Discussing Laddering Application by the Means-End Chain Theory

Abstract

This article aims at analyzing laddering as a technique of qualitative research, emphasizing the procedures for data collection, analysis and interpretation, and its main limitations as well. “Laddering refers to an in-depth, one-on-one interviewing technique used to develop an understanding of how consumers translate the attributes of products into meaningful associations with respect to self, following means-end theory” (Reynolds & Gutman, 1988, p. 12). The critical literature review shows that laddering is useful in studies on human behavior, especially those related to the Means-End Chain (MEC) model. For a successful application, highly trained interviewers, homogeneous groups of respondents, and the Laddermap should be taken into consideration.

An investigation of the effect of extroverted and introverted personalities on knowledge acquisition techniques

“…There are different techniques in this category including concept maps, state transition networks and process maps (Milton, 2003). • Laddering techniques: Rooted in George Kelly's personal construct theory, the laddering technique includes creation, revision and validation of hierarchical knowledge (Veludo-de-Oliveira et al, 2006). The structure of the data is often in the form of ladder due to its hierarchical nature (e.g.…”

Summary of cognitive, affective, and behavioural outcomes of consuming prestigious sports events

“…Gutman's (1982) means-end theory was employed as a basis for data collection. Means-end theory is well suited to exposing hidden motivations as it seeks to explain how products or services facilitate the achievement of the desired end states (Veludo-de-Oliveira, Ikeda, & Campomar, 2006). The means-end perspective assumes that the consumer draws parallels between product/service attributes and the desired outcomes they can achieve through consumption, whereby attributes are said to lead to consequences, which in turn result in the satisfaction of desired consumer values (Gutman, 1982).…”

“…in this case the prestigious sports event), while consequences and values describe outcomes for the consumer and therefore the means-end theory was considered to provide an appropriate approach to answer the research question. Unlike previous researchers who used means-end chains to create hierarchical maps linking attributes, consequences, and values (Veludo- de-Oliveira et al, 2006), the knowledge obtained about the latter two served as a basis to identify cognitive, affective and behavioural outcomes of consuming prestige.…”

“…Initially, in ten individuals who acknowledged having attended events for prestige reasons were asked to choose three prestigious sporting events they had attended and to select prestige attributes for each event to begin the laddering process. The focus on specific sports events examples was beneficial since using realistic occasions enhances the likelihood of obtaining detailed and complete ladders (Gutman, 1982;Veludo-de-Oliveira et al, 2006). The use of multiple events offered the potential to uncover a wide range of consequences.…”

“…Repetitive and interactive questions were employed to encourage the respondents to move along the levels of abstraction (Veludo-de-Oliveira et al, 2006). Participants were first asked about prestigious events/events with VIP experience they had attended and then for each event the first question was, "What attributes of the event would you consider to be prestigious?"…”