Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Need for control may motivate consumers to approach digital products: a social media advertising study

  • Published:
Electronic Commerce Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A salient characteristic of the current digital economy is the prevalence of digital products. It may be largely attributed to the rapid growth of digital media which grant users tremendous control over various digital content. However, a number of studies in consumer psychology reported that digital products may lead to reduced perceptions of control as the virtual format inhibits sense of ownership. Noticing this conflict in scholarship, this study examines to what extent consumers’ need for control influences their responses to digital versus physical products in a common E-Commerce situation—viewing product advertisements on social media. The results indicated that consumers with high need for control evaluated digital products more positively than physical products and also preferred the advertisements featuring digital products. Moreover, these consumers were also willing to pay more for digital rather than physical products. Such results provided some preliminary evidence to indicate that the experience of using digital products may satisfy online shoppers’ need for control. Both theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is a theory pertaining to people’s motivation and needs. According to this theory, the intrinsic needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness determine most human motives.

References

  1. NTIA (2018). Initial estimates show digital economy accounted for 6.5 percent of GDP in 2016 | National Telecommunications and Information Administration. Web Blog of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration. https://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2018/initial-estimates-show-digital-economy-accounted-65-percent-gdp-2016. Accessed 31 May 2019.

  2. Statista (2018). Digital music industry-statistics & facts. https://www.statista.com/topics/1386/digital-music/ Accessed 31 May 2019.

  3. Gifford (2018). 101 digital products to sell online in 2018 (real examples) | Sellfy. Sellfy Blog. https://blog.sellfy.com/101-digital-products-you-can-sell-online/. Accessed 31 May 2019.

  4. Saddlemyer, J. (2017). Why we value digital products less, and how to increase our attachment to them-needle strategy. Needle. http://needlestrategy.com/2017/12/18/value-digital-products-less-increase-attachment/. Accessed 31 May 2019.

  5. Atasoy, O., & Morewedge, C. K. (2017). Digital goods are valued less than physical goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(6), 1343–1357.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chen, C. Y., Lee, L., & Yap, A. J. (2017). Control deprivation motivates acquisition of utilitarian products. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(6), 1031–1047.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(2), 311–328.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sundar, S. S., Jia, H., Waddell, T. F., & Huang, Y. (2015). Toward a theory of interactive media effects (TIME): Four models for explaining how interface features affect user psychology. The handbook of the psychology of communication technology (pp. 47–86). Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kalyanaraman, S., & Wojdynski, B. W. (2015). Affording control: How customization, interactivity, and navigability affect psychological responses to technology. In S. S. Sundar (Ed.), The handbook of the psychology of communication technology (pp. 425–445). Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Landau, M. J., Kay, A. C., & Whitson, J. A. (2015). Compensatory control and the appeal of a structured world. Psychological Bulletin, 141(3), 694–722.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Park, C. W., Eisingerich, A. B., & Park, J. W. (2013). Attachment–aversion (AA) model of customer–brand relationships. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(2), 229–248.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Eisingerich, A. B., Marchand, A., Fritze, M. P., & Dong, L. (2019). Hook vs. hope: How to enhance customer engagement through gamification. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 36(2), 200–215.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Giles, D. C., Pietrzykowski, S., & Clark, K. E. (2007). The psychological meaning of personal record collections and the impact of changing technological forms. Journal of Economic Psychology, 28(4), 429–443.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Helm, S. V., Ligon, V., Stovall, T., & Van Riper, S. (2018). Consumer interpretations of digital ownership in the book market. Electronic Markets, 28(2), 177–189.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Siddiqui, S., & Turley, D. (2006). Extending the Self in a Virtual World. In P. Connie & P. Linda (Eds.), NA-Advances in Consumer Research (Vol. 33, pp. 647–648). Duluth: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Petrelli, D., & Whittaker, S. (2010). Family memories in the home: Contrasting physical and digital mementos. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 14(2), 153–169.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Edmondson, D. R., & Ward, C. (2017). Students’ attitudes towards textbook types: Are students really ready for e-textbooks? Atlantic Marketing Journal, 5(3), 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Peck, J., Barger, V. A., & Webb, A. (2013). In search of a surrogate for touch: The effect of haptic imagery on perceived ownership. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(2), 189–196.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Reb, J., & Connolly, T. (2007). Possession, feelings of ownership, and the endowment effect. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(2), 107–114.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139–168.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Chatterjee, P., Irmak, C., & Rose, R. L. (2013). The endowment effect as self-enhancement in response to threat. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 460–476.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Morewedge, C. K., & Giblin, C. E. (2015). Explanations of the endowment effect: An integrative review. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(6), 339–348.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Beggan, J. K. (1992). On the social nature of nonsocial perception: The mere ownership effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(2), 229–237.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Shu, S. B., & Peck, J. (2011). Psychological ownership and affective reaction: Emotional attachment process variables and the endowment effect. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(4), 439–452.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Peck, J., & Shu, S. B. (2009). The effect of mere touch on perceived ownership. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(3), 434–447.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Sundar, S. S. (2008). The main model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 73–100). Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Arman (2018). EBook customization–Do you need it? | Online file conversion blog. https://blog.online-convert.com/ebook-customization-do-you-need-it/. Accessed 31 May 2019.

