Effects of risk and benefit perceptions on the buying intent of functional food of Vietnamese consum

The theory of risk perception explains that consumers are aware of undesirable

consequences of their buying decisions (Bauer, 1960). There are a number concepts of

risk perception, but these concepts all have many similarities. In this thesis, the

candidate chooses the definition of Schiffman & Kanuk (2000), in which risk

perception is the perception of uncertainty that consumers face when they cannot

foresee the results of their purchase decisions

pdf12 trang | Chia sẻ: honganh20 | Ngày: 10/03/2022 | Lượt xem: 220 | Lượt tải: 0download
Bạn đang xem nội dung tài liệu Effects of risk and benefit perceptions on the buying intent of functional food of Vietnamese consum, để tải tài liệu về máy bạn click vào nút DOWNLOAD ở trên
thesis is “food is used to support the function of parts of the human body, has nutritional effects, makes the body comfortable, increases resistance. and reduce the risk of disease”. 2.2. Theoretical basis 2.2.1. Theory of planning behavior (TPB) The TPB assumes that human behavior is purely due to rational control. There are three conceptually independent factors that determine the intentions: (i) attitude towards behavior, (ii) subjective norms; (iii) behavior control perception. Based on TPB theory, the candidate wants to focus on cognitive factors that control behavior. Functional food are products directly related to consumers' health, the functional food market in Vietnam has many shortcomings related to consumer perception (will be written more detail on the research), making intentional dietary functional food buying behavior more difficult to control. Therefore, it is necessary to consider more carefully the issues related to perception in general and perception of behavior control in particular when studying the buying intent of functional food in Vietnam. 2.2.2. Theory of risk and benefit perception on buying intent Effects of risk perception on buying intent Schiffman and Kanuk (2000) assert that consumers are aware of uncertainty (or risk perception) when consuming products and this affects their buying intent. Risk perception acts as a barrier to buying intent (Peter & Ryan, 1976). Murphy and Enis (1986) argue that risk perception creates a sense of loss that can be very large, directly and significantly influence consumers' buying decisions and behaviors. In addition, Wood and Scheer (1996) find that the decline of risk perception not only increases the purchasing power, but also increases the customer's buying intent. As such, risk perception has a negative effect on buying intent. Effects of benefit perception on buying intent Alka Sharma & Palvi Bhardwaj (2015) demonstrated that benefit perceptions positively affect buying intent of customers (with the test for P - value <0.05). Arijit Halder, Amit Panda, S Madhav & Shekhar Suman (2014) also reached similar conclusions when studying the effects of benefit perceptions on festive shopping online. In a study of buying street food intent, Choi, Ok & Lee (2013) showed that benefit perceptions of street food positively affect the customers' intention to consume street food. Thereby showing benefit perception has a positive effect on buying intent. Effects of risk and benefit perception on buying intent Choi, Lee, & Ok (2013) examined in detail the perceived factors that influence consumer attitudes and behavioral intent in Korea towards street food. They makes an important conclusion about the direction of the impact of these two types of perceptions: risk and benefit perception both influence food buying intent, in which risk perception has negative effects, benefit perception has positive effects. As for the food and medicine sector, most of the research works on individual factors, such as Schnettler et al. (2014) on the readiness to buy functional food under the impact of benefit perceptions. MRSuplet et al. (2014) examines the relationship between risk perception factors and buying intent in the generic drug market. Other studies examine the effect of general perception along with other factors on direct and indirect buying intent, such as the study by Golnaz Rezai et al (2017) on functional food. There has not been a single study in the functional food sector that has placed risk and benefit perceptions of benefit in the same research model to examine their effect on buying intent. 