Young-Soo Kim, Do-Hyung Park and Se-Bum Park
People can easily track and understand their usage pattern for any content (e.g. movies, games) or service (e.g. card payment, cell phone usage) by using technologies such as the…
Abstract
Purpose
People can easily track and understand their usage pattern for any content (e.g. movies, games) or service (e.g. card payment, cell phone usage) by using technologies such as the internet and smart phones. When consumers evaluate their past consumption patterns, they may experience two different kinds of regret: content-based or monetary-based. The purpose of this paper is to propose that perceived self-control, defined as the extent to which people believe they can control their usage, plays a moderating role in the tariff-choice process (flatrate vs pay-per-use) for two types of content: vice-based and virtue-based.
Design/methodology/approach
Two laboratory experiments were designed to test the hypotheses. There were a total of 200 participants (86 for Experiment 1 and 114 for Experiment 2) who completed the entire experimental process (i.e. stimulus exposure, questionnaire reporting, dependent variable measurement, manipulation of the independent variables, and control checks).
Findings
The results of this research provide evidence supporting the role of perceived self-control in tariff preference by showing that preference varies between flat-rate and pay-per-use tariff options. Specifically, virtue-based content users were more likely to prefer the pay-per-use tariff when their perceived self-control was low vs when it was high. In contrast, vice-based content users were more likely to prefer the flat-rate tariff when their perceived self-control was low vs when it was high.
Originality/value
There are three contributions of the present research. First, the authors investigated the effect of content type on tariff preference. Second, the authors suggest that there is a moderating effect of perceived self-control on tariff preference. Third, this study revealed the factors affecting consumers’ perceived self-control.
Details
Keywords
Johanna E. Elzerman, Martinus A.J.S. van Boekel and Pieternel A. Luning
Meat substitutes can be environmentally more sustainable alternatives to meat. However, the image of these products in The Netherlands is still low. The purpose of this paper is…
Abstract
Purpose
Meat substitutes can be environmentally more sustainable alternatives to meat. However, the image of these products in The Netherlands is still low. The purpose of this paper is to explore consumers' experiences and sensory expectations of meat substitutes and the appropriateness of the use of meat substitutes in meals.
Design/methodology/approach
In total, 46 consumers took part in seven focus group discussions. These discussions consisted of three steps, starting with a general discussion on meat substitutes, followed by a discussion on the appropriateness of the use of meat substitutes as ingredients (minced, in pieces or slices) by using photographs of six different dishes (soup, pasta, rice, wrap, meal salad, and pizza). The discussions were concluded with a taste session of two dishes with meat substitutes.
Findings
Consumers in this study regarded health aspects and easy preparation as positive aspects of meat substitutes. Lack of information on the package, and high price were reported as negative. Sensory aspects such as neutral taste or tastiness, crispiness, chicken‐like texture, or granular texture were seen as positive attributes. Negative sensory aspects that were mentioned were uniform taste, compactness, dryness and softness. Most consumers found the use of meat substitutes appropriate in the dishes we presented.
Originality/value
The paper's findings can, together with quantitative consumer and sensory research, be a start towards consumer‐oriented product development of environmentally more sustainable meat substitutes. The central role of meal context and appropriateness is an aspect that has not yet received much attention in food science.