You are here

Home » Content

Kişiye özel fiyat teklifinin zamanlamasının, İnternette satın alma karar sürecine etkisi

Effect of personalized price offer timing in Internet on decision making stages

Journal Name:

  • İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2012

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The aim of this study is to investigate the cause-effect relationship between personalized price offer timing and decision making stages. In the study, in order to measure the effect of personalized price offer timing on decision making stages in Internet, a field experiment is conducted with a sample size of 580. Personalized price is determined on the basis of pre-purchases of individuals, constituting the sample, from the website. Personalized price is offered to consumers on different stages of decision making and the differences on buying behavior are observed. Collected data is analyzed with Pearson chi-square and logistic regression analysis. It is found that, the effect of a personalized price offer is higher if the customer has not formed his/her consideration set yet. However, no significant relationship is found between the presence of a personalized price offer and the product to be included in customer‟s choice set.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, küme teorisi çerçevesinde tanımlanan satın alma sürecine etki eden bir değişken olan kişiye özel fiyat teklifinin zamanlaması ile satın alma süreci arasındaki neden sonuç ilişkisini araştırmaktır. Çalışmada, kişiye özel fiyat teklifinin, İnternette, tüketiciye sunulma zamanlamasının satın alma sürecine etkisini ölçmek amacıyla saha deneyi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Saha deneyine 580 kişi katılmıştır. Kişiye özel fiyat, deneklerin İnternet sitesinden daha önce yaptıkları satın almaya göre belirlenmiştir. Deneklere satın alma sürecinin farklı safhalarında kişiye özel fiyat önerilmiş ve satın alma davranışlarındaki farklılıklar izlenmiştir. Deneylerde elde edilen veriler, Pearson ki-kare ve lojistik regresyon analizi kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Çalışma sonucuna göre; tüketicinin dikkate alınanlar kümesi oluşmadan önce önerilen kişiye özel fiyat teklifi, oluştuktan sonra önerilen teklife göre daha etkilidir ve satın almayı olumlu yönde etkilemektedir. Çalışmada, kişiye özel fiyat teklifinin zamanlaması ile tüketicinin önerilen ürünü seçim kümesine alması arasında anlamlı bir ilişki bulunamamıştır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-kisiye-ozel-fiyat-teklifinin-zamanlamasinin-internette-satin-alma-karar-surecine-etkisi.pdf
  • 2
172-188
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

