分担惩罚就是减半惩罚:同时召回可减少产品的市场份额损失

Qianwen Shao, Yi‐Na Li, Jiuchang Wei, Haipeng (Allan) Chen
{"title":"分担惩罚就是减半惩罚:同时召回可减少产品的市场份额损失","authors":"Qianwen Shao, Yi‐Na Li, Jiuchang Wei, Haipeng (Allan) Chen","doi":"10.1002/mar.22006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Manufacturers often recall defective products. When this occurs, multiple recalls of defective products can be announced in the same statement or separate statements (i.e., concurrent vs. separate recalls). We draw upon the attribution theory to study whether and how concurrent (vs. separate) recalls of multiple products affect each recalled product's market share loss. In this study, a unique dataset of product recalls in the Chinese automobile industry and two experiments reveal that when products are concurrently (vs. separately) recalled, each product's defect is perceived as less distinctive, thus assuaging the market share loss for the focal product. In addition, the mitigating effect of concurrent recalls is stronger when the focal product is recalled with many (vs. few) other products but weaker for products with high price premiums and those with a recall history. These insights suggest that manufacturers can strategically use concurrent recalls to minimize market share loss resulting from product recalls, particularly when dealing with lower‐priced products or those with a limited recall history.","PeriodicalId":188459,"journal":{"name":"Psychology & Marketing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A punishment shared is a punishment halved: Concurrent recalls reduce products’ market share loss\",\"authors\":\"Qianwen Shao, Yi‐Na Li, Jiuchang Wei, Haipeng (Allan) Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/mar.22006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Manufacturers often recall defective products. When this occurs, multiple recalls of defective products can be announced in the same statement or separate statements (i.e., concurrent vs. separate recalls). We draw upon the attribution theory to study whether and how concurrent (vs. separate) recalls of multiple products affect each recalled product's market share loss. In this study, a unique dataset of product recalls in the Chinese automobile industry and two experiments reveal that when products are concurrently (vs. separately) recalled, each product's defect is perceived as less distinctive, thus assuaging the market share loss for the focal product. In addition, the mitigating effect of concurrent recalls is stronger when the focal product is recalled with many (vs. few) other products but weaker for products with high price premiums and those with a recall history. These insights suggest that manufacturers can strategically use concurrent recalls to minimize market share loss resulting from product recalls, particularly when dealing with lower‐priced products or those with a limited recall history.\",\"PeriodicalId\":188459,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology & Marketing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology & Marketing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.22006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology & Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.22006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

制造商经常会召回有缺陷的产品。在这种情况下,缺陷产品的多次召回可以在同一声明中宣布,也可以在不同声明中宣布(即同时召回与分别召回)。我们借鉴归因理论,研究同时(与分别)召回多种产品是否以及如何影响每种召回产品的市场份额损失。本研究利用中国汽车行业独特的产品召回数据集和两个实验揭示,当产品同时(与单独)召回时,每个产品的缺陷被认为不那么明显,从而缓解了重点产品的市场份额损失。此外,当重点产品与许多(而不是少数)其他产品同时召回时,同时召回的缓解效应更强,但对于高溢价产品和有召回历史的产品,这种效应则较弱。这些启示表明,制造商可以战略性地利用同时召回来尽量减少产品召回造成的市场份额损失,尤其是在处理低价产品或召回历史有限的产品时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A punishment shared is a punishment halved: Concurrent recalls reduce products’ market share loss
Manufacturers often recall defective products. When this occurs, multiple recalls of defective products can be announced in the same statement or separate statements (i.e., concurrent vs. separate recalls). We draw upon the attribution theory to study whether and how concurrent (vs. separate) recalls of multiple products affect each recalled product's market share loss. In this study, a unique dataset of product recalls in the Chinese automobile industry and two experiments reveal that when products are concurrently (vs. separately) recalled, each product's defect is perceived as less distinctive, thus assuaging the market share loss for the focal product. In addition, the mitigating effect of concurrent recalls is stronger when the focal product is recalled with many (vs. few) other products but weaker for products with high price premiums and those with a recall history. These insights suggest that manufacturers can strategically use concurrent recalls to minimize market share loss resulting from product recalls, particularly when dealing with lower‐priced products or those with a limited recall history.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The double‐edged sword of generative artificial intelligence in digitalization: An affordances and constraints perspective Social comparison theory: A review and future directions The double‐edged sword of generative artificial intelligence in digitalization: An affordances and constraints perspective Social comparison theory: A review and future directions Bayesian inference and consumer behavioral theory
×
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