IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joreco/v69y2022ics0969698922001771.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which consumers are willing to pay for smart car healthcare services? A discrete choice experiment approach

Author

Listed:
  • Woo, JongRoul
  • Shin, Jungwoo
  • Kim, Hongbum
  • Moon, HyungBin

Abstract

The technology adoption lifecycle model categorizes consumer groups in the new concept products and services market, based on different characteristics and needs, into innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards, in order of adopting new products and services. This study aims to estimate heterogeneous consumer preferences and willingness to pay for a new concept convergence service, the smart car healthcare service, using a choice experiment questionnaire and a hierarchical Bayesian mixed logit. We found that consumers were willing to pay an additional 3000 to 6000 KRW/month (2.65–5.29 USD/month) for a service that measured both physical movement and vital signs compared to either the former or the latter. It was also found that they were willing to pay about 3000 KRW/month (2.65 USD/month) more for a service that provides health condition predictions compared to one that provides only the current health condition. In addition, customers who were young, innovative, and favored the utility of healthcare services showed a lower sensitivity to service fees than those who were not. Thus, they were found to have a greater willingness to pay for advanced smart car healthcare services.

Suggested Citation

  • Woo, JongRoul & Shin, Jungwoo & Kim, Hongbum & Moon, HyungBin, 2022. "Which consumers are willing to pay for smart car healthcare services? A discrete choice experiment approach," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:joreco:v:69:y:2022:i:c:s0969698922001771
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103084
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969698922001771
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103084?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caussade, Sebastián & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios & Rizzi, Luis I. & Hensher, David A., 2005. "Assessing the influence of design dimensions on stated choice experiment estimates," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 621-640, August.
    2. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    3. Chang, Yu-Wei & Chen, Jiahe, 2021. "What motivates customers to shop in smart shops? The impacts of smart technology and technology readiness," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    4. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    5. Ossama Elshiewy & German Zenetti & Yasemin Boztug, 2017. "Differences Between Classical and Bayesian Estimates for Mixed Logit Models: A Replication Study," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 470-476, March.
    6. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, September.
    7. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. "Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    8. Park, Jungkun & Hong, EunPyo & Le, Hoang TPM, 2021. "Adopting autonomous vehicles: The moderating effects of demographic variables," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    9. Martina Raue & Lisa A. D'Ambrosio & Carley Ward & Chaiwoo Lee & Claire Jacquillat & Joseph F. Coughlin, 2019. "The Influence of Feelings While Driving Regular Cars on the Perception and Acceptance of Self‐Driving Cars," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 358-374, February.
    10. Denzil G. Fiebig & Michael P. Keane & Jordan Louviere & Nada Wasi, 2010. "The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 393-421, 05-06.
    11. Stephane Hess & John Rose, 2012. "Can scale and coefficient heterogeneity be separated in random coefficients models?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(6), pages 1225-1239, November.
    12. Maeng, Kyuho & Jeon, Seung Ryong & Park, Taeho & Cho, Youngsang, 2021. "Network effects of connected and autonomous vehicles in South Korea: A consumer preference approach," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    13. Allenby, Greg M. & Rossi, Peter E., 1998. "Marketing models of consumer heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 57-78, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lee, Hye-Jeong & Yoo, Seung-Hoon & Lim, Sesil & Huh, Sung-Yoon, 2023. "External benefits of a road transportation system with vehicle-to-everything communications," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 128-138.
    2. Ho Seoung Na & Junseok Hwang & Hongbum Kim, 2023. "Which Attributes Should be Considered in Regulating the Internet of Things? Evidence From Conjoint Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, November.
