The role of gift recipient perception in changing brand attitudes and giver – recipient relationship...

ScanGate document

TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC ĐHQGHN, KINH TẾ - LUẬT, T.XXI, Số 1, 2005 THE ROLE OF GIFT RECIPIENT PERCEPTION IN CHANGING BRAND ATTITUDES AND GIVER - RECIPIENT RELATIONSHIP AN AGENDA FOR RESEARCH Wujin Chu” Nguyen Thi Phi Nga“ Introduction Gift been change giving/receiving defined as behavior the process or not through gift gift is a ritual find giving and receiving of that takes place in strength giver relationship and the reciprocity or recipient is one integrate a society; views giving gesture 1976; in 1979; consider maintaining mean of of social a Schieffelin gift as a 1982; giving social is ties can be considered (Otnes, there Lowery, is recipient only as Kim few side This the studies study, the been of since late 1983), and up to (1976, model 1979) of gift and exchange the most comprehensive literature framework that divided and described in in social exchange processes, the examined stages the these gifting activities and in 1983 search “giver centric” exchange Up to now, and focus on gift- therefore, tried of stages This side to examine whether the recipient may giving/receiving © Prof., Seoul National University, Korea, ™ Faculty of Law, Vietnam National University, Hanoi 59 (1983), gift actual and gift disposition the giver/recipient of aspects theory divides stages: Based on the suggestions made by Belk (1976, Sherry have (gestation), relationship (reformulation) to fill this gap by focusing on the recipient gift- variables model three purchase realignment whole of many into (prestation) the researchers influence within model 1993) research Belks (1983) details a Most of the researches before and after of Sherry’s for in general Since Sherry (1983) provided a relationship the appearance has 1979; Sherry both remain in as implications to consumer Sherry’s 1988) serves of symbolic communication date, (Belk instrumental useful 1970 (Belk that rhetorical Cheal and interest (1980) communication the Gift-giving/receiving of giving/ processes in Literature review the form gift the Caplow gift As exchange, receiving the between recipient's ambivalence marketing area all society although in different forms to build and brand and different gift-receipt situations in order to exchange that takes place between a giver and recipient The toward the giver-recipient relationship realignment have of his/her attitude related can be 1979) and to gift- organized Woujin Chu, Nguyen Thi Phi Nga into two lines implications of for research this that current have study: (1) various aspects of gift-giving behavior; (2) various aspects of gift-receiving behavior ambivalence focused on can be sources and of mixed Barber ambivalence giving behavior will discuss of gift- both gift- is phenomena personality” (p.6-7) In this processes, recipient ambivalence is the mechanism of Unfortunately attitude this matter change has not been well researched so far The current research focuses on Before reviewing two lines of research mentioned above, we first clarify this concept địt: Consumer Understanding Ambivalence Although ambivalence may explored in consumer research, be little it has a rich history in other disciplines — notably, psychology and sociology (Otnes, Lowery and Shrum 1997) Up to date, the research of Otnes and co-authors (1997) is the most significant study in consumer ambivalence area In the synthesized ambivalence: research, the authors interpretations psychological sociological ambivalence; four these ambivalence; ambivalence; and consumer of cultural ambivalence as follows: Psychological as the emotions internal toward ambivalence experience is referred of mixed an object or person For example, the coexistence emotions of love and fear; happiness and sadness for the same object may occur simultaneously sequentially is the distinct example or of psychological ambivalence ambivalence focused on internal force, the sociological While psychological in the social definition of roles and statuses, not in the feeling-state processes the as follows: “ the located giving and gift-receiving as closely related in gift-exchange Merton described experiences, review feelings (1976) sociological ambivalence literature external forces, such as the existing social structure Although this study focuses on gift-receipt the how of one or Whereas sociological conceptualized as another type of ambivalence in resulting from conflicting social roles and norms, cultural ambivalence pertains to conflicts between cultural values Because cultural values are often expressed through social norms, therefore, the boundaries between sociological and cultural remain