1 An Advanced Seminar in Consumer Behavior Research Amrita School of Business Summer Quarter 2012, PhD Program Resource Person: Dr. Deepak Gupta, Professor, Amrita School of Business Course Objectives: 1) To understand, through a brief overview, the broad domain of the field of Consumer Behavior ; some of the major theories that have informed the field; and the principal questions asked by Consumer Behavior scholars 2) To familiarize ourselves with some of the major models developed by Consumer Behavior researchers over the years. To explore some of the original constructs developed by Consumer Behavior scholars. To learn the art of doing good Consumer Behavior research through some of the seminal research articles in the field. 3) To learn through the course exercises some of the key research oriented skills. To develop over the course, and present, an original research question in Consumer Behavior. To explore, as a class, these original research questions Course Philosophy: This course takes you into the field of consumer behavior, exploring some of the important questions asked by eminentconsumer behavior researchers, the theoretical models that were adapted or developed by the researchers, and the way the work has evolved over the years. Given the short time at our disposal, the material covered in class will at best give you a brief flavor of the kind of work being done by consumer behavior researchers, and a possible structure to help you organize your learning. Your learning, thus, is going to be a direct function of your attitude and effort, especially the readings you do beyond the classroom. If you can enter the thinking and the passion of the researchers, you would have made a huge leap forward in your own work. Do not be afraid to take this leap, and do not be afraid to work hard ☺ Course Pedagogy: 1) In class discussion of research articles, and research ideas 2) Using mind‐maps to explore research ideas and salient literature 3) Collaborative development of original research ideas through structured Peer‐to‐Peer feedback Course Examination: 1) Classroom presentation, and critique of, research articles (20%) 2) Classroom presentation of research area and research question (25%) 3) End of course Term Paper on original research question (35%) 4) Class participation (20%)
Transcript
1
An Advanced Seminar in Consumer Behavior Research Amrita School of Business Summer Quarter 2012, PhD Program
Resource Person: Dr. Deepak Gupta, Professor, Amrita School of Business
Course Objectives:
1) To understand, through a brief overview, the broad domain of the field of Consumer Behavior ; some of the major theories that have informed the field; and the principal questions asked by Consumer Behavior scholars
2) To familiarize ourselves with some of the major models developed by Consumer Behavior researchers over the years. To explore some of the original constructs developed by Consumer Behavior scholars. To learn the art of doing good Consumer Behavior research through some of the seminal research articles in the field.
3) To learn through the course exercises some of the key research oriented skills. To develop over the course, and present, an original research question in Consumer Behavior. To explore, as a class, these original research questions
Course Philosophy:
This course takes you into the field of consumer behavior, exploring some of the important questions asked by eminentconsumer behavior researchers, the theoretical models that were adapted or developed by the researchers, and the way the work has evolved over the years. Given the short time at our disposal, the material covered in class will at best give you a brief flavor of the kind of work being done by consumer behavior researchers, and a possible structure to help you organize your learning. Your learning, thus, is going to be a direct function of your attitude and effort, especially the readings you do beyond the classroom. If you can enter the thinking and the passion of the researchers, you would have made a huge leap forward in your own work. Do not be afraid to take this leap, and do not be afraid to work hard ☺
Course Pedagogy:
1) In class discussion of research articles, and research ideas 2) Using mind‐maps to explore research ideas and salient literature 3) Collaborative development of original research ideas through structured Peer‐to‐Peer feedback
Course Examination:
1) Classroom presentation, and critique of, research articles (20%) 2) Classroom presentation of research area and research question (25%) 3) End of course Term Paper on original research question (35%) 4) Class participation (20%)
2
Some Guidelines Regarding the Course Exercises
Broad Research Skills Components Research Article Presentation Exercise
Your Research Question Presentation
1 Identifying the Question
Research Area What is your area of research?
Research Topic What is your broad research topic?
Research Question(s) What is the principal research question? How clearly has it been defined? Is the question interesting?
What is your research question? Why is it interesting? Why is it important?
2 Reviewing the Literature
Identifying the Major Streams
What are the major academic streams the authors are referring to?
What are the major academic streams which will inform your research?
Identifying the Seminal Readings
How extensive is the work they are citing? Have they missed any seminal readings? Which journals are their citations coming from?
Have you identified the seminal readings that are important for your work? Have you covered the important journals?
Identifying the Recent Salient Work
How recent is the literature they have covered?
