New Product Evaluation

The measure of purchase intention was measured through three items developed based on the study by Lehmann and Pan (1994). These items (question 1-3) measure choice, the degree in which a product is acceptable, and to what extent the product would be evaluated. Choice is the most important measure of intention, but with the two other questions, more nuances of the concept are captured. In addition, four question were developed independently. Question seven covers intention to purchase, and covers the same dimension as question 2. Question 4-6 were developed independently, but they are often found as components of evaluation scales in other research. For instance, Reinders et al. (2010) include “bad-good” and “unattractive-attractive” products, and Campbell and Goodstein (2001) include items of “bad-good” and “unappealing-appealing”

products. The items were evaluated on a 7-point, Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The scales includes a natural centre, which is desirable for a neutral response option. Additionally, it includes adequate nuances in the response options. A summary of the items used to measure of evaluation is showed in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2: Customer Evaluation Scale

Customer Evaluation of a New Product scale

Norwegian English

1. Vio Alpine er absolutt et akseptabelt produkt for meg

2. Vio Alpine er en alpinbrille jeg kunne kjøpt

3. Vio Alpine er en skibrille jeg absolutt ville vurdert dersom det var aktuelt for meg å kjøpe skibriller

4. Vio Alpine virker alt i alt svært attraktivt for meg

5. Vio Alpine virker som en bra skibrille

1. Vio Alpine is an acceptable product for me

2. Vio Alpine is a definitely goggle I could have bought

3. Vio Alpine is definitely a goggle I would consider purchasing if I were to purchase goggles.

4. Vio Alpine seems like an overall attractive product

5. Vio Alpine seems like a good goggle

6. Dersom en venn skal ha skibriller kommer jeg til å anbefale Vio Alpine for ham/henne

7. Jeg kunne godt tenke meg å kjøpe Vio Alpine

6. If a friend of mine were to have goggles I would recommend Vio Alpine

7. I would like to purchase Vio Alpine

3.3.3. Brand Equity

In the present study, the scale of brand equity by W. G. Kim, Jin-Sun, and Kim (2008) was applied. In their study of the influence of brand equity on perceived value and revisit intension in the hospitality industry, they used the measures of brand awareness, brand loyalty and brand associations as suggested by Yoo and Donthu (2001). Yoo and Donthu (2001) paper gets a validated measure of brand equity. Their measurement scale is based on the conceptualization of brand equity by Aaker (1991) and Keller (1993). This scale has been the most widely accepted and validated scale for brand equity (W. G. Kim et al., 2008). Together brand awareness, brand loyalty and brand associations form the measure of brand equity in this study. In the original scale, the dimension of brand quality was also included. However, in this study brand quality is excluded as the sample is drawn from a population that does not necessarily are familiar with the quality of the specific brand or hotel. Additionally, there might be differences in the quality between the hotels within the same hotel chain.

The items were evaluated on a 7-point, Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). W. G. Kim et al. (2008) used a 7-point Likert scale in their study and Yoo and Donthu (2001) used a 5-point Likert scale. The scales both includes a natural centre, which is desirable for a neutral response option. This study chose to apply the 7-point Likert scale as used by W. G. Kim et al. (2008) as they studied a similar industry and situation. The 7-point Likert scale also allows more nuances in the responses than a

item’s relationship to the latent variables (dimensions) is presented in Table 3.3. The scale are adapted to each situation by replacing “hotellet” with the brand name of the hotel analysed.

Table 3.3: Brand Equity Scale Brand Equity Scale

Norwegian English Dimension

1. Jeg kjenner til hotellet I am aware of the hotel

Brand awareness 2. Jeg kan gjenkjenne hotellet blant

andre konkurrerende merker I can recognize the hotel among other competing brands

3. Jeg vet hvordan hotellets fysiske

utseende er I know what the hotel’s physical

appearance looks like 4. Jeg ser på meg selv som lojal mot

hotellet I consider myself to be loyal to

the hotel

Brand Loyalty 5. Hotellet ville vært mitt førstevalg The hotel would be my first

choice 6. Jeg ville med stor sannsynlighet

byttet til et annet hotell enn Hotellet dersom et annet hotell har et

kampanjetilbud (Reversed)

I am very likely to switch to another hotel brand that runs promotions (Reversed) 7. Jeg kommer raskt på noen

egenskaper ved hotellet

Some characteristics of the hotel come to my mind quickly

Brand associations 8. Jeg kommer raskt på symbolet eller

logoen til hotellet

I can quickly recall the symbol or logo of the hotel

9. Jeg har vanskeligheter med å forestille meg hotellet (reversed)

I have difficulty in imagining the image of the hotel in my mind (reversed)

3.3.4. Perceived Risk

The measure of perceived risk was adopted from the scale used by Laroche et al. (2005).

In their study of three intangibility dimensions on perceived risk and consumer’s ability

to evaluate goods and services, they developed a general measurement scale of perceived risk that measure the negative consequences of a purchase.

The items were evaluated on a 7-point, Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Laroche et al. (2005) used a 9-point Likert scale in their study. Yet, other scales in this study use a 7-point scale it may be easier for the participants with a scale with the same amount of points. The scale includes a natural centre, which is desirable for a neutral response option, and it includes adequate nuances in the response options. A summary of the items used to measure perceived risk is presented in Table 3.4.

Table 3.4: Perceived Risk Scale Perceived Risk Scale

Norwegian English

Det vil sannsynligvis være feil av meg å kjøpe Vio Alpine

There is a good chance I will make a mistake if I purchase Vio Alpine.

Jeg har en følelse av at bruk av Vio Alpine vil medføre store problemer

I have a feeling that purchasing Vio Alpine will really cause me lots of trouble.

Jeg vil pådra meg en viss risiko hvis jeg

bruker Vio Alpine I will incur some risk if I buy Vio Alpine.

Vio Alpine er et svært risikabelt kjøp Vio Alpine is a very risky purchase.