Detergents

Journal of Business & Policy Research
Volume 5. Number 1. July 2010 Pp. 123 - 157
Consumers’ Shopping Behaviour Pattern on Selected

Consumer Goods: Empirical Evidence on Malaysian
Consumers
Oriah Akir* and Md. Nor Othman**
In the consumer behaviour literature, several perspectives on consumer decision

making have been considered, including consumer degree of involvement, degree
of information search, the number of alternatives available/attributes importance,
demographic variables and interpersonal influence that affect consumer buying
decision and shopping pattern on certain consumer goods, both high and low
involvement products. A cross-sectional survey was conducted and 1000
consumers were interviewed through mall intercept of which only 500 were useable
for the analysis of the findings. In this paper, a framework which integrates several
dimensions affecting consumer decision making (demographic variables, attributes
importance, interpersonal influence) and repurchase intention as well as the
possible relationship among variables is developed. The framework is tested by the
use of standardized multiple regression analysis to determine the linear
relationship among all these variables. The results of this research support the
complexity of consumer buying behaviour. Consumers’ preference differs on which
attributes they emphasize more as compared to the others, and the issue of how
significantly others influence their buying decisions. The findings revealed that
purchasing high involvement products was regarded as a very important decision
in comparison to purchasing low involvement products. Second, quality, brand
name, informational influence and product information had significant direct
relationship on repurchase intention for high involvement products. While for low
involvement products, price and brand name significantly predict consumers’
repurchase intention. Finally, the influence of significant others/interpersonal
influence (spouses, siblings, family members, friends, and the like) did not
significantly affect repurchase intention regardless of whether the products are low
involvement products or high involvement products. In conclusion, the implications
of this research: 1) contributes to the body of knowledge and exploratory model
building on consumer purchase behaviour; and 2) the research model will provide
an important input to the marketing decision-making process and management
decision, such as marketers, product managers and/or brand managers to
streamline their marketing plan and strategies.
Field of Research: consumer behaviour and marketing
1. Introduction
Consumer behaviour theorists generally believe that consumer behaviour
theories can be applied globally but consumer preferences and tastes are
influenced by their cultural background (Schutte and Ciarlante, 1998). Therefore,
marketers and business practitioners have to recognize that consumers‟ attitudes
and beliefs, preferences, needs and tastes towards certain products or services
are greatly influenced by their culture and the society they belong to. For
instance, consumers in other parts of the globe may consider price as the most
important determinant in their decision to buy food items, whereas, in others, they
may consider quality as the most important factor that may affect their choices.
Other factors that may surface could also be the influence of significant others,
____________________________________
* Lecturer of University Technology MARA, Malaysia, oriah@sarawak.uitm.edu.my
** Professor of University Malaya, Malaysia, mohdnor@um.edu.my
Akir & Othman
such as spouse, siblings, family members, friends, salespersons, relatives or

neighbours (on consumers‟ purchase decisions and/or repurchase intentions),
and even the marketing stimuli triggered by the marketers. Despite all these
uncertainties, marketers or businesses still invest a lot of money in their
marketing plans to indulge consumers to buy their products or services. This is
an on-going process that they have to deal with in order to meet consumers‟
specific needs and preferences. It is not enough to offer a variety of products, but
the true gain in business platform is how to sustain profit and survive in the
marketplace by satisfying consumers‟ needs and wants relative to the value of
the offerings. Hence, this paper empirically investigate the consumers‟ shopping
behaviour pattern on selected consumer goods and address the issues on what
they buy, why they buy, when they buy, where they buy, how much and how
often do they buy, the factors that influence their buying decisions, and the
determinants that influence consumers‟ purchase/repurchase intention. For
example, in the case of Malaysia, it was reported that, around 70 percent of
Malaysian consumers across all segments plan what they buy. Nevertheless the
majority will still buy additional items (AC Nielsen, 2006).
Specific research questions addressed by the research:
a) What are the general shopping behaviour patterns of consumers when