  29. Wind, J., & Rangaswamy, A. (2001). Customerization: The next revolution in mass customization. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 15(1), 13–32.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Sundar, S. S., & Nass, C. (2001). Conceptualizing sources in online news. Journal of Communication, 51(1), 52–72.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Cortez, J. (2018). The importance of being interactive while streaming. Switchboard Live, https://switchboard.live/blog/interactive-live-streaming-engagement/. Accessed 31 May 2019.

  33. Williams, F., Rice, R. E., & Rogers, E. M. (1988). Research methods and the new media. New York: Simon and schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Jensen, J. F. (1998). “Interactivity”. Tracking a new concept in media and communication studies. Nordicom Review, 19(1), 185–204.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wojdynski, B. W. (2015). Interactive data graphics and information processing: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 27(1), 11–21.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Kristof, R., & Satran, A. (2002). Interactivity by design. San Francisco: Adobe Press.

    Google Scholar 

  37. White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, 66(5), 297–333.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Burger, J. M. (1987). Effects of desire for control on attributions and task performance. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 8(4), 309–320.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Kelley, H. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28(2), 107–128.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Lunardo, R., & Mbengue, A. (2009). Perceived control and shopping behavior: The moderating role of the level of utilitarian motivational orientation. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16(6), 434–441.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Friese, J. P., Kay, A. C., Eibach, R. P., & Galinsky, A. D. (2014). Seeking structure in social organization: Compensatory control and the psychological advantages of hierarchy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(4), 590–609.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kay, A. C., Whitson, J. A., Gaucher, D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2009). Compensatory control: Achieving order through the mind, our institutions, and the heavens. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(5), 264–268.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Burger, J. M., & Cooper, H. M. (1979). The desirability of control. Motivation and Emotion, 3(4), 381–393.

    Google Scholar 

  44. De Rijk, A. E., Le Blanc, P. M., Schaufeli, W. B., & JDe Jonge, J. (1998). Active coping and need for control as moderators of the job demand–control model: Effects on burnout. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 71(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Burger, J. M., & Hemans, L. T. (1988). Desire for control and the use of attribution processes. Journal of Personality, 56(3), 531–546.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Zak, A., Hunton, L., Kuhn, R., & Parks, J. (1997). Effects of need for control on personal relationships. The Journal of Social Psychology, 137(5), 671–672.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Moulding, R., & Kyrios, M. (2007). Desire for control, sense of control and obsessive-compulsive symptoms. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 31(6), 759–772.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Hamerman, E. J., & Johar, G. V. (2013). Conditioned superstition: Desire for control and consumer brand preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 428–443.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Faraji-Rad, A., Melumad, S., & Johar, G. V. (2017). Consumer desire for control as a barrier to new product adoption. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(3), 347–354.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Phillips, D. M., Olson, J. C., & Baumgartner, H. (1995). Consumption visions in consumer decision making. In F. Kardes & M. Sujan (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research (pp. 280–284). Provo: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Shiv, B., & Huber, J. (2000). The impact of anticipating satisfaction on consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 202–216.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Pew Research Center (2019). Social media fact sheet. Retrieved from: https://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/social-media/.