How dated are your articles? Have you looked at current working papers and SSRN?
Critiquing and Synthesizing the Literature
How clearly have the authors identified the gaps in earlier work? How persuasively have they situated their own work?
Have you worked out a conceptual structure to organize your literature review? Have you clearly identified the weaknesses and gaps in earlier work? Have you clearly laid out where your work makes its original contributions?
3 Research Design Chosen Methodology Is the research intending to create new theory or to test it? Is the chosen methodology appropriate for the task? Were there any weaknesses in research design?
Will your research be generating or testing theory? What is your chosen research methodology and why?
Theory & Hypothesis What is the principal theoretical model that
Will you be using an existing theoretical
3
the authors have used? Have their hypothesis been clearly specified, and justified?
framework or creating your own? Are there clear predictions/ hypothesis that emanate from your model?
Chosen Sample What was the sample used in the research? Was it appropriate?
What is your intended sample size and method? Justify it.
4 Doing Original Research
Secondary Data What secondary data was used in the research? How was it used?
Are you using any secondary data in your analysis? Justify its usage.
Primary Data What primary data was created for the research?
Where will your primary data come from? Are you reaching the right people? How confident are you about getting the data?
Analysis and Findings What were the techniques used for analyzing the findings? Critique their use. Did the authors explore alternative explanations for their findings? Did they discuss the weaknesses and shortcomings? Did they explore possible future directions for the work? Were the results and conclusions arrived at by the authors logical? Were they persuasive?
What qualitative/ quantitative techniques are you intending to use to analyse your data? How confident are you about your analytical abilities? Do you have a clear data analysis plan? Are you testing alternative explanations for your results?
5 Communicating the Research Findings
Writing the Research How was the overall organization of the paper? Was it well structured? Did it hold your attention?
Have you pulled together your paper into a coherent, well‐connected whole – rewriting earlier parts if necessary?
Presenting the Research
Have your presented your work (at any stage) yet? If you did, does your current version incorporate the salient feedback?
4
The Domain of Consumer Behavior Research: A Mind‐map
Some of Major Consumer Behavior Models over the Years1
The Andreason Model (1965)
1 The diagrams for all the models presented in this section have been taken from the working paper,” Consumer Behavior Models in Tourism: Analysis Study” by Abadalat and El‐emam. These are being used purely for illustrative purposes.
5
6
The Howard Sheth Model of Buyer Behavior (1969)
7
The Nicosia Model (1976)
8
The Bettman Information Processing Model of Consumer Choice (1979)
9
The Engel‐Kolatt‐Blackwell Model of Consumer Behavior (1995)
10
The Course Bibliography
Classic Texts
Bettman, James R. (1979), An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Behavior, Reading, Mass: Addison‐Wesley.
Eagly, Alice H. and Shelley Chaiken (1993), The Psychology of Attitudes, Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Fishbein, M. and Izek Ajzen (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An introduction to theory and research, Reading, Mass: Addison‐Wesley.
Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo (1986), Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change, New York: Springer‐Verlag.
Consumer Behavior Overview
Bazerman, Max H. (2001), “Consumer Research for Consumers,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (Mar), 499‐504.
Calder, B.J. and A.M. Tybout (1987), “What Consumer Research is ...,” Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (Jun), 136‐140.
Holbrook, M.B. (1987), “What is Consumer Research?” Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (Jun), 128‐132.
MacInnis, Deborah. J. and Valerie S. Folkes (2010), “The Disciplinary Status of Consumer Behavior: A Sociology of Science Perspective on Key Controversies.” Journal of Consumer Research, 36(6): 899‐914.
Sheth, J.N. (1992), “Acrimony in the Ivory Tower: A Retrospective on Consumer Research,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 20 (4), 350‐354.
Simonson, Itamar, Z. Carmon, R. Dhar, A. Drolet and S. Nowlis (2001), “Consumer Research: In Search of Identity,” Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 249‐275.
