온라인 쇼핑몰의 평점 분산정도가 제품태도에 미치는 영향: 사회적 배제 유형과 사회적 거리감의 조절효과를 중심으로 (The Effect of Ratings Distribution on Product Attitudes in Online Shopping Mall: Moderating Effect of Social Exclusion and Social Distance)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국유통학회
· 수록지 정보 : 유통연구 / 24권 / 3호 / 109 ~ 132페이지
· 저자명 : 송호준, 천성용

초록

최근 사회적 경쟁이 심화되고 1인 가구 증가, 인구고령화 등으로 인해 개인주의 성향이 확산되면서, 자기 자신이 사회적으로 배제되고 있다고 느끼는 사람들이 증가하고 있다. 선행 연구들에 의하면 이러한 크고 작은 배제 경험은 타인에 대한 공감능력 결여, 독특성 추구, 물질주의 추구 등 이기적 행동으로 이어질 가능성이 높다고 주장한다. 본 연구에서 주목한 주제는 일반적인 온라인 쇼핑몰 구매상황에서 특정 제품에 대한 평점 분산정도가 제품태도에 미치는 영향과 사회적 배제 유형의 조절효과를 살펴보는 것이다. 기존 온라인 리뷰 연구들에서는 평점이 일관되지 않고 분산될 경우 소비자들이 긍정적 평가보다 부정적 평가에 더욱 집중하게 되기 때문에 제품에 대한 전반적 인식이 나빠진다고 주장하는데, 본 연구에서는 이런 양극단의 평가를 받는 제품을 오히려 선호하는 집단으로 사회적 배제 집단을 제시한다. 또한 이러한 사회적 배제의 양극단 평점 선호현상은 평점을 매기는 주체가 불특정 다수가 아닌 사회적 거리가 가까운 내집단일 경우 다시 선호역전 현상이 일어날 것이라 주장한다. 실험 분석결과 사회적 포용 집단은 극단적으로 긍정, 부정이 섞여 있는 양극단 평점분산 조건보다 전반적으로 일정한 평점이 부여된 조건을 더욱 선호하였지만 사회적 배제의 경우 전반적으로 일정한 평점의 제품보다 양극단 평점분산 제품을 더욱 선호하였다. 그러나 사회적 배제 그룹 역시 평점을 매기는 주체가 나와 상관없는 불특정 다수가 아닌 나와 같은 소속이라고 지각되는 내집단일 경우에는 양극단 평점분산 조건보다 일관된 평점분산 조건을 더욱 선호하는 결과가 나타났다. 본 연구는 온라인 쇼핑몰에서 흔히 제공하는 제품 평점 정보를 통해 사회적 배재 집단이 평가가 양분되는 제품에 어떠한 태도를 보이는지를 살펴보았는데, 이들은 호불호가 극단적으로 나누어지는 제품을 자신의 독특성을 과시할 수 있는 수단으로 인식해 오히려 더욱 매력적으로 느낀다는 것을 실험결과로 보여주었다고 할 수 있다. 이러한 결과는 대중성은 떨어지지만 독특한 제품을 생산하는 기업의 마케터나 온라인 평점을 관리하는 쇼핑몰 관리자들에게 시사점을 제공할 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

영어초록

The number of people who feel themselves socially excluded is increasing according as individualistic tendency has recently spread due to intensified social competition, population aging, and increased single-person households. Previous studies suggest that experiences of social exclusion, great and small, are likely to lead to an individual’s selfish tendency due to a lack of ability to sympathize with other’s feelings. The subject on which this study focuses is to examine, from the distribution of online ratings, what effects socially excluded groups have on purchase situation at general online shopping malls. While the existing studies claim that if online ratings are not consistent, but are dispersed, negative bias focusing more on negative reviews occurs and overall attitude towards a relevant product worsens, this study suggests that socially excluded groups prefer products receiving both extreme reviews. In addition, this study argues that despite the phenomenon of social excluded groups’ preferring both extremes reviews, if raters are not unspecified individuals, but those who belong to an ingroup of close social distance, the phenomenon of preference reversal occurs.
This study first conducted an analysis among 2 (Social exclusion type: Exclusion vs. inclusion) X 2 (Online ratings distribution: Both extremes vs. even distribution) X 2 (Social distance: In-group vs. out-group) groups. As a result of the analysis, significant ternary interaction effects of social exclusion, online ratings distribution, and social distance were observed (F=6.716, p < .05), and also, the binary interaction effect between social exclusion and online ratings distribution was significant (F=4.997, p < .05). Next, in order to verify the interaction effect of the concrete Hypothesis 1, this study investigated the impacts of the social exclusion type and online ratings distribution on the attitude to a product, classifying subjects only into the condition in which the subjects of ratings belonged to an out-group with a long social distance. As a result, the social exclusion group had a more favorable attitude to a product with both extremes ratings (M=4.55) than to a product with even ratings (M=3.6) (Planned contrast F(1, 164)=9.585, p < .05). On the other hand, the social inclusion group had a more favorable attitude to a product with even ratings (M=4.35) than to a product with both extremes ratings (M=3.66) (Planned contrast F(1, 164)=4,218 p<.05). These findings support Hypothesis 1-1 that the social exclusion group would show a higher attitude to a product to a product with both extremes ratings and Hypothesis 1-2 that the social inclusion group would show a higher attitude to a product to a product with even ratings. Thus, Hypothesis 1 in this study has all been supported.
Next, in order to verify Hypothesis 2, this study divided the social exclusion type into exclusion and inclusion and examined the interaction effects of in-group/out-group and online both extremes ratings/even ratings. To examine the result of a measurement of the attitude to a product in order to examine Hypothesis 2-1 closely, the social exclusion group responded more favorably to a product with both extremes ratings (M=4.55) than to a product with even ratings (M=3.6) when the subject of ratings was an out-group, unspecified masses (Planned contrast F (1, 64)=9.585, p < .05). On the other hand, if the subject of ratings was an in-group, in which the subjects of ratings belonged to the same group as that one belonged, instead of unspecified masses, a phenomenon of preference reversal occurred, and the group was more favorable to a product with even ratings (M=4.69) than to a product with both extremes ratings (M=3.40) (Planned contrast F (1, 164)=21.224, p<.001). In addition, to examine the result of a measurement of the attitude to a product in order to verify Hypothesis 2-2, the social inclusion group was more favorable to a product with even ratings (M=4.35) than to a product with both extremes ratings (M=3.66) when the subjects of ratings belonged to an out-group and also showed a more favorable attitude to a product with even ratings (M=4.45) than to a product with both extremes ratings (M=3.44) when the subjects of ratings belonged to an in-group (Planned contrast F (1, 164)=4.218 p < .05; planned contrast F (1, 164)=10.543, p < .05).
Until now, it has been assessed that a product with both extremes ratings with extremely clear likes and dislikes had overall lower attraction; however, the social exclusion group overall preferred a product with both extremes ratings to a product with even ratings, while the social inclusion group overall preferred a product with even ratings to a product with both extremes ratings. However, this interaction effect between the social exclusion type and online ratings distribution was controlled according to the degree of social distance, and concretely, there was a phenomenon of preference reversal of social exclusion in an in-group in which the subjects of ratings belonged to the same group as that one belonged, instead of unspecified masses. In other words, if the subjects of ratings belonged to an in-group, the social exclusion group overall preferred even online ratings product than a product with both extremes ratings. On the other hand, the social inclusion group was not affected by the degree of social distance, but consistently preferred a product with even ratings than a product with both extremes ratings. Till now, many studies of online reviews have found out that the overall rating became lower if there was negative information mixed since more weight was given to negative information than to positive information; however, it turned out that the social exclusion group overall preferred a product with both extremes ratings to a product with even ratings. It is expected that these findings were caused by the tendency of the people socially ignored and alienated to perceive that they were alienated not because they were unattractive, but because they were unique people different from the others. As another explanation, social exclusion has a close relation to propensity for conspicuous consumption, and if ratings are divided to both extremes, the heterogeneous ratings imply dichotomous groups’ opposition, so they recognize that such a product is an environment in which they can show off their uniqueness. For example, suppose that there is a film that has both extremes ratings without neutral ratings. This implies the opposition between two groups, i.e. A group that likes the film very much and a group that dislikes it very much. In the pursuit of uniqueness and propensity for conspicuous consumption, caused by the experience of social exclusion, such a film could be recognized as an attractive tool to show off one’s presence and uniqueness, e.g. “You guys think like that because you don’t know it well. It is a really good film because...”

참고자료

· 없음