Florida State University Libraries

Transcription

1 Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2006 The Impact of Self-Concept/Product-Image Congruity and Functional Congruity on Brand Preference: Three Product Categories Jin-Wook Han Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact

2 THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF EDUCATION THE IMPACT OF SELF-CONCEPT/PRODUCT-IMAGE CONGRUITY AND FUNCTIONAL CONGRUITY ON BRAND PREFERENCE: THREE PRODUCT CATEGORIES By JIN-WOOK HAN A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Sport Management, Recreation Management, and Physical Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Degree Awarded: Fall Semester, 2006 Copyright 2006 Jin-Wook Han All Rights Reserved

3 The members of the Committee approve the Dissertation of Jin-Wook Han defended on November 8, Jeffrey D. James Professor Directing Dissertation Leisa Flynn Outside Committee Member Aubrey Kent Committee Member Joohyun Lee Committee Member Approved: Cheryl Beeler, Chair, Department of Sport Management, Recreation Management, and Physical Education The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members. ii

4 Dedicated to Yoon Jung Choi Thank you for being my wife, my friend, and my inspiration iii

5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to first express my deepest appreciation to my parents for their unconditional love and encouragement during this long journey. I also thank my brother and sister for their great encouragement. I would like to extend my sincere appreciation to my major professor Dr. Jeffrey James. Dr. James has been a great mentor for the entire phase of this dissertation. Thanks also to my committee members: Drs. Leisa Flynn, Aubrey Kent, and Joohyun Lee for all of your assistance in the course of this project. My final appreciation goes to my lovely wife, Yoon Jung Choi. I am so very thankful for your tireless support and patience during this demanding process. I do not hesitate to say that this endeavor would not have been possible without your support and love. iv

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Tables... ix List of Figures... xiii Abstract... xv I. INTRODUCTION... 1 Symbolic and functional needs... 1 Self-concept/product-image congruity... 2 Functional congruity... 3 Self-concept/product-image and functional congruity in marketing... 3 II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE Self-concept/product-image congruity Self-concept Definition of self-concept General characteristics of self-concept Research on the self-concept Product image Self-concept/product-image congruity Measurement of the self-concept/product-image congruity Summary Functional congruity Attitude Expectancy-value model Rosenberg s expectancy-value model Fishbein s expectancy-value model Expectancy-value model in marketing.37 Summary v

7 Relationship among constructs Model A Model B Model C III. METHODOLOGY Population and sample Instrument development Pretest Pretest for selecting product categories Pretest for selecting brands Pretest for evaluation criteria Item generation Pilot test Data collection Data analysis IV. RESULTS Pilot study Ski poles Skis Sunglasses Main study Demographic characteristics Descriptive statistics Confirmatory factor analysis Ski poles Skis Sunglasses vi

8 Structural equation modeling Ski poles Skis Sunglasses Summary V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS Overview Confirmatory factor analysis Structural equation modeling Convenience products Shopping products Specialty products Overall assessment of the three models..138 Significance of study Implications Convenience products Shopping products Specialty products Limitations Future research Conclusions APPENDICES A. Focus Group Summary B: Open-Ended Elicitation Questionnaire for Brand Selection (English Version) C: Open-Ended Elicitation Questionnaire for Brand Selection (Korean Version)..156 D: Results of Open-Ended Elicitation Questionnaire for Brand Selection vii

9 E: Open-Ended Elicitation Questionnaire for Evaluative Criteria (English Version) 161 F: Open-Ended Elicitation Questionnaire for Evaluative Criteria (Korean Version)..163 G: Results of Open-Ended Elicitation Questionnaire for Evaluative Criteria H: Initial Questionnaire (English Version) I: Initial Questionnaire (Korean Version) J: Final Questionnaire (English Version) K: Final Questionnaire (Korean Version) REFERENCES BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH viii

10 LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: Comparison of Original Items with Modified Items for Measuring Actual Self-concept/product-image Congruity for Each of Three Product Categories...52 Table 3.2: Items Generated for Measuring Ideal Self-concept/product-image Congruity for Three Product Categories...53 Table 3.3: Items for Measuring Importance of Evaluative Criterion for Each of Three Product Categories...55 Table 3.4: Items for Measuring the Extent to Which the Subjects Views the Brand as Satisfactory With Respect to Each Evaluative Criterion for Each of Three Product Categories Reliability Estimates for Global Attitude...56 Table 3.5: Comparison of Original items with Modified Items for Measuring Brand Preference...58 Table 4.1: Internal Consistency of Scale for Actual Self-concept/product-image Congruity 63 Table 4.2: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Actual Self-concept/product Image Congruity...64 Table 4.3: Initial Internal Consistency of Scale for Ideal Self-concept/product-image Congruity 64 Table 4.4: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Ideal Self-concept/product Image Congruity 65 Table 4.5: Revised Internal Consistency of Scale for Ideal Self-concept/product-image Congruity...66 Table 4.6: Internal Consistency of Scale for Importance of Evaluative Criteria66 Table 4.7: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Importance of Evaluative Criteria...67 Table 4.8: Internal Consistency of Scale for Satisfaction with regard to Evaluative Criteria...67 Table 4.9: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Satisfaction with regard to Evaluative Criteria...68 ix