they decide to buy selected consumer goods (high and low involvement
products)?
b) Is there any relationship between products‟ attributes importance, selected
consumers‟ demographic variables, interpersonal influence and
consumers‟ repurchase intention?
Specific objectives of the research:
a) To determine consumers‟ general shopping behaviour patterns when they

decide to buy selected consumer goods (high and low involvement
products).
b) To examine the relationship between product attributes‟ importance,
selected consumers‟ demographic variables, interpersonal influence and
repurchase intention.
2. Literature Review
This section reviews past studies on various factors, such as price, quality, brand,
product information, demographic variables and interpersonal influence that
might influence consumers‟ purchase decision and how these factors in turn
affect their repurchase intention.
2.1 Introduction
Understanding consumer behaviour is paramount for both marketers and
business alike. Two factors critical to understanding consumer behaviour are:
firstly, the degree of differentiation that a consumer perceives in the product or
service; and secondly, the fundamental determinant of consumer behaviour is
their degree of involvement in the purchase (Blackwell, Miniard, and Engel, 2001;
124
Akir & Othman
Kotler, 1998; Lamb, Hair, and McDaniel, 2000; Business World, 2001).
Conceptually, all consumer buying decisions generally fall along the continuum of
three broad categories: routine response behaviour or habitual decision making;
limited-decision making; and extensive decision-making (Lamb, Hair, and
McDaniel, 2001, Kotler, 2003). The common notion is, consumer tends to be
highly involved when they purchase expensive items, and less involved when
they purchase low involvement products that they purchase frequently and the
price is less expensive (Blackwell, Miniard, and Engel, 2001, Business World,
2001).
Prior to choice decision or repurchase intention, consumers place a number of

attributes in his or her choice sets, in order of importance and relevance. Among
these attributes are price and quality, and consumers tend to use price as a proxy
to quality (Lichtenstein, Bloch, and Black, 1988; Bloch and Black, 1988; Dodds,
Monroe, and Grewal, 1991; Ofir, 2004). However, studies also reveal that,
besides price and quality, other cues that are also considered as more important
to assess the product‟s worth, are attributes such as brand, store name, past
experience, attitude and product information (Cury and Riesz, 1988; Stafford and
Enis, 1969; Erikson and Johansson, 1985; Zeithaml, 1985; Tellis and Geath,
1990, Dodds, Monroe, and Grewal, 1991). Brand name, for example, often
signals as a cue or as a surrogate of product quality use by consumers in their
evaluation of goods or services before they decide to purchase. Some
researchers argue that the effect of price tends to be stronger when it is
presented alone as compared when it is combined together with brand name
(Dodds and Monroe, 1989; Dodds, Monroe, and Grewal, 1991). On the other
hand, Bristow, Schneider, and Schuler (2002), suggest that if consumers
believed that there are differences among brands, then the brand name becomes
the center piece of information in the purchase decision or repurchase intention
and the dependence on the usage of brand name in the search information will
likely increase. Another branch of consumer behaviour research related to brand,
is that, consumers use brands to create or communicate their self-image or
status (Encalas and Betman, 2003; O‟ Cass, and Frost, 2002). Consumers,
sometimes, associate themselves to a given brand when they make brand
choice, and also make their brand choice based on associations with
manufacturer‟s brand name (Aaker, 1997; Fugale, 1986). Besides, brand names
contribute value to the consumer‟s image, as well as the economic success of the
businesses, and it also can affect preference, purchase intention and
consequently, sales (Alreck and Settle, 1999; Ataman and Ulengin, 2003).
An economic theory of information was first proposed by George Stigler in 1961.

