Monday, June 24, 2019

In The Exploratory Effort That Follows

Alternative weights within the theory of reasoned action were proposed for both innovators and noninnovators. The motels were tested for nine brands for both a private necessity and a public luxury product--situations in which reference group influences are expected to vary. Tests of the behavioral intention equation supported the hypothesized pattern. However, the results of the normative crossover effects analysis were inconclusive. Consumer innovativeness and the diffusion of innovations are two of the most frequently researched concepts in consumer behavior. Midgley and Dowling (1978) have provided an excellent summary of the issues involved in the conceptual definition and measurement of consumer innovativeness. One outcome of their thoughtful discussion is the conclusion that "innovativeness is the degree to which an individual makes innovation decisions independently of the communicated experience of others" (Midgley and Dowling 1978, p. As such, innovativeness is posited to be a generalized personality trait and adoption decisions are seen as a function of product interest, individual situations, personal characteristics, and a network of interpersonal influence.


It is this later premise, i.e., the potential relationship between innovativeness and differences in interpersonal influence, that precipitated the present study. In the exploratory effort that follows, differences between innovators and noninnovators in interpersonal influence effects within the theory of reasoned action are hypothesized and tested for multiple brands of two products assumed to differ in perceived reference group influence. Prior to describing that study and the ensuing results, a brief review of prior research and the research hypotheses are presented. Much communication and diffusion research has ignored the effects of social influence (Rogers 1976, p. Social influence can be categorized into informational and normative influence. Informational influence occurs when individuals accept information as evidence of reality while normative influence involves conformity to the expectations of others (Burnkrant and Cousineau 1975, pp. Information is internalized if it is perceived as enhancing the individual's knowledge of the environment. Normative social influence may also occur if the individual is motivated to realize a reward or avoid a punishment. Compliance in this situation would occur if the individual believes the behavior is visible or known to others.


It is generally accepted that word-of-mouth communications often affect the eventual acceptance and diffusion of new products (Midgley and Dowling 1978; Rogers 1983). However, empirical evidence addressing the link between the trait of innovativeness and perceived interpersonal influence is limited. Further, the evidence that is available is equivocal. For example, Berning and Jacoby (1974), in their study of information acquisition in new product purchase decisions, concluded that the decision-making process preceding the purchase of an innovation differs from the process preceding the purchase of an established alternative. The principle difference underlying that process was concluded to be that innovators first seek information from other people. In contrast, and in support of Midgley and Dowling's view, Carlson and Grossbart (1984) found a significant positive relationship between independent judgment making and inherent novelty seeking. The replication and extension of Raju's (1980) optimum stimulation paradigm by Joachimsthaler and Lastovicka (1984) indicates that the relationship between innovativeness and information seeking is quite complex (bicausal). However, close examination of the content of the statements comprising the information seeking scale reveals that the items comprising the scale contained a mix of both personal and impersonal sources of information.


One explanation of interpersonal influence Ln consumer behavior is the theory of reasoned action (Ajzen and Fishbein 1980). This frequently applied model provides a vehicle for exploring some of the differences in interpersonal influences between innovators and noninnovators. Interpersonal influence is assumed operative in several linkages within the motel. The basic equation proposes that behavioral intention is affected directly by subjective norms and attitudes-toward-the act of purchase. Social influences on behavioral intentions are thought to operate principally through an overall measure of subjective norms. Subjective norms, in turn, are presumed to stem from the combination of normative beliefs, i.e., beliefs that certain referents think the person should or should not perform a particular behavior, and motivations-to-comply with the referent group. Two phenomena exist which make the isolation of perceived reference group influences in the theory of reasoned action problematic. These issues are raised nov since one provides a basis for one of the research hypotheses proposed in the next section. These two issues are: (1! multicollinearity between the Aact and SN predictors of behavioral intention and (2) crossover effects from the motel's exogenous cognitive and normative structures to the summary constructs of attitudes and subjective norms.