The driven Mechanism of feature convergence effect

SUN Hong-jie

(1．School of Economics and Management，Southwest Jiaotong University，Chengdu Sichuan 610081，China;2．Strategical Planning College，Chongqing Technology and Business University，Nan’an Chongqing 400067，China)

The driven Mechanism of feature convergence effect

SUN Hong-jie1，2

(1．School of Economics and Management，Southwest Jiaotong University，Chengdu Sichuan 610081，China;2．Strategical Planning College，Chongqing Technology and Business University，Nan’an Chongqing 400067，China)

Feature convergence effect is a new form of context effect，whose internal mechanism is discussed from the perspective of risk-dilution and regret-aversion，through the analysis of consumer inference and emotional process，from the clues of similarities and differences of features．In the case of high perceived risk，the paper reveals that，perceived risk and anticipated regret of feature convergence products is lower than that of feature divergence products．Then due to the driven factors，risk-dilution and regret-aversion，in the case of high perceived risk，customers prefer feature convergence products，not the feature divergence feature product as perceptual focus effect shows，which is called feature convergence effect．

feature convergence effect;context effect;anticipated regret;risk aversion

1 Introduction

Context effect refers to stable preferences deviation due to the fact that consumers are affected by choice set when selecting products from the product choice set［1］．Context effect，violates the traditional rational choice theory and reveals the systemic impact of the choice set on the consumer preferences and choices，which becomes the research focus of the international academic community in recent years［2-4］．The systemic impact of choice set on the consumer choices takes many forms and previous research has focused on the empirical research of mechanism of attraction effect，compromise effect，as well as the perceptual focus effect．The mechanism of a new form of context effect needs to be further discovered and explored．

Consumer choice behavior based on the choice set is complex in that the varied choice set structure and the consumer choice process affected by multiple factors lead to various forms of context effect and driven mechanisms．Scholars mainly study the mechanism of attraction effect and compromise effect from the aspects of perceived bias［5］，information processing［6］，reasons［7］，extremeness aversion，choice set inference［8］，subjective advantages sought［9］，the minimum anticipated loss［10］and the trade-offs aversion［2］，which have obtained a wealth of research results．Feature convergence effect，as a new form of context effect，differs from the existing forms．The studies of feature convergence effect find that in the case of high perceived risk and incomplete information，consumers will act completely different from perceptual focus effect．In other words，consumers will not choose products with unique features but tend to select feature convergence products in the similar and different structures of the choice set．This study reveals a selection mode，or a phenomenon of consumers，in the case of high perceived risk，and the driven mechanism behind the phenomenon is worth further exploration．

2 Emotional mechanism under the clues of context

Consumer perception and inference will be effected by the similar and different features in choice set and the pre-studies of perceptual focus effect based on the impact of features with similarities and differences on consumer perceptual focus point hold the view that consumers concern and prefer feature divergence products in the mode of intuition information processing［11］．However，consumer’s response to the similar and different structures of features，not only through perception，can also be inferred．Due to incomplete information，it is so difficult for consumers to make a choice with direct comparisons of product features that the inference of value and risk by feature information will be needed．Therefore，inference is an important part of the comparisons of product features．In the case of high involvement driven by higher risk perception，features with similarities and differences in the choice set can be an external clue for consumers to determine the degree of risk．

Nelson(1970)points out that when consumers are at risk because of insufficient knowledge and information，they will find clues to reduce the risk［12］．Products and brands can be seen as a series of clues［13］，providing a basis for decisionmaking for consumers．Clues are divided into internal clues and external clues．External clues are low-level clues that can be changed by not changing the product itself(such as price，packaging，brand name，source，etc．)，and internal clues are high-level directly associated with the product［14］．External clues will be very useful［13］and have an impact on consumer risk perception，when the value of internal clues is low［14-16］．Therefore，when consumers do not understand the using effect and safety of products，and do not have access to the internal clues，external clues will be used to enhance the confidence［16］．

