Influence of Promotional Formats On Online Consumer Purchase Intention

International Journal of Innovation in the Digital Economy
Volume 13 • Issue 1
Influence of Promotional Formats on

Online Consumer Purchase Intention
Yi-Fen Chen, Department of International Business, College of Business, Chung Yuan Christian University, Taiwan
Ching-Hsiu Chen, Department of International Business, College of Business, Chung Yuan Christian University, Taiwan
Jing-Sian Lai, Ph. D. Program in Business, College of Business, Chung Yuan Christian University, Taiwan*
ABSTRACT
With the rising popularity of online shopping, scholars have investigated how different promotional
formats motivates online purchasing intention and decisions. This study adopts the extant literature
to investigate the effects of consumer value perceptions, product type, and brand familiarity on online
purchasing intention through two experimental designs. Experiment I manipulates 2 (promotional
formats: bonus pack/price discount) × 2 (consumer value perceptions: utilitarian value/hedonic
value). Experiment II manipulates 2 (promotional formats: bonus pack/price discount) × 2 (product
type: search product/experience product). Experiment III manipulates the influence of 2 (promotional
formats: bonus pack/price discount) × 2 (brand familiarity: high/low) on the purchasing intention.
This study found that utilitarian consumer prefers price discounts, while hedonic consumer prefers
a bonus pack. Further, the search for products with price discounts increases the purchase intention.
This study offers promotion strategies for firms to stimulate online consumer purchase intention.
Keywords
Brand Familiarity, Consumer Value Perceptions, Product Type, Promotional Formats, Purchase Intention
1. INTRODUCTION
Customers are sensitive to the driving force of the product’s price when deciding where to buy a
product (Büyükdağ, Soysal and Ki̇tapc, 2020). Retailers frequently conduct freebie and price discount
promotions to attract consumers and increase revenue in the short term (Liu and Chou, 2020). Sales
promotions are recognised for their effectiveness in increasing sales volume within a short time
period (Santini, Ladeira, Sampaio and Boeira, 2020). Businesses use different promotional formats
to stimulate online consumer purchase intentions; these formats include bonus packs, price discounts,
buy-one-get-one-free, and freebies. The most common promotional formats are bonus packs and
price discounts (Chen, Marmorstein, Tsiros and Rao, 2012). Campbell and Diamond (1990) divided
promotions into two categories: monetary and non-monetary. While both provide the same value to the
consumer, they may differ with regard to purchase decisions (Chandon, Wansink and Laurent, 2000).
Different consumer value perceptions influence different promotional formats. Thus, consumer
value perceptions are characterised by either their hedonic or utilitarian values. The hedonic consumer
DOI: 10.4018/IJIDE.292495 *Corresponding Author

Copyright © 2022, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

1
values the entertainment and emotional experience of consuming, whereas the utilitarian consumer is
rational, task-oriented, functional, and cognitive during online shopping (Babin, Darden and Griffin,
1994). The use of price discounts and bonus packs is widespread in marketing. Promotional formats
that reflect individual product types could motivate online consumer purchase decision-making.
Retail promotion strategies have become an increasingly prominent topic of research (Dunković
and Antonia, 2017). Liu and Chou (2020) discussed the effect of item complementarity in freebie
promotions on value discounting; Büyükdağ, Soysal and Ki̇tapc (2020) discussed the effect of discount
pattern in terms of price promotions on perceived price attractiveness and purchase intention, Ding
and Zhang (2020) showed the effect of gift vouchers versus direct gifts in conditional promotions
Today, technology and ease of living have made online shopping the primary channel of purchase,
which, in turn, has rapidly developed numerous e-commerce platforms. Institute for Information
Industry (2018) reported that 64.9% of Taiwanese netizens shop online using smartphones or tablets.
Thus, businesses must understand what kind of promotional formats, consumer value perceptions,
product types, and brand familiarity can emerge from highly competitive environments. This is a
major issue for enterprises.
Which promotional format would consumers prefer, given high and low brand familiarity? Keller
(1993) found that there is a positive correlation between brand familiarity and consumer purchase
intention; that is, consumers are more interested in high brand familiarity. Moreover, Lee and Yi (2019)
showed that brand familiarity (familiar and unfamiliar) regulates the promotion framework. In other
words, framing the same information in different ways may have a significant impact on customers’
perceived savings, perceptions of product quality, and purchase intentions (Zhao, Sun and Xiao, 2016).
This study extends prior research on promotional formats by using an experimental design. In
this study, we explore the impact of consumer value perceptions, product types, and brand familiarity
on purchase decisions by manipulating promotional formats such as bonus packs and price discounts.
This study thus ascertains what kind of promotional formats stimulate online consumer purchase
intention. Our work could be useful for businesses to develop sound promotional strategies to stimulate
consumer purchase intention.
The purpose of this study is as follows: (1) Exploring whether promotional formats affect online
consumer purchase intention. (2) Exploring whether consumer value perceptions interfere with
promotional formats and online consumer purchase intention. (3) Exploring whether product types
interfere with promotional formats and online consumer purchase intention. (4) Exploring whether
brand familiarity interferes with promotional formats and online consumer purchase intention.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES
2.1. Promotional Formats

Firms often implement new promotion strategies by adopting different promotional formats to stimulate
consumers to buy their products. Price discounts are more widely used than bonus packs (Mazumdar
and Jun, 1993). According to Campbell and Diamond (1990), promotional formats are divided into
monetary promotions, such as price cuts or discount tickets, and non-monetary promotions, such as
freebies and bonus packs. Chandon, Wansink and Laurent (2000) contended that although the values
of monetary and non-monetary promotions are the same, they could influence online consumer
purchase intention. Monetary promotions mainly provide money-saving benefits, while non-monetary
promotions provide hedonic benefits to the incentive-oriented consumer, without focussing on the
comparison between products’ prices. The price discount will influence the attractiveness of the
product (Lehtimäki, Monroe and Somervuori, 2019). Gupta and Cooper (1992) defined this perceived
discount as ‘the expected savings from a consumer’s internal reference price’. Therefore, the consumer
will be stimulated by the price discount through perceived savings in their purchase decision-making.
2
Moreover, Foubert, Breugelmans, Gedenk and Rolef (2018) found that when a firm equivalently
provides premium and price-cut promotions, the consumer would prefer price cuts, leading to greater
purchase intention. Based on non-monetary promotions, this study used ‘bonus packs’ to investigate
online consumer behaviour.
2.2. Purchase Intention

