Satın Alma Niyetinin Öngörüsünde Planlı Davranış Modeli’nin Farklı Ürün Sınıfları İçin Denenmesi

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 2, 111 - 127, 29.06.2015

Taner Sığındı , Bahtışen Kavak

https://doi.org/10.18037/ausbd.29324

Cited By: 4

Öz

Satın alma davranışını etkileyen öncül değişkenlerin farklı ürün sınıfları için incelenmesinin, pazarlama uygulamacıları ve araştırmacılar için önemli faydalar sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir. Yapılan yazın taramasında, belirli bir ürün sınıfı için Planlı Davranış Kuramı’nı (PDK) satın alma davranışının öngörüsünde test eden bir çalışmaya rastlanmamıştır. Dolayısıyla çalışmanın amacı, satın alma niyetinin öngörüsünde farklı ürün sınıfları için PDK’nın kullanılıp kullanılamayacağını açıklamaya çalışmaktır. Bu amaçla PDK’de yer alan tutum, öznel norm ve algılanan davranışsal kontrol değişkenlerinin satın alma niyeti üzerindeki etkisi Copeland’in ürün sınıflandırmasında yer alan kolayda, beğenmeli ve özellikli mallar için araştırılmıştır. Satın alma niyetinin, uygun koşullarda satın alma davranışına dönüşeceği varsayılmıştır. Ankara ve Gaziantep il merkezlerinde yaşayan 570 hane halkı çalışmanın örneklemini oluşturmaktadır. Veriler yüzyüze görüşme yöntemi ile toplanmış ve çoklu doğrusal regresyon analizi kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma bulguları tutum, öznel norm ve algılanan davranışsal kontrol değişkenlerinin satın alma niyetini; kolayda, beğenmeli ve özellikli mallar için olumlu bir şekilde etkilediğini göstermektedir. Bu etkinin farklı ürün sınıfları için değişen oranlarda gerçekleştiği tespit edilmiştir. Çalışmanın son kısmında, yöneticiler ve gelecekte yapılacak çalışmalar için öneriler sunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Planlı Davranış Kuramı, Kolayda Mallar,, Beğenmeli Mallar, Özellikli Mallar