2.3. Research background The functional food market in Vietnam currently has three characteristics as follows: - The first characteristic: when it comes to the functional food market today as well as in the future is the large market size, diversified product portfolio, variety of types, high growth rate, and profitability. developed at a very good rate. Functional food are considered as a preventive health tool in the twenty-first century to help people fight the onslaught of non-communicable chronic diseases. - The second characteristic: Vietnamese functional food market is the production of counterfeit products, poor quality counterfeits, and deceiving consumers. - The third characteristic: It is related to consumer perception of functional food. Many people today still do not clearly distinguish whether a functional food is a medicine or not. Based on the characteristics of the functional food market in Vietnam, the candidate has a preliminary assessment that consumers' perception is not clear about food products, factors related to health, money, psychology, Convenience / convenience will be factors that influence your intention to purchase the functional food. From the first judgment based on this research context, the candidate conducts a review of the risk and benefit perception factors and selects the appropriate factors. 2.4. Overview of international research on risk and benefit perception factors 2.4.1. Perception factors Risk perception factors Financial risk perception (RRTC) The RRTC is often described as the consumer perception of a net loss, including the possibility of the necessary repair, replacement and/or refund (Horton, 1976; Sweeney et al., 1999). More specifically, the RRTC relates to the possibility that the product / service purchase is not worth the share of the expenditure spent (Roehl & Fesenmaier, 1992). Indeed, in a shopping situation where the higher the customer spend on the product, the higher the financial risk to the customer. Meanwhile, in Vietnam, the price of the product in this market is considered to be relatively high relative to the average income per capita, and the risk perception may be appropriate for the purchase of functional food in Vietnam. H1: Financial risk perception has a negative effect on the buying intent of functional food. Risk perception of use (RRCD) The RRCD is the perception of a consumer's loss when their product or brand expectations do not come true after a purchase (Horton, 1976). In the current context of the functional food market, when consumers are limited to obtain multi-dimensional information about the product, in addition to the specific characteristics of the functional food such as: the effect of the product is not immediately apparent. but need to be used for a long time to be effective, many advertising information is vague, customers may find it difficult and lack confidence to evaluate the quality and use of the product, then RRCD is likely to appear in consumer mind. H2: Utility risks perception has a negative effect on the buyng intent of functional food. Psychological risk perception (RRTL) When studying RRTL, it can be understood that this consumer perception of the ability to choose bad products hurts their egos (Nepomuceno, Laroche, Richard, & Eggert, 2012; Schiffman, O 'Cass, Paladino, D'Alessandro, & Bednall, 2011; Stone & Gronhaug, 1993). TPCN is also considered a food, so there is a certain degree of psychological risk. H3: Psychological risk perception has a negative impact on the buying intent of functional food. Social risk perception (RRXH) Social risk is the perception of losing respect or respect (Murray & Schlacter, 1990). Social risk associated with buying and using products is often associated with the risk of losing position in a social group; appearing in a foolish manner or not following a general tendency, this is a kind of risk in some social groups (Lee, 2009). When using TPCN, users have the ability to change their health and bodily functions and this in some cases may be related to the consumer position, social image (for example, product groups support physiological). Besides, the trend of consuming functional food products as a gift is also a form of making this product become a public consumer product. H4: Perceptions of social risks have a negative effect on the buying intent of functional food. Time risk perceptions (RRTG) RRTG is concerned with the perception of time-taking, convenience, and efforts to get a product that must be fixed, connected, and replaced if it goes wrong (Nepomuceno, Laroche, Richard, & Eggert, 2012; Schiffman, O'Cass, Paladino, D'Alessandro, & Bednall, 2011; Stone & Gronhaug, 1993). In the context of consuming functional food products in Vietnam, there are product lines sold widely on the market, which cost customers time to inspect and choose their own products. H5: Time risk perception has a negative effect on the buying intent of functional food. Benefit perception factors Benefit Perception (LICD) LICD represents the beliefs of consumers about the function that the product / service brings. In which, the functional value is the utility obtained from the substitutability for utility, convenience, or physical activity, an alternative that acquires the functional value through the possession of the prominent function. functional, ergonomic, or physical "(Sheth et al, 1991). The abuse of media against functional food products leads to the fact that the common reference sources of consumers in Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi are mainly friends, family members, doctors, pharmacists. Therefore, it can be seen that consumer perception about the use of functional food in Vietnam is only reflected in a minority of customers. H6: Perception of utility benefits has a positive effect on the buying intent of functional food. Benefit perception (LITL) According to Forsythe, et al. (2006), LITL was perceived to be able to shop anytime from different places regardless of location and not visiting stores. Convenience is measured based on time spent, where to shop and the purchase process. Convenience here can take the form of time, effort, and stress. Then, when the product is easily acquired, it's convenience in possession. In the food sector, Choy, Lee & Ok (2013) affirms that LITL can be expressed as the perception of speed, convenience for eating and accessibility. Considering the factor of the perception of convenience benefits in relation to the characteristics of the functional food market in Vietnam today, the candidate thinks that the verification of the relationship of the perception of convenience benefits to the traditional medicine market is necessary. H7: Perception of convenience has a positive effect on the buying intent of functional food. Perception of social benefits (LIXH) LIXH is seen as a benefit derived from a product's ability to enhance the social image of users (Jillian C. Sweeneya, Geoffrey N. Soutarb, 2001). In addition to, focusing on improving health, people are also interested in appearance, the position of individuals in the collective, the evaluation of the community ... So, whether functional foodwith the benefits it brings such as community acceptance, collective recognition, appreciation, etc can become a product serving the social needs in the consumer's life? H8: The perception of social benefits has a positive effect on the buying intent of functional food. In addition to the above-mentioned NTLIs, for the case study of buying intentfunctional food, the candidate finds that it is likely that consumers will be interested in economic benefits. From the perspective of health protection as an investment solution for the future, prevention is better than cure, whether consumers are aware that they will not have to spend money on treatment (especially serious illness) in the future (economic benefits), when consuming functional food products or not? Perception of economic benefits, in this study, is understood as consumer perceptions of the economic benefits that can be derived from product consumption, and more specifically the reduction of expenses that customers may have to pay if they do not consume the product. H9: Perception of economic benefits has a positive effect on the buying intent of functional food. 2.5. Research model and hypothesis This study will inherit, develop and test the effects of risks and benefits perception factors on the buying intent of functional food of Vietnamese consumers. Specifically, the candidate will perform: (i) test the effect of 5 types of NTRR factors on buying intent functional food of Vietnamese consumers and 04 types of NTLI factors on the buying intentfunctional food. of Vietnamese consumers, including a new factor proposed by the candidate is perception of economic benefits. According to that orientation and on the basis of the research overview, the candidate proposes the research model and corresponding hypotheses. Factor NTLI Factors NTRR RRTC (H1) LITL (H7) LICD (H6) LIXH (H8) RRTG (H5) RRTL (H3) RRCD (H2) RRXH (H4) LIKT (H9) Buying intent of functional food Hình 2.1: Model of the effects of risk and benefit perception on the buying intent of functional food. Hypothesis: - Effect of NTRR on buying intent: (H1 - H5) H1: Financial NTRR has a negative impact on buying intent of functional food; H2: The use of NTRR has a negative impact on buying intent of functional food; H3: Psychological NTRR has a negative impact on buying intent of functional food; H4: Social NTR has a negative impact on buying intent of functional food; H5: Time NTRR has a negative impact on buying intent of functional food. - Effect of NTLI on buying intent: (H6 - H9) H6: The use of NTLI has a positive impact on buying intent of functional food; H7: Convenient NTLI has a positive impact on buying intent of functional food; H8: Social consumers have a positive impact on buying intent of functional food; H9: Economic NTLI has a positive impact on buying intent of functional food CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1.Research process Hình 3. 