規範導向與模擬思考：向上或向下的事前與反事實思考

Abstract

在作購買決策前與經歷負面服務結果後，模擬可能的結果在消費者決策過程中扮演重要的角色。儘管過去研究曾探討過影響事前與反事實思考的因素，但極少研究關注規範導向理論對消費者心理模擬的影響。本研究聚焦於避害導向與趨利導向的消費者，是否會將規範導向延伸應用在事前與反事實思考，同時是否會影響消費者的後悔與滿意程度。由於規範導向伴隨的心理差異，當在作購買決策的時候，避害導向的消費者會較容易有向上的事前思考。然而趨利導向的消費者傾向有較多的向下的事前思考。而當服務結果是負面的時候，相較於趨利導向的消費者，避害導向的消費者較容易模擬可能達成原先預期的替代方案，而較多的有向上的反事實思考。同時，避害導向的消費者會比趨利導向的消費者覺得後悔與較不滿意。本研究進行的兩個情境基礎的研究來檢驗所提出的理論。結果提供研究人員與實務人員對服務接觸中，規範導向對事前思考、反事實思考、後悔及滿意度的顯著影響有更進一步的了解。

For most consumers in service delivery processes, simulating alternative possible outcomes, both before making decisions and after the negative service outcomes, plays an important role in their decision making processes and evaluations. While abundant previous research has provided insights into factors influencing prefactual thinking and counterfactual thinking, few researchers have drawn regulatory focus theory to explain a variety of consumer mental simulation phenomena. This research focuses on whether the strategies of prevention-focused and promotion-focused consumers extend to the use and consequences of prefactual and counterfactual thinking, as well as on consumer regret and satisfaction after service failures. Due to the psychological differences from regulatory focus, we propose that, when making a purchase decision, a prevention-focused consumer's alternative expected performance outcome would more likely be in an upward direction. On the other hand, a promotion-focused consumer would engage in more downward prefactual thinking. Moreover, a prevention-focused consumer, when the service outcome is negative, is more likely to engage in upward counterfactual thinking to simulate possible alternatives to achieve his/her initial expectation than is a promotion-focused consumer. Also, a prevention-focused consumer is more regretful for the failure and less satisfied with the current service provider than would a promotion-focused consumer. We conduct two studies and scenario-based surveys to examine our theories. The results of our research provide researchers and practitioners richer insight into how regulatory focus could significantly influence the prefactual thinking, counterfactual thinking, regret, and satisfaction in service encounters.