Have We Got a Deal for You: Do You Want the Good News or Bad News First?

IF 9.8 2区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Service Research Pub Date : 2022-08-18 DOI:10.1177/10946705221120147
Kirk L. Wakefield, Priya Raghubir, J. Inman
{"title":"Have We Got a Deal for You: Do You Want the Good News or Bad News First?","authors":"Kirk L. Wakefield, Priya Raghubir, J. Inman","doi":"10.1177/10946705221120147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Traditional practice prominently presents offers (e.g., “50% Off”) followed by a quantity (“When you buy two”), duration (“Today only”), or other conditional restriction as a scarcity appeal to increase urgency. Placing a hurdle to clear before purchase eligibility presents the good news of the offer followed by the bad news of the restriction. We propose and test a sales promotion framework for admission-based experiences showing that leading with the bad news first (the restriction) followed by the good news (the discount) is consistent with consumer news order preferences and changes perceptions of the deal. Our first study confirms consumer preference for bad news before good news in general and ticket offers in particular. The next two studies examine the process by which leading with the bad news (of the restriction first, discount later) increases the salience of the deal (% off). This in turn makes the customer feel in greater control over the offer, thereby making the deal appear to be fairer and more attractive, leading to increased purchase intentions. A fourth study in the field shows presenting the restriction followed by a discount improves click-through and potential revenue compared to presenting the identical offer with the discount preceding the restriction.","PeriodicalId":48358,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Service Research","volume":"26 1","pages":"251 - 269"},"PeriodicalIF":9.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Service Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10946705221120147","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Traditional practice prominently presents offers (e.g., “50% Off”) followed by a quantity (“When you buy two”), duration (“Today only”), or other conditional restriction as a scarcity appeal to increase urgency. Placing a hurdle to clear before purchase eligibility presents the good news of the offer followed by the bad news of the restriction. We propose and test a sales promotion framework for admission-based experiences showing that leading with the bad news first (the restriction) followed by the good news (the discount) is consistent with consumer news order preferences and changes perceptions of the deal. Our first study confirms consumer preference for bad news before good news in general and ticket offers in particular. The next two studies examine the process by which leading with the bad news (of the restriction first, discount later) increases the salience of the deal (% off). This in turn makes the customer feel in greater control over the offer, thereby making the deal appear to be fairer and more attractive, leading to increased purchase intentions. A fourth study in the field shows presenting the restriction followed by a discount improves click-through and potential revenue compared to presenting the identical offer with the discount preceding the restriction.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
我们和你达成协议了吗:你想先听好消息还是坏消息?
传统做法主要是在提供优惠(例如,“五折”)后加上数量(“当你购买两个”)、持续时间(“仅限今天”)或其他条件限制,以增加紧迫感。在购买资格之前设置障碍,这是要约的好消息,其次是限制的坏消息。我们提出并测试了一个基于准入的销售促进框架,该框架表明,首先以坏消息(限制)引导,然后是好消息(折扣),这与消费者的新闻订单偏好一致,并改变了对交易的看法。我们的第一项研究证实了消费者对坏消息的偏好,而不是好消息,尤其是机票优惠。接下来的两项研究考察了坏消息(首先是限制,然后是折扣)增加交易显著性(折扣%)的过程。这反过来又会让顾客觉得自己对报价有更大的控制权,从而使交易看起来更公平、更有吸引力,从而增加购买意愿。该领域的第四项研究表明,与在限制之前提供折扣的相同优惠相比,在限制之后提供折扣可以提高点击率和潜在收入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
20.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Journal of Service Research (JSR) is recognized as the foremost service research journal globally. It is an indispensable resource for staying updated on the latest advancements in service research. With its accessible and applicable approach, JSR equips readers with the essential knowledge and strategies needed to navigate an increasingly service-oriented economy. Brimming with contributions from esteemed service professionals and scholars, JSR presents a wealth of articles that offer invaluable insights from academia and industry alike.
期刊最新文献
Humans Vs. Service Robots as Social Actors in Persuasion Settings Responding to Cyberattacks: The Persuasiveness of Claiming Victimhood Unethical Consumer Behavior Following Artificial Intelligence Agent Encounters: The Differential Effect of AI Agent Roles and its Boundary Conditions A Framework of Services-as-Practices The AR Cloud: Navigating Metaverse Augmentation Technologies for Enhanced Co-Creation of Value Within Services
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1