1: Research process 3.2. Research methodology 3.2.1. Quanlitative reseach Methods: Qualitative research is used with in-depth interview techniques and focus group interviews according to pre-prepared content. Interview content: (1) Open questions to learn about the interviewee's views on the buying intent of functional food; (2) Open questions about the risk and benefit perceptions factors that influence buying intent of functional food, especially the perceived economic benefit factors; (3) List the scales of the variables in the research model so that the interviewees evaluate the suitability of the research context in Vietnam. CFA Scale Quantitative research Theorical basis Quanlitative research Quantitative research EFA Adjustment Cronbach’s Alpha Scale assessment Variances have small EFA Variance analysis Scale Draft scale SEM Eleminate variance with small CFA; Check the robust of model. Test the model Data analysis: Data were collected through face-to-face interviews, the results were aggregated, compared, contrasted and gave the most common opinion on the research problem. Qualitative research results: All experts agree that risk and benefits perception have an impact on buying intent of functional food in which risk perception has negative effects, benefit perception has positive effects. Experts also believe that it is reasonable to put risk and benefit perception into the same research model, because these two concepts, although opposing, always exist in parallel in consumer behavior. - Scale assessment and adjustment: the scales have been evaluated, removed and adjusted to make them easier to understand to put in the questionnaire. - Perceived economic benefit variable: experts all agreed to include this variable in the research model and had suggestions to help improve the scale. 3.2.2. Quantitative research 3.2.2.1. Preliminary quantitative research Sample size: sample size for the preliminary quantitative study is n = 300. Convenient, non-probability sampling method Preliminary quantitative research objectives: evaluate the reliability and distinguishing value as well as the convergence value of the scale. Methods used: test the scale with confidence coefficients Cronbach's Alpha and exploratory factor analysis method EFA Preliminary quantitative research results: - No factor is removed after two tests. Thus, the model and research hypotheses remain the same as the original. - There is a change in the number of observed variables: financial NTRR, utility NTRR, psychological NTRR, time NTLI, the utility NTLI, the convenient NTLI, the social NTLI, the economic NTLI. The complete scales for use in quantitative research are as follows: Research objects Scale Code Financial risks perception I'm afraid the benefits of the functional food are not commensurate with the money I spent earlier RRTC_1 I think spending some money on functional foods affects my other spending levels RRTC_2 I'd rather spend the money on something other than buying functional foods RRTC_3 Utilities risks perception I'm not sure the functional food is as useful as advised / advised RRCD_1 I believe that any claims to be made about the effectiveness of functional foods are not credible RRCD_2 I'm not sure functional foods are as useful as people think RRCD_3 I cannot test the real additive of functional foods before using them RRCD_4 Psychological risks perception I don't think consuming functional foods is appropriate for my image RRTL_1 Having to take functional foods on a regular basis makes me uncomfortable RRTL_2 I am afraid that the wrong consumption of functional food can damage my beliefs and opinions RRTL_3 Social risk perception I am afraid that my loved one will not be satisfied with my taking the functional food RRXH_1 I'm afraid my friend won't be satisfied with my functional food RRXH_2 I am afraid that a sales professional may advise me inaccurate information about dietary functional foods RRXH_3 Taking a functional food may make others think that I have a health problem RRXH_4 Time risk perception I think it takes time to go to a place that sells functional foods RRTG_1 Research objects Scale Code I feel that taking functional foods is time consuming RRTG_2 Getting information about functional foods takes time RRTG_3 I can spend my time learning/using functional foods to make other things more useful. RRTG_4 Utility benefits I have found that the functional food is consistently effective LICD_1 I find that taking functional foods can improve overall health LICD_2 I have found that functional foods work to reduce the risk of certain diseases, or to minimize negative health effects. LICD_3 I find that functional foods have a mental boosting effect LICD_4 Convenience perception On the market today, I see many models and brands of functional food on sale. LITL_1 Information about functional food has been communicated on many media LITL_2 I think I can easily buy functional foods. LITL_3 Functional food are sold in many channels: online, offline (drugstores, supermarkets ...) LITL_4 Economic benefit perception Consumption of functional food will reduce costs compared to buying other food (because functional food contain higher nutrients, higher nutritional content). LIKT_1 Consuming functional foods helps me earn more money thanks to good health and spirit LIKT_2 Consuming functional food does not have to waste effort, time