Accordingly, this theory assumes that the markets are characterized by price
dispersions and both seller and buyer has little information about this dispersion
of prices. As such, consumer has to engage in search activity in order to obtain
information about the products and price at cost. According to Avery (1996)
rational consumers are assumed to search for product information/price
information to a point where the marginal benefits of search are equal to the
marginal costs of search. The search for product information varies in
accordance to price and quality perception on products or services to be
purchased. If consumers perceived that there is a high level of price and higher
125
Akir & Othman
quality variability in the market then they should be more willing to engage in
search activities for price and quality information (Avery, 1996).
Consumers purchase/repurchase intention or purchase decision for a product
and/or service is driven by various reasons, which can be triggered by rational or
emotional arousal (Schffmann and Kanuk, 2004). For example, consumers use
brands to communicate their self-image or status, and the brand images chosen
must be congruent to their own and match to groups they aspire to establish an
association with (Burnkrant and Cousineau, 1975; Bearden, Netemeyer, and
Teele, 1989; Encalas and Bettmann, 2003; O‟ Cass and Frost, 2002). Similarly,
consumers will seek for others who are significant to them for information or wish
to associate or bond with, that is, the group social norms with whom consumers
aspire to establish a psychological association or bonding, such as friends,
neighbours, and the like (Bunkrant and Consineau, 1975; Park and Lessig, 1977;
Bearden, Netemeyer, and Teele, 1989; Mourali, Laroche, and Pons, 2005; Kropp,
Lavack, and Holden, 2005; Kropp, Lavack and Silvera, 2005). Besides, other
factors, such as price, income, education, and other attributes also contribute to
purchase decision/repurchase intention (Andaleeb and Conway, 2006; Al-Hawari
and Ward, 2006; Jamal and Naser, 2002).
2.2 Research Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses

As previously discussed, past and recent studies provide empirical evidence, that
suggest the existence of a relationship between demographic variables, product
attributes and purchase or repurchase intention. Nonetheless, within the domain
of service marketing studies pertaining to the determinants that influence
consumers‟ repurchase intention and satisfaction were widely investigated and
researched in comparison to tangible products. These determinants include
service quality determinants such as reliability, access, courtesy, competence,
responsiveness, tangibles, credibility, communication, customization,
understanding customers‟ needs, and security. Other determinants mentioned in
past studies also included past experience, prior knowledge or familiarity, culture,
demographic variables such as income, education, household size, children and
so forth. Likewise, the studies on consumer susceptibility to interpersonal
influence were also well researched but the study directly investigating the
relationship between interpersonal influence and customer‟s repurchase intention
is still fuzzy. Furthermore, in the literature, past studies that integrated and
directly linked product attributes importance, demographic variables and
interpersonal influence in explaining repurchase intention was also unclear.
Therefore, in view of this argument and to fill in the gap in the literature and add
to the body of knowledge in consumer behaviour model and conception, this
research attempts to explore specifically amongst others, the relationship among
all these variables (product attributes importance, demographic variables,
interpersonal influence and repurchase intention) pertaining to consumers
decisions to purchase or repurchase selected tangible consumer goods (high and
low involvement products). For the purpose of this research the following
conceptual framework was developed as depicted in Figure 1 below.
The framework of this research was developed based on stochastic models of

brand choice and purchase incidence as modified by Jones and Zufryden (1980).
Jones and Zufryden‟s model used demographic variables (household income and
126
Akir & Othman
the number of children in a household) and marketing mix (price dimension) as

explanatory variables to predict brand choice or purchase (criterion variable).
Jones and Zufryden‟s model was tested using logit model estimation. The
explanatory variables were categorical data and the criterion variable was metric
data. Jones and Zufryden‟s (1980) modified model was adapted due to its
flexibility. It was suggested by the authors who developed the model that, “in
terms of its use, the model involves relatively straightforward parameter
estimation procedure and one that is adaptable to exploratory model building”
(Jones and Zufryden, 1980, p. 332). In other words, the intention of Jones and
Zufryden (1980) was to develop a general model which can be used to aid in
marketing decision process. Hence, it was also suggested that the model is very
flexible in which the explanatory variables can be added and dropped as required
by the researchers who wish to replicate or adapt the model. However, in the
current research framework, besides household income, number of children and
price, additional explanatory variables of product attributes importance such as
quality, brand name, product information and interpersonal influence variables
were added to the model. In contrast to Jones and Zufryden„s model, the current
research framework was tested using standardized multiple regression
procedures to determine the linear relationship among all sets of variables used
in the research. This was because the data used in the research were metric for
both the explanatory/independent variables and the criterion/dependent variable.
Explanatory Variables Criterion Variable
The Determinants that

Influence Consumer‟s
Purchase Behaviour
Attributes Importance
Consumer‟s Purchase
 Quality Behaviour
 Price
 Brand Name Repurchase Intention
 Product Information [Low and High
Interpersonal Influence Involvement Products]
 Normative Influence
 Informational Influence
Demographic Variables
 No. of Children
 Household Income Figure 1: The Research Framework
Based on the above argument and discussions in the literature, the following
general hypotheses and specific hypotheses were developed:
General hypotheses:
H1: There is a relationship between products‟ attributes importance,

demographic variables, interpersonal influence and a consumer‟s
Specific hypotheses:
H1a: There is a relationship between quality attribute importance and a

consumer‟s repurchase intention.
127
Akir & Othman
H1b: There is a relationship between price attribute importance and a

H1c: There is a relationship between brand name attribute importance and a
H1d: There is a relationship between product information attribute importance
and a consumer‟s repurchase intention.
H1e: There is a relationship between normative influence and a consumer‟s
H1f: There is a relationship between informational influence and a consumer‟s
H1g: There is a relationship between a household income and a consumer‟s
H1h: There is a relationship between the number of children in a household and
a consumer‟s repurchase intention.
3. Research Methodology
This section briefly describes the research design, population and sample size,
data collection procedure as well as data analysis procedure.
3.1 Research Design and Sampling Procedure

A cross-sectional survey was conducted. A non-probability sampling approach
was employed and a quota sampling technique was applied to draw the sample.
This approach was employed because the sample frame was not easily available
and difficult to draw from and the target population cannot be reached and
identified effectively and efficiently by other means of sampling (Clarke, 2006).
Kinnear and Taylor (1996) reported that about 86 percent of businesses used
quota sampling in business research practice. Further, Kress (1988) contended
that samples, if properly selected, are sufficiently accurate in most cases and
even when the data has considerable heterogeneity, large samples provide data
of sufficient precision to make most decisions (Zikmund, 2000). The target
sample for this study was 1000 consumers residing in one of the cities in one of
the states in Malaysia.
3.2 Target Population and Sample Size

The target population for the research comprised consumers residing in one of
the city in East Malaysia. The total population of the city is 422,240, consisting
210,034 male and 212, 205 female (Department of Statistics, Malaysia, 2004, p.
34). Approximately 1000 consumers were targeted and divided proportionately by
gender, that is, about 50 percent male and 50 percent female. This composition
closely exhibited the population parameter of the chosen city based on statistical
report drawn from Department of Statistics, Malaysia (2004). The sample size
was considered as adequate, since the minimum sample to determine sample
size from a given population is 384 (Krejcie and Morgan, 1970) for every one
million population.
128
Akir & Othman
3.3 Data Collection Procedure

A total of 1000 questionnaires were distributed using mall intercept at six selected
retail outlets located at one of the cities in East Malaysia. The retail outlets
included supermarkets, small retail stores, departmental stores, specialty stores,
hypermarkets, and malls. The selected units of analysis were interviewed
personally. If the sample units were unable to complete the questionnaires, they
were requested to send them by mail using a paid stamped-self-address envelop
provided by the researcher or to return them personally the following day to the
interviewers stationed at the selected retail outlets. The interviews were
conducted daily from 10.30 a.m to 9.30 p.m for three months from September
2008 to November 2008. The personal interviews took place within these three
months and only ended when the minimum targeted size of 500 respondents who
fully completed the questionnaires were achieved with at least 50 percent male
and 50 percent female composition as had been determined by the researcher in
order to meet the quota targeted. The data collected must meet the desired
characteristics that had been determined by the researcher.
3.4 Instrument
Before the full scale research was carried out, pre-testing was performed to
ensure there were no design errors in the questionnaire. Therefore any mistakes
and changes could be corrected and improved. The pre-test was administered
using 30 consumers as respondents who characterized the intended consumers
for the main research. They consisted of part-time students who enrolled for the
Bachelor in Business Administration (Honours) (Marketing) (BBA) (M) and
Executive Master in Business (EMBA) programmes at one of the public
universities located at one of the cities of an East Malaysian state. These
respondents were selected at the researcher‟s convenience and they were
similar in makeup to the sample of the main research (Zikmund, 2000; Malhotra,
2004). Feedback from the pre-test study indicated that the respondents were
comfortable with the questions asked. However, based on the pre-test feedback,
a few changes were made to ensure the final respondents in the actual survey
understand the questions. At this pre-testing stage, the respondents were also
asked to rank order which of the products category given to them that they
considered as high involvement products and low involvement products of the six
categories chosen, namely: personal computer, fashion clothing, instant noodle,
instant coffee and detergent.
In order to address the research questions and objectives, a set of structured

questionnaire was prepared consisting of four sections, namely section A, B, C
and D. Section A captured the consumers‟ general shopping behaviour pattern
which addressed questions related to the products category that the consumers
bought, why did the consumers buy the products, what were the preferred brand
names bought by the consumers, did they prefer foreign brand or local brand,
what were the reasons for choosing foreign and local brand, when did they
usually buy the products, where did they usually buy the products, how much
they spent and how many times they bought the products for the last 12 months,
how did they know about the products, which advertisements medium influenced
them the most, who influenced their purchasing decisions and what were the
129
Akir & Othman
products category that they ranked as the most important in their decision making
process. Section B which included questions on attributes importance and
interpersonal influence consists of 39 items using a 7-point Likert Like Scale
anchored with “1” as strongly disagree and “7” as strongly agree. These items
included price (7 items), quality (7 items), brand (7 items), product information (6
items) and interpersonal influence (12 items). The items used in section B were
adapted from various authors related to the research such as Aliman‟s (2005)
product information scales, Lichtenstein, Ridgway and Netemeyer„s (1993) price -
quality scales, Sproles and Kendall‟s (1986) consumer decision making styles
scales, Bearden, Netemeyer and Teele‟s (1989) 12-items Consumer
Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence scales (CSI), and Blair and Innis‟s (2002)
brand dependence scales. Section C captured the questions on the consumer‟s
repurchase intention consisting of eight items adapted from Levesque and
McDougall„s (1996) repurchase intention scales using a 7-point Likert Like Scale
anchored with “1” as strongly disagree and “7” as strongly agree. Please refer to
Appendix 1 for the detailed items used in the research.
Finally, section D required the respondents to state their personal information

regarding their gender, age, income, education, family size, number of children in
a household, household size, marital status, religion, employment sectors,
occupation, religious orientation, involvement level and a presence of at least one
child in a household. Six types of product category selected for the research were
personal computer, branded perfume, and fashion clothing which represented the
high involvement product category, while detergent, instant noodle, and instant
coffee were low involvement products.
3.5 Analysis Procedure

The data was analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)
version 12.0. Descriptive statistics such as mean and standard deviation were
generated to provide an overview of the data. Frequency distribution was used to
describe the characteristics of the consumers‟ general shopping behaviour
pattern as well as to profile the respondents‟ personal information. The
standardized multiple-regression analysis was used to examine the linear
relationship between the explanatory/dependent variables (quality, price, brand
name, product information, normative influence, informational influence,
household income, number of children) and the criterion/dependent variable
(repurchase intention). Correlation coefficient test and significant levels were
conducted to check the strength of the linear relationships between pairs of
variables. The determinant of correlation matrix was generated to provide the
information on the multicollinearity. Kaiser‟s criterion (KMO) and Barlett‟s Test of
Sphericity was performed as a check to substantiate the appropriateness of
conducting a factor analysis and also to examine the sampling adequacy.
Cronbach‟s alpha coefficient was conducted to determine the items reliability and
internal consistency (Nunally, 1978; Malhotra, 2004).
130
Akir & Othman
4. Findings and Discussions
4.1 Respondents’ Profile

