Consumer Perception of Mobile Phone Attributes

8/13/2019 Consumer Perception of Mobile Phone Attributes

1/8

Consumer Perception ofMobile Phone Attributes

Tao Zhang1, Pei-Luen Patrick Rau

2, Jia Zhou

2

1Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science

Vanderbilt University, TN 37211, USA2Department of Industrial Engineering,

Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China

ABSTRACT

This paper reported results from a questionnaire survey of consumer perception of

product attributes of mobile phones and how they consider the importance of each

product attribute. The questionnaire contained 35 items covering brand, physical

attributes, functional attributes, and beneficial attributes. All the items were

measured with 7-point Likert scale anchored from strongly disagree to strongly

agree.The questionnaire was administrated online to a broad sample (N=215) in

China. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted to find out the latent

constructs of mobile phone product attributes, which also reflect consumers

common idea of attribute category. Eight factors, accounting for 62.88% of the total

variation, were identified: common functions, appearance, multimedia functions,connectivity, personal information management functions, body design, brand &

country, and product image. These attribute factors can be used as a basis for

understanding of product attributes and its influencing factors. Results from the

factor analysis also provide information about what consumers are concerned about

when they evaluate mobile phones or make purchase decisions.

Keywords: Product Attributes, Perception, Mobile Phones

INTRODUCTION

The perception of various product attributes gives the first impression for

consumers, particularly when they have limited time and bandwidth to do a

thorough research on a new product. This perception of attributes also has strong

relation with consumer judgment of whether the product will satisfy their needs.

Studying the structure of product attributions based on consumer perceptions will

help practitioners to understand consumers acceptance of products. This is


2/8

2

especially important for mobile phones as more and more technologies and

functional designs have been integrated into new mobile phones. Consumer

requirements of mobile phone are now not limited to the basic communicationfunctions, but also on functions for other mobile applications, efficiency, ease of use

and comfort. Unlike other interactive systems (e.g., desktop computing), consumer

criteria of judging benefits expected from mobile phones include factors like

function specification, aesthetics, brand image, self-feeling and user experience.

These factors altogether add influence on the overall consumer perception.

Therefore, the objective of this study was to provide a quantitative and structural

assessment of consumer perceptions of product attributes of mobile phones.

LITERATURE REVIEW

PRODUCT ATTRIBUTES

Earlier studies such as Lancaster (1966) held that attributes are the objective

physical aspects of a product. He said that people do not acquire products for the

sake of the products themselves, but for the utility that is produced by

characteristics of the products attributes. However, many of the product

characteristics that are important from the point of view of consumers as well as

designers are neither physical nor objective. Therefore, according to Grunet (1989),

product attribute is any aspect of the product itself or its use that can be used to

compare product alternatives.Each alternative can (but need not) be characterized

by all attributes, that is, using one attribute does not preclude using another

(Nelson, 1970). Attributes may concern concrete product properties, practical

consequences the product and its use and possession may cause, or consequences

related to consumerspersonal values.Product Attributes are requirement factors placed on a product from a consumer.

Every product item is viewed as a combination of correlative product attributes by

the consumer. The designed functions of the product, together with the appearance,

price, brand, package and after-sale service, are all parts of product attributes.

Attribute is said to be important if a change in the individuals perception of that

product attribute leads to a change in the attitude toward the product. (Jaccard,

Brinberg, & Ackerman, 1986). Attribute importance is characterized by the salience

and determinacy of an attribute. Salience refers to the accessibility of the attribute,

and determinacy to the correlation between an attribute and overall preference.

Lefkoff-Hagius and Mason (1990) created a synthesis from a number of earlier

studies and divided product attributes into the three categories: characteristics

attributes, beneficial attributes and image attributes. Characteristics attributes are

related to the physical properties of a product; beneficial attributes refer to benefits

or risks that the product may cause; and image attributes are properties of the

product that have an ability to define the product owners relation to other people or

self.


3/8

Chapter title 3

INFLUENCE OF PRODUCT ATTRIBUTES

Consumer perception of product attributes can influence the formation and change

of attitude, thereby impose its influence on buying behavior. Kotler and Armstrong

(2005) said that consumers regard product as the combination of product attributes

which are capable to satisfy their interests or requirements. Consumers make

evaluation and choice according to certain rules regarding the performance of

product attributes, and the importance they put on every attribute. Payne (1976)

suggested that consumers attach different importance on product attributes. In

certain occasions, only one single product attribute can lead to the buying decision,

while in some other occasions there is a complex process when they are making any

decision based on product attributes. Bahn et al. (2007) studied how feel of material,

elasticity, tactile oneness, shape, and color of the passenger car crash pad influences

satisfaction. The results indicated that softness of material was the key affective

response factor of satisfaction. Product attributes also influence affect. Seva et al.(2007) found strong relationship between attributes of mobile phone and pre-

purchase affect. For example, slimmer phones increase feeling of contentment and

encouragement, larger display increase feelings of amazement and encouragement.

