Author
Listed:
- Bridget K. Behe
- Jessica E. Fry
Abstract
Consumers do perceive risk in purchase decisions and seek to reduce both uncertainty and probability of loss. Risk also varies across persons and purchasing situations. Retailers promote product guarantees as risk reducers, but the quantitative evidence is lacking. They offer guarantees to help resolve outcomes from post-purchase problems mainly, product performance. We used an online survey to investigate the role of risk mitigation by money-back guarantees (MBGs) on a live product: plants. We obtained online responses from 504 US residents ≥ age 18 years who had made at least one live plant purchase in the six months prior to the study. As MBG length increased, perceived risk (PR) decreased. PR was higher for men than for women and declined as income increased. Subjects with a higher level of product involvement, expertise, delight, repurchase intentions, and regret had a higher level of PR. We conducted separate Chow tests for annual and perennial plants by price and MBG length and found several break points. As price increased from $5 to $10, a 30-d MBG reduced PR for annual plants while the reduction in PR was incrementally decreased for all guarantee lengths when annuals were priced over $20. With perennial plants, the MBG had an increasingly larger effect on reducing PR for each $10 increase in price. Overall, for each day increase in MBG length, we observed a 0.0337 decrease in PR, which meant that a 90-d MBG on a plant would reduce PR by 3%. This quantitative evidence of reduction in PR should encourage the use and communication of MBGs which have the potential to improve purchases, customer retention, and profitability.
Suggested Citation
Bridget K. Behe & Jessica E. Fry, 2020.
"How much do plant guarantees reduce perceived risk?,"
Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 242-258, February.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:23:y:2020:i:2:p:242-258
DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2019.1569092
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:taf:jriskr:v:23:y:2020:i:2:p:242-258. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.