1 / 20

Understanding Consumer Reluctance to Dispose of Unwanted Objects

Research explores why consumers keep, dispose, or temporarily use objects they no longer need, impacting clutter, costs, and environment. Studies reveal psychological, situational, and intrinsic factors affecting decision-making.

benedict-davis
Télécharger la présentation

Understanding Consumer Reluctance to Dispose of Unwanted Objects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Consumer reluctance to dispose of objects they do not use anymore Valérie GUILLARD PhD student

  2. Research context • Charitable organizations • Firms which work on the replacement market • Consumers who are reluctant to dispose of objects What do consumers do with objects they do not use anymore?

  3. Research context • Little attention in marketing on the question: what do consumers do with objects they do not use anymore? • Exploratory researches (Jacoby and al, 1977 ; Hanson, 1982 ; McConocha and al, 1992). • Conceptual model of major disposition behaviors: • Keep the product. • Permanently dispose of it: • Give it, • Trade it, • Throw it away, • Exchange it. • Temporarily dispose of it: • Loan it, • Rent it.

  4. Research context (continued) • Choise of an option depends on: • Product intrinsic factors.

  5. Research context (continued) • Situational factors.

  6. Research context (continued) • Psychological characteristics of the decision maker.

  7. Research area • In this research, we are focused on objects: • For which consumer do not have any use anymore, • Still usable by others, • That are not worth being sold. • Perceived cost > perceived benefit. • Objects that nobody wants to buy. • Decision to know what to do with these objects is costly and complex: • Keeping  clutter, • Giving, exchanging  information search, transportation costs, • Throwing away  environmental costs. • Before this decision: • Some consumers have no difficulty to dispose of objects, • Others are always reluctant to do so.

  8. Research questions • Why do some consumers have reluctance to dispose of objects they do not use anymore, still usable by others, that are not being sold?

  9. Importance of the subject • A lot of people seem to be concerned with the problem: • Exploratory study. • “New” job in France: Home organizer. • What is known on the subject: • Literature on how people get rid of « sacred » objects, inalienable objects. (Sherry, 1990 ; Herrmann, 1997 ; Belk and Sherry, 1999). • No literature on the causes of their behavior. • No literature on knowing which consumers are reluctant to dispose of objects. • Research aims at characterizing the consumer reluctance to dispose of objects as a personal determinant.

  10. Research objectives • Knowing the nature of the Reluctance to Dispose of Objects (RDO). • Study 1. • Measuring this phenomenon. • Study 2. • Identifying consumers who are reluctant to get rid of objects. • Study 3.

  11. Study 1: Knowing the nature of the Reluctance to Dispose of Objects (RDO) • Psychological blockage which leads people to keep objects. (Frost and al, 1999 ; 2003). • What is the nature of this psychological blockage? • Literature on psychological possession and on relationships with objects (Pierce and al, 2003 ; Belk, 1988, 1991 ; Tisseron, 1999 ; Beaudrillard, 1968 ; Richins, 1994). • Objects may have sense when they enable people to: • Control their environment, • Recall past, memories, interpersonal links, • Have a social context.

  12. Study 2: Measuring this phenomenon • Objective of a scale: to identify people who are reluctant to dispose of objects. • Definition: consumer’s stable and recurrent reluctance to dispose of objects that do not have any use for them anymore, that are still usable by others but that are not worth being sold. • First step: • Exploratory studies. • “Do you keep objects you do not use anymore? Why?” • “You replace a furniture, what do you do of the former?” • Second step: • First data collection (N=180). • Third step : • Second data collection (N=150).

  13. Study 2: Measuring this phenomenon (continued) • Guilt ( = 0,8), “I will feel guilty if I dispose of it ”, « I feel I do a fault if I do not keep it », “I keep it because I offend someone if I throw it away”, “I feel some remorse for getting rid of objects” ; • Indecision ( = 0,79) “I never know if I have to dispose of it or not”, « I can not make the decision to get rid of objects », « It is always the fear of making mistakes which prevents me to dispose them»; • Environmental concern( = 0,810) “ To built them, we need materials and it causes damage in environment” ; « I keep them until that I find an industry to recycle them » ; « I feel guilty when I threat environment”, • Fear of emptiness ( = 0,70) “ I abhor a vacuum” “ I feel anxious if I part with my objects”; • Felt responsibility vis a vis future generation ( = 0,76) “ I keep them [books] because I will show them to my children” ; “ I would like to pass on future generation”.

  14. Study 2: Measuring this phenomenon (continued) You certainly have to make a decision concerning objects you do not use anymore, still usable and that are not being sold. When you have to make this decision, what do you tell yourself?

  15. Study 2: Measuring this phenomenon (continued) • 2 dimensions: • Sentimental • Instrumental • 75% of variance explained. • Retest (same people, N=90, 3 weeks later) • Correlation = 0,87**. • This scale measures a stable and recurrent reluctance to dispose of objects.

  16. Study 2: Measuring this phenomenon (continued) • Fourth step: • Confirmatory analysis (N=420). • RMSEA = 0,06 ; SRMR = 0,1 ; AGFI = 0,923 ; Chi2/ddl = 2,50 • Rhô de Joreskog and main indicators show a good fit between data and model. • Fifth step: • Nomological and predictive validity: • Two behaviors which logically come from RDO: • Not throwing away objects. • Keeping.

  17. Study 2: Measuring this phenomenon (continued)

  18. Study 2: Measuring this phenomenon(continued)Nomological validity H1a: The more a consumer is reluctant to dispose of objects, the less he has a tendency to throw them away. H1b: The more a consumer is reluctant to dispose of objects, the more he has a tendency to keep them.

  19. Study 3: Identifying consumers reluctant to dispose of objects • Test with personality scales. • N=330 • 100 adults (means of age : 41 ; 30% male ; 70% female) • 230 students (means of age : 21 ; 43% male ; 57% female)

  20. Conclusion • Some people are reluctant to get rid of objects they do not use anymore. • These people do not throw away objects and have the tendency to keep them. • No significant correlation with demographics. • No significant correlation with materialism. • Some people want to identify the future owner of their objects when they want to give them (Lastovicka and Fernandez, 2005 ; Price, Arnould and Curasi, 2000). Are they RDO? Thank you !

More Related