indistinct ambivalence (Otnes, Lowrey, Shrum, 1997) Considering ambivalence ¡is the outcome of consumer behavior, Otnes, Lowery and following Shrum (1997) definition offered of the consumer ambivalence: “Consumer ambivalence is the simultaneous or sequential experience or multiple emotional states, as a result of the interaction between internal factors and external objects, people, and/or cultural phenomena institutions, in market- oriented have contexts, and/or that indirect prepurchase, purchase can direct on ramifications or post purchase attitudes and behavior” (p.83) Although ambivalence defined as the co-occurrence experience Clore, & Shrum, of multiple Collin, 1997), 1998; the been has or sequential emotions Otnes, term is (Ortony, Lowery, & sometimes interpreted as a synonym for mixed emotions between the positive emotion and negative emotion (e.g., Williams & Aaker, 2002) Tạp chi Khoa hoc DHQGHN, Kinh té - Ludt, T.XM, So 1, 2005 The role of gift recipient perception 61 As previously mentioned, a few studies have discussed ambivalence outcomes behavior More as emotional recently, studies analyses three motives: obligation, self- interest, and Self-interest altruism involves gift-giving to ultimately improve of gift giving describe the mixed emotions the situation of the giver The second study that emerge both during dyadic exchanges is conducting by Belk and Coon which focus on exchange (Otnes et al 1994; Sherryet self-gifting (Sherry what is missing et al from al, 1993) and 1995) However, the consumer associated to motivations, express through the economic, social and agapic behavior literature is an explication of the love) exchange dimensions processes third study Goodwin’s by which ambivalence may be generated and its effects to consumer attitude and behavior Gift-receiving is the Goodwin good context to see the emergence of recipient ambivalence, thus this study purchased focuses on suggested 1.2 Various aspects of gift-giving (1993)'s theories is (romantic (p.398).The one (1990) did not mention about altruism However, this motives study with self-interest gifts are only self-interest or obligation Rather, that found Goodwin there and may et al (1990) be elements obligation as a of joint motive of the gift-giver behavior Most gift-exchange research conducted before and after the appearance of Sherry’s Gift-giving occasion Gift-giving/receiving occasion will be model could be described as “giver-centric” related (Otnes, Lowery, ambivalence One area research in the gift- interest to Kim 1993) It is the most marketers, because it culminates in a purchase Related to givercentric, many aspects were explored and can be considered impacts on as direct recipient’s or indirect behavior, such as gift-giving motivation; gift-giving occasion; type of gift-giving; other important factors considered by giver in gift-selecting, which will be covered here after to gift-situation issue: On what occasions the U.S and found occasion that the most is birthday second one is Christmas other occasions listed anniversary It is important Bussey it links product category selection, making decisions about time and monetary constraints, the search and gift selection process, thus, impact on recipient's emotions The specific issue of gift-giving motivations has generally been ignored across the literature, with the exception of three important studies The first study is Wolfinbarger (1990) which Tap chi Khoa học ĐHQGHN, Kinh tế- Luật, T.XXI, Số I, 2005 found (1967), that in the Christmas, and the (29 percent) The in his Day, study Father's and are day, graduation a study most which popular (35 percent) wedding as people the frequency of all gift-giving occasions in Gift-giving motivations motivation generally give gifts? Belk (1973) examined Mother’s giving recipient giving literature should interest about this wedding, to consider giver’s gift- and_ in popular the U.K, occasion is is followed by birthday This finding is just reverse of the finding of Belk (1973) Ruth, categories occasion Brunel, Otnes of gift-giving (i.e., (1999) Christmas, Year), individual occasion wedding) and no-occasion classified into Chinese public New (ie., birthday, (le, “just Wujin Chu, Nguyen Thi Phi Nga 62 because”, “thank you”) Accoyding to Ruth, recipient definition, most theoreticians would agree that a situation comprises a point in time in high-personalized and space (Belk, 1975) By Belk (1979), the occasion or in affirming farewell occasion, situational conditions of gift-giving may differ according to characteristics of the Brunel, Otnes (1999), giver and have mixed emotions but still did not explain the reason gift-giving systematically presentation Type of gift-giving Although not mentioned, it consumers many _ has researches been (givers found that and recipients) may gift categories The have different level of ambivalence across different type of popular aspect attracted researchers is the types of gifts occasion, people generally prefer or of the gift is public, anonymous, and event or performance Other important to An other people would the most important decisions in the study of consumer in giftgiving behavior British study, Lows et al (1971), in the categorized the most of factors aspect of of the gift is agree-upon considered by giver in gift selecting literature one private, activities by the recipient (p 96) giving is whether the conveyed directly or contingent upon some buy Lutz (1979) mentioned that the choice gift whether gift Clark of is the consider and interest Belk the store when which choosing (1979) from gift- factors, mention product quality, appearance, and in a that brand name, which the gift is relevant types of gifts given by occasions: personal gifts are the most popular gifts purchased are the important factors to the during sometimes be important Christmas household items weddings and Novelties follow this engagements, and During household gifts are usually given Personal gifts are predominant on birthdays, anniversaries (see Othman, Lee, p.4) Relating to the givers and the prospective when buyer purchasing Clarke and frequently different type of gift, givers and recipients Belk indicated that with the have different emotions Related literature mentioned types of gift: gift, expressive gift (Joy instrumental 2001) and “pure” gift (Belk and Coon, 1993) in which “pure gift” often makes recipient ambivalence Gift recipient's situation emotions affect to and attitude in different aspects As a starting point for a in some situation gift According (1979), to consumers for the “right” price to amount, neither “too much” (1979) suggested that when people buy gifts they would consider much about and the the relationship receiver and Lee factors by consumption: between By considered important the might can nor “too little” Othman Gift giving situation price spend rather than the “best value for money” purchase If the correct messages are to be sent, the giver should spend an appropriate and a Belk search recipient’s ambivalence, some studies were conducted However, the examining giver factors when choosing gifts, explored urban the priority of Malaysian’s (1) relationship between giftthe giver and the recipient; (2) gift that convey certain meaning/message; Tap chi Khoa hoc DHQGHN, Kinh tế - Luật, (3) product T XM, Số I, 200: The role of gift recipient perception quality; the (4) price range; product; from (6) time which the 63 (5) uniqueness spent; gift (7) the is purchased of attempt store through (p.21) These results were the same if comparing between male and female behavior is the interesting finding of Othman and Givers will pay different attitude when choosing gifts, to the different That is these factors may lead emotions the to thus, recipient’s main important reason for considering these aspects 1.3 Various aspects of gift-receiving behavior Surprisingly, little attention has been directed toward “recipient-centric” although recipients play-an important role in gift-giving/receiving This role can be expressed givers’ through selection strategies vary, depending on the recipient for whom Caplow are the gift is intended 1982; Cheal a few centric, some main 1982; 1988) Although there studies focusing reviewing (Belk the on recipient- related literature, aspects can be categorized: recipients’ characteristic; (2) (1) antecedents of gift-receipt related to the reformulation of interpersonal relationships In the popular existing characteristics mentioned are recipients Kim literature, “easy” According (1993), “an easy to the most of recipients and “difficult” Otnes, Lowery, recipient was one who had, in the past, correctly interpreted the message that a giver, in the guise of a specific role(s), wished contrast, recipients “our is unconsciously, to convey”, interpretation that, they Tạp Khoa học ĐHQGHN of and difficult consciously thwart Kinh tế - Luật, a in or givers T XM Số I, 2005 a perceive particular role As a result, givers difficult misinterpreting gifts specific roles” (p.231) recipients designed as to express Otnes, Kim, Lowery (1992) offered nine reasons to explain why they categorized gift-recipients: (1) perceived lack of necessity/desire; unappreciated; (2) fear of being different (3) tastes/interests; (4) unfamiliarity with the recipient; (5) perceived recipient limitations; (6) imposed giver limitations; (7) imbalance; (8) personality conflicts; (9) thwarting of a gift selection These also considered as the main sources of givers’ ambivalence