We believe that the similarities and differences，many or few，between features in the choice set，which are important external clues and from which consumers can benefit to form a correct judgment of the objective reality when faced with limited information，have same information impact．When the information of features compared is incomplete，and other features between products are same，internal clues will not work．At same time，the clues of features with similarities and differences will be activated due to the factthatperceived risk strengthens consumer information-seeking needs，with the result that consumer inference to the clues of features with similarities and differences is produced．The inference，in the comparisons among features of products，is a deep-processing to feature information in certain circumstances，and is consumers’association to feature distribution，risk and group recognition．Therefore，in the case of high perceived risk，features with similarities and differences in the choice set without complete information will become important external clues which will affect consumers’judgments and emotions through consumer inference．With the anticipated emotions’influence on people’s decision-making behavior［17-18］，individuals tend to avoid possible negative emotions，but to seek positive emotions after decision making．Therefore，emotions have a majorimpacton consumers’judgments and choices，especially negative emotions，such as risk aversion，and regret．Perceived risk and anticipated regret studies found that people tend to be risk aversion and regret aversion．We believe that feature convergence effect is a form of context effect driven by risk aversion and regret aversion after consumer inference to the clues of features with similarities and differences．Below we will reveal the mechanism of feature convergence effect，from two levels，risk dilution and regret aversion．

3 Risk dilution mechanism of feature convergence effect

Cox(1967)， Greenleaf andLehmann，(1991，1995)，and Dahr(1997)，show that the perceived risk have an important impact on shop-ping attitudes，purchase intention，and shopping behavior，whose exist causes the consumer protection act，or risk-reduce behavior［19-21］．Consumers select feature convergence products in the case of high-risk perception．Is it due to the fact that feature convergence products can effectively reduce the perceived risk?Consumers must search for relevant information before purchasing products to make rational purchasing decisions and minimizing the uncertainty or risk of the purchase decision．The effort to search for information has a positive relationship with perceived risk［22-23］．So we believe that in the case of high perceived risk，risk perception will encourage consumers to interpret external clues，and to infer from the clues of products features with similarities and differences．Then how consumers determine the level of perceived risk of products of features with similarities and differences?

Preliminary studies have shown that external clues can be used to reduce risk in products purchase［15-16］．Wernerfelt(1995)believes that customers take advantage of market data to infer the product utility［8］．Customers imagine themselves in a world where people have absolute preference，according to which enterprises design products in a rational manner．Therefore the set of products on the market reflects the distribution of people’s needs．Then those who do not have an absolute preference but only know its own relative preference will infer the correct choice from the set of products．The result of this rank-order decision rule reflects that customers will choose from a set of products that has preference order and diverse sequence．Similarities and differences of the features will show the amount relations within the choice set，due to which consumers have the inference that feature convergence products are needed，recognized and mature more than feature divergence products and thus perceived risk is lower．

Therefore，consumers will infer the effectiveness of the product and market recognition，or the maturity of the product，by the similarities and differences of product features in the choice set［8］，so that the perceived risk of feature convergence products is much lower．Feature convergence effect is driven due to the fact that consumers use the clues of similarities and differences to infer the perceived risk of convergence products and divergence products in the case of high risk，and find the result that perceived risk of the convergence products is lower than that of the divergence products．Therefore，we believe that in the case of high-risk perception，the feature convergence products will reduce consumers’risk perception and have riskdilution effect，while in the case of low perceived risk，this risk-dilution is not obvious and feature convergence effect will not be driven．

4 Regret-aversion mechanism of feature convergence effect

Regret，the negative emotion based on a counterfactual thinking，has a close relation with the whole process of consumption，such as the prepurchase evaluation，purchase decision，afterpurchase behavior．Anticipated regret，as an important perspective of consumer choice studies，affects people’s assessment of the program，and thus influence people’s choice behavior［7］．During decision-making，considering regret-aversion，consumers tend to have the choice with minimal regret［24-25］．Does similarities and differences of features in the choice set affect the consumer’s anticipated regret?Is feature convergence effect driven by the fact that anticipated regret of feature convergence products is lower than that of feature divergence products?