Kaynakça

• Ajzen, I. (1985). From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior. Kuhl, J. ve Beckman, J. (Ed.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior, Germany: Springer.
• Ajzen, I. (1991). e eory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), December, 179-211.
• Ajzen, I. (2002a). Residual E ects of Past on Later Behavior: Habituation and Reasoned Action Pers- pectives. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6(2), 107-122.
• Ajzen, I. (2002b). Perceived Behavioral Control, Self- Efficacy, Locus of Control, and the eory of Plan- ned Behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665-683.
• Ajzen, I. (2006). Constructing a TPB Questionnaire: Conceptual and Methodological Considerations. http://www.people. umass.edu/aizen/pdf/tpb. me- asurement.pdf. (12 Nisan 2010).
• Ajzen, I. (2008). Consumer Attitudes and Behavior. Herr, P.M. ve Cardes, F.R. (Ed.), Handbook of Con- sumer Psychology içinde (s. 525-548). New York, U.S.A.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Ajzen, I. ve Fishbein, M. (1980). Predicting and Un- derstanding Consumer Behavior: Attitude-Behavi- or Correspondence. Ajzen, I. ve Fishbein, M. (Ed.), Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Be- havior içinde (s. 148-172). U.S.A.: Prentice-Hall.
• Ajzen, I. ve Fishbein, M. (2000). Attitudes and the Atti- tude-Behavior Relation: Reasoned and Automatic Processes. European Review of Social Psychology, 11, 1-33.
• Ajzen, I. ve Madden, T.J. (1986). Prediction Of Goal- Directed Behavior: Attitudes, Intentions, And Per- ceived Behavioral Control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(5), 453-474.
• Akgül, A. ve Çevik, O. (2003). İstatistiksel Analiz Tek- nikleri: SPSS’te İşletme Uygulamaları. Ankara: Emek.
• Albarracin, D.; Johnson, B.T.; Fishbein, M. ve Muel- lerleile, P.A. (2001). eories of Reasoned Action and Planned Behavior as Models of Condom Use: A Meta-Analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 142-161.
• Armitage, C.J. ve Conner, M. (2001). E icacy of the eory of Planned Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Re- view. e British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, December, 471-499.
• Arvola, A.; Vassallo, M.; Dean, M.; Lampila, P.; Saba, A.; Lahteenmaki, L. ve Shepherd, R. (2008). Pre- dicting Intentions to Purchase Organic Food: e Role of A ective and Moral
• Attitudes in the eory of Planned Behavior. Appetite, 50, 443-454.
• Bansal, H.S. ve Taylor, S.F. (2002). Investigating In- teractive E ects in the eory of Planned Be- havior in a Service-Provider Switching Context. Psychology&Marketing, 19(5), 407-425.
• Bearden, W.O. ve Etzel, M.J. (1982). Reference Group In uence on Product and Brand Purchase Decisi- ons. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 183-194.
• Bearden, W.O. ve Woodside, A.G. (1977). e E ect of Attitudes and Previous Behavior on Consumer Choice. Journal of Social Psychology, 103, 129-137.
• Bonfield, E.H. (1974). Attitude, Social In uence, Per- sonal Norm, and Intention Interactions as Related to Brand Purchase Behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 11, November, 379-389.
• Chiou, J.S.; Huang, C. ve Chuang, M. (2005). Antece- dents of Taiwanese Adolescents’ Purchase Inten- tion Toward the Merchandise of a Celebrity: e Moderating E ect of
• Celebrity Adoration. Journal of Social Psychology, 145(3), 317-332.
• Cook, A.J.; Kerr, G.N. ve Moore, K. (2002). Attitudes and Intentions Towards Purchasing GM Food. Jo- urnal of Economic Psychology, 23, 557-572.
• Cooke, R. ve Sheeran, P. (2004). Moderation of Cogni- tion-Intention and Cognition-Behavior Relations: A Meta-analysis of Properties of Variables From the eory of Planned Behavior. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 159-186.
• Copeland, M.T. (1923). Relation of Consumers’ Buying Habits to Marketing Methods. Harvard Busi- ness Reviews, 1(3), 282-289.
• De Canniere, M.H., De Pelsmacker, P. ve Geuens, M. (2009). Relationship Quality and the eory of Planned Behavior Models of Behavioral Intentions and Purchase Behavior. Journal of Business Research, 62, 82-92.
• Derbaix, C. Ve Leheut, E. (2008). Adolescents: Invol- vement in Product Categories and Attitude Toward Brands. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 23(2), 37-64.