11 Table 4.10: Internal Consistency of Scale for Functional Congruit...69 Table 4.11: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Functional Congruity.69 Table 4.12: Initial Internal Consistency of Scale for Brand Preference 70 Table 4.13: Intercorrelations among Items Measuring Brand Preference Table 4.14: Revised Internal Consistency of Scale for Brand Preference Table 4.15: Internal Consistency of Scale for Actual Self-concept/product-image Congruity...71 Table 4.16: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Actual Self-concept/product Image Congruity..72 Table 4.17: Initial Internal Consistency of Scale for Ideal Self-concept/product-image Congruity Table 4.18: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Ideal Self-concept/product Image Congruity Table 4.19: Revised Internal Consistency of Scale for Ideal Self-concept/product-image Congruity...74 Table 4.20: Internal Consistency of Scale for Importance of Evaluative Criteria 74 Table 4.21: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Importance of Evaluative Criteria...75 Table 4.22: Internal Consistency of Scale for Satisfaction with regard to Evaluative Criteria.75 Table 4.23: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Satisfaction with regard to Evaluative Criteria...76 Table 4.24: Internal Consistency of Scale for Functional Congruity...77 Table 4.25: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Functional Congruity...77 Table 4.26: Initial Internal Consistency of Scale for Brand Preference...78 Table 4.27: Intercorrelations among Items Measuring Brand Preference...78 Table 4.28: Revised Internal Consistency of Scale for Brand Preference...79 x

12 Table 4.29: Internal Consistency of Scale for Actual Self-concept/product-image Congruity...79 Table 4.30: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Actual Self-concept/product Image Congruity...80 Table 4.31: Initial Internal Consistency of Scale for Ideal Self-concept/product-image Congruity...80 Table 4.32: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Ideal Self-concept/product Image Congruity...81 Table 4.33: Revised Internal Consistency of Scale for Ideal Self-concept/product-image Congruity...82 Table 4.34: Internal Consistency of Scale for Importance of Evaluative Criteria...82 Table 4.35: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Importance of Evaluative Criteria 83 Table 4.36: Internal Consistency of Scale for Satisfaction with regard to Evaluative Criteria...83 Table 4.37: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Satisfaction with regard to Evaluative Criteria.. 84 Table 4.38: Revised Internal Consistency of Scale for Satisfaction with regard to Evaluative Criteria..84 Table 4.39: Internal Consistency of Scale for Functional Congruity...85 Table 4.40: Intercorrelations Among Items Measuring Importance-Satisfaction Product...85 Table 4.41: Internal Consistency of Scale for Brand Preference...86 Table 4.42: Intercorrelations among Items Measuring Brand Preference...87 Table 4.43: Revised Internal Consistency of Scale for Brand Preference...87 Table 4.44: Descriptive Statistics of Demographic Characteristics...87 Table 4.45: Means, Standard Deviations, Skewness, and Kurtosis for Items of Ski Poles...89 Table 4.46: Means, Standard Deviations, Skewness, and Kurtosis for Items of Skis xi

13 ...92 Table 4.47: Means, Standard Deviations, Skewness, and Kurtosis for Items of Sunglasses...93 Table 4.48: Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Four Constructs for Ski Poles: Item Loadings (β), Standard Errors (SE), t-values (t), Construct Reliability (CR), and Average Variance Extracted (AVE)...96 Table 4.49: Correlations Among Four Factors for Ski Poles...97 Table 4.50: Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Four Constructs for Skis: Item Loadings (β), Standard Errors (SE), t-values (t), Construct Reliability (CR), and Average Variance Extracted (AVE)...99 Table 4.51: Correlations Among Four Factors for Skis Table 4.52: Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Four Constructs for Sunglasses: Item Loadings (β), Standard Errors (SE), t-values (t), Construct Reliability (CR), and Average Variance Extracted (AVE)..103 Table 4.53: Correlations Among Four Factors for Sunglasses..104 Table 4.54: The Results of Structural Equation Modeling of Three Proposed Models for Ski Poles 111 Table 4.55: The Results of Structural Equation Modeling of Three Proposed Models for Skis Table 4.56: The Results of Structural Equation Modeling of Three Proposed Models for Sunglasses xii