Fishbein (1975) proposed the Multi-attribute Attitude Model, in which he stated

that the attitude towards certain products will be reflected by the evaluation of

important attributes, then attitude can be assessed by measuring the evaluation of

these attributes:

n

i

iio ebA

1

, where

oA = Attitude towards the product

i

b = The strength of belief on product attribute i

ie = The performance rating of product attribute i

n = Number of important product attributes

METHODOLOGY

ITEMS OF PRODUCT ATTRIBUTES GENERATION

Based on examination of prior work on similar products and analysis of the

characteristics of mobile phones, an initial pool of items was developed. Items about

function specification were based on the official websites of major mobile phone

manufacturers. More items were developed by the author to cover all the threeclassifications of product attributes (characteristics attributes, beneficial attributes

and image attributes). All the items were measured with 7-point Likert scale

anchored at strongly disagree and strongly agree. Two criteria were used to

determine which product attribute information will be presented in the


4/8

4

questionnaire: the respondent should understand what the specified attribute is; and

the attribute should be relatively important to consumers during their assessment of

perceived usability.Initial items of product attributes were firstly examined by the authors according

to the correlation between items, and then critiques of items were sought from a

focus group discussion. Three Ph.D. students and two master students majoring in

Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) took part in the focus group discussion. They

were all familiar with the research topic and questionnaire design. The aim of focus

group discussion was to check if there were ambiguities in the wording of items, if

there were important missing items regarding mobile phone products, and if there

were any inconsistencies in the arrangement of items and overall questionnaire

design. Several items were adjusted and wording modifications were made from the

critiques. Two master students majoring in Social Science and one master student

majoring in Economics were then asked to examine the adjusted questionnaire. The

focus of their work was to check if there was overlap between items, if there were

suggestive wordings in the item descriptions, and if there were questions that may

exceed respondentsknowledge and proficiency. The author took their feedback and

incorporated it in the final revision of the questionnaire. There were 35 items in the

final version of the questionnaire. These items were categorized into: brand,

physical attributes, functional attributes, and beneficial attributes, which were

similar to categories in the study by Lefkoff-Hagius and Mason (1990).

DATA COLLECTION

The questionnaire was administrated online to a broad sample in China including

undergraduate and graduate students in several universities in Beijing, employees

working in telecommunication industry, manufacturing industry, consulting

company, and the government. A total of 215 responses were collected. As shown

in Table 1, although more than half of the respondents are college students, the

sample represents a wide range of mobile phone consumers with different age,

education level, and income. The majority of respondents are young people with

high level of education and middle level of income in China. The questionnaire

began with an introduction of the survey objectives, followed by a survey of

demographic information, mobile phone usage and experience. Then the list of 35

items was given. Respondents were asked to choose the extent to which they agree

with the descriptive items for the mobile phone product attributes. They were

encouraged to put down their email addresses to get a copy of the result analysis.


5/8

Chapter title 5

Table 1Demographic profile of questionnaire respondents

VARIABLE CATEGORYNUMBER OF

RESPONSES PERCENTAGE

Age

30 years 3 1.4%

Gender Female 82 38.1%

Male 133 61.9%

Education Level

High school 3 1.4%

Associate degree 6 2.8%

4 years undergraduate 90 41.9%

Master student 100 46.5%

Doctorial student 16 7.4%

Occupation

Government official

/Company manager7 3.3%

Technician/Engineer 42 19.5%

Business/Service

employee10 4.7%

Student 136 63.3%

Others 20 9.4%

Monthly Income

10000 RMB 2 0.9%

RESULTS

Exploratory factor analysis is a method for reducing the dimensionality of

multivariate data and understanding patterns of association among variables, with

the underlying common factor model. The model assumes that the observed

variance in each measure is attributable to a relatively small number of common

factors and a single specific factor. The objective of exploratory factor analysis is to

identify the common factors and explain their relationship to the observed data, and

the factor solution is derived from the patterns of association in the observations

(Lattin, Carroll, & Green, 2002).

An exploratory factor analysis was conducted in SAS to determine the latent

traitsof the items of product attributes. Principal axis factoring approach and the

varimax rotation method was used. After deleting one item causing almost equal

loadings on two common factors, the result shows that the first eight common

factors account for 62.88% of the total variation in data. Items were then assigned to

the common factors, given the criteria that factor loadings of items should be higher

than 0.5. The result of exploratory factor analysis is shown in Table 2.


6/8

6

Table 2 Internal consistencies, means, standard deviations and factor loadings of

attribute items

FACTORS ITEMS MEAN SDFACTOR

LOADINGS

Common

functions

( = 0.89,

Variance

accounted

for = 4.27)

I believe input method is an important

feature for me to judge whether the

mobile phone is easy to use.

5.87 1.263 0.78

I think the short message functions

(storage and manipulation) are important

for me.

