Some digital platforms introduced a novel positive-framing design in the multi-dimensional rating system, which framed the attribute with positive words for consumers to rate. The results from a cross-platform quasi-natural experiment show that the positive-framing design can increase the rating scores compared with the traditional non-positive framing design.

기존 연구들은 도덕적 판단이 다양한 요인에 의해 영향받는다는 것을 보여주었다. 혐오감이 도덕적 엄격함을 유도하며, 도덕적 처벌에 대한 청중효과는 이를 보여주는 예들이다. 도덕적 판단이 유동적이라는 것은 강한 정서적, 인지적 효과를 가진 영상자극이 도덕적 판단에 어떤 영향을 미치는지에 대한 질문을 던지게 한다. 긍정영상이 도덕적 행동을 촉진한다는 것을 보여준 연구들은 일부 존재하지만(Schnall, Roper, & Fessler, 2010), 부정영상이 도덕적 판단에 미치는 영향을 확인한 연구는 존재하지 않는다. 본 연구는 인간의 선함과 악함을 보여주는 영상이 자신과 타인에 대한 도덕적 판단에 미치는 영향을 검증하였다. 이를 위해 참가자들에게 인간의 긍정 혹은 부정적인 면을 보여주는 영상을 시청하게 한 다음, 자신 혹은 타인의 도덕적 위반행위의 옳고 그름에 대해 판단하게 하였다. 그 결과 영상의 내용(긍정, 부정)과 행위주체(자신, 타인) 모두 도덕적 판단에 유의미한 영향을 미쳤으나, 두 요인간의 상호작용이 발견되었다. 특히 인간의 악함을 보여주는 영상을 시청한 경우 참가자들은 타인의 도덕적 위반행위를 더욱 가혹하게 판단하였다. 이 결과는 영상의 내용이 도덕적 판단에 영향을 미치며, 그 영향이 행위주체에 따라 달라진다는 것을 보여준다. 도덕적 혐오, 프레이밍 효과, 기본적 귀인오류에 근거하여 이 결과를 해석하였다.

