As a society, it’s often said that we are driven to desire
objects that we cant have and therefore want them even more (Luigi, 2009). People place high value
on objects that are in short supply, and lower the value on those that are in
abundance – scarcity.
An example of this is the “PS4 – 20th Anniversary
Edition”. This trailer outlines a number of principles that form the scarcity
persuasion technique. (1) Social Proof – if a product is sold or there are an
extremely low number of stocks available (only 12,300 20th
Anniversary PS4 worldwide), then people automatically interpret this to mean
that the product is good. (2) Commitment and Consistency – if someone has
already committed themselves to something (for stance, all the game consoles
invented by Play Station), then find out that they can’t have one, it makes
them want it even more. (3) Uniqueness – people are motivated to maintain
individual differences in terms of how they define themselves on various
important self-related dimensions; for instances being one few people in the
world to own a limited edition 20th Anniversary PS4.
Van Herpen et al (2014) carried out
study that aimed to look at the effects of scarcity of a specific wine to
increase the demands for this choice. In experiment 1 participants were exposed
to a shelf a rare wine (partly stocked) and a common wine (fully stocked
shelf). Those in the ‘rare wine’ condition were told that there weren’t many
available due to either a high demand or limited supply. In experiment 2
participants were asked to “Imagine that a close friend, who has moved abroad,
was coming to visit on Friday. You are looking forward to having an evening to
chat together, which you cannot do very often. You are going to buy a bottle of
wine for that evening. Next, you will see three wines from which you can make a
choice.” A picture informed them of what the bottles look like and how many are
in the store. One of the wines had emptied shelf space as evidence of prior
purchases (demand-scarce); another had shelf space only for 3 bottles
(supply-scarce); and the final wine was presented with 9 bottles in shelf space
fitted for these 9 bottles (control group).
TABLE 1. Mean scores of participant
rating scale in experiment 1
|
|||||||||
|
Popularity
|
Exclusiveness
|
quality
|
Preference
|
|||||
Rare
|
common
|
Rare
|
common
|
Rare
|
common
|
Rare
|
common
|
||
Scarcity
|
Demand-caused
|
6.96
|
4.26
|
4.60
|
5.80
|
6.33
|
6.40
|
5.91
|
6.22
|
Supply-caused
|
6.49
|
5.40
|
4.26
|
3.87
|
5.60
|
5.70
|
5.32
|
5.89
|
Results indicate that participants generally
rated the rare wine was more poplar than the common wine, even more so when the
reason for the scarcity was due to a high consumer demand rather than limited
supply. Table 1. also indicated that the rare wine was considered more
exclusive when the reason for scarcity was due to limited supply
available.
Reference
Van
Harpen, E., Pieters, R., & Zeelenberg, M. (2014). When less sells more or
less: The scarcity principle in wine choice. Food Quality and Prefernce, 36, 153-160
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.