The expected benefit as determinant of deal-prone consumers response to sales promotions

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services

Volumn 18, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 542-547

  Palazon, Mariola ^a   Delgado Ballester, Elena ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MURCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Deal proneness; Premiums; Price discounts

Indexed keywords

CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; PRICE DYNAMICS; SHOPPING ACTIVITY; THEORETICAL STUDY;

EID: 80053249251     PISSN: 09696989     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2011.07.004     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Ailawadi K.L., Neslin S.A., Gedenk K. Pursuing the value-conscious consumer: store brands versus national brand promotions. Journal of Marketing 2001, 65(January):71-89.
2. Alford B.L., Biswas A. The effects of discount level, price consciousness and sales proneness on consumers price perception and behavioral intention. Journal of Business Research 2002, 55(9):775-783.
3. Anic I.-D., Radas S. The consumer in-store purchasing behavior associated with deal-proneness for a hypermarket retailer in Croatia. Privredna kretanja i ekonomska politika 2006, 109:63-81.
4. Blattberg R.C., Neslin S.A. Sales Promotion, Concepts, Methods, and Strategies 1990, Ed. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
5. Burton S., Lichtenstein D.R., Netemeyer R.G., Garretson J.A. A scale for measuring attitude toward private label products and an examination of its psychological and behavioral correlates. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sciencie 1998, 26(4):293-306.
6. Chandon P., Wansink B., Laurent G. A benefit congruency framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing 2000, 64(October):65-81.
7. Chandrashekaran R. The influence of redundant comparison prices and other price presentation formats on consumers' evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing 2004, 80(1):53-66.
8. Chandrashekaran R., Grewal D. Asimilation of advertised reference prices, the moderating role of involvement. Journal of Retailing 2003, 79(1):53-62.
9. Choi S., Stanyer M., Kim M. Consumer responses to the depth and minimum claimed savings of "scratch and save (SAS)" promotions. Psychology and Marketing 2010, 27(8):766-779.
10. Dastous A., Jacob I. Understanding consumer reactions to premium-based promotional offers. European Journal of Marketing 2002, 36(11/12):1270-1286.
11. DelVecchio D. Deal-prone consumers response to promotion, the effects of relative and absolute promotion value. Psychology & Marketing 2005, 22(5):373-391.
12. Diamond W. Just what is a "dollars worth? Cosumer reactions to price discounts vs. extra product promotions. Journal of Retailing 1992, 68(3):254-270.
13. Garretson J.A., Burton S. Highly coupon and sale prone consumers: benefits beyond price savings. Journal of Advertising Research 2003, 43(2):162-172.
14. Grewal D., Marmorstein H., Sharma A. Communicating price information through semantic cues, the moderating effects of situation and discount size. Journal of Consumer Research 1996, 23(September):148-155.
15. Hardesty D.M., Bearden W.O. Consumer evaluations of different promotion types and price presentations, the moderating role of promotional benefit level. Journal of Retailing 2003, 79(1):17-25.
16. Inman J.J., Peter A.C., Raghubir P. Framing the deal, the role of restrictions in accentuating deal value. Journal of Consumer Research 1997, 24(June):68-79.
17. Kidd R.F. Manipulation checks, advantage or disadvantage. Representative Research in Social Psychology 1976, 7(2):160-165.
18. Kramer T., Kim M.K. Processing fluency versus novelty effects in deal perceptions. Journal of Product & Brand Management 2007, 16(2):142-147.
19. Lee-Wingate S.N., Corfman K.P. A little something for me and maybe for you, too: promotions that relieve guilt. Marketing Letters 2009, 10.1007/s11002-009-9093-2.
20. Lichtenstein D., Burton S., Netemeyer R. An examination of deal proneness across sales promotion types, a consumer segmentation perspective. Journal of Retailing 1997, 73(2):283-297.
21. Lichtenstein D., Netemeyer R., Burton S. Distinguishing coupon proneness from value consciousness, an acquisition-transaction utility theory perspective. Journal of Marketing 1990, 54(July):54-67.
22. Lichtenstein D.R., Netemeyer R.G., Burton S. Assesing the domain specificity of deal proneness, a field study. Journal of Consumer Research 1995, 22(December):314-326.
23. Mantel S.P., Kardes F.R. The role of direction of comparison attribute based-processing and attitude based-processing in consumer preference. Journal of Consumer Research 1999, 25(4):335-352.
24. Meyers-Levy J., Peracchio L. Getting an angle in advertising: the effect of camera angle on products evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research 1992, 29(4):454-461.
25. Meyers-Levy J., Tybout A.M. Context effects at encoding and judgment in consumption settings: the role of cognitive resources. Journal of Consumer Research 1997, 24(1):1-14.
26. Nunes J.C., Park C.W. Incommensurate resource, not just more of the same. Journal of Marketing Research 2003, 40(February):26-38.
27. Pechtl H. Profiling intrisic deal proneness for hilo and edlp price promotion strategies. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 2004, 11(4):223-233.
28. Petty R.E., Cacioppo J.T. Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches 1981, William C. Brown, Dubuque, IA.
29. Raghubir P. An information processing review of the subjective value of money and prices. Journal of Business Research 2006, 59(10-11):1053-1062.
30. Schneider L.G., Currim I.S. Consumer purchase behaviors associated with active and passive deal-proneness. International Journal of Research in Marketing 1991, 8(3):205-222.
31. Swaminathan S., Bawa K. Category-specific coupon proneness, the impact of individual characteristics and category-specific variables. Journal of Retailing 2005, 81(3):205-214.
32. Tan S., Chua S. "While stocks last! impact of framing on consumers perception of sales promotions. Journal of Consumer Marketing 2004, 21(5):343-355.
33. Völckner F. The dual role of price: decomposing consumers reactions to price. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 2008, 36:359-377.
34. Zhang Y., Buda R. Moderating effects of need for cognition on responses to positively versus negatively framed advertising messages. Journal of Advertising 1999, 28(2):1-15.