Purchase intention is the possibility of a consumer’s willingness to purchase a product (Dodds,
Monroe and Grewal, 1991). Zeithaml (1988) stated that the consumer’s perceived risk could stimulate
purchase intention, and thus the consumer decides the benefit and value from perception. Previous
studies found that perceived value has a significant influence on purchase intention (Chen and Cheng,
2019). Online consumer purchase intention is mainly affected by the impact of a purchased product’s
perceived risk (Bettman, 1973).
Furthermore, advertisement information could affect online consumer purchase intention,
indicating consumers’ evaluation of purchasing an advertised product (Shen, Chi and Chen, 2007).
Online consumer purchase intention is an important predictive factor in online shopping (Pavlou,
2006). Zeithaml (1988) used perceived value to evaluate purchase intention, which was widely applied
in other studies. Based on the above arguments, this study proposes the following hypotheses.
H1: Price discounts will increase online consumer purchase intention more than bonus packs.
2.3. Consumer Value Perceptions

Consumer value can help us understand consumer purchase behaviour (Chen, Lai and Fang, 2020).
Consumers evaluate their experience based on utilitarian and hedonic values (Ryu, Han and Jang,
2010). These values can help us understand consumer purchase behaviour. Babin, Darden and
Griffin (1994) defined hedonic value as entertainment and emotional experience value as not benefit
orientation, while they defined utilitarian value as rational, work functional, and perception evaluation.
Lan and Huang (2018) studied whether the hedonic or utilitarian value has a positive influence on
consumer behaviour.
Hirschman (1983) concluded that when a hedonic consumer is shopping, a firm should consider
satisfying their objectivity and subjective demands. For instance, utilitarian consumers are more likely
to consider the reality of a situation. Chandon, Wansink and Laurent (2000) believed that monetary
and non-monetary promotions enable consumers to have different levels of utilitarian and hedonic
benefits. Monetary promotion is cost-saving- and convenience-oriented, whereas non-monetary
promotion provides hedonic benefits. Thus, this study suggests that the utilitarian consumer prefers
a price discount, while the hedonic consumer prefers a bonus pack.
H2a: Under a bonus pack promotion, consumers with hedonic value perceptions have higher purchase
intention than consumers with utilitarian value perceptions.
H2b: Under a price discount promotion, consumers with utilitarian value perceptions have higher
purchase intention than consumers with hedonic value perceptions.
2.4 Product Type

Product attributes are classified into search and experience products based on the evaluation of a
product’s quality (Nelson, 1970). Before purchasing a product, the consumer can understand its
attributes and gain product information without any experience. These types of products are called
search products, and they include glasses, fresh-meal containers, and tissues. On the other hand, if a
product’s quality information can only be gained after the consumer’s use, it is called an experience
product; these include perfumes and reed diffusers.
3
Prior research investigated online search and experience products based on consumer behaviour
(Wan, Nakayama and Sutcliffe, 2012; Huang, Lurie and Mitra, 2009). In the discussion on consumer
value perceptions, Babin, Darden and Griffin (1994) suggested that the hedonic consumer values
entertainment and emotional experience when shopping, whereas the utilitarian consumer would
consider a more realistic situation (Hirschman, 1983). Chandon, Wansink and Laurent (2000)
suggested that monetary promotion provides money-saving and functional convenience benefits,
while non-monetary promotion upgrades the consumer’s shopping value into a hedonism benefit.
Nelson (1970) noted that search products allow easier access to quality information before purchase
decisions are made, compared with experience products.
In summary, this study supposes that the utilitarian consumer prefers to search for products to
satisfy his or her demand for product information, and thus a price discount could help him or her save
money. On the other hand, the hedonic consumer would prefer an experience product to increase his
or her entertainment and emotional experience value. Here, a bonus pack would provide him or her
with a hedonic benefit. Therefore, this study proposes that consumers who purchase search products
prefer a price discount, while those who purchase experience products prefer a bonus pack.
H3a: Under a bonus pack promotion, experience products will increase purchase intention compared
with search products.
H3b: Under a price discount promotion, search products will increase purchase intention compared
with experience products.
2.5. Brand Familiarity

A brand’s name provides product quality information (Alba and Hutchinson, 1987). In their
study, a brand is said to represent the quality of its product itself, and thus brand familiarity
indicates the consumer’s experience with the brand’s products directly or indirectly. Thus,
brand familiarity denotes prior experience and brand exposure (Sundaram and Webster,
1999). When brand familiarity is higher, the consumer’s brand knowledge structure is based
on greater confidence in terms of product evaluation (Hardesty, Carlson and Bearden, 2002).
Nevertheless, Keller (1993) suggested that brand familiarity positively correlates with online
consumer purchase intention; that is, consumers have higher purchase intention when brand
familiarity is high. Brand familiarity-familiar and non-familiar-could then regulate promotion
framing (Lee and Yi, 2019).
All purchase decisions involve risk, and hence consumer purchase intention is often
affected by the perceived risk of a desire to purchase (Bettman, 1973). This risk is characterised
by unpleasant emotions arising from an unexpected and uncertain product purchase (Bauer,
1960). Dowling and Staelin (1994) stated that, in perceived risk, consumers are anxious about
uncertain and unfavourable results arising from their shopping experience. However, high
brand familiarity could reduce the negative impact of advertisement-based reality perception
(Yang and Hsu, 2018).
In summary, consumers with high brand familiarity will exhibit higher purchase intention when
the perceived risk is low. Given any information uncertainty, the perceived risk will then increase.
To avoid products with high perceived risk, consumers prefer price discounts, whereas they prefer
bonus packs for products with low perceived risk (Lin and Shen, 2012).
H4a: Under a bonus pack promotion, high brand familiarity will increase purchase intention compared
with low brand familiarity.
H4b: Under a price discount promotion, low brand familiarity will increase purchase intention
compared with high brand familiarity.
4
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1. Research Framework

This study used an experimental design to investigate the impact of promotional formats on online
consumer purchase intention. This study also investigated whether consumer value perceptions
(utilitarian value/hedonic value), product type (experience product/search product), and brand
familiarity (high/low) have interaction effects on promotional formats (price discount/bonus pack).
Research framework is shown in figure 1.
3.2. Experimental Design