in reasons are gift-giving, thus, may impact on recipients’ experience in gift-receipt and emotions as Otnes, Lowrey, Shrum (1997) mentioned in psychological ambivalence that “ objects would through ambivalence” (p.81) experience become Antecedents of gift receipt related to the reformulation of interpersonal relationships An other aspect interested in giftreceiving behavior in the previous literature is to explore the impact of some main Recipients’ characteristics express gift exchange typically Lee’s study to antecedents realignment 2004) Ruth, explored on relationship Otnes, Brunel antecedents: (1999; (1) the perception of the existing relationship, (2) the gift, (3) the ritual context; and (4) his/her emotional reactions The convergence of these antecedents affects six types of relationship realignment outcomes: strengthening, affirmation, negligible confirmation, Although antecedents weakening this research positive effect, negative and severing explored the of giver-recipient relationship Waujin Chu, Nguyen Thi Phi Nga 64_ realignment through gift receiving but still have not showed the psychological among mechanism systematically, which determine in gift-exchange This study is therefore an The of gift exchange the had investigated the research framework is psychological mechanism explaining the attitudes change process and highlight were the key variables and their relationships to presented above It was concluded that no study following built base on the gaps in the literature and The literature pertaining to consumer ambivalence in gift giving/receiving as well aspects attitudes attempt to fill this gap in the research Research model and hypotheses other ambivalence, toward a brand, giver-recipient relationship the recipient’s atitude change as consumer be tested interaction Prior brand Prior attitudes giver-recipient relationship v Gift receiving Balance theory, Ambivalence theory Congruity v theory Attitude change cH | Post brand Post theory, Involvement giver-recipient relationship attitudes The relationship between variables in the research model can be expressed as follow Recipient perception on incongruity or imbalance or ambivalence between prior to brand attitudes and prior giver-recipient relationship may effect on post brand attitudes and post giver-recipient elements are the person P (gift-recipient), relationship to obtain congruity, or balance and or solving ambivalence between these two elements in recipient’s psychology This phenomenon can be explained by the psychological mechanism based on the balance theory of Heider (1958) According Cartwright Anderson (2002), Harary (1956); (1977); Feather (1964); Solomon the balance and basic theory is elements in P-O-X triad, Heider’s whose an other person O @ift-giver) and X, which may be a third person, an object, or a concept (in this context, X is considered as rand attitudes) affective relations Positive or negative among the elements characterized the triads For example, if the receiver likes the giver, the giver has positive attitudes toward gift’s brand, but Tap chi Khoa hoc ĐHQGHN, Kinh tế - Luật, T.XX1, So 1, 2005 ‘The role of gift recipient perception the receiver not have positive brand 43) attitudes, is relationship then unbalance the In this triad example, said to balance be If the example, could giver-recipient strong dominated base on in the the above congruity theory, dislike the giver or having post favorable recipient’s post brand attitudes should be more favorable after receiving a gift to brand solve be attained if the attitude assumption receiver It is the balance of changes primitive theory unbalanced triads tend toward balance Although balance explain the brand attitudes theory change relationship in that but more to of congruity (1955) the it does theory helps attitude of Osgood, to explain change to logic Focusing on the when involvement with attitudes, for it recipient's favorable brand of may be changing attitudes Krugman when the strong Involvement (1965) Likelihood Cacioppo, Schumann, Unlike Model and (Petty, 1983) help to explain this aspect According to this theory, when evaluator has of the relation strength post Elaboration low personal consideration, cognitive response less likely to occur and is considered, congruity theorists consider both the direction and magnitude of the relation brand reasonable Theory The the original formulations of balance theory in which only the direction high But receiving that gift from trustworthy giver The Low not Tannenbaum this has condition attitude from prior neutral brand attitude post allow to predict the exactly direction and magnitude tension recipient giver-recipient realignment the unfavorable help recipient's or to attitudes change by