5.97 1.199 0.82

I think the phonebook functions (storage

and manipulation) are important to me.5.95 1.274 0.85

I think the battery time is important. 6.04 1.087 0.77

Appearance

(= 0.79

Variance

accounted

for = 3.46)

I will be attracted by the appearance

design of certain mobile phone and then

want to own it.

5.01 1.448 0.75

If I like the appearance of certain mobile

phone, I will be very interested in it.4.92 1.450 0.72

I think the body color is important to me. 5.04 1.395 0.73

I like the mobile phone appearance with

special material.4.85 1.370 0.65

I think it is a great pleasure to show the

special appearance design of mobile

phone to others.

4.61 1.549 0.55

Connectivity

(= 0.70

Variance

accounted

for = 2.44)

I think the GRRS connection is

important.3.93 1.722 0.55

I will consider the connectivity

(USB/Infrared/Bluetooth/Wifi) when

choosing mobile phone.

4.98 1.607 0.75

I will consider the accessories available

when choosing mobile phone.5.08 1.450 0.57

Body design

(Variance

accounted

for =2.15)

I think one particular body design in

more suitable for me.2.44 1.281 -0.97

I think the body design should not be

considered to be important.5.56 1.281 0.97

PIM

Functions

(= 0.67

Variance

accounted

for =2.11)

I will ask about the capability to deal with

events like temporary note/number

taking when buying a mobile phone.

5.07 1.600 0.63

I think the date planning functions like

notepad, to do list, memo are important

to me.

5.26 1.436 0.59


7/8

Chapter title 7

I think the voice recording function is

important to me.4.08 1.488 0.70

Brand &

Country

(= 0.69

Variance

accounted

for =1.92)

I will only use certain brands of mobile

phone.5.13 1.657 0.65

I will choose mobile phones from certain

countries.3.43 1.625 0.75

I will exclude mobile phones from certain

countries.4.27 1.939 0.57

Product

image

(Variance

accounted

for =1.61)

I believe the mobile phone design partly

represents my life style.4.89 1.457 0.71

CONCLUSIONS

There is no precise definition of product attributes for mobile phones, as consumers

generally perceive product attributes in a conceptual way. The notion of product

attributes is formed and existing during the perception process. Previous studies on

mobile phones mainly considered individual attributes, without a systematic view of

how all the attributes influence perception of mobile phones as a whole. This study

fills this gap. The exploratory factor analysis was appropriate to find out the latent

constructs of mobile phone product attributes, which also reflect consumers

common idea of attribute categories. Eight factors were identified: common

functions, appearance, multimedia functions, connectivity, personal information

management functions, body design, brand & country, and product image, which

accounted for 62.88% of the total variation. Important factors such commonfunctions and appearance are identified. Since people use mobile phones for daily

communications, they stress the importance of phonebook and SMS functions. Ease

of use of input methods also influences their perception of common functions. The

quantitative approach used in the present study can be beneficial to similar studies

of consumer digital products. Results of this study can be smoothly implemented

into design and marketing practice as a perceptive model. Limited resources can be

efficiently allocated to important attributes.

REFERENCES

Bahn, S., Lee, C., Lee, J. H., and Yun, M. H. (2007). A statistical model of

relationship between affective responses and product design attributes forcapturing user needs. Usability and Internationalization, Pt 2, Proceedings -

Global And Local User Interfaces, 4560, 305-313.

Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An

Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley.


8/8

8

Grunet, K. G. (1989). Attributes, Attribute Value and Their Characteristics: A

Unifying Approach and An Example Involving A Complex Household

Investment.Journal of Economic Psychology, 10, 229-251.Jaccard, J., Brinberg, D., and Ackerman, L. J. (1986). Assessing Attribute

Importance: A Comparison of Six Methods.Journal of Consumer Research,

12(4), 463-468.

Kotler, P., and Armstrong, G. (2005). Principles of Marketing (11 ed.). Prentice

Hall.

Lancaster, K. J. (1966). A New Approach to Consumer Theory. Journal of

Political Economy, 74(2), 132-157.

Lefkoff-Hagius, R., and Mason, C. H. (1990). The Role of Tangible and Intangible

Attributes in Similarity and Preference Judgments. In M. E. Goldberg (Ed.),

Advances in Consumer Research (Vol. 17, pp. 135-143). Provo, UT:

Association for Consumer Research.

Nelson, P. (1970). Information and Consumer Behavior. Journal of Political

Economy, 78(2), 311-329.Payne, J. W. (1976). Task Complexity and Contingent Processing in Decision

Making: An Information Search and Protocal Analysis. Organizational

Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 366-387.

Seva, R. R., Duh, H. B. L., and Helander, M. G. (2007). The marketing

implications of affective product design. Applied Ergonomics, 38(6), 723-

731

Documents

Consumer Perception of Mobile Phone Attributes