14 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1: Structural Model of Image-based and Utilitarian Decision-making Process for Participant Sport Consumption...5 Figure 1.2: Path Analytic Model of Store Loyalty...6 Figure 1.3: Sirgy et al. s (1991) Hypothesized Model...7 Figure 2.1: Schematic Conception Model of Attitudes...32 Figure 2.2: Model A...41 Figure 2.3: Model B...44 Figure 2.4: Model C...45 Figure 3.1: Hypothesized Measurement Model of Self-concept/product-image Congruity.54 Figure 3.2: Hypothesized Measurement Model for Functional Congruity...57 Figure 4.1: Second-order CFA Model for Self-concept/product-image Congruity for Ski Poles 98 Figure 4.2: Second-order CFA Model for Self-concept/product-image Congruity for Skis Figure 4.3: Second-order CFA Model for Self-concept/product-image Congruity for Sunglasses Figure 4.4: Model A Figure 4.5: Model B Figure 4.6: Model C Figure 4.7: Results of Structural Equation Modeling for Model A Figure 4.8: Results of Structural Equation Modeling for Model B Figure 4.9: Results of Structural Equation Modeling for Model C Figure 4.10: Results of Structural Equation Modeling for Model A xiii

15 Figure 4.11: Results of Structural Equation Modeling for Model B Figure 4.12: Results of Structural Equation Modeling for Model C Figure 4.13: Results of Structural Equation Modeling for Model A Figure 4.14: Results of Structural Equation Modeling for Model B Figure 4.15: Results of Structural Equation Modeling for Model C Figure 5.1: Model A Figure 5.2: Model B Figure 5.3: Model C xiv

16 ABSTRACT According to Bhat and Reedy (1998), consumers essential needs can be categorized as either symbolic or functional. The self-concept/product-image congruity model is based on the premise that consumers try to satisfy symbolic needs as part of their consumption situation. In addition to evaluating a brand based on symbolic needs, consumers may evaluate a brand based on functional needs. In an attempt to satisfy functional needs, consumers may choose a brand based on perceived functional or utilitarian aspects of a brand. The focus of the current study was to test and compare three existing models integrating both self-concept/product-image congruity and functional congruity, and to determine which is most predictive of consumers brand preferences across different product categories in the context of ski equipments. Data were collected from collegiate skiers who are affiliated with Korean University Ski Team Association (n=299). The findings in the current study provide three propositions. First, for a convenience product, the Model C, which assumed that there were no direct effects of self-concept/product-image congruity on brand preference; only indirect effects exist through functional congruity, was selected as the most representative model in the current data set. More specifically, self-concept/product-image congruity was not a significant predictor of brand preference. In addition, the impact of functional congruity on brand preference was significant but very small. Second, for a shopping product, Model B, which suggests that self-concept/product-image congruity has both a direct effect on brand preference and an indirect effect through functional congruity was selected as the most representative model. Even though both self-concept/product-image congruity and functional congruity had a significant impact on brand preference, self-concept/productimage congruity was a stronger predictor of brand preference than functional congruity for a shopping product. Third, for a specialty product, Model B was also selected as the most representative model. Both self-concept/product-image congruity and functional congruity were significant predictors of brand preference. However, self-concept/productimage congruity is a more significant predictor of brand preference for a specialty product in the current study. From a marketing perspective, the results indicated that it is critical to establish different marketing strategy depending upon product categories. xv

17 INTRODUCTION Since the first ski resort was established in 1975, the ski population of Korea has grown enormously due to increases in leisure time and individual income (Lee & Lee, 2003). In 2002, the ski population of Korea surpassed four million people. As the ski population has increased, competition among ski equipment companies in Korea has become increasingly intense (Kim, Lee, & Kim, 2003). As the number of skiers and the volume of ski equipment imported have increased, the competition among ski equipment companies in Korea to attract skiers has increased (Kim et al., 2003). Faced with such a competitive market condition, it is critical for marketers to understand why a skier prefers a specific brand of ski. Consumer decision making in selecting a particular brand has been considered as a complex choice process. This process is becoming more complicated as manufacturers continuously introduce new brands in the market. Understanding the processes by which consumers form purchase intentions and favorable brand attitudes is of vital importance to marketing managers as well as consumer researchers. In order to understand a consumer s brand preference it is first necessary to examine what kind of needs consumers are attempting to satisfy with their choice. Symbolic and functional needs According to Bhat and Reedy (1998), consumers needs can be categorized as symbolic or functional. Symbolic needs can be explained by the fact that brands act as symbols of their owner s self-concept, thereby fulfilling the need to show success, achievement, power, or other dimensions of personality (Foxall, Goldsmith, & Brown, 1998). A consumer may buy goods and/or services to express something about himself or herself, communicating to others what she or he believes, or she or he is like. Selecting brands with images that are congruent to one s own self-image may also reflect an attempt to preserve or enhance an individual s self-image. Levy (1959) proposed that the symbolic expression of consumptive behavior may be more important to the consumer than the functional benefits of the product. Belk (1988) also argued that consumers regard their possessions as part of themselves. Functional needs are explained by the fact that consumers try to maximize total 1

18 utility by purchasing products based on objective criteria like price or performance (Schiffman & Kanuk, 1994). In order to make a rational decision, consumers in general experience a number of cognitive processes that include deciding on the degree to which each attribute is important in a product category, collecting information about competing brands attributes, judging the levels of each attribute in competing brands, and finally using a judgment rule to decide on the optimal brand. Some researchers have argued that functional needs may be more appropriate for predicting consumer behavior for consumers who place high value on a product s tangible and utilitarian benefits (Ditcher, 1960; Holbrook, 1980; Levy, 1959). Depending only on the functional needs, however, may result in the lack of consideration regarding symbolic needs. Self-concept/product-image congruity The self-concept/product-image congruity model is based on the concept that consumers choose products that are consistent with their perceptions of themselves and reject those which are incongruous with their self-perceptions. That is to say, consumers show a preference toward a brand which can satisfy their symbolic needs. The effects of the self-concept/product-image congruity model have been extensively explored in the consumer research literature (Belk, Bahn, & Mayer, 1982; Ericksen 1996; Jamal & Goode 2001; Solomon, 1983; Zinkhan & Hong, 1991). The results have shown in general that the self-concept/product-image congruity model have an impact on consumer preferences with regard to a brand (Mehta, 1999). Previous research has also indicated that the self-concept/product-image congruity model may influence not only a consumer s product preference, but also his/her purchase intentions (Ericksen, 1996; Mehta 1999). For example, Ericksen (1996) found that there was a significant relationship between self-image congruity and purchase intention. The study suggested that consumer behavior such as product use, product ownership, brand attitude, purchase motivation, purchase intention, or brand choice is partly explained by the self-concept/product-image congruity model. Consumers are expected to prefer brands that have images compatible with their self-perceptions (Belk, Bahn, & Mayer, 1982; Ericksen 1996; Jamal & Goode 2001; Solomon, 1983; Zinkhan & Hong, 1991). 2

19 Functional congruity While some consumers evaluate a brand based on its symbolic image, others base their evaluations on whether a brand may satisfy their functional or utilitarian needs. Sirgy, Johar, Samli and Claiborne (1991) defined functional congruity as the match between the product or brand s utilitarian attribute and the consumer s expectation of that attribute (p. 364). The functional congruity model is based on the fact that consumers may select a brand or product based on perceived functional or utilitarian aspects (Sirgy & Johar, 1985). A specific brand of automobile, for example, may be evaluated along a set of utilitarian attributes such as price, gallons per mile, safety, durability, acceleration, and so on. A consumer may have beliefs about the actual brand s characteristics along these attributes and also ideal points or standards used to judge the relative goodness of the beliefs about the brand. The greater the congruence between the consumer s utilitarian beliefs about the actual brand and the ideal beliefs, the greater the preference for the brand. The definition of functional congruity is consistent with that of an attitude measured with the expectancy-value model in that the expectancy-value model defines a brand attitude as the degree to which a consumer regards a brand as satisfactory with respect to each functional attribute. In other words, if a consumer perceives congruity between a brand s functional attribute and his or her expectation of the attribute, it also means that the functional attributes of the brand satisfy the consumer s utilitarian needs. With this assumption, previous researchers used the expectancy-value model to explain consumer behavior (Bass & Talarzyk, 1972; Battman, Capon, & Lutz, 1985; Lindgren & Konopa, 1986). The results of their studies indicated that functional congruity measured by the expectancy-value model significantly influenced a variety of consumer behaviors. Self-concept/product-image and functional congruity in marketing Since consumers needs can be either symbolic or functional, it is not sufficient to predict consumer behavior with just the self-concept/product-image congruity model or the functional congruity model. Some researchers have begun to integrate both the self-concept/product-image congruity model and functional congruity model to explain 3

20 and predict brand preference based on consumers symbolic and functional needs (Kang, 2002; Sirgy & Samli, 1985; Sirgy, Johar, Samil, & Claiborne, 1991). An important reason for examining the two models together is to measure more accurately the strength and influence of symbolic and functional needs. Testing the two models together would allow a researcher to examine which needs have a stronger influence on brand preference, or the extent to which both contribute to brand preference. From a marketing perspective, the self-concept/product-image congruity and functional congruity models are significant areas of research in consumer behavior. Both models provide a marketing manager with strategic insights concerning brand-positioning concepts. The two models may be used to position a brand depending upon what kind of needs consumers try to meet. For example, if target consumers value a brand s functional aspects, a marketer might emphasize the brand s performance on the attribute that is most important to consumers in their advertisements. If target consumers focus more on the congruity between the self-concept and brand image, marketers need to include a strategy in advertisements that encourages consumers to think about their own self-concept and how their self-concept is consistent with the image of the advertised brand. From a participant sport consumption perspective, Kang (2002) conducted a study to examine one s decision-making process using both self-participant image congruency and attitude (functional congruity) models (See Figure 1.1). The results of the study indicated that both self-participant image congruency and attitudes impact one s decision to initiate sport or exercise participation in the consumption context. In addition, the results revealed that attitudes (functional congruity) had a greater influence on one s decision to initiate sport participation than did self-participant image congruency. Samli and Sirgy (1981) first examined the impact of both models along with socioeconomic status, area loyalty, and shopping-complex loyalty on store loyalty. The results of the study indicated store-image evaluation (functional congruity) was a significant predictor of store loyalty. They also found that the self-image/store-image congruity did not significantly influence the store loyalty. However, it was important to note that there were significant correlations between self-image/store-image congruity and store-image evaluation. They introduced a biasing effect of self-congruity on functional congruity in explaining this correlation. They maintained that although 4

