사용자 경험과 지각된 위험에서의 관계 : 제품과 서비스의 비교 실증 연구 = Interrelationships in User Experiences and Perceived Risks : A Comparative Empirical Study of Products and Services

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study empirically investigates the key differences and interrelationships between products and services from the perspectives of user experience (UX) and perceived risk. Over the past decade, the global experience economy has grown significantly. As consumer demand gradually shifts from material consumption to experiential consumption, users increasingly prioritize holistic UX over traditional factors such as functionality and price when selecting products or services. Well-designed UX can effectively reduce perceived risk, which is particularly important given that, based on prospect theory, perceived risk exerts a strongly negative influence on consumer behavior. However, academic research on the relationship between UX and perceived risk has lagged behind practical applications. While "products" and "services" differ substantially in terms of design intent and interaction mode, most studies to date have been qualitative in nature or limited to unidimensional quantitative analyses, lacking a comprehensive view of their complex interplay in UX and risk perception. Consequently, it is crucial to understand how multi-dimensional UX affects perceived risk and to apply such insights to optimize product design and service processes—an urgent issue for both academia and industry.
Drawing on a comprehensive literature review, this study develops a theoretical framework connecting UX and perceived risk and proposes six hypotheses addressing structural differences in UX, the extent of perceived risk, and the influence of user experience on risk perception. In the preliminary phase, a wide range of products and services frequently encountered in personal consumption contexts were collected. To control for extraneous variables, a questionnaire survey was conducted, and consumer value theory was applied to classify all items into three categories: Goal-Oriented Group (G-Group), Process-Oriented Group (P-Group), and Emotion-Oriented Group (E-Group). Ultimately, six representative items were selected for further analysis: power banks and haircuts (G-Group), sneakers and sauna services (P-Group), and model toys/plushies and stage plays (E-Group).
Following the grounded theory approach and expert interviews, 18 UX attributes were extracted from the literature. Exploratory factor analysis revealed significant differences in the composition of UX evaluation elements between products and services. The findings suggest: (1) The physical and functional nature of products results in unique emphasis on operability and functionality, which are critical for enhancing product UX; (2) The interpersonal and environmental dependency of services leads to distinct emphasis on environmental factors and professionalism, highlighting the need for skilled providers and contextual support—underscoring the importance of product-service systems (PSS).
The main empirical study utilized independent samples t-tests and multiple regression analyses to examine consumer UX, perceived risk, and their interrelation in product-service comparisons, offering a new theoretical model for UX-driven risk management. Key findings include: (1) In terms of findability, products scored higher than services, largely due to more accessible online information, whereas services rely on subjective experiences and word-of-mouth; (2) In convenience, products again scored higher, as product ownership enables immediate use, while services often involve waiting; (3) In assurance, products were perceived as more secure due to their tangibility, which can serve as concrete evidence in after-sales scenarios; (4) In responsiveness, services outperformed products due to real-time adaptability to user feedback; (5) In sociality, services again scored higher, owing to user-provider interactions that enhance engagement and emotional connection.
The study further found that consumers without prior experience perceived significantly higher risk than those with experience, and that, overall, perceived risk was lower for products than for services. Certain UX elements were shown to significantly reduce perceived risk—for instance, assurance for products, professionalism for services, and attraction across both categories.
Additionally, the study uncovered nuanced findings. While inexperienced consumers generally perceived higher risk, the risk gap narrowed for familiar items, supporting Bandura's social learning theory: individuals learn not only from direct experience but also by observing others. Moreover, the UX–risk relationship showed stronger explanatory power in services than in products, suggesting that consumers are more emotionally influenced by past experiences when assessing services, but rely more on rational evaluation when assessing products.
Interestingly, certain UX factors were found to perceived risk. In the product category, high aesthetics appeal raised expectations, thus elevating risk when those expectations are unmet. In the service category, strong sociality was linked to highe rperceived risk, possibly due to increased dependency or emotional investment.