Out of 1000 respondents interviewed through mall intercept, only 500 sets of the
questionnaires were fully completed and useable in the analysis which yielded a
response rate of 50 percent. The research findings revealed that 259 (51.8%) of
the respondents were female and 241 (48.1%) were male. The research also
indicated that 172 (34.4%) of the respondents were aged between 25 to 29 years
old, followed by 107 (21.4%) aged between 20 to 24 years old, 87 (17.4%) of the
respondents were within the age range of 30 to 34 years old, 51 (10.2%) of them
were aged between 35 to 39 years old, 34 (6.8%) were aged between 40 to 44
years old, 22 (4.4%) of them aged below 20 years old, while 13 (2.6%) of them
were aged between 45 to 49 years and the other 14 (2.6%) of them were 50
years old and above. In terms of household income, the research indicated that
the household monthly income of the respondents were mostly within the range
of RM2000 to RM4999 (197 or 39.4%), followed by 129 (24%) between RM5000
to RM6999, 81 (16.2%) below RM1000, 52 (10.4%) between RM7000 to
RM8999, 24 (4.8%) between RM9000 to RM9999, and only 26 (5.2%) earned
above RM10 000. Most of the respondents, that is, 169 (33.8%) of them had
college diploma level of education, followed by a university degree, that is, 143
(28.6%) of them, 108 (21.6%) of them had secondary level of education, five
(1%) of them had primary level education, and 18 (3.6%) had other educational
level.
Essentially, the majority of the respondents, that is, 246 (49.2%) were single, 167
(33.4%) of them were married with children, 80 (16%) of them were married
without children, and seven (1.4%) of them were divorced/widowed or single-
parents. The majority of the respondents were Christians (248 or 49.6%), 168
(33.6%) of them were Muslims, 67 (13.4%) were Buddhist/Taoist, 11 (2.2%) of
them were Hindu and six (0.2%) of them were from other beliefs. Most of the
respondents had 3 to 4 children in their household (223 or 44.6%), 145 (29%)
had 5 to 6 children, 82 (16.4%) of them had between 1 to 2 children, and 50
(10%) of them had 7 or more children. On average most of the respondents were
religious people, that is, 411 (82.2%) of them stating that their strength of
religious orientation were between average and strong. While the other 63
(12.6%) of them and another 26 (5.2%) of them stated that their strength of
religious orientation were between very strong and very weak, respectively.
Please refer to Appendix 2 for the detailed breakdown of the respondents‟
characteristics.
4.2 Respondents’ Shopping Behaviour Pattern

In terms of buying decision, the research indicated that a majority of the
respondents ranked buying fashion clothing as their most important purchase
decision, followed by personal computer, branded perfume, instant noodle,
instant coffee, and stated buying detergent as the least important purchase
decision. This finding seems to be consistent with past studies that contended
any purchase which is used publicly such as fashion clothing (rank 1, mean -
1.72) is considered as an important decision by consumers (Clerk and Belk,
131
Akir & Othman
1979). Buying personal computer (Rank 2, mean - 1.88) was also considered as
an important decision. This could be due to its expensive price which requires the
consumers to search for information and opinion from others. The next important
purchase decision is buying branded perfume (rank 3, mean - 2.43), but its usage
is invisible to the public as compared to fashion clothing. However, in general,
buying low involvement products such as instant noodle, instant coffee and
detergent were not considered as an important decision by consumers because
these products are bought frequently and do not require considerable effort for
information search in the consumer‟s decision making process.
In conclusion, the results of the findings were consistently in line with the notion
that consumers tend to be more involved when they decide to purchase
expensive items and the products that they purchase display social visibility in
comparison to purchasing inexpensive, frequently purchased items and if the
usage of the product is not publicly visible (Lamb, Hair, and McDaniel, 2001,
Kotler, 2003; Blackwell, Miniard, and Engel, 2001; Business World, 2001; Asseal,
1987; Clarke and Belk, 1979). Examples of such products include instant noodle,
instant coffee and detergent, which are considered as low involvement products
and perfume which is used by consumers but not publicly visible. In relation to
brand preference, a majority of the respondents mentioned Acer as the most
preferred brand for personal computer/laptop, followed by Dell and Compact.
While fashion clothing (designer label) most preferred was Levi‟s followed by
Nike, Adidas and Nicole. Calvin Klein was considered as the most preferred
brand for branded perfume, followed by Avon, Silky, and Body Shop. Next,
Breeze was the most preferred brand for detergent, followed by Daia and Fab.
For instant noodle, Maggie was the most preferred brand, followed by Indomee,
and Mee Sedap. While for instant coffee, Nescafe was the most preferred brand,
followed by Kapal Api and Indocafe.
Table 1: Most Important Purchase Decision Ranked According to Products‟ Category
No. Products‟ Category Mean Score Rank

