several consumption occasions; that is, when a series of choices are made simultaneously, typically most of items will not be consumed until later. Conversely, in the other strategy (i.e., sequential choices/sequential consumption), the consumer buys one item at a time, just before each consumption occasion; that is, a single choice from the same set is made in each period for immediate consumption. Simonson (1990) refers to the former choice mode as simultaneous choice and the latter as sequential choice. Previous research has demonstrated that when people choose many items at once, they take more variety than when they choose them one at a time (e.g., Simonson 1990; Read and Loewenstein 1995). That is, consumers who make simultaneous purchases in a category and are uncertain about their future preferences tend to choose a variety of preferred items rather than multiple replicates of the most preferred item. Given that many of the decisions involve choices between hedonic and utilitarian options, hence, we can predict that the tendency to diversify portfolios of choices will result in a greater mix of hedonic and utilitarian options in simultaneous than sequential choices condition. However, the question of interest is how the choice strategies consumers use for the purchase of multiple items from a product class can affect the relative choice share of hedonic (vs. utilitarian) option(s) consumers select. Thus, the current research examines how choice strategies (i.e., simultaneous choice strategy vs. sequential choice strategy) influence the choice between hedonic and utilitarian options. Prior research has found that it is more difficult to justify hedonic consumption and easier to justify utilitarian consumption (e.g., Okada 2005; Prelec and Loewenstein 1998). Two reasons for this relative difficulty in justifying hedonic consumption are that (1) there is a sense of guilt associated with it and (2) its benefits are more difficult to quantify. Thus, consumers in the sequential choices condition for immediate consumption tend to select more utilitarian (vs. hedonic) options. However, people precommit to indulgence (or hedonic consumption) in the future in order to make sure they will not exert excessive self-control (Kivetz and Simonson 2002b). Thus, we predict that simultaneous choice mode for future consumption (vs. sequential choice mode for immediate consumption) will increase the choice share of hedonic (vs. utilitarian) options (hypothesis 1). In addition, we make two predictions. First, because asking people to provide reasons for their choice amplifies the need for justification, and because such amplified need for justification evokes more guilt associated with the hedonic consumption, we predict that the choice share of hedonic (vs. utilitarian) options will be attenuated more greatly in the simultaneous than sequential choices condition when consumers are asked to justify their choices (hypothesis 2). Second, building on the previous findings that attributes compatible with individuals' goal orientation tend to be overweighted in choice―that is, prevention-focused individuals are more likely than promotion-focused consumers to overweight utilitarian relative to hedonic attributes and select the option superior on these attributes (Chernev 2004), we predict that the choice share of hedonic (vs. utilitarian) options will be more likely to decrease in the simultaneous choices condition when consumers are more prevention (vs. promotion) oriented, whereas the effects of promotion and prevention motivations on choice between hedonic and utilitarian options will not be found in the sequential choices condition (hypothesis 3). These predictions were tested and confirmed in three experiments. Three product categories (i.e., milk, drink, and snack) were selected for three experiments. There were 12 hedonic/utilitarian options available, four in each product category; that is, each product category included two hedonic and two utilitarian options. In experiment 1, it was found that in all three product categories participants who made choices simultaneously for sequential consumption were more likely to select hedonic (vs. utilitarian) options than participants who made choices sequentially. In experiment 2, in all three product categories the choice share of hedonic (vs. utilitarian) options were found to decrease more greatly in simultaneous than sequential choices condition when participants were under the justification (vs. no justification) condition. In experiment 3, when participants were under the prevention (vs. promotion) condition, in all three product categories the choice share of hedonic (vs. utilitarian) options were found to decrease more greatly only in simultaneous choices condition. Consequently, hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 were all supported. Finally, we discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our findings and develop directions for future research.

, , , , , ,

simultaneous choice, sequential choice, utilitarian options, hedonic options, justification, promotion focus, prevention focus