Welcome to the InfoSci Platform
Applying the Direct and Indirect Methods of Purchase Intentions to Assess Interest in a Proposed Graduate Student Association

Applying the Direct and Indirect Methods of Purchase Intentions to Assess Interest in a Proposed Graduate Student Association

Michael J. Roszkowski, Margret McManus
Copyright: © 2013 |Volume: 3 |Issue: 2 |Pages: 17
ISSN: 2155-5605|EISSN: 2155-5613|EISBN13: 9781466633506|DOI: 10.4018/ijtem.2013070102
Cite Article Cite Article

MLA

Roszkowski, Michael J., and Margret McManus. "Applying the Direct and Indirect Methods of Purchase Intentions to Assess Interest in a Proposed Graduate Student Association." IJTEM vol.3, no.2 2013: pp.21-37. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijtem.2013070102

APA

Roszkowski, M. J. & McManus, M. (2013). Applying the Direct and Indirect Methods of Purchase Intentions to Assess Interest in a Proposed Graduate Student Association. International Journal of Technology and Educational Marketing (IJTEM), 3(2), 21-37. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijtem.2013070102

Chicago

Roszkowski, Michael J., and Margret McManus. "Applying the Direct and Indirect Methods of Purchase Intentions to Assess Interest in a Proposed Graduate Student Association," International Journal of Technology and Educational Marketing (IJTEM) 3, no.2: 21-37. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijtem.2013070102

Export Reference

Mendeley
Favorite Full-Issue Download

Abstract

One purported means for reducing the social desirability inherent in stated purchase intentions is indirect questioning, whereby the respondent is asked to comment about the probable buying behavior of another abstract individual. The contention is that respondents will project their own predilections unto the other person, thereby allowing for a more valid expression of their own purchase intentions. The 343 respondents to a survey intended to gauge interest in the creation of a graduate student association provided ratings of participation likelihood (very unlikely, somewhat unlikely, not sure, somewhat likely, very likely) for both themselves and for “other graduate students” in four potential functions: academic, social, advocacy, and community service. The perceived likelihood of others’ participation did correlate with one’s own stated level of likelihood in all four functions (r = .47 to .51), which is consistent with projection. However, counter to expectations, on only one function — academic — was the self rating higher than the rating of others’ interest, and notably, this was the function for which the expressed self interest was the highest. On all four functions, there was a systematic difference such that (1) other students’ likelihood is rated lower than one’s own likelihood when one’s own interest is high, and (2) other students’ likelihood is rated to be higher than one’s own likelihood when one’s stated likelihood is low. An anchoring and adjustment mechanism with regressive tendencies appears to be operating. The main implication of the results is that ratings of others’ interest are not necessarily going to be lower than the respondent’s own stated interest, even on socially desirable behaviors. Whether the interest rating assigned to others will be higher or lower than the respondent’s own interest depends on whether the self rating is low or high.

Request Access

You do not own this content. Please login to recommend this title to your institution's librarian or purchase it from the IGI Global bookstore.