Perception
Allen, M. W., Gupta, R., & Monnier, A. (2008). The Interactive Effect of Cultural Symbols and Human Values on Taste Evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(2), 294‐308. Brucks, M., Zeithaml, V. A., & Naylor, G. (2000). Price and Brand Name As Indicators of Quality Dimensions for Consumer Durables. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(3), 359‐374 Deng, X., & Kahn, B. E. (2009). Is Your Product on the Right Side? The “Location Effect” on Perceived Product Heaviness and Package Evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(6), 725‐738. Grewal, D., & Compeau, L. D. (2007). Consumer responses to price and its contextual information cues. Review of Marketing Research, 3, 109‐131 Hirschman, Elizabeth C. and Morris B. Holbrook, ‘Hedonic consumption: Emerging concepts, methods, and propositions’, Journalof Marketing 46 (Summer 1982): 92–101. Krishna, A. (2011). An integrative review of sensory marketing: Engaging the senses to affect perception, judgment and behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1‐20.
11
Mick, David, ‘Consumer research and semiotics: Exploring the morphology of signs, symbols, and significance’, Journal of Consumer Research 13 (September 1986): 196–213. Moore, Danny L. , Douglas Hausknecht and Kanchana Thamodaran, ‘Time compression, response opportunity, and persuasion’, Journal of Consumer Research 13 ( June 1986): 85–99. Nöth, Winfried ‘The language of commodities. Groundwork for a semiotics of consumer goods’, International Journal of Research in Marketing4 (1988): 173–86. Peck J. and T.L. Childers, ‘Individual differences in haptic information processing: The “need for touch” scale’, Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3) (2003): 430 –42. Spangenberg, E., Sprott, D., Grohmann, B., & Tracy, D. (2006). Gender‐congruent ambient scent influences on approach and avoidance behaviors in a retail store. Journal of Business Research, 59(12), 1281‐1287 Spangenberg, E., Grohmann, B., & Sprott, D. (2005). It�s beginning to smell (and sound) a lot like Christmas: the interactive effects of ambient scent and music in a retail setting. Journal of Business Research, 58(11), 1583‐1589.
Motivation& Persuasion
Bagozzi, Richard P. and Utpal Dholakia (1999), “Goal Setting and Goal Striving in Consumer Behavior,” Journal of Marketing, 63, 19‐32.
Celsi, Richard L. and Jerry C. Olson (1988), “The Role of Involvement in Attention and Comprehension Processes,” Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (Sep), 210‐224.
Petty, Richard E., John T. Cacioppo and David Schumann (1983), “Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement,” Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (Sep), 135‐146.
Peracchio, L. and J. Meyers‐Levy (1997), “Evaluating Persuasion‐Enhancing Techniques from a Resource‐Matching Perspective,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (Sep), 178‐191.
Shapiro, Stewart (1999), “When an Ad’s Influence is beyond our Conscious Control: Perceptual and Conceptual Fluency Effects Caused by Incidental Exposure,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (Jun), 16‐36.
Attitude
Albarracin, D., B.T. Johnson, M. Fishbein, and P. Muellerleile (2001), “Theories of reasoned action and planned behavior as models of condom use: A meta‐analysis,” Psychological Bulletin, 127.
Fazio, Russell, Martha Powell, and Carol Williams (1989), “The Role of Attitude Accessibility in the Attitude‐to‐Behavior Process,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (Dec), 280‐288.
Fazio, Russell H., D.M. Sanbonmatsu, M.C. Powell and F.R. Kardes (1986), “On the Automatic Activation of Attitudes,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 229‐238.
12
Janiszewski, C. (1988), “Preconscious Processing Effects: The Independence of Attitude formation and conscious thought,” Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (Sep), 199‐209.
Millar, Murray G. and Abraham Tesser (1986), “Effects of Affective and Cognitive Focus on the Attitude‐Behavior Relation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (2) 270‐276.
Schlosser, Ann E., and Sharon Shavitt (2002), “Anticipating Discussion about a Product: Rehearsing What to Say Can Affect Your Judgments,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (Jun), 101‐115.
Sengupta, Jaideep and Gavan J. Fitzsimons (…), “The Effects of Analyzing Reasons for Brand Preferences: Disruption or Reinforcement,” Journal of Marketing Research, 37 (3), 318‐330.
Sengupta, Jaideep and Gita Venkataramani Johar (2002), “Effects of Inconsistent Attribute Information on the Predictive Value of Product Attitudes: Toward a Resolution of Opposing Perspectives,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (1), 39‐56.
Wilson, Timothy D., Samuel Lindsey, and Tonya Y. Schooler (2000), “A Model of Dual Attitudes,” Psychological Review, 107
Wilson, Timothy D. and Dana S. Dunn (1986), “Effects of Introspection on Attitude‐Behavior Consistency: Analyzing Reasons versus Focusing on Feelings,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 249‐263.