This study used experimental design methods to explore how promotional formats influence the
purchase intentions of online consumers through three experiments. Experimental design methods
require a design in which independent variables are manipulated in relatively controlled environments
and dependent variables are controlled (Büyükdağ, Soysal and Ki̇tapc, 2020). As a result, the
relationship can be measured as a result of the effect of manipulations (Büyükdağ, Soysal and Ki̇tapc,
2020; Malhotra and Birks, 2006). ExperimentImanipulates promotion formats (price discount/bonus
pack) and consumer value perceptions (utilitarian value/hedonic value), as represented in figure 2.
Figure 1. Research Framework
Figure 2. Experiment I
5
ExperimentIImanipulates promotional formats (price discount/bonus pack) and product types (search
product/experience product) and influences purchasing intention, as presented in figure 3. Experiment
III manipulates promotional formats (price discount/bonus pack) and brand familiarity (high/low)
and influences purchasing intention, as presented in figure 4.
3.3. Sample
Data were collected via surveys using Google Forms. To increase the motivation of the
participants, respondents received 7-11 coupons (worth NT$ 100) through a random selection
of ten participants’ emails.
Each participant was randomly assigned to one of 12 experimental scenarios. The respondents
were expected to have an online shopping experience; each participant was offered only one group
of experimental scenarios. Thus, 482 respondents’ answers were collected.
Table 1 reported the demographic statistics of the respondents, including gender, age, education,
occupation, and monthly income. Of all respondents, 66% were female, 53.9% were between the
ages of 19 to 25 years, 75.7% were university- and college-educated, and 55.4% were students. All
respondents in the online shopping experience had an online shopping experience.
3.4. Experiment Procedure

The study used two experimental designs and an investigation using an online questionnaire. The
experiments helped us understand the influence of different promotional formats on online consumer
purchase intentions. In Experiment I, consumer value perceptions are the interference variables, in
Figure 3. Experiment II
Figure 4. Experiment III
6
Table 1. Demographic statistics of participants
Frequency Percentage (%)

Gender
Male 164 34
Female 318 66
Age
18 and below 58 12
19 to 25 260 53.9
26 to 30 26 5.4
31 to 35 18 3.7
36 and above 120 24.9
Education
Junior high school and below 4 0.8
Senior high school 59 12.2
University and college 365 75.7
Postgraduate 54 11.2
Occupation
Student 267 55.4
Service industry 69 14.3
Commercial / Financial industry 42 8.7
Public employees 22 4.6
Information technology 11 2.3
Other 71 14.7
Monthly Disposable Income
NT$ 5,000 and below 99 20.5
NT$ 5,001 to NT$ 10,000 177 36.7
NT$ 10,001 to NT$ 20,000 71 14.7
NT$ 20,001 to NT$ 30,000 48 10
NT$ 30,001 and above 14 2.9
Experience of Online Shopping
Less than one year 29 6
One to three years 109 22.6
Three to five years 155 32.2
Five to seven years 88 18.3
More than seven years 101 21
Experiment II, product types are the interference variables, and in Experiment III, brand familiarity
is the interference variable. There are 12 groups of experimental scenarios: Experiment I has four
groups and Experiment III have eight groups. The participants were randomly distributed across the
12 scenarios, and each participant could only see one scenario.
7
The experimental design has three parts. First, this study asked participants about their basic
information: gender, age, education, occupation, and monthly disposable income. Second, to
understand their online shopping experiences, this study asked six questions. If the participants had
no online shopping experience, the answer was concluded thereafter. After presenting an online
shopping scenario, participants measured their purchase intentions for a product. This study used a
five-point Likert scale (“strongly disagree” =1 to “strongly agree” =5). Third, this study simulated
an online shopping scenario.
In Experiment I, participants were shown a reed diffuser with a price discount of 33% off and
a get-50%-more-free bonus pack. To confirm whether consumer value perception was successfully
manipulated, this study determined whether the participant was affected by the promotional message.
Experiment II and III used a price discount of 33% off and a get-50%-more-free bonus pack. The
experience product was a reed diffuser, while the search product was tissues. The reed diffuser came
in two brands: Cocodor (high brand familiarity) and I Ching (low brand familiarity). Similarly, for
tissues, Kleenex had high brand familiarity and P-LIFE had low brand familiarity. To confirm whether
brand familiarity was successfully manipulated, this study determined whether the participant was
affected by brand familiarity. Further, to ensure that the product type was successfully manipulated,
this study performed a pretest. In the pretest result, the search product was tissues (M=3.56, t=13.387,
p=0.000) and the experience product was the reed diffuser (M=4.17, t=18.937, p=0.000).
3.5. Manipulation Checks

To ensure that the product type was successfully manipulated, the pretest used five-point Likert
scales (“strongly disagree” =1 to “strongly agree” =5) as a rating scale for 36 participants. Thus,
the manipulation check result for the search product (M tissue=3.56, t=13.387) and the experience
product (M reed diffuser =4.17, t=18.937). To ensure that the promotional formats of the product price
were successfully manipulated, 36 participants chose the price level. According to the results, the
price level of a string interfold tissue was NT$101 to NT$150. The price level of a reed diffuser was
NT$101 to NT$200.
3.6. Measurement
Purchase intention is the measure of consumers’ online shopping. Table 2 provides measurement items
for brand familiarity (Alba and Hutchinson, 1987). Table 3 reports the measurement items for measuring
purchase intention (Dodds, Monroe, and Grewal, 1991; Zeithaml, 1988). Similarly, Table 4 reports the
Table 2. Measurement items of brand familiarity
Construct Measurement Item Reference

1. I have seen the advertising of this product.
Alba and
2. I have heard people talking about this product.
Brand Familiarity Hutchinson
3. I know this product.
(1987)
4. I have friends who have bought this product.
Table 3. Measurement items of purchase intention

1. I will consider this product.
Dodds et al.
2. I am probably buying this product.
Purchase Intention (1991); Zeithaml
3. Overall, I have high willingness to buying this product.
(1988)
4. I will recommend this product to my friends and family.
8
Table 4. Measurement items of consumer value perceptions

