【作者】 魏馨怡； 陈学芳； 马剑虹；

【Author】 Wei Xinyi;Chen Xuefang;Ma Jianhong;Department of Psychology and Behavioral Science, Zhejiang University;

【机构】 浙江大学心理与行为科学系；

【摘要】 人们可能对那些激发他们在社交环境中行为的社交能力有不同的目标取向,研究发现不同的社交目标取向预示着不同的行为反应。消费者社会化模型认为一些前因变量会通过社会化角色(如父母、同伴、媒体等)影响社会化的过程,进而影响消费者社会化的结果。消费决策风格是消费者在作出决策时所表现出的稳定购物决策态度、习惯、倾向等心理特征。从消费者社会化的角度看,社交目标取向可作为社会化过程中形成的一种行动意图来影响消费决策风格,然而目前对社交目标取向和消费决策风格之间关系的研究还较少。此外,研究发现不同宗教信仰会影响个体的消费决策风格和目标取向,而中国与印尼在宗教信仰的人数比例上有较大差异。因此,为了探索社交目标取向与消费决策风格的关系,以及在中国、印尼两种文化间的差异,本研究使用社交目标取向量表(SAGOS)及消费者决策风格量表(CSI)测量两国共237名大学生(中国:132,印尼:105)的社交目标取向与消费决策风格,通过路径分析探究两变量之间的关系。结果表明所使用的量表在两个文化环境中的信度良好。中国被试中仅2.3%有宗教信仰;印尼被试均有宗教信仰。在两国文化中,实用主义消费风格仅受发展目标取向影响显著,社交取向消费风格受到发展目标取向和趋近目标取向的共同影响,不可取的消费风格仅受回避目标取向的影响。对比两国数据,在消费风格上,中国不可取的消费风格维度得分显著大于印尼。在社交目标取向中,中国发展目标取向维度和趋近目标取向维度得分显著大于印尼。对比两个变量的关系,中国文化中,社交取向的消费风格受趋近目标取向的影响(效应量为0.347)大于印尼文化中这一影响(效应量为0.185)。结果表明:不同的社交目标取向可以预测不同的消费决策风格,同时该效果具有跨文化的一致性,但在影响程度上存在一定差异。中国大学生较印尼大学生在消费风格上更容易冲动和困扰,同时更重视提高社交技巧和关系质量,更倾向于获得积极的社交评价和声望。更多还原

【Abstract】 People may have different goal orientations toward social competence that motivate their behavior in social settings. Research has found that different social goal orientations indicate different behavioral responses. The consumer socialization model postulated that some antecedent variables affected socialization processes via socialization agents(such as parents, peers, media, etc.). Then these socialization processes, in turn, affected consumer socialization outcomes. Consumer decision-making styles referred to the psychological characteristics of stable shopping decision-making attitudes, habits, and tendencies shown by consumers when making decisions. From the perspective of consumer socialization, social goal orientation could be used as an action intention formed in the socialization processes to influence consumer decision-making styles. However, there are few researches on the relationship between social goal orientation and consumer decision-making styles. In addition, some research found that different religious beliefs affected the individual’s consumer decision-making styles and goal orientation, and the proportion of religious beliefs in China and Indonesia was quite different. Therefore, in order to explore the relationship between social goal orientation and consumer decision-making styles, as well as the differences between the two cultures of China and Indonesia, this study used the Social Goal Orientation Survey(SAGOS) and Consumer Style Inventory(CSI) to measure the social goal orientation and consumer decision-making styles of 237 students(China: 132, Indonesia: 105). We explored the relationship between the two variables through path analysis. The results showed that the scales we used had good reliability in the two culture. Only 2.3% of Chinese participants had religious beliefs; while Indonesian participants all had religious beliefs. In both cultures, utilitarian consumer styles were only significantly influenced by social developing goals, social/conspicuous consumer styles were influenced by social developing goals and social demonstration-approach goals, and the undesirable consumer styles were only affected by social demonstration-avoidance goals. Comparing the data of the two countries, in terms of consumer decision-making styles, Chinese undesirable consumer styles dimension score was significantly higher than that of Indonesia. In the social goal-orientation, the scores of Chinese social developing goal orientation dimension and social demonstration-approach goal dimension were significantly higher than those of Indonesia. Comparing the relationship between the two variables, in Chinese culture, the influence of social demonstration-approach goal on social/conspicuous consumer decision-making styles was greater(with the effect size of 0.347) than in Indonesian culture(with the effect size of 0.185). The results indicate that different social goal-orientations could predict different consumer decision-making styles, and the effect has cross-cultural consistency, with only a certain difference in the degree of this predictive effect. Chinese students are more likely to be impulsive and confused in their consumer decision-making styles than Indonesian students, and they pay more attention to improve social skills and relationship quality and are more inclined to gain positive social evaluation and prestige.更多还原