21 functional congruity is a stronger predictor of consumer behavior, functional congruity is influenced by self-congruity. Overall self-image congruency Intention to initiate participant sport consumption Attitude Figure 1.1. Structural Model of Image-based And Utilitarian Decision-making Process for Participant Sport Consumption (Kang, 2002) Based on the findings of the Samli and Sirgy study (1981), Sirgy and Samli (1985) developed a path analytic model of store loyalty. In this model, assuming the biasing effect of self-image/store-image congruity on functional evaluation as discussed above, they hypothesized that store loyalty would be determined by functional evaluation (functional congruity) and in turn the functional evaluation would be influenced by selfimage/store-image congruity (see Figure 1.2). The results of the study supported this hypothesis indicating that store loyalty was a result of functional evaluation (functional congruity) and that functional evaluation was influenced by self-image/store-image congruity. 5

22 Self-image/ store-image congruity Functional store image Store loyalty Figure 1.2. Path Analytic Model of Store Loyalty (Sirgy & Samli, 1985) Sirgy et al. (1991) developed a model to test two hypotheses: (1) consumer behavior is more strongly predicted by functional congruity than by self-congruity and (2) functional congruity is influenced by self-congruity (see Figure 1.3). Sirgy et al. s (1991) model was somewhat different from Sirgy and Samli s (1985) model in that they hypothesized self-congruity might directly influence consumer behavior. Unlike Sirgy and Samli s (1985) model which considered only an indirect impact of self-image-storeimage congruity on store loyalty through functional evaluation, Sirgy et al. s (1991) model depicted both direct and indirect impact of self-congruity on consumer behavior. The results revealed that both self-concept/product-image congruity and the functional congruity model positively influenced a variety of consumer behavior including store loyalty and attitude/intention toward a brand, and found that functional congruity was a stronger predictor of consumer behavior. In addition, the results indicated that there is a moderate positive relationship between self-concept/product-image congruity and functional congruity. 6

23 Self-congruity Consumer behavior Functional congruity Figure 1.3. Sirgy et al. s (1991) hypothesized model All three models discussed above basically have one element in common; both self-concept/product-image congruity and functional congruity were used to predict different aspects of consumer behavior. However, these three models also have a structural difference in that they examined different interrelationships among variables. Kang (1996) considered an independent effect of the self-image congruity and functional congruity on intention to initiate participant sport consumption. He argued that from a psychological perspective self-image congruity and attitude had been developed from theoretically different traditions. Based on this idea, he assumed that both concepts may conflict with each other. As a result, he assumed that there was no direct relationship between self-image congruity and attitude. Introducing the biasing effect of self-image congruity on functional congruity, Sirgy and Samli s (1985) and Sirgy et al. s (1991) model hypothesized direct relationship between self-image congruity and functional congruity. According to Sirgy et al. (1991), a biasing effect implies that although the functional congruity is stronger predictor of consumer behavior, functional congruity is also influenced by self-image congruity. As shown in Figure 1.2, Sirgy and Samli (1985) hypothesized the path analytic model in which the effects of self-congruity on store loyalty were evident only through functional 7

24 congruity. Sirgy et al. (1991) examined a model in which the effects of self-image congruity on consumer behavior are seen both independently and through functional congruity. In spite of the importance of both self-image/product-image congruity and functional congruity for predicting various aspects of consumer behavior such as brand preference, product preference or purchase intention, all the three extant models which employed both self-image/product-image congruity and functional congruity suggested different points of view about the interrelationship among self-image congruity, functional congruity, and a variety of consumer behavior outcome variables. Previous research has not led to a convincing argument for the primary use of any of the three models; it is uncertain which of the three models is the most appropriate for predicting consumer behavior. Marketing managers are left in a quandary as to which model may be most appropriate. In addition, even though Sirgy et al. (1991) tested their model across different consumer populations and product categories, no study to date has tested the utility of the three models in predicting consumer behavior across different product categories. According to Kotler and Armstrong (2001), consumers might exhibit different perceptions and buying behaviors toward different product categories. Therefore, it is questionable if one model exhibits a superior model fit over the other models regardless of product categories or the model fit varies with types of product. In the context of ski equipment market, if one model indicates a dominant fit over the other models, marketing managers for ski equipment companies can adapt the model to predict skiers consumption behavior across various product categories. Otherwise, marketing managers for ski equipment companies should apply a different model in predicting consumer behaviors, depending on product categories. Therefore, the main purpose of this research was to test and compare the three existing models that integrate self-concept/product-image congruity and functional congruity and to determine which is most predictive of consumers brand preferences across different product categories in the context of ski equipment industry in Korea. The following chapters in this document include a review of literature from which the conceptual definitions of self-concept/product-image congruity, functional congruity, and description about three existing models integrating both self-concept/product-image 8