1. The website promotional information improves my performance in
evaluating the product during shopping.
2. I find the website promotional information to be useful for shopping.
Childers et al.
3. The website promotional information enhances my effectiveness in
Utilitarian Value (2001);
shopping.
Han et al. (2018)
4. The website promotional information offer good value for the price.
5. The website promotional information provide a good deal.
6. The website promotional information provide good benefits that I enjoy.
1. The shopping experience with the website promotional information
is not boring.
2. The shopping experience with the website promotional information
is exciting. Babin et al.
3. The shopping experience with the website promotional information (1994);
Hedonic Value
is enjoyable. Childers et al.
4. I place a greater importance to website promotional information. (2001)
5. Website promotional information create happiness and encourages
me to shop.
6. Website promotional information is a good way to find out what is new.
Table 5. Measurement result of brand familiarity
Construct Measurement Item Mean Std. Dev Cronbach’s α

1. I have seen the advertising of this
2.73 1.376
product.
2. I have heard people talking about
2.39 1.233
Brand Familiarity this product. 0.912
3. I know this product. 2.86 1.435
4. I have friends who have bought this
2.54 1.353
product.
Note: Std. Dev: Standard Deviation
Table 6. Measurement result of purchase intention

1. I will consider this product. 3.93 0.971
2. I am probably buying this product. 3.82 0.979
Purchase Intention 3. Overall, I have high willingness to 0.831

3.17 1.101
buying this product.
4. I will recommend this product to my
3.98 0.945
friends and family.
9
measurement items for consumer value perception (Babin, Darden and Griffin, 1994; Childers, Carr,
Peck and Carson, 2001; Han, Lee, Trang and Kim, 2018).
4. RESULTS
This study used SPSS 22.0 software for data analysis. The measurement results for brand familiarity
have four measurement items (Table 5), and the results for purchase intention also have four
measurement items (Table 6). Finally, the results for consumer value perceptions have 12 measurement
items (Table 7).
The Cronbach’s α coefficient of brand familiarity is 0.912, that of purchase intention is 0.831,
and that of consumer value perceptions is 0.901 for utilitarian value and 0.828 for hedonic value.
4.1. Experiment 1
This study used an analysis of variance (ANOVA) to test the variable hypotheses, along with its
main and interaction effects. Table 8 reports the interaction effect between promotional formats
and consumer value perceptions in Experiment I. Results indicate that promotional formats have
a significant influence on purchase intention (F = 9.646, p < 0.01), indicating interaction effects
between promotional formats and consumer value perceptions (F = 14.620, p < 0.001).
Table 7. Measurement result of consumer value perceptions

1. The website promotional information
improves my performance in evaluating the 3.88 0.967
product during shopping.
2. I find the website promotional information
3.76 0.996
to be useful for shopping.
3.56 1.135
Utilitarian Value enhances my effectiveness in shopping. 0.901
4. The website promotional information offer
3.63 1.033
good value for the price.
3.91 0.928
provide a good deal.
3.60 0.998
provide good benefits that I enjoy.
7. The shopping experience with the website
3.64 0.926
promotional information is not boring.
3.71 0.924
promotional information is exciting.
3.77 0.823
Hedonic promotional information is enjoyable.
0.828
Value 10. I place a greater importance to website
3.69 0.834
promotional information.
11. Website promotional information create
3.65 0.947
happiness and encourages me to shop.
12. Website promotional information is a good
3.80 0.812
way to find out what is new.
10
Table 8. Analysis results of experiment I
Dependent Variable Independent Variable df MS F-value p-value

Promotional formats 1 7.965 9.646** 0.002
Consumer value perceptions 1 0.100 0.125 0.724
Purchase Intention
Promotional formats × Consumer value
1 11.663 14.620*** 0.000
perceptions
Note: df is degree of freedom; MS is Mean square; * is significant at 5% critical level; ** is significant at 1% critical level; *** is significant at 0.1% critical level.
Table 9 and Figure 5 support consumers who are exposed to a price discount, which leads to higher
purchase intention compared with consumers who are exposed to a bonus pack in online shopping
(M price discount = 3.8866 > M bonus pack = 3.5197, F = 6.874, p = 0.010). Therefore, H1 is supported.
Table 10 and Figure 6 support consumers who are exposed to hedonic value, which leads to
higher purchase intention compared with consumers who are exposed to utilitarian value in online
shopping when using a bonus pack (M hedonic value = 3.7813 > M utilitarian value = 3.2134, F = 7.190, p =
0.009). Therefore, H2a is supported.
Table 11 and Figure 6 support consumers who are exposed to utilitarian value, which leads to
higher purchase intention compared with consumers who are exposed to hedonic value in online
shopping when using a price discount (M utilitarian value = 4.1554 > M hedonic value = 3.6837, F = 7.859, p
= 0.006). Therefore, H2b is supported.
Table 9. Purchase intention of promotional formats
Group 1 & 2 Group 3 & 4

Promotional Formats Price Discount Bonus Pack
(n=86) (n=89)
Mean 3.8866 3.5197
Standard Deviation 0.80317 1.03024
F (1,173) = 6.874**, p = 0.01
Note:* is significant at 5% critical level; ** is significant at 1% critical level; *** is significant at 0.1% critical level
Figure 5. Purchase intention of promotional formats
11
Table 10. The interaction effects between bonus pack and consumer value perceptions
Group 3 Group 4
Bonus Pack Utilitarian Value Hedonic Value
(n=41) (n=48)
Mean 3.2134 3.7813
F (1,87) = 7.190**, p = 0.009
Note:* is significant at 5% critical level; ** is significant at 1% critical level; *** is significant at 0.1% critical level.
Figure 6. The interaction effects between promotional formats and consumer value perceptions on purchase intention
Table 11. The interaction effects between price discount and consumer value perceptions
Group 1 Group 2
Price Discount Utilitarian Value Hedonic Value
(n=37) (n=49)
Mean 4.1554 3.6837
F (1,84) = 7.859**, p = 0.006
4.2. Experiment 2
Table 12 reports the interaction effect between promotional formats and product type. Results
indicate that promotional formats have a significant influence on purchase intention (F =
6.132, p < 0.05), indicating the interaction effects between promotional formats and product
type (F = 19.089, p < 0.001).
Table 13 and Figure 7 report results for using bonus packs: the product type has no significant
impact on purchase intention (M experience products = 3.6920 > M search products = 3.6171, F = 0.354, p =
0.553). Therefore, H3a is not supported.
12
Table 12. Analysis results of experiment II