[1] S. Ho, K.Y. Tam, An Emprical Examination of the Effects of Web Personalization at Different Stages of Decision Making. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 19, 1, 95-112 (2005).
[2] S. Ho, K.Y. Tam, Web Personalization as a Persuasion Strategy: An Elaboration Likelihood Model Perspective. Information Systems Research, 16, 3, 271-291 (2005).
[3] M. Ligth, M.T. Maybury, Personalized Multimedia Information Access. Communications of the ACM, 45, May, 54-59 (2002).
[4] V. Swaminathan, The Impact of Recommendation Agents on Consumer Evaluation and Choice: The Moderating Role of Category Risk, Product Complexity, and Consumer Knowledge. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13, 1/2, 93–101 (2003).
[5] U. Manber, A. Patel ve J. Robison, Experience with Personalization on Yahoo!. Communicationsof the ACM, 43, 8, 35–39 (2000).
[6] S. Loeb, Architecting Personalized Delivery of Multimedia Information. Communications of the ACM, 35, 12, 39-47 (1992).
[7] R.L. Andrews ve T.C. Srinivasan, Studying Consideration Effects in Emprical Choice Models Using Scanner Panel Data. Journal of Marketing Research, 32, 30-41 (1995).
[8] J.A. Howard, Consumer Behavior:Application of Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1963.
[9] J.R. Bettman, An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1979.
[10] B.T. Ratchford, Cost-Benefit Models for Explaining Consumer Choice and Information Seeking Behavior. Management Science, 28, 2, 197-212 (1982).
[11] S.M. Shugan, The Cost of Thinking. Journal of Consumer Research, 7, 2, 99-111 (1980).
İ. Kaya, A. Sağkaya Güngör /İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi 41, 2, (2012) 172-188 © 2012
187
[12] T.S. Gruca, Determinants of Choice Set Size: An Alternative Method for Measuring Evoked Sets. Advances in Consumer Research, 16, 515-521 (1989).
[13] A.A. Bailey, Consideration Sets and Brand Positioning: A Social Cognition Perspective. Doktora Tezi, The University of Iowa, 2001.
[14] G. Stigler, The Economics of Information. Journal of Political Economy, 69, 3, 213-225 (1961).
[15] J.R. Hauser, B. Wernerfelt, An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, March, 393-408 (1990).
[16] J.H. Roberts, J.M. Latin, Development and Testing of a Model of Consideration Set Composition. Journal of Marketing Research, 28, November, 429-440 (1991).
[17] J.E. Sheridan, M.D. Richards ve J.W. Sloeum, Comparative Analysis of Expectancy and Heuristic Models of Decision Behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 361-68 (1975).
[18] P.R. Wright, F. Barbour, Phased Decision Strategies: Sequels to Initial Screening, in Management Science: Multiple Criteria Decision Making (M.K. Starr ve ve M. Zeleny, Eds.), North Holland TIMS Studies, No. 6, Amsterdam: North Holland, 91-109 (1977).
[19] D.A. Lussier, R.W. Olshavsky, Task Complexity and Contingent Processing in Brand Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 6, 2, 154-165 (1979).
[20] J.R. Hauser, S. M. Shugan, Defensive Marketing Strategies. Marketing Science, 2, 4, 319-360 (1983).
[21] P. Kotler, Marketing Management: Analysis,Planning, Implementation and Control, 8th ed. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall. Inc, 1994, p.181.
[22] P. Kumar, Dynamic Hierarchical Bayesian Models of Consideration and Choice- Issues and Estimation. Doktora Tezi, State University of New York, Buffalo, 1997.
[23] Personalization Consortium, 2 August 2005, Available at: www.personalization.org/personalization.html, 21 Ekim 2009.
[24] Samsung, Mobile Phone Shopper Behaviour Analysis Report, 2008.
[25] J. Vesanen, What is Personalization? A Conceptual Framework. European Journal of Marketing, 41, 5/6 (2007).
[26] D. Pierrakos, G. Paliouras, C. Papatheodorou ve C. Spyropoulos, Web Usage Mining as a Tool for Personalization: A Survey. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 13, 4, 311-372 (2003).
[27] B.P.S. Murthi, S. Sarkar, The Role of the Management Sciences in Research on Personalization. Management Science, 49, 1344-1362 (2003).
[28] H.R. Varian, Differential Pricing and Efficiency. First Monday. 1, 2, August 5th 1996.
[29] H.R. Varian, “Economics of Information Technology”, Working Paper, University of California at Berkeley, 2003. Available at http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~hal/Papers/mattioli/mattioli.pdf, 15 Haziran 2009.
[30] A. Bardakci, Kitlesel Bireyselleştirme Uygulama Yöntemleri. Akdeniz Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 8, 1–17 (2004).
[31] L. Spiller, M. Baier, Contemporary Direct and Interactive Marketing, 2nd edt., Pearson Prentice Hall, London, 2010, s.50.
İ. Kaya, A. Sağkaya Güngör /İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi 41, 2, (2012) 172-188 © 2012
188
[32] I. Simonson, Determinants of Customer Responses to Customized Offers: Conceptual Framework and Research Propositions. Journal of Marketing, 69, 32-45 (2005).
[33] E. Çelebi, Kriz, Mağazaları İnternete Taşıyor, Alışveriş 700 Milyon Dolara Koşuyor. Hürriyet, 16 Şubat 2009.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com