稀少性被認為是最具效果的說服性原則之一，行銷實務中常見許多品牌利用稀少性訴求來增加消費者的注意力及購買意願。然而對於有關產品稀少性如何增進消費者購買意願、以及稀少性訴求是否適用於所有銷售情境卻仍不甚清楚。對於行銷活動之規劃而言，了解稀少性如何影響產品評估與探討稀少性效果是否會受產品基本態度影響是一重要議題。

本篇論文的第一部分，是奠基於 Lynn 1991年所提出的 S-E-D 模型，與Monroe and Krishnan (1985) 的知覺價值模型，提出一個較完整的稀少性效果架構來驗證產品稀少性如何透過中介機制—預期昂貴、知覺品質、知覺符號性利益、知覺貨幣犧牲，進而影響知覺價值與購買意願。本研究利用線性結構模式來驗證該模型之適切性。研究結果指出：產品稀少性會透過預期昂貴、 知覺品質、與知覺符號性利益的提升進而增加知覺價值與購買意願。

本篇論文的第二部分，則根據激勵推斷理論(Motivated Reasoning Theory)與訊息曲解理論(Information Distortion Theory)來驗證消費者對產品的基本態度是否會干擾稀少性訊息對產品評估的影響。研究中針對兩個不同的產品，利用兩個2 (產品的初始態度：喜好/不喜好) X 2 (產品供應: 充分/稀少)的實驗設計，並搭配衡量或操弄兩種不同的態度運作來進行干擾效果分析。研究結果指出：在喜好態度下，產品稀少性會更加提升知覺品質, 同時會降低知覺貨幣犠牲，進而明顯地強化消費者對產品的知覺價值。研究中並發現，消費者對產品的基本態度，相對於稀少性訊息，對知覺價值有更強烈的影響。最後，本篇論文根據研究結果提出具體建議與未來研究方向。

In the world of applied marketing, scarcity appeal is an important strategy (Brannon and McCabe, 2001). Famous brands like NIKE, Apple, and Swatch have designed and produced limited-edition products specifically to stress the unavailability of products, thereby attracting more attention from markets and intensifying the desire for ownership (Brannon and McCabe, 2001). However, how scarcity affect evaluation, and does scarcity work for all products and on all consumers are not clear.

The first part of this article examines how scarcity influences consumers’ value perceptions and purchase intents via mediating mechanisms—assumed expensiveness, perceived quality/symbolic benefits, and perceived monetary sacrifice. To fully understand the effects of scarcity, a conceptual framework incorporating Lynn’s S-E-D model (1992b) and the price-perceived quality model (Monroe & Krishnan, 1985) is developed. The proposed model is tested using SEM (Structural Equation Modeling) performed by LISREL, and results indicate that all hypothesized causal relationships are statistically significant.

The second part of this paper, based on motivated reasoning theory (Agrawal and Maheswaran, 2005; Jain and Maheswaran, 2000) and information distortion theory (Adaval, 2003; Chernev, 2001), explores the moderating impact of consumers’ initial product attitudes on the effects of scarcity. These results show that individuals utilize different strategies in processing scarcity information, influencing the value perception in varied ways. Finally, this study concludes by discussing managerial implications and making suggestions for future research.