  53. Facebook (2019). Facebook reports second quarter 2019 results. Retrieved from https://investor.fb.com/investor-news/press-release-details/2019/Facebook-Reports-Second-Quarter-2019-Results/default.aspx. Accessed 9 Aug 2019.

  54. MacKenzie, S. B., Lutz, R. J., & Belch, G. E. (1986). The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanations. Journal of Marketing Research, 23(2), 130–143.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Bettman, J. R., & Park, C. W. (1980). Effects of prior knowledge and experience and phase of the choice process on consumer decision processes: A protocol analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(3), 234–248.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Rafaeli, S. (1988). From new media to communication. Advancing communication science: Merging mass and interpersonal processes (pp. 110–134). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Korgaonkar, P. K., & Wolin, L. D. (1999). A multivariate analysis of web usage. Journal of Advertising Research, 39, 53–68.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Huang, M.-H., & Rust, R. T. (2017). Technology-driven service strategy. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(6), 906–924.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Kannan, P. K., & Li, H. A. (2017). Digital marketing: A framework, review and research agenda. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 34(1), 22–45.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Denegri-Knott, J., Watkins, R., & Wood, J. (2013). Transforming digital virtual goods into meaningful possessions. In J. D. Knott & M. Molesworth (Eds.), Digital virtual consumption (pp. 83–98). Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Fritze, M. P., Eisingerich, A. B., & Benkenstein, M. (2018). Digital transformation and possession attachment: examining the endowment effect for consumers’ relationships with hedonic and utilitarian digital service technologies. Electronic Commerce Research, 9, 311–337.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Sundar S. S., & Marathe, S. (2006). Is it tailoring or is it agency? unpacking the psychological appeal of customized news. In The 89th Annual Convention of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, San Francisco.

  64. Belk, R. W. (2013). Extended self in a digital world. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 477–500.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Liao, T. H., & Keng, C. J. (2013). Online shopping delivery delay: Finding a psychological recovery strategy by online consumer experiences. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1849–1861.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Wu, L. (2019). Website interactivity may compensate for consumers’ reduced control in E-Commerce. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 49, 253–266.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983). Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 135–146.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Geuens, M., De Pelsmacker, P., & Faseur, T. (2011). Emotional advertising: Revisiting the role of product category. Journal of Business Research, 64(4), 418–426.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Wingreen, S. C., Mazey, N. C., Baglione, S. L., & Storholm, G. R. (2018). Transfer of electronic commerce trust between physical and virtual environments: experimental effects of structural assurance and situational normality. Electronic Commerce Research, 19, 339–371.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Burger, J. M. (2013). Desire for control: Personality, social and clinical perspectives. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Baron, R. S., & Logan, H. (1993). Desired Control, felt control, and dental pain: Recent findings and remaining issues. Motivation and Emotion, 17(3), 181–204.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Cutright, K. M., & Samper, A. (2014). Doing it the hard way: How low control drives preferences for high-effort products and services. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(3), 730–745.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Journalism and Mass Communications, College of Information and Communications, University of South Carolina, 800 Sumter Street, Room 328, Columbia, SC, 29208, USA

    Linwan Wu

  2. Communication Department, College of Arts and Sciences, Seattle University, 901 12th Avenue, 1103 Building, #309, Seattle, WA, 98122, USA

    Jiangmeng Liu

Authors
  1. Linwan Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jiangmeng Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Linwan Wu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, L., Liu, J. Need for control may motivate consumers to approach digital products: a social media advertising study. Electron Commer Res 21, 1031–1054 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-020-09399-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10660-020-09399-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation