تفاوت بین زنان و مردان در جبران هدیه دریافتی

اکبری, محسن; ابراهیم پور, مصطفی; حدادی, معصومه

doi:10.29252/jbmp.15.26.123

تفاوت بین زنان و مردان در جبران هدیه دریافتی

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

¹ * استادیار، دانشگاه گیلان (نویسنده مسئول)

² ** استادیار، دانشگاه گیلان.

³ *** کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه گیلان

10.29252/jbmp.15.26.123

چکیده

چکیده هدیه‌دادن از ویژگی‌های جوامع سنتی و همچنین امروزی محسوب می‌شود و یک تبادل تشریفاتی نمادین است. هدف پژوهش حاضر، کشف تأثیر ارزش‌ هدیه دریافتی بر قصد جبران هدیه است که در این رابطه، احساس تعهد، متغیر میانجی و جنسیت، متغیر تعدیل گر در نظر گرفته شده است؛ در این راستا تعداد 348 پرسشنامه در میان مشتریان فروشگاه‌های هدیه، توزیع و به 341 مورد پاسخ داده شد. برای تجزیه‌وتحلیل داده‌ها از نرم‌افزار Smart PLS استفاده شد. بررسی و تحلیل یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که ارزش‌های هدیه دریافتی بر قصد جبران هدیه تأثیرگذار است و این تأثیر از طریق متغیر میانجی احساس تعهد بیشتر است؛ همچنین نتایج نشان داد که جنسیت، رابطه بین ارزش هدیه دریافتی و قصد جبران هدیه را تعدیل می‌کند و مردان بیشتر قصد جبران هدیه دریافتی را دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Difference between Men and Women in Received Gift Compensation

نویسندگان [English]

Mohsen Akbari ¹
Mostafa Ebrahipour ²
Masoumeh hadaddi ³

¹ Assistant Professor, UnAssistant Professor, University of Guilaniversity of Guilan

² Assistant Professor, University of Guilan

³ MSc. Business Administration, University of Guilan.

چکیده [English]

Gift giving is features of traditional as well as modern societies and also, is part of symbolic exchange rituals. The objective of this research is to investigate the impact of received gift value on intention to gift compensation of gift receivers with moderating role of gender and with mediating role of obligation. In this study, 341 gift shop customers were surveyed. Smart Partial Least Square (PLS) was employed to analyze data. Analysis shows that received gift value has an impact on intention to gift compensation and this impact is greater with the mediating role of obligation. Also analyses show that gender moderates the relation between received gift value and gift compensation intention and the men are more intended compensate the received gift compensation.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

Gift Giving
Perceived Gift Value
Compensation Intention
Obligation

مراجع

Anton, C., Camarero, C., & Gil, F. (2014). The culture of gift giving: What do consumers expect from commercial and personal contexts? Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 13(1), 31-41.
Beatty, S. E., Kahle, L. R., & Homer, P. (1991).Personal values and gift-giving behaviors: A study across cultures. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 149-157.
Cravens, D. W., Holland, C. W., Lamb, C. W., &Moncrief, W. C. (1988). Marketing's role in product and service quality. Journal of Industrial Marketing Management, 17(4), 285-304.
CruzâCardenas, J. (2014). The status of gifts in the receiver's life: Reasons for the transformation of commercial products into special, common or hated objects. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38(2), 139-145.
Davies. G., Whelan. S., &Walsh. M. (2010).Gift and gifting. International Journal Management Reviews,12(4), 413-343.
Dwyer, F. R., Schurr, P. H., & Oh, S. (1987).Developing buyer-seller relationships. The Journal of Marketing, 51(2), 11-27.
Fornell, C., &Larcker, D. F. (1981).Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Fischer, E., & Arnold, S. J. (1990). More than a labor of love: Gender roles and Christmas gift shopping. Journal of consumer research, 17, 333-345.
Ferrandi, J. M., Louis, D., Merunka, D., & Valette-Florence, P. (2015). The Influence of Personal Values and Materialism on Motivations towards Gift-Giving: A Model and Empirical Evidence. In Assessing the Different Roles of Marketing Theory and Practice in the Jaws of Economic Uncertainty (pp. 1-6). Springer International Publishing.
Goodwin, C., Smith, K. L., &Spiggle, S. (1990). Gift giving: Consumer motivation and the gift purchase process. Journal of Advances in Consumer Research, 17(1), 690-698.
Giesler, M. (2006).Consumer gift systems. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(2), 283-290.
Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. Journal of American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161-178.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., &Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Journal of Advances in International Marketing (AIM), 20, 277-320.
Lawler, E. J., & Yoon, J. (1996). Commitment in exchange relations: Test of a theory of relational cohesion. Journal of American Sociological Review, 61(1), 89-108.
Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (1992).Relationships between providers and users of marketing research: The nature of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research, 10, 404-409.
Mayet, C., & Pine, K. J. (2010).The psychology of gift exchange. University of Hertfordshire.
Mowen, J.C., & Minor, M. (1998).Consumer Behavior, 5thedn. London: Prentice Hall.
Palan, K. M., Areni, C. S., & Kiecker, P. (2001). Gender role incongruency and memorable gift exchange experiences. Advances in Consumer Research, 28, 51-57.
Schwartz, B. (1967). The social psychology of the gift. American Journal of Sociology, 73(1), 1-11.
Stephen, M. (2000). Reparation and the gift. Ethos, 28(2), 119-146.
Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159-170.
Sque, M., & Payne, S. A. (1994).Gift exchange theory: Acritique in relation to organ transplantation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19(1), 45-51.
Sherry, J. F. Jr. (1983). Gift giving in anthropological perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(2), 157-168.
Yang, K., & Jolly, L. D. (2009). The effects of consumer perceived value and subjective norm on mobile data service adoption between American and Korean consumers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16(6), 502-508.
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. The Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2-22.