空间距离与产品属性对消费者选择偏好的影响

心理与行为研究 ›› 2015, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (4): 534-540.

空间距离与产品属性对消费者选择偏好的影响

王阳¹, 牟兵兵², 宛小昂²

1 中国人民大学附属中学朝阳学校，北京 100028;
2 清华大学心理学系，北京 100084

收稿日期:2014-03-22 出版日期:2015-07-20 发布日期:2015-07-30
通讯作者: 宛小昂
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金(71472106)。

The Effects of Spatial Distance and Product Attributes on Consumer Selection Preference

Wang Yang¹, Mu Bingbing², Wan Xiaoang²

1 Chaoyang School, High School Affiliated to Renmin University of China, Beijing 100028;
2 Department of Psychology, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084

Received:2014-03-22 Online:2015-07-20 Published:2015-07-30

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 通过两个实验检验空间距离如何影响消费者选择偏好。实验一中，产品与消费者之间的空间距离不影响他们对不可匹配属性更优产品的偏好。实验二中，两种产品之间的空间距离与产品属性交互作用影响了消费者的选择偏好，使他们在两产品之间空间距离远时比近时更偏好不可匹配属性更优产品。两种不同类型的空间距离对消费者选择偏好的影响是不同的。强调两产品之间的空间距离远，会影响消费者在选择过程中对不可匹配属性的使用。

关键词: 空间距离, 产品属性, 选择偏好, 心理距离。

Abstract: We report a study designed to examine how spatial distance interacts with product attributes to influence consumer selection preference. In the preliminary experiment, we asked Chinese participants to rate the attractiveness and importance of certain attributes that potato chips might have. Thus, we obtained descriptions of two brands of potato chips which had comparable overall attractiveness. One brand had more attractive alignable attributes, whereas the other brand had more attractive nonalignable attributes. In Experiment 1, we examined how the egocentric spatial distance and product attributes interact to influence consumer preference. The results revealed that the egocentric spatial distance between the participants and each brand of potato chips did not influence their selection preference. In Experiment 2, we examined how the allocentric spatial distance and product attributes interact to influence consumer preference. The results revealed that consumers had a higher preference on the brand which had more attractive nonalignable attributes, when the spatial distance between the two brands of potato chips increased. Taken together, these results demonstrated that emphasizing the allocentric distance between two products might highlight the difference between them, and therefore increase consumer′s usage of nonalignable attributes in their selection process.

Key words: spatial distance, product attributes, consumer selection preferences, psychological distance.

中图分类号:

B849：F713.55

王阳, 牟兵兵, 宛小昂. 空间距离与产品属性对消费者选择偏好的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2015, 13(4): 534-540.

Wang Yang, Mu Bingbing, Wan Xiaoang. The Effects of Spatial Distance and Product Attributes on Consumer Selection Preference[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2015, 13(4): 534-540.

参考文献

[1] 凤四海, 张甜, 黄希庭, 李丹, 苏丹.(2008). 建构层次和事件性质对活动设定时间距离的影响. 心理科学, 31(4), 848-851.
[2] 李雁晨, 周庭锐, 周锈.(2009). 建构层次理论：从时间距离到心理距离. 心理科学进展, 17, 667-677.
[3] 罗艳琳, 王鹏, 李秀军, 石雅琪, 陈墨, 王培培, 胡斯秀, 罗跃嘉. (2010). 汉字认知过程中整字对部件的影响. 心理学报, 42(6), 683-694.
[4] 孙占林.(2010). 自然方位属性对左右尊卑的影响. 社会科学, (7), 177-186.
[5] 杨琳.(1996). 左右尊卑文化现象的研究. 中国文化研究,(2), 32-38.
[6] 朱正宝, 欧阳瑞凡. (2008). 联合分析法在研究产品消费偏好中的应用: 3G手机实证研究. 中国集体经济, (1), 64-65.
[7] Avraamides, M. N., Loomis, J. M., Klatzky, R. L., & Golledge, R. G.(2004). Functional equivalence of spatial representations derived from vision and language: Evidence from allocentric judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 30, 801-814.
[8] Bartsch, K., & Wellman, H. M.(1988). Young children′s conception of distance. Developmental Psychology, 24, 532-541.
[9] Boroditsky, L.(2000). Metaphoric structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition, 75, 1-28.
[10] Carpenter, G. S., & Nakamoto, K.(1989). Consumer preference formation and pioneering advantage. Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 285-298.
[11] Frster, J., Friedman, R. S., & Liberman, N.(2004). Temporal construal effects on abstract and concrete thinking: Consequences for insight and creative cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 177-189.
[12] Fujita, K., Henderson, M. D., Eng, J., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N.(2006). Spatial distance and mental construal of social events. Psychological Science, 17, 278-282.
[13] Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B.(1994). Structural alignment in comparison: No difference without similarity . Psychological Science, 5, 152-158.
[14] Gourville, J. T., & Soman, D.(2005). Overchoice and assortment type: When and why variety backfires. Marketing Science, 24, 382-395.
[15] Ji, L., Peng, K., & Nisbett, R.(2000). Culture, control, and of relationships in the environment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 943-955.
[16] Liberman, N., Sagristano, M., & Trope, Y.(2002). The effect of temporal distance on level of construal. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 523-535.
[17] Liberman, N., & Trope, Y.(1998). The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal construal theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 5-18.
[18] Malkoc, S., Zauberman, G., Ulu, C.(2005). Consuming now or later? The interactive effect of timing and attribute alignability. Psychological Science, 16, 411-417.
[19] Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D.(1997). The effects of alignability on memory. Psychological Science, 8, 363-367.
[20] Markman, A. B., & Medin, D. L.(1995). Similarity and alignment in choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63, 117-130.
[21] Miller, J. M., & Krosnick, J. A.(1998). The impact of candidate name order on election outcomes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 291-330.
[22] Peng, K., Nisbett, R. E., & Wong, N. Y. C.(1997). Validity problems comparing values across cultures and possible solutions. Psychological Methods, 2, 329-344.
[23] Scarabis, M., Florack, A., & Gosejohann, S.(2006). When consumers follow their feelings: The impact of affective or cognitive focus on the basis of consumers′ choice. Psychology & Marketing, 23, 1015-1034.
[24] Slovic, P., & MacPhillamy, D.(1974). Dimensional commensurability and cue utilization in comparative judgment. Organizationa Behavior and Human Performance, 11, 172-194.
[25] Thorndyke, P. W., & Hayes-Roth, B.(1982). Differences in spatial knowledge acquired from maps and navigation. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 560-589.
[26] Trope, Y., & Liberman, N.(2010).Construal-Level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117, 440-463.
[27] Wang, R. F., & Spelke, E. S.(2002). Human spatial representation: insights from animals. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 376-382.
[28] Zhang, M., & Wang, J.(2009). Psychological distance asymmetry: The spatial dimension vs. other dimensions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19, 497-507.
[29] Zhang, S., & Fitzsimons, G. J.(1999). Choice process satisfaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77, 192-214.
[30] Zhang, S., & Markman, A. B.(1998). Overcoming the early entrant advantage: The role of alignable and nonalignable differences. Journal of Marketing Research, 35, 413-426.
[31] Zhang, S., & Markman, A. B.(2001). Processing product unique features: Alignability and involvement in preference construction. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 11, 13-27.