The Influence of Beliefs in Luck on the Willingness to Participate in Online Lottery Promotion: A Perspective on Probability and Value

KE Wei-lin; LU Chang-bao; XU Tao-ran

Volume 39 Issue 1

Jan. 2024

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Journal of Guangdong University of Finance & Economics > 2024 > 39(1): 114-128

KE Wei-lin, LU Chang-bao, XU Tao-ran. The Influence of Beliefs in Luck on the Willingness to Participate in Online Lottery Promotion: A Perspective on Probability and Value[J]. Journal of Guangdong University of Finance & Economics, 2024, 39(1): 114-128.

Citation:

KE Wei-lin, LU Chang-bao, XU Tao-ran. The Influence of Beliefs in Luck on the Willingness to Participate in Online Lottery Promotion: A Perspective on Probability and Value[J]. Journal of Guangdong University of Finance & Economics, 2024, 39(1): 114-128.

Citation:

KE Wei-lin, LU Chang-bao, XU Tao-ran. The Influence of Beliefs in Luck on the Willingness to Participate in Online Lottery Promotion: A Perspective on Probability and Value[J]. Journal of Guangdong University of Finance & Economics, 2024, 39(1): 114-128.

PDF( 1542 KB)

The Influence of Beliefs in Luck on the Willingness to Participate in Online Lottery Promotion: A Perspective on Probability and Value

1.
School of Business Administration, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, Wuhan 430073
2.
School of Economics & Management, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350108, China

Received Date: 2023-10-23
Available Online: 2024-01-30
Publish Date: 2024-01-28

Abstract

Abstract

Probability and prize value are two key dimensions that affect individuals' willingness to participate in a lottery. Based on these two dimensions, two types of "low-probability/high-value" and "high-probability/low-value" lottery combinations and three psychological experiments are designed to reveal the impact of probability or value, luck belief, and the number of failures on individuals' willingness to participate in online lottery promotions. The results demonstrate that: (ⅰ) compared to the "high-probability/low-value" lottery, people generally prefer the "low-probability/high-value" combinations, which verifies the fact that people overestimate the small probability in the online lottery decision-making process and elucidates the basic principle of people's enthusiasm for participating in "low-probability/high-value" online lottery activities; (ⅱ) the luck belief has a moderating effect on people's online lottery selection, showing that individuals with low luck belief prefer the "high-probability/low-value" online lottery, while those with high luck belief in luck individuals prefer the "low-probability/high-value" one; (ⅲ) the research on the phenomenon of continuing to participate in online lottery despite multiple failures found that there is an interactive effect between luck belief and probability/value at the initial participation. However, this interaction effect disappears after multiple failures. At this time, even individuals with high luck belief are no longer keen on participating in "low-probability/high-value" lottery after multiple attempts. These conclusions provide important implications for enterprises to carry out lottery promotion activities better, for consumers to make more rational lottery decisions, and the government to regulate lottery sales more effectively.
- enterprise marketing,
- online lucky draw,
- belief in luck,
- winning probability,
- prize value,
- willingness to draw,
- koi activity

FullText(HTML)

References(47)