Introduction Recent years have witnessed a rapid growth in sharing service businesses. In B2C sharing-service businesses such as Zipcar, customers share goods and services provided by a service firm with other customers and perform the roles played by service employees in traditional service businesses. Consequently, how well one customer carries out expected tasks influences the quality of service provided to other customers. Extant studies have emphasized the importance of a governance system to prevent such a social dilemma as the personal interest of an individual being pursued at the sacrifice of the interest of the community. However, few studies have empirically examined the effect of different design of a governance system. To fill this gap in the research, this study examines the framing effect of customer messages on customer intention to cooperate by complying with the request by the firm. Theoretical development For customers to be willing to cooperate with a firm, they have to be first motivated to do so. The framing effect of on customer motivation has been well demonstrated (Ganzach & Karsahi, 1995) in diverse service contexts such as healthcare (Christensen, Heckerling, Mackesy, Bernstein, & Elstein, 1991), education (Fryer Jr, Levitt, List, & Sadoff, 2012), and consumer behaviors (Ganzach & Karsahi, 1995; White, MacDonnell, & Dahl, 2011) In the context of service consumption, motivation is defined as the inner driver that triggers an individual to cooperate with the service providers (Tsai, Wu, & Huang, 2017). Whether messages were framed as a gain versus a loss exerted a significant impact on consumer motivation. In the consumer behavior contexts, consumer reactions to frames were mixed (Ganzach & Karsahi, 1995). In this study, we will examine the framing effect in the context of sharing service consumption. H1: In the B2C sharing service context, the framing of customer message (gain vs. loss) will affect customer motivation to comply with the request of the service firm. Customers tend to behave different depending on the value they pursue through consumption (Hwang & Griffiths, 2017). Even in the same consumption context, values of customer pursuit can vary widely. Hence, we intend to examine the moderating effect of customer value perception of sharing service on the effect of message framing on motivation. Studies showed that customers pursuing utilitarian values consider monetary savings and convenience as important, while customers pursuing symbolic value consider status and self-esteem as important and those pursing hedonic values consider entertainment and exploration as important (Rintamäki, Kanto, Kuusela, & Spence, 2006). The framing effect was shown to differ by the emphasized value of the product in the context of advertisement. A gain frame was more effective than a loss frame when the ad highlighting the hedonic attributes of a product while a loss frame was more effective when the ad stressing the utilitarian attributes of the product (Lin, 2007). Taken together, we conjecture that customers pursing different values will react differently to the same frame of messages and the level of motivation triggered by the same message frame will also differ. H2: Customer value perception of sharing service will moderate the framing effect of customer messages (gain vs. loss) on motivation. Specifically, customers pursuing utilitarian values will react more strongly to the messages framed as a loss (H2a), while customers pursuing hedonic or symbolic values will react more strongly to messages framed as a gain (H2b). The effect of motivation on customer behaviors and behavioral intentions have been well demonstrated (Ganzach & Karsahi, 1995). In the service context, customer cooperation behaviors induced by motivation significantly influence the efficiency of service operations (Mills & Morris, 1986). We propose that the motivation enhanced by customer messaged influence customer willingness to cooperate. H3: In the B2C sharing service context, motivation affects customer willingness to cooperate. Methodology Data will be collected from American consumers who have used a car sharing service at least once in the past one year through an online scenario-based survey using a 2 (message frames: gain vs. loss) x 3 (values of sharing service: utilitarian vs. hedonic vs. symbolic) between-subject experimental design. Hypotheses will be tested by an analysis of variance and a regression analysis. Implication The findings of this study will help P2P service firms better design customer messages in inducing customer cooperation and how to customize the design by customers’ value perceptions of sharing service.

In the context of Sunday brunch evaluation, this research found that US participants perceived a menu price with 15% customary tipping as less expensive than the same price with a 15% mandatory service gratuity. In addition, they expressed greater intent to patronize a restaurant when it is under voluntary tipping than when it is under a corresponding mandatory service gratuity. More importantly, the results showed that participants’ use of surcharge information and perceived surcharge fairness acted in parallel and with similar strengths as mediators of the relationship between surcharge policy and menu price perception. However, the relationship between surcharge policy and patronage intent was fully mediated by participants’ perceived surcharge fairness. The findings of the present research have important implications for the US food service industry as a growing number of restaurants have adopted mandatory service gratuity in place of voluntary tipping in recent years. Although the decision to switch to mandatory service gratuity is mostly driven by concerns about internal customers such as employee compensation, this research suggests that it may have a negative impact on external customers in terms of menu price perception and patronage intent. Consequently, restaurants, especially those targeting price-sensitive clientele, should think twice before jumping on the mandatory gratuity bandwagon.

Intrigued by the recent emergence and success of low-cost airlines, which use the additive option price framing (as opposed to the subtractive option price framing used by the traditional full-service airlines), we attempted to develop and empirically test a theoretical model that can help better understand the success of this innovative pricing practice for optional services. Drawing on the prospect theory and the loss aversion and endowment effect theory, we argue that option price framing affect customer responses such as perceived risk, perceived price fairness and affect. Further, we propose interaction effects between option framing and product type (utilitarian vs. hedonic) on perceived risk. Using a quasi-experimental design, we constructed four scenarios (2 option price framings x 2 product types). We administered the scenario-based survey among part-time MBA students (full-time managers). Analysis results of 132 responses demonstrated that customer responses in perceived risk, perceived fairness and affect were more favorable in the additive option framing, which in turn led to higher purchase intention. Further, these effects were stronger for utilitarian products. For hedonic products, no difference in perceived risk was observed between the two option price framings. Consequently, our study offered an explanation for when and why the additive option price framing might work better.