peripheral route quickly but temporary and can not predict of the behavior relation also draw attention to the strongly Base on the foundations of the research held will tend to change less than one that is weakly held or changes in evaluation are model always increased the frame of based on different gift receiving situations p which are expressed in the following table: congruity reference in the direction with the (Osgood, of existing Tannenbaum, 1955, and the proposed psychological hypotheses will mechanism, be tested Gift receiving situations focus on recipient's perception of prior brand attitude and prior giver-recipient relationship Prior relationship Prior brand attitudes Shoe that: Neutral attitude Unfavorable ARI AR2 AR3 AR4 ARS AR6 ABI Week Note Favorable AB2 AB4 A Ri indicats the degree of attitude ABS change toward AB3 A B6 the giver-recipient relationship (i = 1, ,6) A Bi indicates the degree of attitude change toward a brand (i = 1, ,6) Tap chi Khoa hoc DHQGHN, Kinh té - Luật, T.XM, Số I, 2005 Wujin Chu, Nguyen Thi Phi Nga 66 Hereunder are the hypotheses will be tested: the post giver-recipient relationship will be weaken (H 5.2.) Hypothesis 1: When the gift recipients Hypothesis 6: When the gift recipient's perception of prior attitude toward a brand percpetion of prior attitude toward a brand is favorable and is unfavorable and the prior giver-recipient relationship is recipient’s the prior strong, giver-recipient then post-brand the attitude gift becomes more favorable (H1.1); and the post giver- recipient (H1.2) relationship will be strengthen relationship research concerned relationship recipient's is giver-recipient strong, post-brand then the attitude gift deeply focuses on marketing area than social one, therefore, is the (H 6.1) and weaken (H 6.2.) brand and the post brand the post giver-recipient relationship will be perception of prior attitude toward a brand neutral then attitude is more unfavorable This Hypothesis 2: When the gift recipients is weak, attitudes and change the are following more proposed additional hypotheses should be tested becomes Hypothesis 7: Under the prior strong more favorable (H2.1); and the post giver- giver-recipient relationship, the recipient’s recipient (2.2) post relationship will Hypothesis 3: When be strengthen the gift recipient’s perception of prior attitude toward a brand is unfarorable and the prior giver-recipient relationship is strong, then the recipient’s post-brand favorable recipient (H3.2) becomes attitudes (H3.1); and relationship the will be more post giver- less strong the gift recipient’s perception of prior attitude toward a brand and the prior giver-recipient relationship is weak, then the post brand attitude becomes less favorable (H4.1.) and the post giver-recipient relationship will be strengthen (H4.2) Hypothesis 5: When the gift recipient’s percpetion of prior attitude toward a brand is neutral relationship and the is weak, attitude becomes prior giver-recipient then the post brand unfavorable (H5.1) and attitude depending on recipient’s perception the change different of differ level prior of brand attitudes - Hypothesis brand 7a: attitude The change recipient's is greater post when receiving the prior neutral brand than the prior favorable brand - Hypothesis brand Hypothesis 4: When is favorable brand 7b: The attitude change recipient's is greater post when receiving the prior neutral brand than the prior unfavorable brand Hypothesis 8: giver-recipient recipient's differ post depending recipients Under the prior weak relationship, the gift brand attitude change on different level of the perception of brand prior attitudes - Hypothesis brand attitude 8a: The change recipient's is greater post wher receiving the prior neutral brand than th‹ prior favorable brand Tap chi Khoa hoc ĐHQGHN, Kinh tế - Luật, T XM, Só I, 200 The role of gift recipient perception 67 - Hypothesis 8b: The recipient's post brand attitude change is greater receiving the prior neutral brand when than the managers from most including this study can gain insights prior unfavorable brand psychological Research consumers’ design To understand different gift recipient's receiving situations posibility change of brand as post study emotions giver-recipient in and attitude as well relationship, the capture the lived phenomenology gift receipt and seeks to understand prior brand attitudes and prior recipient relationship converge recipient ambivalence and effect on relationship of how giver- effect on its subsequent realignment and changing brand attitudes To obtain this purpose, it is suitable to use the qualitative data collection method, in-depth interview experiment In between addition, the subject factorial 2x3 (strong and weak