Journal Search Engine
Search Advanced Search Adode Reader(link)
Download PDF Export Citaion korean bibliography PMC previewer
ISSN : 2233-4165(Print)
ISSN : 2233-5382(Online)
Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business Vol.10 No.3 pp.35-44
DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.13106/ijidb.2019.vol10.no3.35.

The Impact of Cause Diversity and Fit on Purchase Intention According to Choice of Cause

Xiangdong Shen**,Byungryul Bae***
* This study was revised and supplemented paper published at winter conference of IFBC 2019. ** First Author, Doctoral Candidate of Marketing, Dept. of Business Administration, Chonbuk National University, Republic of Korea. E-mail: shen_0301@naver.com
*** Corresponding Author, Professor, Dept. of Business Administration, Chonbuk National University, Republic of Korea. Tel: +82-63-270-3044, E-mail: bbr@jbnu.ac.kr
January 15, 2019. January 31, 2019. February 05, 2019.

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this study is to empirically investigate the effect of choice of cause on the purchase intention by dividing it into the situation selected by the consumer and the company. This study also examines the moderating effect of cause options diversity and company-cause fit on the relationship between choice of cause and purchase intention. This will provide the theoretical information necessary to gain an in-depth understanding of the consumer's intention to purchase the cause-related marketing campaign, and in practice, it is expected that companies will be able to obtain useful information for effective planning and execution of the cause-related marketing campaign.
Research design, date, and methodology - This study's survey was carried out on the college students of university located in Shandong, China. It was from November 4-11, 2018, and a total of 440 questionnaires were distributed, with 424 collected. Of them, effective questionnaires used in the final study were a total of 400 except 24 that couldn't be used. In this study, empirical analysis was done with frequency analysis, reliability analysis, analysis of variance and simple effect analysis by using Statistics Package SPSS 20.0.
Results - The results are reported below: first of all, in the cause-related campaign consumers are more willing to buy the products when they are allowed to choice the focal cause of charity than when the company selects the cause of charity. Furthermore, the positive effect of allowing consumers to choice the cause of charity (vs. company choice) on purchase intentions is greater for high cause diversity to select. Finally, the positive effect of allowing consumers to choice the cause of charity (vs. company choice) on purchase intentions is greater when perceived fit between the company and the cause charity is low.
Conclusions - This study extends the scope of the consumer perspective from consumer purchase intention research to the choice of cause in the cause-related marketing. When consumers select the cause, it would be better to provide the cause charity in diversifying selection and provide options for low fit between company and cause charity.