25 congruity and functional congruity in predicting a variety of consumer behaviors were derived (Ch. 2), an explanation of the methodology utilized for the study (Ch. 3), a reporting of the results from the pilot study, and the main study (Ch. 4), and a discussion of the results along with implications and suggestions for future research (Ch. 5). 9

26 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE The review of literature contains three main sections: (1) self-concept/productimage congruity model, (2) functional congruity model, and (3) three proposed models. The first section discussing the self-concept/product-image congruity model includes four subsections. Since the model is comprised of two elements: self-concept and productimage, the first subsection focuses primarily on the first elements, the self-concept, discussing what is the self-concept, what are the general characteristics of the selfconcept, and what research has been conducted in a variety of academic fields regarding self-concept. The second subsection introduces the notion of product symbolism and product image in connection with a consumer s self-concept. The third subsection synthesizes the two concepts discussed at the previous subsections to explain what the self-concept/product-image congruity model is, and discusses what empirical work using the self-concept/product-image congruity model has been done in the marketing area. The final subsection examines problems and limitations associated with previous measures of the self-concept/product-image congruity model, and then reports on the strength of the method designed by Sirgy et al. (1997) that was used in this study. The second section addressing the functional congruity model consists of two subsections: attitude in general and an expectancy-value model. The first subsection focuses on general characteristics and the historical perspective of attitude. The second subsection describes the general concept of an expectancy-value model, and presents the two most popular versions: Rosenberg (1956) and Fishbein s (1963) models, and the application of the expectancy-value model to marketing. The third section consists of three subsections examining three proposed models that were tested in this study. Each subsection introduces the theoretical and empirical background of each model. 10

27 Self-concept/product-image congruity Self-concept Definition of self-concept. According to Hattie (1992), the number of published articles associated with the self-concept in psychology and education since 1974 surpassed 10,000. Burn (1979) argued that since the cognitive appraisal of self was regarded as a strong driver of the control and direction of human behavior, the concept of self has been of major interest to psychologists, educators, and marketers. Even though the self-concept has drawn significant attention from scholars in a variety of academic fields, there exists ambiguity and variety with regard to a conceptualization of the self-concept. In order to help our understanding of the selfconcept, the first step should be understanding and defining what is the self, based on the idea that the self-concept is an extension of the term self. To understand the current notions of self-concept, it might be valuable to look back and examine some of the previous major philosophical and psychological theories of self. Baumeister (1987) also supported this idea arguing that the modern issues concerning the definition of self could be accounted for by examining the shift in types of definition processes over time. Attempts to determine what the self is dates back to ancient Greek. Hattie (1992) argued that early philosophers such as Socrates and Plato considered the self as the soul. Socrates contended that the soul is the true self, the real person, the essence, the real self, and the spiritual unity. Plato classified the soul into three categories: the rational principle, irrational principle, and desire. Plato, however, emphasized that the rational principle, similar to the concept of intellect or reason, is most critical among the three categories. Plato maintained that developing the intellect leads to better understanding of ourselves. Considering the fact that the fundamental dictum for Socrates and Plato was Know thyself, it is natural that there was much concern for a proper education to lead one to be a rational person, that is, to know oneself (Hattie, 1992). According to Hattie (1992), Locke and Hume held that a person can know him/herself by experience. Locke maintained that if a person can discover what he/she is in terms of experience, he/she will thereby know what kind of a person he/she is. Hume regarded the self as embedded in a series of experiences that combine and recombine, and the experiences follow one another in an endless chain (Hattie, 1992). Kant also 11

28 supported this idea, arguing that the only self we know anything about is the empirical me, not a pure I. These two aspects of the self were labeled by Shopenhauer as the Knower and the Known, respectively (Fiewell, 1997). In the 19th century there was considerable interest in the self. James (1890) first dichotomized the self into those which refer to self as agent or subject (I, knower) and those which refer to self as object (Me, known) (Kang, 1996). The subject was that which thinks and the object was that which was thought about (Hattie, 1992). It was the Me in his conceptualization that became the construct known as self-concept. In this sense James defined the self as an object of self-perception and self-knowledge. According to James, an individual s self is the total sum of all that he or she can tell about him or her. He also argued that human beings have been interested in the interpretation and evaluation of themselves, because self could play a role as the reference point for each individual s view of the world. In the 20th century, while James considered the interaction of one s thoughts, feelings, perceptions, and aspirations critical in the formation of the self-concept, some social integrationists regarded social interactions between the individual and others as essential (Cooley, 1902; Mead, 1934). Cooley (1902) introduced a more sociological perspective of the looking-glass self. The notion of the looking-glass self is the ability of the person to see himself or herself through the reactions of others, and others to appraise and react to the person as an object like other persons. Mead (1934) further theorized that infants are born lacking a self-concept, but they acquire one through social interaction with significant others and peers in which they take on the attitude of these others toward them. Freud (1914) referred the self as ego and placed greater importance on ego development and functioning. Fromm (1947) regarded the self as the inner nature or essential nature of a human being. He also considered that the interest about the self is the fundamental human need. With such general ideas of the self, theorists have established a notion of selfconcept. Rosenberg (1979) defined self-concept as the totality of the individual s thoughts and feelings having reference to himself as an object (p.7). Rosenberg also proposed the idea that self-concept consists of the perceptions a person has about his own abilities, characteristics, limitations, appearance, and personality. Frey and Carlock 12