    3. Kim, Kyungah & Kim, Junghun, 2024. "The study of brand loyalty and switching cost on OTT bundled service choice: Focusing on reference-dependent preferences in the saturated market," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    4. Cobelli, Nicola & Cassia, Fabio & Zardini, Alessandro & Kuppelwieser, Volker G., 2024. "Pharmacies providing health services: Attitudes toward eHealth in Italy," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    5. Kim, Doha & Song, Yeosol & Kim, Songyie & Lee, Sewang & Wu, Yanqin & Shin, Jungwoo & Lee, Daeho, 2023. "How should the results of artificial intelligence be explained to users? - Research on consumer preferences in user-centered explainable artificial intelligence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kaye-Blake, William & Abell, Walter L. & Zellman, Eva, 2009. "Respondents’ ignoring of attribute information in a choice modelling survey," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(4), pages 1-18.
    2. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    3. Fifer, Simon & Rose, John M., 2016. "Can you ever be certain? Reducing hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments via respondent reported choice certaintyAuthor-Name: Beck, Matthew J," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 149-167.
    4. Irani, Alexandra & Chalak, Ali, 2015. "Harnessing motorists’ potential demand for hybrid-electric vehicles in Lebanon: Policy options, CO2 emissions reduction and welfare gains," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 144-155.
    5. Katharina Keller & Christian Schlereth & Oliver Hinz, 2021. "Sample-based longitudinal discrete choice experiments: preferences for electric vehicles over time," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 482-500, May.
    6. Balogh, Péter & Török, Áron & Czine, Péter & Horváth, Péter, 2020. "A fogyasztói magatartás elemzése feltételes választási modellekkel - a mangalicakolbász példáján [Analysing consumer behaviour with conditional choice models, with Mangalica sausage as an example]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(5), pages 474-494.
    7. J. Price & D. Dupont & W. Adamowicz, 2017. "As Time Goes By: Examination of Temporal Stability Across Stated Preference Question Formats," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 643-662, November.
    8. Wasi, Nada & Carson, Richard T., 2013. "The influence of rebate programs on the demand for water heaters: The case of New South Wales," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 645-656.
    9. Lew, Daniel K. & Wallmo, Kristy, 2017. "Temporal stability of stated preferences for endangered species protection from choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 87-97.
    10. Sever, Ivan & Verbič, Miroslav & Klarić Sever, Eva, 2019. "Cost attribute in health care DCEs: Just adding another attribute or a trigger of change in the stated preferences?," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Fifer, Simon & Rose, John & Greaves, Stephen, 2014. "Hypothetical bias in Stated Choice Experiments: Is it a problem? And if so, how do we deal with it?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 164-177.
    12. David Hensher & John Rose & Zheng Li, 2012. "Does the choice model method and/or the data matter?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 351-385, March.
    13. Lehmann, Nico & Sloot, Daniel & Schüle, Christopher & Ardone, Armin & Fichtner, Wolf, 2023. "The motivational drivers behind consumer preferences for regional electricity – Results of a choice experiment in Southern Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    14. Broberg, Thomas & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Persson, Lars, 2021. "Household preferences for load restrictions: Is there an effect of pro-environmental framing?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    15. Woo, JongRoul & Moon, Sungho & Choi, Hyunhong, 2022. "Economic value and acceptability of advanced solar power systems for multi-unit residential buildings: The case of South Korea," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    16. Byun, Hyunsuk & Shin, Jungwoo & Lee, Chul-Yong, 2018. "Using a discrete choice experiment to predict the penetration possibility of environmentally friendly vehicles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 312-321.
    17. Holte, Jon Helgheim & Kjaer, Trine & Abelsen, Birgit & Olsen, Jan Abel, 2015. "The impact of pecuniary and non-pecuniary incentives for attracting young doctors to rural general practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 1-9.
    18. Yang, Xiaoke & Chen, Qiuhua & Lin, Nenmei & Han, Mengzhu & Chen, Qian & Zheng, Qiuqin & Gao, Bin & Liu, Fengbo & Xu, Zhongyue, 2021. "Chinese consumer preferences for organic labels on Oolong tea: evidence from a choice experiment," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 24(3), February.
    19. Krucien, Nicolas & Ryan, Mandy & Hermens, Frouke, 2017. "Visual attention in multi-attributes choices: What can eye-tracking tell us?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 251-267.
    20. Alessandro Mengoni & Chiara Seghieri & Sabina Nuti, 2013. "The application of discrete choice experiments in health economics: a systematic review of the literature," Working Papers 201301, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna of Pisa, Istituto di Management.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:joreco:v:69:y:2022:i:c:s0969698922001771. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-retailing-and-consumer-services .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.