References

Adaval, R. (2003), “How good gets better and bad gets worse: Understanding the impact of affect on evaluations of known brands,” Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), 352-367
Agarwal, S. and Teas, R.K. (2001), “Perceived value: Mediating role of perceived risk,” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Fall, 1-13.
Agrawal, N. and Maheswaran, D. (2005), “Motivated reasoning in outcome-bias effects,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 798-806.
Atlas, M.S. and Snyder, C.R. (1978), “The effects of need-for uniqueness upon valuation of scarce and non-scarce objects,” unpublished honors thesis at the University of Kansas.
Bagozzi, R.R. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of structural equation models,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94.
Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986). “The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(December), 1173-1182.
Bell, D. (1982), “Regret in decision making under uncertainty,” Operations Research, 30 (September-October), 961-981.
Bhat, S. and Reddy, S.K. (1998), “Symbolic and Functional Positioning of Brands,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 15(1), 32-43.
Bolton, L., Warlop, L., and Alba, J.W. (2003), “Consumer perceptions of price (un) fairness,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29(2), 474-491.
Brannon, L. A., and Brock, T. C. (1998), Scarcity claims elicit extreme responding to persuasive messages: Role of cognitive elaboration. Unpublished manuscript.
Brannon, L. A., and Brock, T. C. (2001), “Limiting time for responding enhances behavior corresponding to the merits of compliance appeals: Refutations of heuristic-cue theory in service and consumer settings,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 10(3), 135-146.
Brannon L. A., and Mccabe, A. E. (2001), “Time-restricted sales appeals: the importance of offering real value,” Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 42(4), 47-52.
Brock, T. C. (1968), “Implications of commodity theory for value change,” In Greenwald, A.G., Brock, T.C., and Wstrom, T.M. (Eds.), Psychological Foundations of Attitudes, New York: Academic Press.
Chapman, J. and Wahlers, R. (1999), A Revision and Empirical Test of the Extended Price-perceived Quality Model,” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Summer, 53-64.
Chernev, A. (2001), “The impact of common features on consumer preferences: A case of confirmatory reasoning,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27(4), 475-488.
Cialdini, R. B. (1993). Influence: Science and Practice, New York: Harper Collins.
Cialdini R.B., Trost, M.R., and Newsom, J. (1995), “Preference for consistency: The development of a valid measure and the discovery of surprising behavioral implication,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(February), 318-328.
Dickson, P.R., Sawyer, A.G.. (1990), “The price knowledge and search of supermarket shoppers,” Journal of Marketing, 54(3), 42-53.
Dodds, W. and Monroe K. B. (1985), “The effect of brand and price information on subjective product evaluations”, Advances in Consumer Research, 12, 85-90.
Dodds, W., Monroe D. B. and Grewal, D. (1991), “Effects of price, brand store information on buyers’ product evaluations,” Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 307-319.
Emerson, R.M. (1962), “Power-dependence relations,” American Sociological Review, 27, 31-41.
Festinger, L. (1957), A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Palo Alto, CA: Standford University Press.
Folger, R. (1992), “On wanting what we do not have,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 123-133.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error,” Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
Fromkin, H.L. (1970), “Effects of experimentally aroused feelings of undistinctiveness upon valuation of scarce and novel experience,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 521-529.
Giner-Sorolla, R. and Chaiken (1997), “Selective use of heuristic and systematic processing under defense motivation,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23 (January), 84-97.
Hanna, N. and Wozniak, R. (2001), Consumer Behavior: An Applied Approach, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Holman, R.H. (1980), Apparel as Communication, In: Hirschman, E. C. and Holbrook, M. B. (Eds.), Symbolic Consumer Behavior, MI: Association for Consumer Research.
Inman, J. J., Anil, C. P., and Raghubir, P. (1997), “Framing the deal: The role of restrictions in accentuating deal value,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 68-79.
Jain, S.P. and Maheswaran, D. (2000), “Motivated reasoning: A depth of processing perspective,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26(4), 358-371.
Janis, I.L. and Mann, L. (1977), Decision Making. New York: Free Press.
Jöreskog, K.G. and Sörbom, D. (2001), LISREL 8: User’s Reference Guide. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software Inc.
Jung, J. M., and Kellaris, J. J. (2004), “Cross-national differences in proneness to scarcity effects: The moderating roles of familiarity, uncertainty avoidance, and need for cognitive closure,” Psychology & Marketing, 21(9), 739-753.
Keller, K.L. (1993), “Conceptualizing, Measuring and Managing Customer-based Brand Equity,” Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.