Anticipated regret studies have found that anticipated regret is associated with result valence and more regret will be produced when people face negative results than positive results［26-27］．Selection of the utility of a thing，not only is affected by effect of the thing itself，but also the things that are rejected at that time［28-29］．Thus，anticipated regret will affect the risk decision-making，so people tend to choose safer products，showing risk aversion［7］．We has made it clear in the previous analysis，in the case of high perceived risk，perceived risk of feature convergence products is lower than that of feature divergence products，therefore，according to either result potency or two products of the expected reference view，the regret degree of selecting feature convergence products is lower than that of feature divergent products．

According to the regret theory of decision justification theory proposed by Connolly and Zeelenberg(2002)，regret is related to not only comparative assessment of results，but also the feeling of regret［30］．According to Wernerfelt(1995)，customers use market data to infer the product effectiveness［8］，and then come to the conclusion that feature convergence pro ducts have a broader use of the crowd and this is a conservative choice;compared to feature divergence products，sense of remorse with wrong choice must be lower．Therefore，from the perspective of remorse，anticipated regret of selecting features convergence products is lower than that of feature divergence products．

In addition，social comparison studies have found that people make social comparisons every day［31］，which have impact on people’s emotions［32］and decision-making process［33］．If customers infer that feature convergence products have a broader use of the crowd，by social comparisons，then people will find a sense of security in the wider community so that anticipated regret of selecting feature convergence products is lower．

Therefore，in the case of high perceived risk，within a choice set that contains features of incomplete information，customers have lower perceived risk of the feature convergence products，and the sense of regret for having conservative choice is low．Customers infer that feature convergence products have a broader use of the crowd．All of these lead to the fact that regret degree of feature convergence products is lower than that of feature divergence products．While in the case of low perceived risk，consumers do not have obvious risk-perceived difference between feature convergence products and feature divergence products，and have a low sense of remorse to the wrong choice，which makes the anticipated regret degree difference between feature convergence products and feature divergence product not significant．Thus，in the case of high perceived risk，anticipated regret become an important driving variable for consumers selecting feature convergence products，and regret aversion turns to be important mechanism of feature convergence effect．

5 Conclusion

Feature convergence effect is a new form of context effect，whose internal mechanism is discussed from the perspective of risk-dilution and regret-aversion，through the analysis of consumer inference and emotional process，from the clues of similarities and differences of features．The paper reveals feature convergence effect is driven by risk-dilution and regret-aversion，due to the fact that consumers interpret and infer the clues of similarities and differences of the products in the choice set，then judge from perceived risk and the size of crowd between feature convergence products and feature divergence products．Customers tend to choose feature convergence products because of all these mechanisms in the case of high perceived risk．The mechanism of feature convergence effect revealed this paper is different from that of other context effects，which shows the complicity of choice set and variety of customer response and plays an indispensable part in improving context effect studies based on choice set．

［Reference］

［1］Prelec D，Wernerfelt B，Zettelmeyer F．The role of inference in context effects：Inferring what you want from what is available［J］．Journal of Consumer Research，1997，24(1)：118-125．

［2］Hedgcock W，Rao A．Trade-off aversion as an explanation for the attraction effect：A functional magnetic resonance imaging study［J］．Journal of Marketing Research ，2009，46(1)：1-13．

［3］Ha Y W，Park S．The influence of categorical attributes on choice context effects［J］．Journal of Consumer Research ，2009，36(3)：463-477．

［4］Khan U，Zhu M，Kalra．A．When trade-offs matter：The effect of choice construal on context effects［J］．Journal of Marketing Research，2011，48(1)：62-71．

［5］Huber J，Payne J W，Puto C．Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives：Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis［J］．Journal of Consumer Research，1982，9(1)：90-98．

［6］Malaviya P，Sivakumar K．The influence of choice justification and stimulus meaningfulness on the attraction effect［J］．Journal of Marketing Theory，2002(10)：20-29．

［7］Simonson I．Choice based on reasons：The case of attraction and compromise effects［J］．Journal of Consumer Research，1989，16(2)：158-174．

［8］Wernerfelt B．A rational reconstruction of the compromise effect：Using market data to infer utilities［J］．Journal of Consumer Research，1995，21(4)：627-633．

［9］Ariely D，Wallsten T．Seeking subjective dominance in multidimensional space：An exploration of the asymmetric dominance effect［J］．Organizational Behavior ＆Human Decision，1995，63(3)：223-232．

［10］Sheng S，Parker A M，Nakamoto K．Understanding the mechanism and determinants of compromise effects［J］．Psychology ＆ Marketing，2005，22(7)：591-609．

［11］Hamilton R，Hong J，Chernev A．Perceptual focus effects in choice［J］．Journal of Consumer Research，2007，34(2)：187-199．

［12］Nelson P J．Information and consumer behavior［J］．Journal of Political Economy，1970，78(2)：311-329．