Promotional formats 1 2.988 6.132* 0.014
Purchase Intention Product type 1 5.738 11.777** 0.001
Promotional formats × Product type 1 9.301 19.089*** 0.000
Note: df is degree of freedom; MS is Mean square; * is significant at 5% critical level; ** is significant at 1% critical level; *** is significant at 0.1% critical
level.
Table 13. The interaction effects between bonus pack and product type
Group 9 & 10 Group 11 & 12

Bonus Pack Experience Products Search Products
(n=69) (n=79)
Mean 3.6920 3.6171
F (1,146) = 0.354, p = 0.553
Figure 7. The interaction effects between promotional formats and product type
Table 14 and Figure 7 support consumers who are exposed to search products, which leads to
higher purchase intention than consumers who are exposed to experience products in online shopping
when using a price discount (M search products = 3.9737 > M experience products = 3.4556, F = 19.720, p =
0.000). Therefore, H3b is supported.
4.3. Experiment 3
Table 15 reports the interaction effect between promotional formats and brand familiarity. Results
indicate that promotional formats have a significant influence on purchase intention (F = 4.281, p
< 0.05), indicating the interaction effects between promotional formats and brand familiarity (F =
0.009, p < 0.05).
13
Table 14. The interaction effects between price discount and product type

Price Discount Experience Products Search Products
(n=86) (n=73)
Mean 3.4556 3.9737
F (1,157) = 19.720***,
p = 0.000
Table 15. Analysis results of experiment III

Promotional formats 1 2.274 4.281* 0.039
Brand familiarity 1 2.262 4.259* 0.04
Purchase Intention
Promotional formats × Brand
1 0.005 0.009 0.924
familiarity
Note: df is degree of freedom; MS is Mean square; * is significant at 5% critical level; ** is significant at 1% critical level; *** is significant at 0.1% critical
level.
Table 16 and Figure 8 report results for using bonus packs: high brand familiarity has no significant
impact on purchase intention (M low brand familiarity = 3.7432 > M high brand familiarity = 3.5633, F = 2.070, p =
0.152). Therefore, H4a is not supported.
Table 17 and Figure 8 report results for price discounts: low brand familiarity has no significant
impact on purchase intention (M high brand familiarity = 3.7436 < M low brand familiarity = 3.9074, F = 2.187, p =
0.141). Therefore, H4b is not supported.
5. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATION
This chapter discusses this study’s findings, conclusion, and the managerial implications of the
findings. This study also presents the limitations and opportunities for future research.
5.1. Discussion
Pricing is one of the most important marketing tools that can direct consumers’ feelings, perceptions,
and behaviours (Büyükdağ, Soysal and Ki̇tapc, 2020). Previous research showed that customer
behaviour plays an important role in pricing decisions. (Zhao, Wang, Cao and Wu, 2021). In this age
Table 16. The interaction effects between bonus pack and brand familiarity
Group 9 & 11 Group 10 & 12

Bonus Pack High Brand Familiarity Low Brand Familiarity
(n=75) (n=73)
Mean 3.5633 3.7432
F (1,146) = 2.070, p = 0.152
14
Table 17. The interaction effects between price discount and brand familiarity

Price Discount High Brand Familiarity Low Brand Familiarity
(n=78) (n=81)
Mean 3.7436 3.9074
F(1,157) = 2.187, p = 0.141
Figure 8. The interaction effects between promotional formats and brand familiarity
of advanced networks, consumers can get substantial information about retailers and their offerings
(Farshbaf-Geranmayeh and Zaccour, 2021). As a popular promotional tool, price discounts have
been extensively employed by practitioners in both the online and offline marketplaces (Zhao, Sun
and Xiao, 2016). This study investigated the relative attractiveness of a bonus pack compared with a
price discount. It assumed that a price discount is more attractive to the consumer and thus claimed
that it will increase online consumer purchase intention.
First, this study compared price discounts and bonus packs. This study found that H1 was
supported that a price discount increases online consumer purchase intention more than a bonus
pack does. This may be due to perceived savings. Consistent results with the Gupta and Cooper
(1992) indicated that consumers using price discounts sought to stimulate perceived savings, which
influenced their purchase decisions.
Second, company should take customer behaviour (e.g., perception, habits) into consideration
(Zhao, Wang, Cao and Wu, 2021). Differences in consumer value perceptions influence online
consumer purchase intention in different promotional formats. Thus, H2a is supported; that is, the
hedonic consumer has a higher purchase intention with a bonus pack. Because such consumers focus
on the experience value, the bonus pack increases hedonic benefits. Thus, H2b is supported; that is,
the utilitarian consumer has a higher willingness to purchase with a price discount due to perceived
savings. Consistent results with the Chandon, Wansink and Laurent (2000) indicated that monetary
and non-monetary promotions can offer consumers different levels of utilitarian and hedonic benefits.
15
Consumers still face uncertainty when they purchase goods (Hsu, Yu and Chao, 2019). With
uncertain information, perceived risk increases (Lin and Shen, 2012). This study revealed that
different product types may influence different promotional formats. Thus, H3a is not supported. This
study might attribute this reason to the possibility of an experience product’s quality and uncertain
information, leading to higher perceived risk, which affects the success of a bonus pack. Thus, H3b
is supported. That is, utilitarian consumers have higher purchase intentions because search products
allow the consumer to determine product quality before purchase. Hence, price discounts enable
utilitarian consumers to generate perceived savings. Finally, high/low brand familiarity may affect
different promotional formats. Thus, H4a is not supported due to the effect of utilitarian consumers.
Such consumers are task-oriented and practical and like to save money. Thus, H4b is not supported.
That is, products with low brand familiarity may be manufactured by a new brand (hence, less
information). Utilitarian consumers would consider a more realistic situation.
5.2. Conclusion
This study applied promotional formats to online consumer purchase intention by first dividing them
into a bonus pack and a price discount. Participants were presented with two scenarios: a 33% off
price discount on a product and a ‘get 50% more free’ bonus pack. First, this study found that price
discounts and bonus packs significantly influenced online consumer purchase intention. Consumers
who got price discounts sought to stimulate perceived savings, which influenced their purchase
decisions (Gupta and Cooper, 1992). Thus, price discounts in monetary promotions, rather than bonus
packs in non-monetary promotions, will increase online consumer purchase intentions.
Second, this study explored promotional formats using consumer value perceptions. This study
revealed that consumers with hedonic value perceptions have higher purchase intentions for a bonus
pack in non-monetary promotions. Traditionally, non-monetary promotions increase hedonic values.
Consistent results with the Chandon, Wansink and Laurent (2000) noted that monetary and non-monetary
promotions can offer consumers different levels of utilitarian and hedonic benefits. Additionally, a price
discount promotion significantly influences the purchase intention of consumers with utilitarian value
perceptions Chandon, Wansink and Laurent (2000) noted that monetary promotions provide utilitarian
benefits, such as savings. This study revealed that consumers with utilitarian value perceptions have
higher purchase intentions for a price discount in monetary promotions.
Third, experience products with a bonus pack promotion does not significantly influence
online consumer purchase intention. This study revealed that such products do not significantly
affect purchase intention when there is a bonus pack. This may be because consumers perceive a
higher risk of purchasing in this case. Additionally, searching for products with a price discount
promotion significantly influence online consumer purchase intention. This study revealed that
price discounts on searching products significantly affect consumer purchase intention, possibly
due to the effect of utilitarian consumers. Such consumers make savings for price discount
promotions, and the information of the target product is easy to access and evaluate. Thus, their
purchase intention increases.
Finally, this study explored whether promotional formats affect online consumer purchase
intention through brand familiarity. This study revealed that high brand familiarity does not
significantly affect purchase intention when there is a bonus pack. This may be because
utilitarian consumers are practical and like to save money, and bonus packs do not meet
utilitarian consumers’ needs. Additionally, under a price discount promotion, low brand
familiarity does not significantly influence online consumer purchase intention. Low brand
familiarity does not significantly affect purchase intention when there is a price discount.
This may be because utilitarian consumers are practical and savings-oriented. Products with
low brand familiarity may be manufactured by a new brand (hence, less information). The
utilitarian consumer would consider a more realistic situation.
16
5.3. Research Implication