29 (1982) defined the self-concept as the individual s attitudes toward self. Hattie (1992) maintained that the self-concept is a person s cognitive appraisals of attributes about him or herself. He argued that self-concept could both mediate and regulate behavior. Metha (1999) described self-concept as a person s perception of himself. Dolich (1969) and Landon (1974) simply defined the self-concept as myself as I see myself. Based on the preceding review, the self-concept may be defined in this study as an individual s perception of his or her own abilities, limitations, appearance, and characteristics, including one s own personality. That is to say, the self-concept is a set of knowledge and beliefs about one s self that is stored in memory. General characteristics of self-concept. Considering previous research on selfconcept, Kang (2002) argued that the self-concept has three general characteristics. First, as discussed before, the self can be both subject and object of a person s own knowledge and evaluation. Rosenberg (1979) emphasized that it is necessary to distinguish the difference between the self as subject or agent and the self as an object of the person s own knowledge and evaluation. Rosenberg also argued an individual can stand outside himself and look at himself as an object, describing, evaluating, and responding to himself, but the object he is perceiving, evaluating or responding to is himself (p.20). The second characteristic is that the self-concept is formed through life experiences and social interactions. In an earlier work, Grubb and Grathwohl (1967) postulated that the self-concept is formed in an interaction process between an individual and others, and that an individual will strive for self-enhancement in the interaction process. In a current self-concept trend, social interaction is considered as one of the major concerns of the self-concept (Markus & Wurf, 1987). According to Onkvisit and Shaw (1987), people derive their self-concepts through their interactions with the external environment, especially other people. The third characteristic is that the self-concept has a multidimensional structure. James (1890) argued that there were four facets of the self-concept: spiritual self, material self, social self, and bodily self (Hattie, 1992). The spiritual self is composed of the thoughts and feelings which are a composite of one s intellectual, moral, and religious beliefs. The material self consists of those material possessions that we see as a part of us. Incorporating the opinions of the individuals and groups one values forms the social self. 13

30 The bodily self was considered by James as least important, and is simply one s physical appearance. He further claimed that these were hierarchically ordered according to their worth, and the self-concept was the total sum of all these attributes (Hattie, 1992). Tannenbaum (1978) divided the self-concept into dynamism, proprioception, exteroception, and regarding the other, based on process rather than content. He defined dynamism as those elements contributing to the emergence of a biologically and environmentally enriched person striving for completeness. For propriorception, he argued that there were three kinds of propriorception such as self-perceiving, self-feeling, and self-finding, which are related to person s inner state. The exteroception is the process converting attention from the internal state to the external factors influencing self-development. Regarding the other is the final process within the self-concept. He argued that if a person feels qualitatively different from the other, the person consequently realizes that he or she is quantitatively different from the other (Hattie, 1992). According to Rosenberg (1979), there were many ways in which an individual sees him or herself. These ways are associated with the content of the self including physical and material aspects, social structure, self as a social actor, abilities and talents, interests and attitudes, abstract characteristics such as personality traits, and inner thoughts, feelings and attitudes. Based on Rosenberg s (1979) idea, Higgins (1983) argued that the self can be classified into actual self, ideal self, and ought self. He defined the actual self as how an individual actually sees himself, the ideal self as how an individual would like to be, and the ought self as how an individual feels he should be. In the following subsection, more discussion is presented on how the dimensions of the self-concept are different and what research has been conducted in various academic areas regarding the dimensions of selfconcept. Research on the self-concept. Educators and educational psychologists have agreed with the premise that the self-concept is a hierarchical and multidimensional structure. Shavelson and colleagues maintained that the self-concept is organized hierarchically, with a number of different domains or facets (Hattie, 1992; Shavelson & Bolus, 1982; Shavelson, Hubner, & Stanton, 1976; Shavelson & March, 1986). Shavelson 14

