You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Consumer Perceptions of Interpersonal Equity and Satisfaction in Transactions: A Field Survey Approach
Richard L. Oliver and John E. Swan
Journal of Marketing
Vol. 53, No. 2 (Apr., 1989), pp. 21-35
Published by: American Marketing Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1251411
Page Count: 15
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Automobile purchasers were surveyed about feelings toward their inputs to and outcomes from the sales transaction, as well as their perceptions of the inputs and outcomes of the salesperson. Structural equation modeling with maximum likelihood estimation shows two concepts advanced in the equity literature, fairness and preference (advantageous inequity), to be related differentially to input and outcome judgments. No necessary symmetry is observed between the weights attached to inputs and outcomes or between those attached to self and salesperson. When framed in a larger perspective involving satisfaction with the salesperson, the fairness dimension mediates the effect of inputs and outcomes on satisfaction whereas preference does not. The fairness influence is robust against the simultaneous inclusion of disconfirmation in the satisfaction equation. Satisfaction, in turn, is related strongly to the consumer's intention cognitions. The findings suggest that the retail sales transaction may differ in substantive ways from the subject-peer and worker-coworker comparisons in other disciplines and that models of interpersonal satisfaction in the sales transaction should include the mediating effect of the fairness dimension of equity. The managerial implications of these findings are discussed.
Journal of Marketing © 1989 American Marketing Association