A significant amount of research on promotional formats exists, and findings indicate different
perspectives. Some scholars have found that consumers prefer bonus packs for non-monetary
promotions (Chen, Marmorstein, Tsiros and Rao, 2012; Liu and Chiu, 2012), while others have noted
that consumers prefer price discounts for monetary promotions (Foubert, Breugelmans, Gedenk and
Rolef, 2018). This study supports the latter discussion and confirms that when promotional formats are
applied to the sale of online shopping products, price discount promotions increase purchase intention.
This study focussed on promotional formats to explore consumer value perceptions in
terms of online consumer purchase intention. Our results indicate that utilitarian consumers
have higher purchase intentions for price discounts, while hedonic ones have higher purchase
intentions for bonus packs.
There is limited research that applies promotional formats to product types. This study thus
compensates for this shortcoming by exploring different promotional formats against product types
to infer purchase intentions.
5.4. Managerial Implication

This study provides important information about whether specific discount patterns in price discounts
and bonus packs are necessary for retailers and businesses and which patterns in the promotion are
more favoured by the consumer, are perceived as attractive, and affect purchase intention. First, this
study found that different promotional formats influence online consumer purchase intentions. Further,
promotional formats, consumer value perceptions, and product types also influence purchase intention.
In light of these results, this study proposes the following managerial implications for marketing. First,
company should use price discounts to increase online consumer purchase intention. Pricing is one of
the most important marketing tools that can direct consumers’ feelings, perceptions, and behaviours
(Büyükdağ, Soysal and Ki̇tapc, 2020). The present research suggests that price discounts were shown
to improve responses of less-involved consumers (Kim and Han, 2020). Furthermore, in this study,
the effect of online consumer price discounts and bonus packs on purchase intention was analysed,
and it was found that price discounts increased consumer purchase intention more than bonus packs
did. Thus, firms can use these promotions to effectively increase the purchase intention of online
shoppers. When selling products online, firms should clearly indicate the discount percentage and
amount, which would allow consumers to perceive their savings and purchases.
Second, company should use price discounts for the utilitarian consumer and bonus packs
for the hedonic consumer. Online environments include both hedonic and/or utilitarian attributes,
which provide hedonic and/or utilitarian benefits to a consumer. Consumers also evaluate a message
emotionally and/or cognitively if they perceive a review to have high-quality content (Hlee, Lee,
Yang and Koo, 2019; Lin, Lu and Wu, 2012). This study found that utilitarian consumers prefer price
discounts due to the prospects of monetary savings. Thus, firms can target utilitarian consumers using
such promotions. Since the utilitarian consumer is more practical and savings-oriented, the function
of the item should be clearly displayed on the shopping website, along with the discount percentage
and amount. Furthermore, hedonic consumers prefer bonus packs. Since hedonic consumers prioritise
experience value in their purchases, this study suggests that firms target such consumers using bonus
pack promotions. In this case, the promotion information should be displayed on the shopping website
to attract consumers with hedonic value perceptions.
Finally, company should use price discounts on searching products. The ways in which consumers
process and evaluate each type of information differ and the dominant aspects of the information
process are usefulness and enjoyment (Hlee, Lee, Yang and Koo, 2019). In the era of online
shopping, consumers still face uncertainty when purchasing goods, particularly brands that they
have not purchased previously (Hsu, Yu and Chao, 2019). This study found that searching products
significantly affect the purchase intention of utilitarian consumers when there is a price discount.
17
Since the utilitarian consumer is rational and savings-oriented, this promotion strategy is successful in
increasing the purchase intention as it could generate more perceived savings. Moreover, the quality
and information of search products are easy to access and evaluate. Thus, based on our experiments’
results, when the product is a target product, firms should use price discounts to increase online
consumer purchase intention.
6. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
First, this study chose only two products-tissues (search product) and reed diffuser (experience
product)-for our experimental design. Different products, however, may reveal different experimental
results. Therefore, more diverse products should be used in future experiments. Second, this study
focussed on the effects of promotional formats, consumer value perceptions, product types, and
brand familiarity on online consumer purchase intention. However, there are many factors that affect
purchase intention, and future studies should include a greater number of interference variables.
18
REFERENCES
Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1987). Dimensions of consumer expertise. The Journal of Consumer Research,
13(4), 411–454. doi:10.1086/209080
Andrews, D. (2016). Product information and consumer choice confidence in multi-item sales promotions.
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 28, 45–53. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.07.011
Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping
value. The Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 644–656. doi:10.1086/209376
Bauer, R. A. (1960). Consumer behavior as risk taking. Routledge.
Bettman, J. R. (1973). Perceived risk and its components: A model and empirical test. JMR, Journal of Marketing
Research, 10(2), 184–190. doi:10.1177/002224377301000209
Büyükdağ, N., Soysal, A. N., & Ki̇tapc, O. (2020). The effect of specific discount pattern in terms of price
promotions on perceived price attractiveness and purchase intention: An experimental research. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, 55, 102112. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102112
Campbell, L., & Diamond, W. (1990). Framing and sales promotions: The characteristics of a ″good deal ″.
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 7(4), 25–31. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000002586
Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency framework of sales promotion
effectiveness. Journal of Marketing, 64(4), 65–81. doi:10.1509/jmkg.64.4.65.18071
Chen, H., Marmorstein, H., Tsiros, M., & Rao, A. R. (2012). When more is less: The impact of base value
neglect on consumer preferences for bonus packs over price discounts. Journal of Marketing, 76(4), 64–77.
doi:10.1509/jm.10.0443
Chen, Y. F., & Cheng, R. C. (2019). Single discount or multiple discounts?: Effects of price promotion framing
messages on online consumer purchase intention. International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction,
15(1), 1–14. doi:10.4018/IJTHI.2019010101
Chen, Y. F., Lai, J. S., & Fang, T. T. (2020). Exploring the goal value of middle-aged and older adults travel using
means-end chain approach. Journal of Tourism and Leisure Studies (Champaign, Ill.), 26(1), 1–34. doi:10.6267/
JTLS.202004_26(1).0001
Childers, T. L., Carr, C. L., Peck, J., & Carson, S. (2001). Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for online retail
shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing, 77(4), 511–535. doi:10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00056-2
Ding, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Hiding gifts behind the veil of vouchers: On the effect of gift vouchers
versus direct gifts in conditional promotions. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 57(4), 739–754.
doi:10.1177/0022243720916753
Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’
product evaluations. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 307–319. doi:10.2307/3172866
Dowling, G. R., & Staelin, R. (1994). A model of perceived risk and intended risk-handling activity. The Journal
of Consumer Research, 21(1), 119–134. doi:10.1086/209386