• Ford, Je rey D. ve Elwood A. Ellis (1980). A Reexa- mination of Group In uence on Member Brand Preference. Journal of Marketing Research, 17, February, 125-132.
• Foxall, G.R. ve De Soriano, M.M.Y. (2005). Situational In uences on Consumers’ Attitudes and Behavior. Journal of Business Research, 58, 518-525.
• Francis, J.J., Eccles, M.P., Johnston, M., Walker, A., Grimshaw, J., Foy, R., Kaner, E.F.S., Smith, L. ve Bonetti, D. (2004). “Constructing Questionnaires Based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour: A Manual for Health Services Researches.” http:// www.people.umass.edu/aizen/pdf/Francis%20etal. TPB%20- research%20manual.pdf, (13nisan2010).
• Garson, D. (2010). Testing of Assumptions. Wor- king Paper. http://faculty.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/ PA765/ assumpt.htm. (11 Ağustos 2010)
• Glasman, L.R. ve Albarracin, D. (2006). Forming Atti- tudes at Predict Future Behavior: A Meta-Analy- sis of the Attitude-Behavior Relation. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 778-822.
• Glassman, M. ve Fitzhenry, N. (1976). Fishbein’s Sub- jective Norm: eoretical Considerations and Em- pirical Evidence. Advances in Consumer Research, 3(1), 477-480.
• Gökdemir, Ö. (2005). Avrupa Birliği ve Türkiye’de As- gari Çalışma Yaşı Uygulamaları. Son Baskı, 2(3), http://www. sonbaski.com/mart2005 ozge.htm, (11 ağustos 2010).
• Grimm, P. E. (2005). A Components’ Impact on Brand Preference. Journal of Business Research, 58, 508- 517.
• Grubb, E.L. ve Stern, B.L. (1971). Self-Concept and Significant Others. Journal of Marketing Research, 8, August, 382-385.
• Hafstrom, J.L.; Chae, J.S. ve Chung, Y.S. (1992). Con- sumer Decision-Making Styles: Comparison Bet- ween United States and Korean Young Consumers. Journal of Consumer A airs, 26(1), 146-158.
• Hair, J.F., Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J.; Anderson, R.E. ve Tatham, R.L. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis (6th edition). U.S.A.: Pearson-Prentice Hall.
• Hay, J.F. ve Jacoby, L.L. (1996). Seperating Habit and Recollection: Memory Slips, Process Dissociations, and Probability Matching. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 22, 1323-1335.
• Harrell, G.D. (2002). Marketing: Connecting with Cus- tomers (2nd edition). U.S.A.: Prentice-Hall.
• Hoyer, W.D. (1984). An Examination of Consumer Decision Making for a Common Repeat Purchase Product. Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 822- 829.
• Hoyer, W.D. ve Brown, S.P. (1990). E ects of Brand Awareness on Choice for a Common, Repeat- Purchase Product. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 141-148.
• Hundekar, S.G.; Appannaiah, H.R. ve Reddy, P.N. (2010). Principles of Marketing. India: Mumbai.
• Kavak, B. (2013). Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları: Tasarım ve Analiz (2. baskı). Ankara, Türkiye: Detay.
• Kavak, B. ve Sığındı, T. (2012). Pazarlamadaki Ürün Sını andırmasına İlişkin bir Yazın İncelemesi. H.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 30(1), 49-67.
• Kerin, R.A.; Hartley, S.W.; Berkowitz, E.N. ve Rude- lius, W. (2003). Marketing (8th edition). U.S.A.: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
• Kim, K.; Reicks, M. ve Sjoberg, S. (2003). Applying the eory of Planned Behavior to Predict Dairy Product Consumption by Older Adults. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 35(6), 294-301.
• Kokkinaki, F. (1999). Predicting Product Purchase and Usage: The Role of Perceived Control, Past Behavior and Product Involvement. Advances in Consumer Research, 26, 576-583.
• Kotler, P. ve Armstrong, G. (2008). Principles of Mar- keting (12th edition). U.S.A.: Pearson-PrenticeHall.
• Lee, C. ve Green, R.T. (1991). Cross-Cultural Exami- nation of the Fishbein Behavioral Intentions Mo- del. Journal of International Business Studies, 22(2), 289-305.
• Leong, S.M. (1993). Consumer Decision Making for Common, Repeat-Purchase Products: A Dual Replication. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2(2), 193-208.
• Liska, A.E. (1984). A Critical Examination of the Causal Structure of the Fishbein/Ajzen Attitude-Be- havior Model. Social Psychology Quarterly, 47(1), 61-74.
• Louis, W; Davies, S.; Smith, J. ve Terry, D. (2007). Pizza and Pop and the Student Identity: e Role of Referent Group Norms in Healty and Unhealty Eating. Journal of Social Psychology, 147(1), 57-74.