These findings systematically reveal structural differences in UX dimensions between products and services, as well as the heterogeneous mechanisms through which they influence perceived risk. From the perspective of UX-driven risk perception management, this study emphasizes the need for differentiated design optimization and strategic interventions tailored to the inherent attributes and interaction modes of products and services. This approach not only enhances consumer trust and satisfaction but also provides actionable empirical evidence for enterprises aiming to improve UX and mitigate perceived risk, thereby fostering the co-evolution and sustainable development of integrated product-service systems.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

本研究旨在從用戶體驗與感知風險的角度，實証探討産品與服務之間的關鍵差異及其相互關繫。過去10年中，全球體驗經濟市場一直在持續增長。隨着消費者需求從物質性消費逐漸轉向體驗性消費，用戶在選擇産品或服務時，已不僅關注功能與價格等傳統要素，更加重視整體的用戶體驗。良好的用戶體驗設計可以有效降低用戶的感知風險，這有重大的意義，因爲基於前景理論，感知風險對消費者的行爲有巨大的負麵影響。但學界對用戶體驗和感知風險兩者關繫的研究一直存在理論髮展落後於實踐運用的問題。我們能很容易區分“産品"和“服務"在設計意圖、交互方式等各方麵都存在不少差異，但對兩者的研究大多爲定性研究，部分定量研究僅停留在單一維度上，未能全麵考慮産品和服務在用戶體驗和感知風險中的複雜互動關繫。因此，如何從多維度理解用戶體驗對感知風險的影響，並據此優化産品設計與服務流程，成爲學界與業界亟需解決的問題。
本研究首先通過文獻回顧，構建了用戶體驗與感知風險的理論框架，並提出六項研究假設，涵蓋用戶體驗結構差異、感知風險程度、體驗情況對風險認知的影響等內容。先行研究中首先提取個人消費場景下的大量産品和服務。開展問捲調查控製無關變量，引入消費者價值理論將所有商品分爲了目標導向組(Goal-Oriented Group)，過程導向組(Process-Oriented Group)和情感導向組(Emotion-Oriented Group)。最終選擇了充電寶-理髮（G-Group）、運動鞋-桑拿房（P-Group）、模型和毛絨玩具-舞颱劇（E-Group）這6個研究對象進行後續比較。
遵循解釋性紥根理論方法，結合專家訪談，作者從文獻中提取了18個UX特徵要素。運用探索性要因分析及對比，髮現産品和服務的用戶體驗評價要素構成存在差異。研究者認爲：①産品的物理特性與功能導向導緻了操作性和功能性在産品中獨有而服務中不重要。完善的功能和穩定的操作才能最大程度提昇産品的用戶體驗。②服務的人際互動和環境依賴特性導緻了環境和專業性在服務中獨有而在産品評價中不重要。服務提供者需要更加專業才能帶來好的用戶體驗，並且服務的開展依賴於環境、有形産品的支持，這些觀點進一步強化了産品服務繫統（PSS）的重要性。
在接下來的實証研究中運用獨立樣本T檢驗與多元回歸分析等統計方法，基於産品與服務對比的前提，全麵研究了消費者用戶體驗、感知風險及兩者的關繫，爲産品和服務的用戶體驗設計提供了新的理論框架。研究髮現，産品和服務的實際用戶體驗也有差異。①在蒐索性的體驗上産品普遍高於服務，研究者認爲互聯網髮展帶來信息傳播方式的改變是直接原因。産品可以通過網絡蒐索查找，而服務由於體驗要素都更加主觀，導緻傳播方式更多還是依賴口碑宣傳。②在便利性的體驗上産品普遍高於服務，研究者認爲産品歸屬權髮生變化，産品歸消費者個人所有是直接原因。擁有産品後消費者隨時隨地可以使用，但服務的使用總是存在等待時間，即存在延遲滿足現象。③在保障性的體驗上産品普遍高於服務，研究者認爲是産品的有形性帶來的益處。有形産品本身就是售後保障的証據，而服務由於無形性和體驗的主觀性，髮生不滿意時難以獲得有力証據。④在響應性的體驗上服務普遍高於産品，研究者認爲是服務的高頻互動特性帶來的。服務可以根據用戶的反饋實時做出調整，但是産品的功能和設計通常是固定的，無法立刻響應用戶個性化的需求。⑤在社會性的體驗上服務普遍高於産品，研究者認爲和上一項類似。和服務提供者的互動可以增強用戶的參與感和情感連接。
研究還髮現，在感知風險方麵，首先無體驗的消費者比有體驗的消費者感知到更高的風險。其次，消費者對産品感知到的風險普遍低於對服務感知到的風險。