31 et al. (1976) introduced the hierarchical and multidimensional features of a self-concept model. In their model, a general self-concept located at the apex of the model was divided into two dimensions: academic and non-academic self-concept. In turn, these secondorder facets can be subdivided. Academic self-concept can be divided into subject matter areas (i.e., English, history, mathematics, and science). Non-academic self-concept can be divided into peers, significant others, emotional states, physical ability and physical appearance under the headings of social self-concept, emotional self-concept, and physical self-concept. Marsh and his colleagues made an effort to support the adequacy of the Shavelson et al. s model with a scale to assess self-concept across seven first-order facets (i.e., physical appearance, physical abilities, peer relations, parent relations, reading, mathematics, and school) for children in grades 2-5, and adolescents. They found that instead of having one second-order academic self-concept factor to represent the covariance in the first-order academic factor as indicated by Shavelson et al. (1976), having two second-order academic factors (i.e., mathematics and reading) showed the best model fit to the sample data as well as only one second-order non-academic factor was specified to represent covariance in the non-academic factors. Song and Hattie (1984) modified Shavelson s model in two aspects. First, they divided academic self-concept into achievement, ability, and classroom self-concepts. Ability self-concept was defined as the extent to which the individual believes he or she is capable of achieving, whereas achievement self-concept relates to feelings or perceptions of actual achievement (Hattie, 1992). The classroom self-concept denoted how confident an individual was in his or her classroom activities. Second, the nonacademic self-concept was modified and reformulated as two second-order factors: social self-concept and self-regard or presentation self-concept. Along with the attempt to clarify the dimensionality of the self-concept, educators also made an effort to find behavioral correlates of self-concept, based on the idea that the self-concept may guide, mediate, and regulate an individual s behavior (Hattie, 1992). Even though there are several behavioral correlates of self-concept that have been of particular interest to educators, one of the most consistent lines of inquiry in the literature relating to self-concept has been an attempt to uncover the possible link 15

32 between self-concept and the various measures of academic performance or achievement. Wyile (1979) argued that a person s self-concept is strongly associated with academic achievement. Addressing the results of previous studies that showed positive correlations between self-concept and academic achievement, he hypothesized that students who had higher self-concept can achieve a higher grade than those who had lower self-concept. The results of his study also indicated that there was a positive relationship (0.30) between grade point average and a test of overall self-concept. This result could allow educators to consider the self-concept enhancement as a resource for raising students academic achievement. West, Fish, and Stevens (1980) also reported that sufficient evidence of a significant correlation between general self-concept and achievement does exist ranging from.18 to.50. James (1890) was the first psychologist to introduce the self-concept to the area of psychology (Reed, 2002). He not only established the multifaceted and hierarchical notion of the self-concept with three constituents (e.g., bodily self, social self, and spiritual self), but also believed that these three elements of the self may be capable of regulating and guiding individual behavior. Like educators, psychologists mainly focused on the examination of the selfconcept as a behavioral influence. Rogers (1951) explained that each individual will strive to actualize, maintain, and enhance himself or herself, and then these needs will drive people s behaviors (Felker, 1974). Maslow (1954) introduced similar ideas in describing the process of self-actualization, which refers to the process of achieving one s potential. According to Maslow, an individual is motivated to behave and act in order to achieve his or her potential. Epstine (1973) introduced the notion of the self-concept as a self-theory, which he defined as the vehicle by which people construe themselves and their experiences. Epstein hypothesized three unique functions of the self-theory: to assimilate experience, to promote self-esteem, and to increase feelings of pleasure over pain. Therefore, Epstein s notion of the self-theory incorporates the self-concept as both the aggregate of one s self-evaluations as defined by James (1961), and as an active regulator of cognitive and affective process. In a consumer behavior context, this idea that the self-concept may guide and 16

33 regulate an individual s behavior could provide interesting insights with an assumption that consumers might be influenced to direct their purchase behavior towards products and brands that will protect or enhance their self-concept (Grubb & Grathwohl, 1967). In short, individual consumers might use products and brand to express something about themselves. Based on this assumption, Sirgy (1982) argued that consumers choose products that are consistent with their perceptions of themselves and reject those which are incongruent with them, which is called self-concept/product-image congruity. The greater the match between the product or brand image and a consumer s self-concept, the more likely that the consumer has a favorable attitude toward that product or brand. He explained that products and brands were considered as objects that consumers purchase either to maintain or enhance their self-concept. He also posited that the choice of which brand to buy depends upon how consistent the consumer perceives the brand to be with his or her self-concept. Chon (1992) first applied the self-concept/product-image congruity model to tourism through a study of post-visit satisfaction. He found that tourists satisfaction significantly correlated with self-image/destination image congruity. That is, he found tourists who perceived a low discrepancy between a destination s user-image and their self-image were most satisfied with the destination, while those with high discrepancy were found to be least satisfied. Like education and psychology, the self-concept was also considered to have a multidimensional structure in the marketing area. Some researchers have argued that selfconcept must be treated as having two components- the actual self-concept and the ideal self-concept, defined as the image of oneself as one would like to be (Belch, 1978; Belch & Landon, 1977; Dolich, 1969; Sirgy, 1982). The ideal self-concept has been referred to as the ideal self, idealized image, and desired self. Other investigators have gone beyond these two dimensions. Sirgy (1980) referred to actual self-image, ideal self - image, social self-image, and ideal social self-image. The social self-concept (sometimes referred to as looking glass self or presenting self ) has been defined as the image that one believes others possess, while the ideal social self-concept (sometimes referred to as desired social self ) denotes the image that one would like others to possess 17