Klayman, J. (1995), “Varieties of confirmation bias,” Decision Making from the Perspective of Cognitive Psychology, In: Busemeyer, J.R., Hastie, R., and Medin, D.L., New York: Academic Press, 385-418.
Kline, R.B., (1998), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, New York: Guilford Press.
Lichtenstein, D., Bloch, P.H., and Black, W.C. (1988), “Correlates of price acceptability,” Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 243-252.
Lichtenstein, D., Ridgway, N.M., Netemeyer, R.G.. (1993), “Price perceptions and consumer shopping behavior: A field study,” Journal of Marketing Research, 30(2), 234-245.
Lord, C.G., Lepper, M.R., and Ross, L. (1979), “Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(November), 2098-2110.
Lynn, M., (1989), “Scarcity effects on desirability: mediated by assumed expensiveness,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 10, 257-274.
Lynn M., (1991), “Scarcity effects on value: A quantitative review of the commodity theory literature,” Psychology & Marketing, 8(1), 43-57.
Lynn, M., (1992a), “The psychology of unavailability: explaining scarcity and cost effects on value,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 3-7.
Lynn, M., (1992b), “Scarcity’s enhancement of desirability: The role of naïve economic theories,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 67-78.
Lynn, M. and Bogert, P. (1996), “The effects of scarcity on anticipated price appreciation,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26(22), 1978-1984.
Monroe, K.B. and Krishnan, R. (1985), “The Effect of Price on Subjective Product Evaluations,” In: Jacoby, J. and Olson, J.C. (Eds.), Perceived Quality: How Consumers View Stores and Merchandise, Lexington Books.
Parasuraman, A. (1997), “Reflections on going competitive advantage through customer value,” Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science, 25(2), 154-161.
Rao, A.R. and Monroe, K.B. (1989), “The effect of price, brand name, and store name on buyers’ perceptions of product quality: An integrative review,” Journal of Marketing Research, 26(3), 351-357.
Rieck, D. (1997), “A Stick and Red Feathers: How to Trigger the ‘Yes’ Response,” Direct Marketing, 60(8), 54-55.
Russo, J.E., Medvec, V.H., and Meloy, M.G.. (1996), “The distortion of information during decisions,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66(1), 102-110.
Russo, J.E., Meloy, M.G., and Medvec, V.H. (1998), “Predecisional distortion of product information,” Journal of Marketing Research, 35(November), 438-452.
Scitovsky, T. (1945), “Some consequences of the habit of judging quality by price,” Review of Economic Studies, 12, 100-105.
Salter, S.F. (1997), “Developing a customer value-based theory of the firm,” Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science, 25(2), 162-167.
Seta, J. J., and Seta, C. E. (1992), “Personal equity-comparison theory: An analysis of value and the generation of compensatory and noncompensatory expectancies,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 47-66.
Snyder, C.R. (1992), “Product Scarcity by Need for Uniqueness Interaction: A Consumer Catch-22 Carousel,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 9-24.
Snyder, C.R. and Fromkin, H. L. (1980), Uniqueness: The Human Pursuit of Difference, New York: Plenum.
Solomon, M.R. (1983), “The role of products as social stimuli: A symbolic interactionism perspective,” Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 319-329.
Stock A. and Balachander, S. (2005), “The making of a “Hot Product”: A signaling explanation of marketers’ scarcity strategy,” Management Science, 51(8), 1181-1192.
Suri, R., and Monroe, K. B. (2003), “The effects on time constraints on consumers’ Judgments of process and products,” Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 92-104.
Swami, S. and Khairnar, P. J. (2003), “Diffusion of products with limited supply and known expiration date,” Marketing Letters, 14(1), 33-46.
Teas, P. K. and Agarwal S. (1997), Quality cues and perceptions. Iowa State University working Paper #37.6: Iowa State University.
Teas, R. K., and Agarwal, S. (2000), “The effects of extrinsic product cues on consumers’ perceptions of quality, sacrifice, and value,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 280-292.
Verhallen , T. M. M. (1982), “Scarcity and consumer choice behavior,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 2, 299-321.
Verhallen , T. M. M. (1984), “Unavailability and the evaluation of goods: A behavioral economics approach,” unpublished manuscript, Tilburg University, The Netherlands.
Verhallen, T. M. M., and Robben, H. S. J. (1994), “Scarcity and preference: an experiment on unavailability and product evaluation,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 15, 315-331.
Verhallen T. M. M., and Robben, H. S. J., (1995), “Unavailability and the evaluation of goods,” Kyklos, 48, 369-387.
Wills, T.A. (1981), “Downward comparison principles in social psychology,” Psychological Bulletin, 90, 245-271.
Wood, C.M. and Scheer, L.K. (1996), “Incorporating perceived risk into models of consumer deal assessment and purchase intent,” Advances in Consumer Research, 23, 399-404.
Worchel, S. (1992), “Beyond a commodity theory analysis of censorship: When abundance and personalism enhance scarcity effects,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 79-92.