and money to process like other food LIKT_3 Social Consuming functional food will help improve the way LIXH _1 Research objects Scale Code benefits perception people see me Consuming functional foods will help me impress others LIXH _2 Consuming functional food helps users gain acceptance from the community LIXH _3 I can advise relatives/friends on functional foods if I have experience using them. LIXH _4 Buying intent I will actively seek and purchase functional food in the near future YDM_1 I am looking for information on a number of functional foods YDM_2 I am willing to buy functional food at reputable places YDM_3 I will recommend a dietary functional food that I know / plan to use to friends and relatives YDM_4 I plan to take a functional food next month YDM_5 3.2.2.2. Official quantitative research - Sampel: 800 consumers - Sampling method: non-probability sampling - The candidate has conducted official quantitative research in two cities, Hanoi and Hochiminh City. The number of questionnaires gave out 800 votes, collected 745 questionaires, however, after screening and discarding invalid votes (the questionnaires did not have enough answers, the questionnaires did not specify the information of respondents, the questionnaires had sentences answer the same in most question) the candidate only used 686 valid votes for the official analysis. All research samples intend to buy/consume functional food within the past 6 months. CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS 4.1. Scale testing using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) 4.1.1. CFA test scale of the group of risk perception factors Hình 4.1: CFA test results scale a group of risk perception factors CFA results obtained in Figure 4.1 are as follows: CMIN / df = 1.78; GFI = 0.933; TLI = 0.953; CFI = 0.961; RMSEA = 0.048. The above results show that the scale of manifestations of risk perception is consistent with market data. The risk perception scales all meet the criteria for their own evaluation: the robust of the scale of the group is guaranteed because of CR> 0.7, the convergence value of the scale is guaranteed because AVE> 0.5 and scale because MSV <AVE, SQRTAVE values are greater than all Inter-Construct Correlations. 4.1.2. CFA test scale of the group of benefits perception factors Hình 4.2: CFA test results scale a group of benefit perception factors CFA results obtained in Figure 4.2 are as follows: CMIN / df = 1,670; GFI = 0.950 (> 0.9); TLI = 0.973 (> 0.9); CFI = 0.979 (> 0.9); RMSEA = 0.044 (<0.05). The above results show that the scale of manifestations of perceptions of benefits is consistent with market data when assessed against common standards. The robust of the scale of the group of perceptions of benefits is guaranteed because CR> 0.7, the convergence value of the scale is guaranteed because AVE> 0.5 and the scale reaches discriminant validity because MSV <AVE, SQRTAVE value is greater than all Inter-Construct Correlations. 4.1.3. Structural Equation Model CFA test results are obtained in Figure 4.3: CMIN / df = 1.513; GFI = 0.876 (approximately 0.9); TLI = 0.946 (> 0.9); CFI = 0.953 (> 0.9); RMSEA = 0.039 (<0.08), proving that the critical theoretical scale model is consistent with market data. The robust of the scales is guaranteed because CR> 0.7, the convergence of the scale is guaranteed because AVE> 0.5 and the scale reaches the discriminant value because MSV <AVE, the SQRTAVE values are all greater than all both the Inter-Construct Correlation.4.2. Kiểm định mô hình và các giả thuyết nghiên cứu Hình 4.3: SEM result of 1st theoretical research model The results of testing the suitability of the research model by SEM analysis (Figure 4.3) are as follows: Chi-square / df = 1,868; GFI = 0.848; TLI = 0.988; CFI = 0.916; RMSEA = 0.050. The above results show that the research model is completely suitable with market data. Bảng 4.1: Model test results Standard deviation P meaning Buying intent <--- Financial risks perception 0,072 0,003 Buying intent <--- Utilities risks perception 0,057 *** Buying intent <--- Psychological risks perception 0,031 *** Buying intent <--- Social risk perception 0,049 *** Buying intent <--- Time risk perception 0,040 *** Buying intent <--- Utility benefits 0,061 0,022 Buying intent <--- Convenience perception 0,052 *** Buying intent <--- Economic benefit perception 0,043 *** Buying intent <--- Social benefit perception 0,083 0,228 Ghi chú: P:meaing; ***= P < 0,001. The test results of Table 4.1 for factors RRTC, RRCD, RRTL, social risk, RRTG, LICD, LITL, LKT in the theoretical research model are significant at P-value 0.05. So LIXH variable will be disqualified. The candidate conducted to test this model when removing the variable LIXH. The candidate has appended the arrow to create the correlation between the remainder e1- e1. Hình 4.4:

Các file đính kèm theo tài liệu này:

  • pdfeffects_of_risk_and_benefit_perceptions_on_the_buying_intent.pdf
Tài liệu liên quan