在用戶體驗的部分要素上，良好的體驗對感知風險有顯著降低的作用。例如保障性對産品的感知風險有顯著的降低作用，專業性對服務的感知風險有顯著的降低作用，魅力性在産品和服務中普遍具有降低感知風險的作用。
研究者將上述髮現視爲一般性結論。此外還存在一些比較特殊的結論。
前文已經描述，缺乏體驗的消費者的感知風險普遍高於有體驗的消費者。但是生活中越常見的事物，缺乏體驗的消費者對之的感知風險和有體驗的消費者之間的差距越小。研究認爲這從側麵証實了班杜拉的社會學習理論在用戶體驗設計領域的成立，即人們學習不僅通過直接體驗，還通過觀察他人的行爲以及對這些行爲的後果進行思考而髮生。
在更細緻的對比下髮現，用戶體驗對感知風險的影響模型在産品中的解釋力普遍低於在服務中，即消費者在思考服務的感知風險時，會比思考産品的感知風險更注重過往體驗的影響。研究者認爲，這可能來源於思考産品和服務的方式的差異導緻，在思考産品時更加理性，可能會納入更多的考慮因素；而在思考服務時則更加感性，更注重過往體驗給自己帶來的影響。
同時研究髮現，部分用戶體驗要素反而會增加感知風險。在産品類別中，好的審美性體驗反而會增加感知風險，在服務類別中，好的社會性體驗也會增加感知風險。研究者認爲，這些體驗會造成消費者期望值變高或者依賴性産生，從而使期望的落差變大導緻感知風險的昇高。
這些研究結果繫統性地揭示了不同類型的産品與服務在用戶體驗維度上的結構性差異，以及其對消費者感知風險所産生的異質性影響機製。因此，從用戶體驗驅動的風險感知管理角度出髮，應針對産品與服務在屬性特徵與交互方式上的本質差異，結合本研究所提取的關鍵影響因素，製定差異化的設計優化與策略幹預方案。如此不僅有助於增強消費者對産品與服務的信任感和滿意度，也可爲企業在提昇用戶體驗、降低感知風險方麵提供可操作的實証依據，從而推動産品與服務繫統的協同進化與可持續髮展。

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제 1 장 서론 2
• 1.1. 연구 배경 2
• 1.2. 연구 필요성 6
• 1.3. 연구 목적 8
• 1.4. 연구 방법 및 프로세스 10
• 제 2 장 이론적 고찰 및 가설의 설정 14
• 2.1. 제품과 서비스 14
• 2.1.1. 양자의 차이점 14
• 2.1.2. 양자의 통합성 16
• 2.2. 사용자 경험 관련 개념 19
• 2.2.1. 사용자 경험의 탄생과 정의 19
• 2.2.2. 사용자 경험의 대표 이론 20
• 2.2.3 제품과 서비스 사용자 경험 차이에 대한 정성적 탐색 23
• 2.3. 지각된 위험 관련 개념 25
• 2.3.1. 지각된 위험의 정의 25
• 2.3.2. 제품 및 서비스 영역에서의 지각된 위험 비교 연구 26
• 2.4. 사용자 경험이 지각된 위험에 미치는 영향 28
• 2.5. 소결 31
• 제 3 장 사전 연구 33
• 3.1. 제품과 서비스의 실증 연구 대상 선정 33
• 3.1.1. 예비 선정 33
• 3.1.2. 설문지 설계 및 배포 34
• 3.1.3. 설문 결과 분석 35
• 3.1.4. 상품의 추가 분류 기준 36
• 3.1.5. 실행 및 결과 40
• 3.2. 사용자 경험(UX) 평가요소 분석 41
• 3.2.1. 사용자 경험(UX) 평가요소 조사 41
• 3.2.2. 설문지 구성 및 배포 44
• 3.2.3. 신뢰도, KMO 및 Bartlett 검정 46
• 3.2.4. 탐색적 요인 분석 47
• 3.2.5. 요인 제거 사유 및 차원 명명 49
• 3.2.6. 탐색적 요인 분석 결과 54
• 3.3. 소결 55
• 제 4 장 실증 연구 61
• 4.1 실증 연구 프레임워크 61
• 4.2. 설문 설계 및 자료 수집 65
• 4.3. 차이 분석 66
• 4.3.1. 사용자 경험 차이 분석 67
• 4.3.2. 전반적 지각된 위험 차이 분석 69
• 4.3.3. 소결 70
• 4.4. 다중 회귀분석 71
• 4.4.1. 모형 설명력, 유의성 및 검정 지표 72
• 4.4.2. 제품의 다중 회귀계수 결과 74
• 4.4.3. 서비스의 다중 회귀계수 결과 76
• 4.4.4. 소결 78
• 제 5 장 연구 결론 85
• 5.1 제품과 서비스의 사용자 경험 평가요소 구성 85
• 5.2. 제품과 서비스의 사용자 경험 차이 87
• 5.3. 제품과 서비스의 지각된 위험 차이 90
• 5.4. 사용자 경험이 지각된 위험에 미치는 영향 92
• 5.4.1. 일반화된 결론 93
• 5.4.2. 비일반화된 결론 1 93
• 5.4.3. 비일반화된 결론 2 95
• 5.5. 제안 96
• 5.5.1. 사용자 경험 디자이너에 대한 제안 96
• 5.5.2. 기업에 대한 제안 98
• 5.5.3. 정책 입안자에 대한 제안 99
• 5.6. 연구 주장 99
• 5.6.1. 경제 및 비즈니스 주장 100
• 5.6.2. 사회 및 복지 주장 101
• 5.6.3. 문화 및 라이프스타일 주장 102
• 5.6.4. 기술 및 디자인 주장 103
• 5.7. 연구 한계 및 향후 연구 104
• 참고 문헌 106
• 부록 129