Dunković, D., & Antonia, P. C. (2017). Retailer pricing strategy: diffuse coupons effects contingent on store
format. In Proceedings of the 5th Business & Management Conference (p. 44). doi:10.20472/BMC.2017.005.001
Farshbaf-Geranmayeh, A., & Zaccour, G. (2021). Pricing and advertising in a supply chain in the presence of
strategic consumers. Omega, 97, 105752. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2020.102239
Foubert, B., Breugelmans, E., Gedenk, K., & Rolef, C. (2018). Something free or something off? A comparative
study of the purchase effects of premiums and price cuts. Journal of Retailing, 94(1), 5–20. doi:10.1016/j.
jretai.2017.11.001
Gupta, S., & Cooper, L. (1992). The discounting of discounts and promotion thresholds. The Journal of Consumer
Research, 19(3), 401–411. doi:10.1086/209310
19
Han, H., Lee, J. S., Trang, H. L.-T., & Kim, W. (2018). Water conservation and waste reduction management
for increasing guest loyalty and green hotel practices. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 75,
55–66. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.03.012
Hardesty, M. D., Carlson, J. P., & Bearden, O. W. (2002). Brand familiarity and invoice price effects on consumer
evaluations: The moderating role of skepticism toward advertising. Journal of Advertising, 31(2), 1–15. doi:1
0.1080/00913367.2002.10673663
Hirschman, E. C. (1983). Predictors of self-projection, fantasy fulfillment, and escapism. The Journal of Social
Psychology, 120(1), 63–76. doi:10.1080/00224545.1983.9712011
Hlee, S., Lee, J., Yang, S. B., & Koo, C. (2019). The moderating effect of restaurant type on hedonic versus
utilitarian review evaluations. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 77, 195–206. doi:10.1016/j.
ijhm.2018.06.030
Hsu, C. L., Yu, L. C., & Chao, H. Y. (2019). How Online Beauty Brand Community users’ Experience Contributes
to their Experiential Value, Attitudes and Continuance Intention. Management Review, 38(4), 1–14. doi:10.6656/
MR.201910_38(4).CNI001
Huang, P., Lurie, N. H., & Mitra, S. (2009). Searching for experience on the web: An empirical examination
of consumer behavior for search and experience goods. Journal of Marketing, 73(2), 55–69. doi:10.1509/
jmkg.73.2.55
Institute for Information Industry. (2018). [Online shopping survey series 2] mobile online shopping penetration
rate reached 64.9%. Retrieved 5 1, 2019, from Market Intelligence & Consulting Institute: https://mic.iii.org.
tw/IndustryObservations_PressRelease02.aspx?sqno=489
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of
Marketing, 57(1), 1–22. doi:10.1177/002224299305700101
Kim, C. H., & Han, E. (2020). Premiums paid for what you believe in: The interactive roles of price promotion and
cause involvement on consumer response. Journal of Retailing, 96(2), 235–250. doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2019.10.001
Lan, S. T., & Huang, S. C. (2018). The influence of hedonic value and utilitarian value to consumer. Journal of
Tourism and Leisure Management, 6(1), 87–98. doi:10.6510/JTLM.201806_6(1).0008
Lee, S., & Yi, Y. (2019). “Retail is detail! Give consumers a gift rather than a bundle”: Promotion framing and
consumer product returns. Psychology and Marketing, 36(1), 15–27. doi:10.1002/mar.21154
Lehtimäki, A. V., Monroe, K. B., & Somervuori, O. (2019). The influence of regular price level (low, medium,
or high) and framing of discount (monetary or percentage) on perceived attractiveness of discount amount.
Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, 18(1), 76–85. doi:10.1057/s41272-018-0152-2
Lin, H. F., & Shen, F. (2012). Regulatory focus and attribute framing: Evidence of compatibility effects in
advertising. International Journal of Advertising, 31(1), 169–188. doi:10.2501/IJA-31-1-169-188
Lin, T. M., Lu, K. Y., & Wu, J. J. (2012). The effects of visual information in eWOM communication. Journal
of Research in Interactive Marketing, 6(1), 7–26. doi:10.1108/17505931211241341
Liu, H. H., & Chiu, Y. Y. (2012). Bonus pack, upgrading or price discount? The impact of promotional framing
on consumers’ cost assignments and relative preference. NTU Management Review, 23(1), 269–296. doi:10.6226/
NTURM2012.MAR.R10048
Liu, H. H., & Chou, H. Y. (2018). Promotional formats and inaction inertia. Journal of Economic Psychology,
66, 22–32. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2018.04.001
Liu, H. H., & Chou, H. Y. (2020). The impact of ltem complementarity in freebie promotions on value discounting.
Journal of Management and Business Research, 37(2), 101–128. doi:10.6504/JMBR.202006_37(2).0001
Malhotra, N. K., & Birks, D. F. (2006). Marketing Research an Applied Approach. Prentice Hall.
Mazumdar, T., & Jun, S. Y. (1993). Consumer evaluations of multiple versus single price change. The Journal
of Consumer Research, 20(3), 441–450. doi:10.1086/209360
20
Mishra, A., & Mishra, H. (2011). The influence of price discount versus bonus pack on the preference for virtue
and vice foods. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 48(1), 196–206. doi:10.1509/jmkr.48.1.196
Nelson, P. (1970). Information and consumer behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 78(2), 311–329.
doi:10.1086/259630
Pavlou, P. A., & Fygenson, . (2006). Understanding and predicting electronic commerce adoption: An
extension of the theory of planned behavior. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 30(1), 115–143.
doi:10.2307/25148720
Ryu, K., Han, H., & Jang, S. (2010). Relationships among hedonic and utilitarian values, satisfaction and
behavioral intentions in the fast-casual restaurant industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 22(3), 416–432. doi:10.1108/09596111011035981
Santini, F., Ladeira, W. J., Sampaio, C. H., & Boeira, J. P. (2020). The effects of sales promotions on mobile
banking a cross-cultural study. Journal of Promotion Management, 26(3), 350–371. doi:10.1080/10496491.2
019.1699622
Shen, Y. C., Chi, C. H., & Chen, J. S. (2007). A new perspective on the effects of price promotions in Taiwan:
A longitudinal study of a chinese society. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(4), 385–390.
doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2006.00569.x
Sundaram, D. S., & Webster, C. (1999). The role of brand familiarity on the impact of word-of-mouth
communication on brand evaluations. Advances in Consumer Research. Association for Consumer Research
(U. S.), 26(1), 664–670.
Wan, Y., Nakayama, M., & Sutcliffe, N. (2012). The impact of age and shopping experiences on the classification
of search, experience, and credence goods in online shopping. Information Systems and e-Business Management,
10(1), 135–148. doi:10.1007/s10257-010-0156-y
Yang, M. C., & Hsu, C. (2018). The influences of employees’ behavioral type on consumers’ expected service
quality, perceived advertising authenticity, and brand attitude in service advertising. The Marketing Review,
15(1), 101–132. doi:10.29931/MR
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis
of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(1), 2–22. doi:10.1177/002224298805200302
Zhao, D. Y., Sun, W. J., & Xiao, L. (2016). Amount-off or Percent-off? The influence of framing effect on
consumers’ purchase decisions for online bargains. In International Conference on Management Science and
Engineering-Annual Conference Proceedings (pp. 627-632). Academic Press.
Zhao, N. G., Wang, Q., Cao, P., & Wu, J. (2021). Pricing decisions with reference price effect and risk preference
customers. International Transactions in Operational Research, 28(4), 2081–2109. doi:10.1111/itor.12673
Yi-Fen Chen is a professor in the Department of International Business at the Chung Yuan Christian University,
Taoyuan City, Taiwan. Her research interests include Internet marketing, consumer behavior, electronic commerce,
information management, and business management. Her paper appeared in Psychology & Marketing, Computers
in Human Behavior, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
and others.
Jing-Sian Lai is a Ph. D. Candidates, Ph. D. Program in Business, College of Business, Chung Yuan Christian
University (Taiwan); Adjunct Lecturer, Department of Economics and Finance, Ming Chuan University (Taiwan). His
research interests include Internet marketing, consumer behavior, electronic commerce, information management,
and business management. His paper appeared in the Journal of Tourism and Leisure Studies, Journal of
e-Business, and others.
21