Memory& Attention
Beihal, Gabriel and Dipankar Chakravarti (1983), “Information Accessibility as a Moderator of Consumer Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (Jun), 1‐14.
Biehal, Gabriel and Dipankar Chakravarti (1986), “Consumers’ Use of Memory and External Information in Choice: Macro and Micro Processing Perspectives,” Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (Mar), 382‐405.
Bettman, J. R. (1979). Memory Factors in Consumer Choice: A Review. Journal of Marketing, 43(2), 37.
Hawkins, Scott A. and Stephen J. Hoch (1992), “Low Involvement Learning: Memory without Evaluation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 19 (Sep), 212‐225.
Keller, K. (1987), “Memory Factors in Advertising: The Effect of Advertising Retrieval Cues on Brand Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (Dec), 316‐333.
Lynch, John G., Howard Marmorstein and Michael F. Weigold (1988), “Choices from Sets Including Remembered Brands: Use of Recalled Attributes and Prior Overall Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (Sep), 169‐184.
Lynch, John G. and Thomas K. Srull (1982), “Memory and Attentional Factors in Consumer Choice: Concepts and Research Methods,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (Jun), 18‐37.
Nedungadi, Prakash (1990), “Recall and Consumer Consideration Set Formation: Influencing Choice without Altering Brand Evaluations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (Dec), 263‐276.
Feldman, John and John G. Lynch (1988), “Self‐generated Validity and Other Effects of Measurement on Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 421‐435.
13
Lynch, John G. and Thomas Srull (1982), “Memory and Attentional Factors in Consumer Choice: Concepts and Research Methods,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (Jun), 18‐37.
Mackenzie, S.B. (1986), “The Role of Attention in Mediating the Effect of Advertising on Attribute Importance,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (Sep), 174‐195.
Menon, Geeta (1993), “The Effects of Accessibility of Information in Memory on Judgments of Behavioral Frequencies,” Journal of Consumer Research, 20 (Dec), 431‐440.
Consumer Knowledge and Learning
Alba, Joseph W. and J. Wesley Hutchinson (2000), “Knowledge Calibration: What Consumers Know and What They Think They Know,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27(Sep), 123‐156.
Alba, Joseph W. and J. Wesley Hutchinson (1987), “Dimensions of Consumer Expertise,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (Mar), 411‐454.
Brucks, M. (1985), “The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Information Search Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (Jun), 1‐16.
Gregan‐Paxton, Jennifer and Deborah Roedder John (1997), “Consumer Learning by Analogy: A Model of Internal Knowledge Transfer,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (Dec) 266‐284.
Hoch, Stephen J. and Young‐Won Ha (1986), “Consumer Learning: Advertising and the Ambiguity of Product Experience,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (Sep), 221‐233.
Huffman, Cynthia and Michael J. Houston (1993), “Goal‐Oriented Experiences and the Development of Knowledge,” Journal of Consumer Research, 20 (Sep), 190‐207.
Johnson, E. J., & Russo, J. E. (1984). Product Familiarity and Learning New Information. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(1), 542.
Moreau, C.P., A.B. Markman and D.R. Lehmann (2001), “What Is It? Categorization Flexibility and Consumers’ Responses to Really New Products,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (Mar), 489‐
Peracchio, Laura A. (1992), “How Do Young Children Learn to Be Consumers? A Script‐processing Approach,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (Mar), 425‐440.
Ratneshwar, S., C. Pechmann and A. Shocker (1996), “Goal‐Derived Categories and the Antecedents of Across‐Category Consideration,” Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (Dec), 240‐250.
Roehm, Michelle L., and Brian Sternthal (2001), “The Moderating Effect of Knowledge and Resources on the Persuasive Impact of Analogies,” Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (Sep), 257‐272.
Sujan, Mita (1985), “Consumer Knowledge: Effects of Evaluation Strategies Mediating Consumer Judgments,” Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (Jun), 31‐46.
14
Van Osselaer, Stijn M.J. and Chris Janiszewski (2001), “Two Ways of Learning BrandAssociations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (Sep), 202‐223.
West, Patricia, Christina Brown and Stephen Hoch, “Consumption Vocabulary andPreference Formation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (Sep), 120‐135.
Wood, Stacy L., and John G. Lynch, Jr. (2002), “Prior Knowledge and Complacencyin New Product Learning,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (Dec), 416‐426.
Judgment and Decision Making
Ariely, Dan (2000), “Controlling the Information Flow: Effects on Consumers' Decision Making and Preferences,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (Sep), 233‐248.
Arkes, Hal R., & Blumer, C. (1985), “The Psychology of Sunk Cost,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35(1): 124‐140.
Bettman, James R., Luce, Mary Frances, & Payne, John W. (1998), “Constructive Consumer Choice Processes,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25(3), 187‐217.
Bettman, James R. and C.W. Park (1980), “Effects of Prior Knowledge and Experience and Phase of the Choice Process on Consumer Decision Processes,” Journal of Consumer Research, 7 (Dec), 234‐248.
Frederick, S., Novemsky, N., Wang, J., Dhar, R., & Nowlis, S. (2009), “Opportunity Cost Neglect,” Journal of Consumer Research, 36(4): 553‐561.
Gourville, John (1998), “Pennies‐a‐Day: The Effect of Temporal Reframing on Transaction Evaluation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (Mar), 395‐408.
Hauser, J. R., & Wernerfelt, B. 1990. An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(4): 393‐408.
Heath, Chip and Jack B. Soll (1996), “Mental Budgeting and Consumer Decisions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (Jun), 40‐52.
Hoyer, Wayne D. (1984), "An Examination of Consumer Decision‐Making for a Common Repeat Purchase Product," Journal of Consumer Research, 11 (3), 822‐29
Huber, Joel, John W. Payne, and Christopher Puto (1982), "Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis," Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (June), 90‐98
Iyengar, Sheena S., and Mark R. Lepper (2000), “When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire too Much of a Good Thing?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6): 995‐1006
Kahneman, Daniel and Amos Tversky (1984), "Choices, Values, and Frames", American Psychologist, 39 (April), 341‐350.
Kahneman, Daniel and Amos Tversky (1979), "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk,” Econometrica, 47 (March), 263‐291.
15
Liu, W., & Aaker, J. (2008). The Happiness of Giving: The Time‐Ask Effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 543‐557.
Novemsky, N., Dhar, R., Schwarz, N., & Simonson, I. (2007). Preference Fluency in Choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(3), 347‐356.
Novemsky, Nathan and Daniel Kahneman (2005), “The Boundaries of Loss Aversion,” Journal of Marketing Research, 42(2): 119‐128.
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1992). Behavioral Decision Research: A Constructive Processing Perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 43(1), 87‐131
Pham, Michel Tuan and Hannah Chang (2010), “Regulatory Focus, Regulatory Fit, and the Search and Consideration of Choice Alternatives,” Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (December), 626‐640
Pham, Michel Tuan (2007), “Emotion and Rationality: A Critical Review and Interpretation of Empirical Evidence,” Review of General Psychology, 11 (2), 155‐178.
Pham, Michel Tuan (1998), “Representativeness, Relevance, and the Use of Feelings in Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 25 (September), 144‐159.
Puto, Christopher (1987), “The Framing of Buying Decisions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (Dec), 301‐315.
Shafir, Eldar (2002), “Rationality,” Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 491‐517
Simonson, Itamar (1989), "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (September), 158‐174
Thaler, Richard H. (1985), "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice", Marketing Science, 4 (Summer), 199‐214.
Ward, James C. and Peter H. Reingen (1990), “Sociocognitive Analysis of Group Decision Making among Consumers,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (Dec), 245‐262.
Zajonc, Robert B. and Hazel Markus (1982), "Affective and Cognitive Factors in Preferences," Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (September), 123‐131.
Affect
Adaval, R. (2001), “Sometimes It Just Feels Right: The Differential Weighting of Affect‐ Consistent and Affect‐Inconsistent Product Information,” Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (Jun), p 1‐17.
Gardner, Meryl P. (1985), “Mood States and Consumer Behavior: A Critical Review,” Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (Dec), 281‐300.
Jr., H. A. R., & Roehm, M. L. (2005). Revisiting the Effect of Positive Mood on Variety Seeking. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(2), 330‐336.
16
MacInnis, D. J., & De Mello, G. E. (2005). The Concept of Hope and Its Relevance to Product Evaluation and Choice. Journal of Marketing, 69(1), 1‐14.
Pham, Michel (1998), “Representativeness, relevance, and the use of feelings in decision making,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (Sep), 144‐159.