References

[1]	乔治·贝尔奇, 迈克尔·贝尔奇. 广告与促销: 整合营销传播视角[M]. 郑苏晖, 等, 译. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2014.
[2]	李佳芮. 新媒体环境下抽奖活动探究——以新浪微博抽奖为例[J]. 新媒体研究, 2018(13): 74-75.
[3]	CHEN M Y. The effects of reward type on evaluations of an online lucky draw[J]. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 2016, 17(2): 188-204.
[4]	YAN D, MUTHUKRISHNAN A V. Killing hope with good intentions: the effects of consolation prizes on preference for lottery promotions[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2014, 51(2): 198-204. doi: 10.1509/jmr.12.0230
[5]	孙庆洲, 邬青渊, 张静, 等. 风险决策的概率权重偏差: 心理机制与优化策略[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019(5): 905-913.
[6]	李纾. 决策心理: 齐当别之道[M]. 上海: 华东师范大学出版社, 2016.
[7]	丹尼尔·卡尼曼. 思考, 快与慢[M]. 胡晓姣, 等, 译. 北京: 中信出版社, 2012.
[8]	寿志钢, 郑伟华. 基于不确定性的促销策略研究: 理论综述与最新进展[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2017(3): 90-98.
[9]	MAZAR N, SHAMPANIER K, ARIELY D. When retailing and Las Vegas meet: probabilistic free price promotions[J]. Management Science, 2017, 63(1): 250-266. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.2015.2328
[10]	ALAVI S, BORNEMANN T, WIESEKE J. Gambled price discounts: a remedy to the negative side effects of regular price discounts[J]. Journal of Marketing, 2015, 79(2): 62-78. doi: 10.1509/jm.12.0408
[11]	陈荣, 何枫. 小概率权重问题及其市场应用[J]. 心理学报, 2008(2): 210-218.
[12]	PRENDERGAST G, THOMPSON E R. Rational and irrational influences on lucky draw participation[J]. International Journal of Advertising, 2013, 32(1): 85-100. doi: 10.2501/IJA-32-1-085-100
[13]	PRENDERGAST GP, THOMPSON ER. Sales promotion strategies and belief in luck[J]. Psychology & Marketing, 2008, 25(11): 1043-1062.
[14]	LAPORTE S, BRIERS B. Similarity as a double-edged sword: the positive and negative effects of showcasing similar previous winners on perceived likelihood of winning in sweepstakes[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2019, 45(6): 1331-1349. doi: 10.1093/jcr/ucy041
[15]	孙悦, 李纾. 澳门人的风险知觉与赌博行为[J]. 心理学报, 2005(2): 260-267.
[16]	GOLDSMITH K, AMIR O. Can uncertainty improve promotions?[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2010, 47(6): 1070-1077. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.47.6.1070
[17]	KALRA A, SHI M. Consumer value-maximizing sweepstakes and contests[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 2010, 47(2): 287-300. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.47.2.287
[18]	郑英隆, 李新家. 新型消费的经济理论问题研究——基于消费互联网与产业互联网对接视角[J]. 广东财经大学学报, 2022(2): 4-14. http://xb.gdufe.edu.cn/article/id/dca9e9ff-b84c-49dc-9e3a-bd8ec11f04d9
[19]	卢长宝, 刘婷婷, 王啊婷. 促销本质、构件及其传播设计的心理语言原理[J]. 福州大学学报: 哲学社会科学版, 2023(5): 78-88.
[20]	CRESPO A E, DEL B G S. The quality of internet-user recall: a comparative analysis by online sales-promotion types[J]. Journal of Advertising Research, 2014, 54(1): 56-70. doi: 10.2501/JAR-54-1-056-070
[21]	BIRNBAUM M H. New paradoxes of risky decision making[J]. Psychological Review, 2008, 115(2): 463-501. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.463
[22]	KAHNEMAN D, TVERSKY A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk[J]. Econometrica, 1979, 47(2): 263-292. doi: 10.2307/1914185
[23]	LI S. Is there a decision weight π?[J]. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 1995, 27(3): 453-463.
[24]	LI S, SUN Y, WANG Y. 50% off or buy one get one free? frame preference as a function of consumable nature in dairy products[J]. Journal of Social Psychology, 2007, 147(4): 413-421. doi: 10.3200/SOCP.147.4.413-422
[25]	卢长宝, 胡珮姗. 懒惰的消费者如何决策?——基于线索效用理论的消费者认知吝啬研究综述及营销启示[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2018(8): 58-70.