relationship) x (favorable brand attitude, neutral brand attitude and unfavorable brand attitude) design will be conducted by different gift using receiving scenarios situations with to test behavioral research, However, managers by understanding mechanism attitudes establish in of gift- First, maintain or relationship expecting enhance with the company the gift recipients desired giving will with become Second, tc marketing can create, company through changing receiving appropriate strategies the closer the hypothesis that when recipients receive the gift which he/she has prior neutral brand attitude, from the givers who has great commitment or strong easily relationship, change suggest their recipients will attitude, may brand an interesting implication for the new brand advertising strategy focusing on the content which only emphasizes new product itself, of Instead of the message the benefits of the advertiser may use peripheral route to persuade consumers by considering recipients “with givers giving new who product has as strong a gift for relationship in different appropriate gift- occasions This type of advertising the above hypotheses not only appeal the gift-givers buying gifts Proposed managerial implications for In this terms study of offers marketing practical hypotheses are accepted difficult find direct to implications, ones It if is implications the often for closely giving occasions, recipient and has partners but to be aware in appropriate also of the initial favorable help new emotion the gift gift- product with its brand after receiving the gift REFERENCE Annamma Joy, “Gift giving in Hongkong and the continuum of social ties”, Journal of Banks, S.K., “Gift-giving: A review and an Interactive Paradigm”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol V1, ed W Willie, Ann Arbor, Michigan: Association for Consumer Research, 1979, p 319-324 Consumer Research, 28, 2001, p 239-256 Tap chi Khoa học ĐHQGHN, Kinh tế - Luật, T XM, Số 1, 200% Wujin Chu, Nguyen Thi Phi Nga Belk, R.W.,”Application and Analysis of the Behavioral Differential Inventory for Assessing Situational Effects in Consumer Behavior”, Advances in Consumer Research, Eds Ward S and K.Wright, Ann Arbor, Michigan: Association for Consumer Research, 1973, p 370-380 Belk, R.W., “The objective situation as a determinant of Consumer Behavior” in Mary Jane Schlinger (ed.), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol 2, Chicago: Association for Consumer Research, 1975 Belk, R.W., “It’s the thought that counts: a signed digraph analysis of gift giving’, Journal of Consumer Research, (December), 1976, p 155-162 Belk, R.W., “Gift giving behavior”, Research in Marketing, 2, 1979, p 95-126 Belk, R.W., & Coon, G.S., “Can’t buy me love: dating, money, and gift”, Advances in Consumer Research, 18, 1991, p 521-527 Belk, R.W., & Coon, G.S., “Can’s buy me love: An alternative to the Exchange Paradigm Based on Dating Experiences”, Journal of Consumer p.393-417 Research, 20 (December), 1993, Clarke, K and R.W Belk, “The effects of product involvement and task definition on anticipated consumer effort”, Advances in Consumer Research Vol 6, ed W.Wilkie, Chicago, Illinois: Association for Consumer Research, 1979, p 313-318 10 Caplow, T., “Christmas Gifts and Kin Networks”, American Sociological Review, 47 (3), at Caplow, Theodore, “Christmas Gift and Kin Network”, American 1982, p 383-392 Sociological Review, 47 (June), 1982, p.383-392 12 13 Cartwright and Harary “Structural balance: A generalization Psychological Review, Vol 63, No 5, 1956, p 277- 293 Faure, of Heider’s Theory”, The C., & Mick, D.G., “Self gifts through the lens of attribution theory”, Advances in Consumer Research, 20, 1993, p 553-556 14 Feather, “A Structural Balance Model of Communication Effects”, Psychological Review, Vol 71, No.4, 1964, p.291-313 | Goodwin, Cathy, Kelly L Smith, and Susan Spiggle, “Gift giving: consumer motivation and the gift purchasing process”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol 17, ed Marvin Goldberg et al., Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 1990, p.690-698 16 Heeler, Roger, June Francis, Chike Okechucku, and Stanley Reid , “Gift vs Personal Brand Selection”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol 6, ed William Wilkie, Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 17 Joy, Annamma, 1979, p.325-328 “Gift giving in Hongkong and the continuum of social ties”, Journal of Consumer Research , Vol 28, 2001, p.239-255 18 Krugman, Herbert 19 McGrath Ann E., The impact of television advertising: learning without involvement Public Opinion Quaterly, 29 (Fall), 1965, p.349-356 Mary, “Gender differences projections”, Psychology and Marketing, in gift exchanges: new