［13］Olson J C．Cue utilization in the quality perception process［A］．In Proceedings of 3rd Annual Conference．M．Venkatesen．ed．Chicago：Association for Consumer［C］．1972：167-179．

［14］Aqueveque C．Extrinsic cues and perceived risk：the influence of consumption situation［J］．Journal of Consumer Marketing ，2006，23(5)：237-247．

［15］Agarwal S，Teas R．Perceived value：mediating role of perceived risk［J］．Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice，2001，9(4)：1-14．

［16］Bearden W，Shimp T A．The use of extrinsic cues to facilitate product adoption［J］．Journal of Marketing Research，1982，19(2)：229-239．

［17］Loomes G，Sugen R．Testing for regret and disappointment in choice under uncertainty［J］．The Economic Journal，1987，97：118-129．

［18］Bell D E．Regret in decision making under uncertainty［J］．Operations Research，1982，30(5)：961-981．

［19］Cox D F．Risk taking and information handling in consumer behaviour［M］．Boston，Harvard Business Press，1967．

［20］Greenleaf E，Donald L．Reasons for substantial delay in consumer decision making［J］．Journal of Consumer Research，1995，22(2)：186-199．

［21］Dhar R．Consumer preference for a no-choice option［J］．Journal of Consumer Research，1997，24(2)：215-231．

［22］Li D J．An empirical study on consumers’information search efforts and the influencing factors：focusing on advertising media［J］．Nankai Business Review，2000(4)：52-59．

［23］Li D J．How Chinese consumers look for commercial information：The case of Tianjin［J］．Nankai Journal，2001(2)：30-35．

［24］Zeelenberg M，Beattie J．Consequences of regret aversion 2：Additional evidence for effects of feedback on decision making［J］．Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes，1997，72(2)：63-78．

［25］Zeelenberg M，Pieters R．Consequences of regret aversion in real life：the case of the Dutch postcode lottery［J］．Organizational Behavior and Human Decision，2004，93(2)：155-168．

［26］Zeelenberg M，van Dijk W W，Manstead A S R．Reconsidering the relation between regret and responsibility［J］．Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes，1998，74(3)：254-272．

［27］Tsiros M，Mittal V．Regret：a model of its antecedents and consequences in consumer decision making［J］．Journal of Consumer Research，2000，26(4)：401-417．

［28］Inman J，Dyer J，Jia J．A generalized utility model of disappointment and regret effects on post-choice valuation［J］．Marketing Science，1997，16(2)：97-110．

［29］Loomes G，Sugen R．Regret theory：an alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty［J］．The Economic Journal，1982，92(4)：805-824．

［30］Connolly T，Zeelenberg M．Regret in decision making［J］．Current Directions in Psychological Science，2002，11(6)：212-216．

［31］Wheeler L，Miyake K．Social comparison in everyday life［J］．Journal of Personality and Social Psychology，1992，62(5)：760-773．

［32］Fox S，Dayan K．Framing and risky choice as influenced by comparison of one’s achievements with others：The case of investment in the stock exchange［J］．Journal of Business and Psychology，2004，18(3)：301-321．

［33］Hoelzl E，Loewenstein G．Wearing out your shoes to prevent someone else from stepping into them：Anticipated regret and social takeover in sequential decisions［J］．Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes，2005，98(1)：15-27．

属性趋同效应驱动机理研究

2012-10-09

国家自然科学基金项目资助(71002108)．

孙洪杰(1978-)，男，山东沂南人，博士，副教授，硕士生导师，主要从事消费行为方面的研究．

孙洪杰1，2

(1．西南交通大学经济管理学院，四川 成都 610081;2．重庆工商大学商务策划学院，重庆 南岸 400067)

文章从属性同异线索切入，通过分析消费者的推断和情绪过程，分别从风险稀释和后悔规避角度探讨属性趋同效应的内在机理，揭示出在高感知风险情形下属性趋同产品的感知风险低于属性趋异产品，属性趋同产品的预期后悔程度低于属性趋异产品，从而使风险稀释和后悔规避驱动消费者在高感知风险情形下选择属性趋同产品，形成属性趋同效应．

属性趋同效应;情境效应;预期后悔;风险厌恶

F019

A

1673-8012(2012)06-0086-05

(责任编辑 穆 刚)