• Lussier, D.A. ve Olshavsky, R.W. (1979). Task Comp- lexity and Contingent Processing in Brand Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 6(2), 154-165.
• Maison, D.; Greenwald, A.G. ve Bruin, R.H. (2004). Predictive Validity of the Implicit Association Test in Studies of Brands, Consumer Attitudes, and Behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(4), 405- 415.
• Mannetti, L.; Pierro, A. ve Livi, S. (2002). Explai- ning Consumer Conduct: From Planned to Self- Expressive Behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(7), 1431-1451.
• Mason, R. (2005). Missing Links: Product Classification Theory and the Social Characteristics of Goods, Marketing Theory, 5(3), 309-322.
• Moschis, G.P. (1976). Social Comparison and Informal Group In uence. Journal of Marketing Research, 13, August, 237-244.
• Murphy, P.E. ve Enis, B.M. (1986). Classifying Pro- ducts Strategically. Journal of Marketing, 50, July, 24-42.
• Nederhof, A.J. (1989). Self-Involvement, Intention Certainty and Attitude-Intention Consistency. British Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 123-133.
• Ouellette, J.A. ve Wood, W. (1998). Habit and Inten- tion in Everyday Life: e Multiple Processes by Which Past Behavior Predicts Future Behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 124(1), 54-74.
• Peter, J.P. ve DonnellyJr, J.H. (2003). A Preface to Marketing Management (9th edition), (U.S.A.: McGraw-Hill).
• Petty, R.E.; Cacioppo, J.T. ve Schumann, D. (1983). Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Ef- fectiveness: e Moderating Role of Involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135-146.
• Ryan, M.J. (1978). An Examination of an Alternative Form of the Behavioral Intention Model’s Norma- tive Component. Advances in Consumer Research, 5, 283-289.
• Ryan, M.J. (1982). Behavioral Intention Formation: e Interdependency of Attitudinal and Social Inf- luence Variables. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 263-278.
• Ryan, M.J. ve Bonfield, E.H. (1975). e Fishbein Ex- tended Model and Consumer Behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 2, September, 118-136.
• Sahni, A. (1994). Incorporating Perceptions of Finan- cial Control in Purchase Prediction: An Empirical Examination of the eory of Planned Behavior. Advances in Consumer Research, 21, 442-448.
• Schuman, H. ve Johnson, M.P. (1976). Attitudes and Behavior. Annual Review of Sociology, 2, 161-207.
• Shao, A.T. (2002). Marketing Research: An Aid to Decision Making, U.S.A.: Thomson-Southwestern.
• Sheppard, B.H.; Hartwick, J. ve Warshaw, P.R (1988). e eory of Reasoned Actioned: A Meta-Analy- sis of Past Research with Recommendations and Modifications for Future Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 325-343.
• Sığındı, T.(2010). Tutum, Öznel Norm ve Algılanan Davranışsal Kontrol Değişkenlerinin Tüketicilerin Satın Alma Niyetlerine olan Etkisinin Copeland’ın Ürün Sını andırması için Araştırılması. (Yayım- lanmamış Doktora Tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi/ Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Smith, J.R.; Deborah J.T.; Manstead, A.S.R.; Louis, W.R.; Kotterman, D. ve Wolfs, J. (2008). The Attitude-Behavior Relationship in Consumer Conduct: e Role of Norms, Past Behavior, and Self- Identity. e Journal of Social Psychology, 148(3), 311-333.
• Sommers, M.S.; Barnes, J.G.; Stanton, W.J.; Etzel, M.J. ve Walker, B.J. (1992). Fundamentals of Marketing (6th edition), Canada: McGraw-Hill Ryerson Limited.
• Sta ord, J.E. (1966). E ects of Group In uences on Consumer Brand Preferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 3, February, 68-75.
• Tabachnick, B.G. ve Fidell, L.S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics (4th edition), U.S.A.: Allyn&Bacon.
• Venkatesan, M. (1966). Experimental Study of Con- sumer Behavior Conformity and Independence. Journal of Marketing Research, 3, November, 384- 387.
• Warshaw, P.R. (1980). A New Model for Predicting Behavioral Intentions: An Alternative to Fishbein. Journal of Marketing Research, 17, May, 153-172.
• Wilson, D.T.; Mathews, H.L. ve Harvey, J.W. (1975). An Empirical Test of the Fishbein Behavioral In- tention Model. Journal of Consumer Research, 1, 39-48.
• Woodside, A.G. ve Bearden, W.O. (1977). Longitudi- nal Analysis of Consumer Attitude, Intention, and Behavior Toward Beer Brand Choice. Advances in Consumer Research, 4(1), 349-356.