Yeung, Catherine W.M. and Robert S. Wyer, Jr. (2004), “Affect, Appraisal and Consumer Judgment,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (Sep), 412‐424.
Zajonc, Robert B. and Hazel Markus (1982), “Affective and Cognitive Factors in Preferences,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (Sep), 123‐131.
Self, Personality, and Lifestyle
Aaker, J. L. (1999). The Malleable Self: The Role of Self‐Expression in Persuasion. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(1), 45.
Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(3), 347.
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the Extended Self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139‐168.
Burroughs, J. W., Drews, D. R., & Hallman, W. K. (1991). Predicting Personality from Personal Possessions : A Self‐Presentational Analysis. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6(6), 147‐163.
Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4),
Kassarjian, H. H., & Sheffet, M. J. (1991). Personality and consumer behavior: an update. (H. H. Kassarjian & T. S. Robertson, Eds.)Perspectives in consumer behavior, 4, 281‐303. Prentice Hall.
Reed II, A. (2004). Activating the Self‐Importance of Consumer Selves: Exploring Identity Salience Effects on Judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 286‐295
Tian, K., & Belk, R. W. (2005). Extended Self and Possessions in the Workplace. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(2), 297‐310.
Reference Groups, Family, Social Class & Culture
Aguirre, B.E. , E.L. Quarantelli and Jorge L. Mendoza, ‘The collective behavior of fads: The characteristics, effects, and career of streaking’, American Sociological Review (August 1989): 569. 107. Arnould, Eric J. ‘Toward a broadened theory of preference formation and the diffusion of innovations: Cases from Zinder Province, Niger Republic’, Journal of Consumer Research 16 (September 1989): 239–67. Barak, Benny and Leon G. Schiffman, ‘Cognitive Age: A Nonchronological Age Variable’, in Kent B. Monroe, ed., Advances in Consumer Research 8 (Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 1981): 602–6. Beatty, Sharon E. and Salil Talpade, ‘Adolescent influence in family decision making: A replication with extension’, Journal of Consumer Research 21 (September 1994) 2: 332–41.
17
Belk, Russell W. , Melanie Wallendorf and John Sherry Jr.,‘The sacred and the profane in consumer behavior:Theodicy on the odyssey’, Journal of Consumer Research 16( June 1989): 1–38. Bell,S., Morris B. Holbrook and Michael R. Solomon, ‘Combining esthetic and social value to explain preferences for product styles with the incorporation of personality and ensemble effects’, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality (1991) 6: 243–74. Briley, D., & Aaker, J. (2001). When does culture matter? The transitory nature of cultural differences in judgments and choices. Advances in Consumer Research, 28(1), 151‐152. Association for Consumer Research. Coleman, Richard P. ‘The continuing significance of social class to marketing’, Journal of Consumer Research 10 (December 1983): 265–80; Turner, Sociology. Dubois, Bernard and Patrick Duquesne, ‘The market for luxury goods: Income versus culture’, European Journal of Marketing 27(1) (1993): 35–44. Escalas, J. E., & Bettman, J. R. (2003). You Are What They Eat: The Influence of Reference Groups on Consumers’ Connections to Brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 339‐348. Fisher, Robert J. and Linda L. Price, ‘An investigation into the social context of early adoption behavior’, Journal of Consumer Research 19 (December 1992): 477–86. Foxall, Gordon R. and Seema Bhate, ‘Cognitive style and personal involvement as explicators of innovative purchasing of health food brands’, European Journal of Marketing 27(2) (1993): 5–16. Fuat Firat A. and Alladi Venkatesh, ‘Postmodernity: The age of marketing’, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 10(3) (1993): 227–49. Gatignon, Hubert and Thomas S. Robertson, ‘A propositional inventory for new diffusion research’, Journal of Consumer Research 11 (March 1985): 849–67. Ger, Güliz and Fabian Csaba, ‘Flying Carpets: The Production and Consumption of Tradition and Mystique’, in S.Hoch and R. Meyer, eds, Advancesin Consumer Research27 (Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 2000): 132–7. Ger, Güliz and Russell W. Belk, ‘I’d like to buy the world a Coke: Consumptionscapes of the “less affluent world”’, Journal of Consumer Policy 19 (1996): 271–304; Robin A. Gregan‐Paxton, Jennifer and Deborah Roedder John, ‘Are young children adaptive decision makers? A study of age differences in information search behavior’, Journal of Consumer Research (1995). Holak, Susan L. , Donald R. Lehmann and Farena Sultan, ‘The role of expectations in the adoption of innovative consumer durables: Some preliminary evidence’, Journal of Retailing 63 (Fall 1987): 243–59. Kirchler, Erich ‘Spouses’ joint purchase decisions: Determinants of influence tactics for muddling through the process’, Journal of Economic Psychology 14 (1993): 405–38. Lackman, Conway and John M. Lanasa, ‘Family decision‐making theory: An overview and assessment’, Psychologyand Marketing 10 (March/April 1993) 2: 81–94 Lastovicka, John L., Lance A. Bettencourt, Renee Shaw Hughner and Ronald J. Kuntze, ‘Lifestyle of the tight and frugal: Theory and measurement’, Journal of Consumer Research 26 ( June 1999): 85–98.