JEL Classifications: L81, M12, M30

공익 선택에 따라 공익 다양성과 적합성이 구매의도에 미치는 영향

심향동,배병렬

초록


    Figure

    Table

    Reference

    1. Alcañiz, E. B., Cáceres, R. C., & Pérez, R. C. (2010). Alliances Between Brands and Social Causes: The Influence of Company Credibility on Social Responsibility Image. Journal of Business Ethics, 96(2), 169-186.
    2. Barone, M. J., Miyazaki, A. D., & Taylor, K. A. (2000). The influence of Cause-Related Marketing on Consumer Choice: Does One Good Turn Deserve Another?. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 248-262.
    3. Becker-Olsen, K. L., Cudmore, B. A., & Hill, R. P. (2005). The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research, 59(1), 2006.
    4. Berglind, M., & Nakata, C. (2005). Cause-related Marketing: More buck than bang?. Business Horizons, 48(5), 443-453.
    5. Botti, S., & McGill, A. L. (2006). When Choosing Is Not Deciding: The Effect of Perceived Responsibility on Satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 33 (September), 211-219.
    6. Brehm, J. W. (l956). Post decision Changes in the Desirability of Alternatives. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52, 384-389.
    7. Brown, T. J., & Peter, A. D. (1997). The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses. Journal of Marketing, 61(1), 1-19.
    8. Carmon, Z., Wertenbroch, K., & Zeelenberg, M. (2003). Option Attachment: When Deliberating Makes Choosing Feel like Losing. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(1), 15-29.
    9. Chernev, A. (2003). When More Is Less and Less Is More: The Role of Ideal Point Availability and Assortment in Consumer Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(September), 170-183.
    10. Cone Communication (2013). Research Report 2013 Cone Communications Social Impact Study. Retrieved October 1, 2010 from http://www.conecomm.com/2013 -social-impact
    11. Cone LLC (2010). Cause Marketing Remains Strong: 2010 Cone Cause Evolution Study. Retrieved September 15, 2010 from http://www.conecomm.com/ news-blog/2010-cone-cause-evolution-study-release
    12. Cumming, G. & Finch, S. (2005). Inference by Eye: Confidence Intervals and How to Read Pictures of Data. American Psychologist, 60(2), 170-180.
    13. Dean, D. H. (2004). Consumer Perception of Corporate Donation: Effects of Company Reputation for Social Responsibility and Type of Donation. Journal of Advertising, 32(4), 91–102.
    14. Dhar, R. (1997). Consumer Preference for a No-Choice Option. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(September), 215-231.
    15. Drumwright, M. E. (1996). Company Advertising with a Social Dimension: The Role of Noneconomic Criteria. Journal of Marketing, 60, 71-87.
    16. Grau, S. L., & Folse, J. A. G. (2007). Cause-related marketing (CRM): The influence of donation proximity and message-framing cues on the less-involved consumer. Journal of Advertising, 36(4), 19-33.
    17. Gurin, M. G. (1987). Cause-Related Marketing in Question. Advertising Age, 58, S-16.
    18. Hoeffler, S., & Keller, K. L. (2002). Building brand equity through corporate societal Marketing. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 21(1), 78-89.
    19. Jang, J. M., & Lee, E. Y. (2016). The Effects of Customer Participation in CSR(Corporate Social Responsibility) Process on Customers' Response. Journal of Distribution Science, 14(3), 45-54.
    20. Jung, Y. S., & Kang, S. A. (2016). The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Corporate Activity. Journal of Distribution Science, 14(12), 31-41.
    21. Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When Choice Is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (December), 995–1006.
    22. Lafferty, B. A., Goldsmith, R. E., & Hult, G. T. M. (2004). The impact of the alliance on the partners: A look at cause-brand alliances. Psychology & Marketing, 21(7), 509-531.
    23. Lee, D. G., & Lee, M. J. (2014). The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility on Corporate Image and Corporate Performance. Journal of Distribution Science, 12(9), 101-112.
    24. Lichtenstein, D. R., Drumwright, M. E., & Braig, B. M. (2004). The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Customer Donations to Corporate-Supported Nonprofits. Journal of Marketing, 68(4), 16-32.
    25. Nan, X. L., & Heo, K. (2007). Consumer Responses to Corporate Social Responsibility(CSR) Initiatives: Examining The Role of Brand-Cause Fit in Cause- Related Marketing. Journal of Advertising, 36(2), 63-74.
    26. Nowak, L. I., & Clarke, T. K. (2008). Cause-Related Marketing: Keys to Successful Relationships with Corporate Sponsors and Their Customers. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 11(1), 2003.
    27. Patel, J. D., Gadhavi, D. D., & Shukla, Y. S. (2017). Consumers’ responses to cause related marketing: Moderating influence of cause involvement and skepticism on attitude and purchase intention. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, 14(1), 1-18.
    28. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Eric J. Johnson, E. J. (1993), The Adaptive Decision Maker, New York: Cambridge University Press.
    29. Pracejus, J. W., & Olsen, G. D. (2004). The Role of Brand/Cause Fitin The Effectiveness of Cause-related and Marketing Campaigns. Journal of Business Research, 57(6), 635-640.
    30. Robinson, S. R., Irmak, C., & Jayachandran, S. (2012). Choice of Cause in Cause-Related Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 78(July), 126-139.
    31. Rifon, N. J., Choi, S. M., Trimble, C. S., & Li, H. (2004). Congruence Effects in Sponsorship: The Mediating Role of Sponsor Credibility and Consumer Attributions of Sponsor Motive. Journal of Advertising, 33(1), 29-42.
    32. Simmons, C. J., & Becker-Olsen, K. L. (2006). Achieving Marketing Objectives Through Social Sponsorships. Journal of Marketing, 70(4), 154-169.
    33. Steckel, R., Simons, J., Tanen, N., & Simons, R. (1999). Making Money While Making a Difference: How to Profit with a Nonprofit Partner. IL: High Tide Press.
    34. Till, B. D., & Nowak, L, I. (2000). Toward effective use of cause‐related marketing alliances. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 9(7), 472-484.
    35. Vaidyanathan, R., & Aggarwal, P. (2005). Using Commitments to Drive Consistency: Enhancing the Effectiveness of Cause-related Marketing Communications. Journal of Marketing Communication, 11(4), 231-246.
    36. Varadarajan, P. R., & Menon, A. (1988). Cause-Related Marketing: A Coalignment of Marketing Strategy and Corporate Philanthropy. Journal of Marketing, 52(July), 58-74.
    37. Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (1998). A typology of Consumer responses to cause-related marketing: From skeptics to socially concerned. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 17(2), 226-238.
    38. Wortman, C. B. (1975). Some Determinants of Perceived Control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(February), 282-294.