[26]	纪冰心, 刘瑜, 陈友庆. 前事实思维的研究概况[J]. 中国健康心理学杂志, 2017(7): 1112-1116.
[27]	EPSTUDE K, SCHOLL A, ROESE N J. Prefactual thoughts: mental simulations about what might happen[J]. Review of General Psychology, 2016, 20(1): 48-56. doi: 10.1037/gpr0000064
[28]	DARKE P R, FREEDMAN J L. The belief in good luck scale[J]. Journal of Research in Personality, 1997, 31(4): 486-511. doi: 10.1006/jrpe.1997.2197
[29]	JIANG Y, CHO A, ADAVAL R. The unique consequences of feeling lucky: implications for consumer behavior[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2009, 19(2): 171-184. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2009.02.010
[30]	HO C M, GROSSMAN D M, SALERNO A, et al. Goal paralysis: how bad luck affects goal commitment[J/OL]. (2023-10-11)[2023-11-14]. Motivation and Emotion, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-023-10045-y.
[31]	COWLEY E, BRILEY D A, FARRELL C. How do gamblers maintain an illusion of control?[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2015, 68(10): 2181-2188. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.03.018
[32]	LUO P, XU Y, LAW R. Chase for lucky numbers and take positive actions[J]. Tourism Economics, 2023, 29(4): 1130-1136. doi: 10.1177/13548166221095793
[33]	WOHL M J A, ENZLE M E. The deployment of personal luck: sympathetic magic and illusory control in games of pure chance[J]. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2002, 28(10): 1388-1397. doi: 10.1177/014616702236870
[34]	卢长宝, 秦琪霞, 林颖莹. 虚假促销中消费者购买决策的认知机制: 基于时间压力和过度自信的实证研究[J]. 南开管理评论, 2013(2): 92-103.
[35]	LUTTER M, TISCH D, BECKERT J. Social explanations of lottery play: new evidence based on national survey data[J]. Journal of Gambling Studies, 2018, 34(4): 1185-1203. doi: 10.1007/s10899-018-9748-0
[36]	SAMUELSON P A. Risk and uncertainty: a fallacy of large numbers[J]. Scientia, 1963, 98: 108-113.
[37]	孙红月, 苏寅, 周坤, 等. 从风险决策中的多次博弈到单次博弈: 量变还是质变?[J]. 心理科学进展, 2011(10): 1417-1425.
[38]	徐四华. 网络成瘾者的行为冲动性——来自爱荷华赌博任务的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2012(11): 1523-1534.
[39]	ZHANG Y Y, RAO L L, LIANG Z Y, et al. Process test of risky decision making: new understanding, new evidence pitting non-compensatory against compensatory models[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014, 22(2): 205-219. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2014.00205
[40]	ZHOU L, ZHANG Y Y, LI S, et al. New paradigms for the old question: challenging the expectation rule held by risky decision-making theories[J]. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 2018, 12: 1-10. doi: 10.1017/prp.2017.14
[41]	LI S. The role of expected value illustrated in decision-making under risk: single-play vs multiple-play[J]. Journal of Risk Research, 2003, 6(2): 113-124. doi: 10.1080/1366987032000078893
[42]	DODDS W B, MONROE K B, GREWAL D. Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers' product evaluations[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1991, 28(3): 307-319.
[43]	MIMOUN B M S, GARNIER M, LADWEIN R, et al. Determinants of e-consumer productivity in product retrieval on a commercial website: an experimental approach[J]. Information & Management, 2014, 51(4): 375-390.
[44]	张初兵, 李东进, 吴波, 等. 购物网站氛围线索与感知互动性的关系[J]. 管理评论, 2017(8): 91-100.
[45]	WANG Z, MAO H, LI Y J, et al. Smile big or not? effects of smile intensity on perceptions of warmth and competence[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2016, 43(5): 787-805.
[46]	陈云贤, 李宜达, 王方方. "有为政府+有效市场"运行模式研究——中观经济学的逻辑与框架[J]. 广东财经大学学报, 2023(4): 4-17. http://xb.gdufe.edu.cn/article/id/af91ebe6-73d5-4cee-a432-3deef1bcf9cc
[47]	卢长宝, 邓新秀, 林嗣杰. 前瞻性情绪及其对购买意向影响的演化过程——基于"双十一"网络大促的多时点调查研究[J]. 北京工商大学学报: 社会科学版, 2021(5): 37-50.