18
McCracken, Grant ‘Culture and consumption: A theoretical account of the structure and movement of the cultural meaning of consumer goods’, Journal of Consumer Research 13 (June 1986): 71–84. Meyers‐Levy, J., & Maheswaran, D. (1991). Exploring Differences in Males� and Females' Processing Strategies. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(1),63‐70. Mick, David Glen and Michelle DeMoss, ‘Self‐gifts: Phenomenological insights from four contexts’, Journal of Consumer Research 17 (December 1990): 327; Milner, Laura M. , Dale Fodness and Mark W. Speece, ‘Hofstede’s Research on Cross‐Cultural Work‐Related Values: Implications for Consumer Behavior’, in W.F. van Raaij and G. Bamossy, eds, European Advances in Consumer Research 1 (Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 1993): 70–6. O’Guinn, Thomas C. and Ronald J. Faber, ‘Compulsive buying: A phenomenological exploration’, Journal of Consumer Research 16 (1989): 147–57. Peracchio, Laura A. ‘How do young children learn to be consumers? A script‐processing approach’, Journal of Consumer Research 18 (March 1992): Polegato, Rosemary and Judith L. Zaichkowsky, ‘Family food shopping: Strategies used by husbands and wives’, The Journal of Consumer Affairs 28 (1994): 2. Rook, Dennis W. , ‘The ritual dimension of consumer behavior’, Journal of Consumer Research 12 (December 1985): 251–64; Schaninger, Charles M. and William D. Danko, ‘A conceptual and empirical comparison of alternative household life cycle models’, Journal of Consumer Research 19 (March 1993): 580–94; Solomon, Michael R. ‘The role of products as social stimuli: A symbolic interactionism perspective’, Journal of Consumer Research 10 (December 1983): 319–29; Steenkamp, Jan‐Benedict E.M. , Frenkel ter Hofstede and Michel Wedel, ‘A cross‐national investigation into the individual and national cultural antecedents of consumer innovativeness’, Journal of Marketing 63(2) (1999): 55–69. Sullivan, Gary L. and P.J. O’Connor, ‘The Family Purchase Decision Process: A Cross‐Cultural Review and Framework for Research’, Southwest Journal of Business and Economics (Fall 1988): Thompson, Craig J. , ‘Marketplace mythology and discourses of power’, Journal of Consumer Research 31 ( June 2004): 162–80. Wallendorf, Melanie and Eric J.Arnould, ‘“My favorite things”: A cross‐cultural inquiry into object attachment, possessiveness, and social linkage’, Journal of Consumer Research 14 (March 1988): 531–47. Webster, Cynthia ‘Effects of Hispanic ethnic identification on marital roles in the purchase decision process’, Journal of Consumer Research 21 (September 1994) 2: 319–31;
19
The Wikipedia Page
An Attitude can be defined as a positive or negative evaluation of people, objects, event, activities, ideas, or just about anything in your environment Attribution is a concept in social psychology addressing the processes by which individuals explain the causes of behavior and events; attribution theory is an umbrella term for various models that attempt to explain those processes Balance Theory is a motivational theory of attitude change, proposed by Fritz Heider (Heider 1958). It conceptualizes the consistency motive as a drive toward psychological balance. The consistency motive is the urge to maintain one's values and beliefs over time Brand loyalty, in marketing, consists of a consumer's commitment to repurchase or otherwise continue using the brand and can be demonstrated by repeated buying of a product or service, or other positive behaviors such as word of mouth advocacy Cognitive dissonance is a discomfort caused by holding conflicting cognitions (e.g., ideas, beliefs, values, emotional reactions) simultaneously. Consumer Behavior is the study of the processes involved when individuals or groups select, purchase, use, or dispose of products, services, ideas, or experiences to satisfy needs and desires. Customer satisfaction … a measure of how products and services supplied by a company meet or surpass customer expectation. Decision making can be regarded as the mental processes (cognitive process) resulting in the selection of a course of action among several alternative scenarios. Drive is an “excitatory state produced by a homeostatic disturbance”(Seward, 1956) Drive theory is based on the principle that organisms are born with certain psychological needs and that a negative state of tension is created when these needs are not satisfied. Expectancy‐value theory was originally created in order to explain and predict individual's attitudes toward objects and actions. Originally the work of psychologistMartin Fishbein, the theory states that attitudes are developed and modified based on assessments