directions from 12 (5), 1995, p.371-393 Tạp Khoa học ĐHQGHN Kinh tế - Luật T XM, Số l, 200% ‘The role of gift recipient perception 20 69 Merton, Robert K and Elinor Barber, “Sociological Ambivalence”, Ambivalence, ed Robert Merton, NewYork: Free Press, 1076, p.3-31 Sociological Otnes Cele, Lowery M Tina, Kim Young Chan, “Gift selection for easy and difficult recipients: a social roles interpretation”, Journal of consumer research, Vol 20, 1993 L 25 Otnes Cele, Lowery M Tina, Kim Young Chan, “Ho,Ho,Woe: Christmas Shopping for “Difficult” People”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol.19, 1992, p.482-487 Otnes, Julie A.Ruth, men’s mixed research, 21, feelings ed about Chris Consumer Research, 24 and Constance Allen C Milbourne, “The pleasure and pain of being close: participation and in Deborah Valentine's Day”, Roedder-John, Advances Provo, UT: in consumer Association for 1994, p.159-164 Ortony, Andrew, Gerald L Clore, and Allan Collins, “The cognitive structure of emotions”, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988 Osgood and Taanenbaum, “The principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change” Psychological Review, Vol.62, No.1, 1955, p 42-55 Otnes, Lowrey, Shrum, “foward understanding Consumer Research, 24, 1997, p 80-93 27 28 of consumer ambivalence”, Journal of Othman Nor Md and Lee Pei-Pei, “Gift giving behavior among urban Malaysian consumers: @ gender comparison” (http://phuakl.tripod.com/p: Park Seong-Yeon, “A comparison of Korean fe and rOthman.doc) American Psychology & Marketing, 15(6), 1998, September, p 577-593 Gift-Giving Behavior’ Petty, Cacioppo, Schumann, “Central and peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness The Moderating Role of Involvement”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.10, 1983, p.135146 30 Pieters G.M Risk, Robben S.J Henrry, “Beyond the Horse's Mouth: Exploring Acquisition and Exchange Utility in Gift Evaluation”, Advances in Consumer Research, 1998, Vol.25, p.163-169 31 Polonsky, Micheael Jay, Donahay, Neal, Rgimbana, Trent King, Bowd, Porter, “Motivations for Male Gift Giving on Valentines Day’, ANZMAC Century: Facing and Challenge, 2000 2000 Visionay Marketing for the 21" 32 Ruth, Brunel, Otnes, “An investigation of the power of emotions in relationship realignment: the gift recipient's perspective”, Psychology and Marketing, 21, 2004, p.29-52 33 Sherry, John, Research, 34 F.dr., “Gift giving in anthropological perspective”, Journal of Consumer 10 (September), 1983, p.157-168 Sherry, John F.Jr., Mary Ann McGrath, and Sidney J.Levy, “The dark side of the gift” Journal of Business Research, 28, 1993, p 225-244 William Patti, L.Aaker Jennifer, “Can mixed emotions Consumer Research, 28, 2002, p 636-649 Tap chi Khoa hoc DHQGHN, Kinh té - Luật, TXM, Sở l, 2005 peacefully coexist?”, Journal of 70 'Wujin Chu, Nguyen Thị Phi Nga TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC DHQGHN, KINH TẾ - LUẬT, T.XXI, Số 1, 2005 NHẬN THỨC CỦA NGƯỜI NHẬN QUÀ TRONG VIỆC THAY ĐỔI THÁI ĐỘ ĐỐI VỚI NHÃN HIỆU SẢN PHẨM VÀ MỐI QUAN HỆ GIỮA NGƯỜI TẶNG VÀ NGƯỜI NHẬN - VẤN ĐỀ CẦN NGHIÊN CỨU Wujin Chu Dai hoc Seoul, Han Quéc Nguyén Thi Phi Nga Khoa Kinh tế, Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội Theo nghiên cứu kinh điển Sherry (1983), trình trao đổi quà bao gồm ba giai đoạn giai đoạn ba cho thấy ảnh hưởng quà nhận đến mối quan hệ người tặng người nhận Tuy nhiên, chưa có nghiên cứu đề cập tới tác động hai nhân tố: (1) mối quan hệ người tặng người nhận trước nhận quà; (2) thái độ nhãn hiệu sản phẩm trước nhận quà tới thay đổi của: (a) mối quan hệ người tặng người nhận sau nhận quà; (b) thái độ nhãn hiệu san phẩm sau nhận quà Cơ chế tâm lý để giải thích tượng quy luật cân bằng, quyluật phù hợp Dựa quy luật tâm lý phối két hợp với phương pháp nghiên cứu vấn sâu, thảo luận nhóm, điều tra thực nghiệm, tác giả viết dự đoán sau nhận quà, người nhận thay đổi thái độ người tặng quà thái độ nhãn hiệu sản phẩm có chênh lệch mối quan hệ loại quà tặng nhằm đưa học cho marketing công tác quảng cáo nhãn hiệu sản phẩm quảr lý khách hàng Tạp chí Khoa học ĐHQGHN, Kinh tế - Luật, T.XM, Số l, ... unfavorable brand Hypothesis 8: giver -recipient recipient''s differ post depending recipients Under the prior weak relationship, the gift brand attitude change on different level of the perception of brand. .. strong, post -brand then the attitude gift deeply focuses on marketing area than social one, therefore, is the (H 6.1) and weaken (H 6.2.) brand and the post brand the post giver -recipient relationship... brand than the prior favorable brand - Hypothesis brand Hypothesis 4: When is favorable brand 7b: The attitude change recipient'' s is greater post when receiving the prior neutral brand than the