Influence of Promotional Formats On Online Consumer Purchase Intention

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Influence of Promotional Formats On Online Consumer Purchase Intention

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Innovation in the Digital Economy

Influence of Promotional Formats on

DOI: 10.4018/IJIDE.292495 *Corresponding Author

2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES

2.1. Promotional Formats

2.2. Purchase Intention

2.3. Consumer Value Perceptions

2.4 Product Type

2.5. Brand Familiarity

3.1. Research Framework

3.2. Experimental Design

Figure 1. Research Framework

3.4. Experiment Procedure

Figure 4. Experiment III

Table 1. Demographic statistics of participants

Frequency Percentage (%)

3.5. Manipulation Checks

Table 2. Measurement items of brand familiarity

Construct Measurement Item Reference

Table 3. Measurement items of purchase intention

Construct Measurement Item Reference

Table 4. Measurement items of consumer value perceptions

Construct Measurement Item Reference

Table 5. Measurement result of brand familiarity

Construct Measurement Item Mean Std. Dev Cronbach’s α

Table 6. Measurement result of purchase intention

Construct Measurement Item Mean Std. Dev Cronbach’s α

Purchase Intention 3. Overall, I have high willingness to 0.831

Table 7. Measurement result of consumer value perceptions

Construct Measurement Item Mean Std. Dev Cronbach’s α

Table 8. Analysis results of experiment I

Dependent Variable Independent Variable df MS F-value p-value

Table 9. Purchase intention of promotional formats

Group 1 & 2 Group 3 & 4

Figure 5. Purchase intention of promotional formats

Table 12. Analysis results of experiment II

Dependent Variable Independent Variable df MS F-value p-value

Group 9 & 10 Group 11 & 12

Group 5 & 6 Group 7 & 8

Table 15. Analysis results of experiment III

Dependent Variable Independent Variable df MS F-value p-value

5. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATION

Group 9 & 11 Group 10 & 12

Group 5 & 7 Group 6 & 8

5.3. Research Implication

5.4. Managerial Implication

6. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

You might also like