Research on the Effect of Deceptive Promotion’s Characteristics on Spillover Effect to Competing Online Stores

Abstract:

Deceptive promotions occur frequently on Taobao Mall, Jd Mall and other net-shopping platforms, which not only affecting the focus online store, but also having favorable or adverse impact on other competing online stores, and cause spillover effect. From the perspective of mass and frequency, this paper used the scenario experiment method to explore the effect of deceptive promotion’s characteristics on negative spillover effect to other competing online stores. The study found that the higher the mass of deceptive promotion is, the stronger negative spillover effect of deceptive promotion from the focus online store to competing online stores is, and the higher the frequency of deceptive promotion is, the stronger negative spillover effect of deceptive promotion from the focus online store to competing online stores is. Frequency moderates the effect of mass on negative spillover effect to competing online stores; under the condition of low-frequency, there are not significant differences between high-mass group and low-mass group; under the condition of high-frequency, spillover effect of high-mass group was significantly stronger than that of low-mass group. In practice, this paper explains the effect of the characteristics of deceptive promotions on spillover effect, which provides valuable reference for competing online stores to predict spillover effect of deceptive promotion effectively.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volume 873)
• Pages: 342-346
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.873.342
• Online since: November 2017
• Authors: Jiao Long Xue, Hai Yan Hua, Yang Yang*
• Keywords: Competing Online Stores, Deceptive Promotion, Frequency, Mass, Spillover Effect

References

[1] C. Lu, Q. Qin, Y. Lin. Cognitive Mechanism in Consumer Decision-Making under Conditions of Deceptive Promotion: An Empirical Research Based on Time Pressure and Overconfidence. Nankai Bus. Rev. 16(2) (2013) 92-103.

[2] F. Jing, C. Cui, M. Tu. A Study of Negative Spillover Effect of Product Harm Crisis' Pervasiveness. Luojia Manag. Rev. 2 (2012) 9-16.

[3] X. Wang, F. Jing, M. Tu. Study on the Industrial Spillover Effect of Solitary or Cluster Product-Harm Crisis. Forum Sci. Tech. China, (11) (2012) 58-64.

[4] J. M. Feldman, J. G. Lynch. Self-Generated Validity and Other Effects of Measurement on Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior. J. Appl. Psychol. 73(3) (1988) 421-435.

DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.73.3.421

[5] B. K. Lee. Audience-Oriented Approach to Crisis Communication: A Study of Hong Kong Consumers' Evaluation of an Organizational Crisis. Commun. Res. 31(5) (2004) 600-618.

DOI: 10.1177/0093650204267936

[6] P. Quester, A. L. Lim. Product Involvement / Brand Loyalty: Is There a Link? J. Prod. Brand Manag. 12(1) (2003) 22-38.

DOI: 10.1108/10610420310463117

[7] W. Lu. Loyal Customers Resisting Competitive Marketing Persuasion: The Moderating Effects of Involvement of Message and Product Knowledge. Econ. Surv. (1) (2012) 93-97.

[8] G. J. Siomkos, G. Kurzbard. The Hidden Crisis in Product-Harm Crisis Management. European J. Mark. 28(2) (1994) 30-41.

DOI: 10.1108/03090569410055265

[9] N. Dawar, M. M. Pillutla. Impact of Product-Harm Crises on Brand Equity: The Moderating Role of Consumer Expectations. J. Mark. Res. 37(2) (2000) 215-226.

DOI: 10.1509/jmkr.37.2.215.18729

[10] Z. Fang, Y. Yang, W. Li, et al. The Spillover Effect of Product Harm Crisis: How to Resolve Product Harm Crisis Triggered by Others. Nankai Bus. Rev. 16(6) (2013) 19-27.

[11] J. L. Xue, H.Y. Hua, Y. Yang, et al. Research on the Effect of Similarity on Spillover Effect of Crisis. J. Centr. Univ. Fin. Econ. (8) (2016) 103-112.