2018
DOI: 10.1007/s11747-018-0592-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Scanning for discounts: examining the redemption of competing mobile coupons

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 60 publications
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Research studies that involve mobile coupons are mostly focused on the redemption rates and the most important features that promote the redemptions; such as time, location, type of product and face value (Danaher et al, 2015;Fong et al, 2015;Hui et al, 2013;Mills & Zamudio, 2018). Meanwhile, no effects on shopping experience were reported.…”
Section: Mobile Device Usage and Retail Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Research studies that involve mobile coupons are mostly focused on the redemption rates and the most important features that promote the redemptions; such as time, location, type of product and face value (Danaher et al, 2015;Fong et al, 2015;Hui et al, 2013;Mills & Zamudio, 2018). Meanwhile, no effects on shopping experience were reported.…”
Section: Mobile Device Usage and Retail Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the focus of this literature review is in-store, it is only natural that the retail environment was the main set for the studies whose majority was conducted in groceries stores (Bellini & Aiolfi, 2019;Grewal et al, 2018;Sciandra et al, 2019), but also in sports stores (Högberg, Ramberg, et al, 2019), shopping malls , movie theatres (Fong et al, 2015) and food retailers (Saarijärvi et al, 2014). Consequently, it reveals a lack of research in service settings, whose analysis could also be beneficial for physical stores, as pointed in many studies (Bellini & Aiolfi, 2019;Grewal et al, 2018;Hui et al, 2013;Mills & Zamudio, 2018;Viejo-Fernández et al, 2020).…”
Section: Contexts: Research Directionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Primary findings Individual differences in coupon behavior Guimond et al (2001) Coupon-prone consumers have different reactions to coupon features (such as face value vs. final price) Laroche et al (2003) Market mavens focus on the cost/benefit evaluation of coupon campaigns (i.e., quality), but are not influenced by quantity (e.g., "two-for-one" coupons) Kukar-Kinney et al (2016) Compulsive buyers are particularly influenced by high-pressure indicators on daily deal sites, such as the number of deals purchased by others and count-down clocks Mills and Zamudio (2018) Brand-focused and deal-prone shoppers respond differently to mobile coupons that feature competing deals in a coupon set Lalwani and Wang (2019) Consumers with an interdependent (vs. independent) self-construal are more likely to redeem coupons due to greater self-regulation (i.e., tendency to follow steps associated with coupon redemption)…”
Section: Authors Yearmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With regards to temporal and geographical mobile targeting, Luo et al [45] found that same-day targeting is more useful for close-distance promotions, whereas one-day prior to targeting is more useful for far-distance promotions. For in-store competing coupon situations, appropriate targeting, price range, and loyalty are indispensable for increasing redemption rates [47].…”
Section: Coupon Redemption Factorsmentioning
confidence: 99%