about beliefs and values. Primarily, the theory attempts to determine the mentalcalculations that take place in attitude development. Learning is acquiring new, or modifying existing, knowledge, behaviors, skills, values, or preferences and may involve synthesizing different types of information The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) of persuasion is a model of how attitudes are formed and changed that was developed by Richard E. Petty and John Cacioppo in the early 1980s…Central to this model is the "elaboration continuum", which ranges from low elaboration (low thought) to high elaboration (high thought). The ELM distinguishes between two routes to persuasion: the "central route," where a subject considers an idea logically, and the "peripheral route," in which the audience uses preexisting ideas and superficial qualities to be persuaded. Means‐end chain analyses often find that consumers select products with attributes that deliver consequences, which in turn contribute to value fulfillment. Motivation is a term that refers to a process that elicits, controls, and sustains certain behaviors
20
In psychology, Memory is the processes by which information is encoded, stored, and retrieved. Perception (from the Latin perceptio, percipio) is the organization, identification, and interpretation of sensory information in order to fabricate a mental representation through the process of transduction, which sensors in the body transform signals from the environment into encoded neural signals. Personality is the particular combination of emotional, attitudinal, and behavioral response patterns of an individual.
A Reference Group is a concept referring to a group to which an individual or another group is compared. Sociologists call any group that individuals use as a standard for evaluating themselves and their own behavior a reference group.
Regulatory focus theory (RFT) is a goal pursuit theory … regarding peoples' perceptions in the decision making process. RFT examines the relationship between the motivation of a person and the way in which they go about achieving their goal Self‐perception theory (SPT) is an account of attitude change developed by psychologistDaryl Bem. It asserts that people develop their attitudes by observing their behavior and concluding what attitudes must have caused them. Semiotics, also called semiotic studies… is the study of signs and sign processes (semiosis), indication, designation, likeness, analogy, metaphor, symbolism, signification, and communication. Social class (or simply "class") is a set of concepts in the social sciences and political theory centered on models of social stratification in which people are grouped into a set of hierarchical social categories.[ Social comparison theory was initially proposed by social psychologistLeon Festinger in 1954. Social comparison theory is centered on the belief that there is a drive within individuals to gain accurate self‐evaluations. The theory explains how individuals evaluate their own opinions and abilities by comparing themselves to others in order to reduce uncertainty in these domains, and learn how to define the self. Social exchange theory is a social psychological and sociological perspective that explains social change and stability as a process of negotiated exchanges between parties. Social exchange theory posits that all human relationships are formed by the use of a subjective cost‐benefit analysis and the comparison of alternatives. Social judgment theory (SJT) is a persuasion theory proposed by Muzafer Sherif and Carl Hovland. This theory looks at how people weigh every new idea presented to us by comparing it with a present point of view. Social perception is, in psychology and other cognitive sciences, that part of perception that allows people to understand the individuals and groups of their social world, and thus an element of social cognition. In sociology, anthropology and cultural studies, a subculture is a group of people with a culture (whether distinct or hidden) which differentiates them from the larger culture to which they belong. Symbolic Interaction, refers to the patterns of communication, interpretation and adjustment between individuals. The Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) was proposed by Ajzen and Fishbein (1975 & 1980). The components of TRA are three general constructs: behavioral intention (BI), attitude (A), and subjective norm (SN). TRA suggests that a person's behavioral intention depends on the person's attitude about the behavior and subjective norms (BI = A + SN). If a person intends to do a behavior then it is likely that the person will do it.