1. Fashion Clothing 1.72 1
2. Personal Computer / Laptop 1.88 2
3. Branded Perfume 2.43 3
4. Instant Noodle 4.84 4
5. Instant Coffee 5.03 5
6. Detergent 5.11 6
Note: Most important given rank “1” and least important rank “6”
In terms of place, a majority of the respondents stated that they purchased their
personal computer at departmental stores, followed by specialty stores, malls,
small retail shops and other shops in that order. Most respondents went to
departmental stores and malls to purchase their fashion clothing and only a few
preferred to go to small retail shops. Similarly, most of the respondents preferred
to shop at departmental stores, supermarkets and malls to buy their branded
perfume, and only a few of them went to small retailers and other shops.
However, for low involvement products such as detergent, instant noodle and
instant coffee, most of the respondents stated that they preferred to go to
supermarkets to purchase them.
132
Akir & Othman
For most high involvement products such as personal computer, fashion clothing,
and branded perfume, a majority of the respondents preferred to purchase them
during special occasion, for example, during sales or promotion periods
throughout the year. For low involvement products such as detergent, instant
noodle and instant coffee, the respondents preferred to buy them either weekly or
monthly. The majority of the respondents, who purchased high involvement
products such as personal computer/laptop, fashion clothing, and branded
perfume, stated that they preferred foreign brand manufactured in foreign
countries. In contrast, for low involvement products such as instant noodle,
instant coffee and detergent, a majority of the respondents mentioned that they
preferred to buy local brands manufactured domestically. The reason for buying
foreign brands for high involvement products like personal computer, fashion
clothing and branded perfume is mainly because they believed that foreign
brands were of high quality as compared to local brands. In addition these
products carry established brand names and are reasonably priced. In contrast,
for low involvement products like instant noodle, instant coffee and detergent,
most of the respondents stated that they preferred local brands because the price
was cheap as compared to foreign brands. On average most of the respondents
spent between RM1000 to RM3000 to purchase a personal computer/laptop. This
explains the popularity of Acer brand among the respondents because the market
price for most Acer brand is around RM2000 to RM3000. For fashion clothing and
branded perfume, the majority of the respondents stated that they spent between
RM100 to RM200 to buy them. In contrast, for low involvement products such as
instant noodle, instant coffee and detergent, most of the respondents spent on
average between RM10 to RM21 to purchase them. For high involvement
products such as personal computer/laptop and branded perfume, most of the
respondents stated that they purchased them only once in the past 12 months.
However, for fashion clothing, they purchased them between one to six times in
the past 12 months. In contrast, most of the respondents buy instant noodle,
instant coffee and detergent more than six times in the past 12 months.
The majority of the respondents stated that they bought both category of products
(high and low involvement products) mainly for their own use, and only a few of
them mentioned that they bought the products as „gift giving‟ and for other
purposes. Most of the respondents mentioned that they frequently saw
advertisements on personal computer/laptop, fashion clothing, and branded
perfume in magazines, brochures/catalogs, TV ads, and newspapers. While
advertisements for detergent, instant noodle, and instant coffee were frequently
advertised on TV, radio, newspapers, and a few in magazines. The respondents‟
decisions to purchase or not to purchase a personal computer/laptop were
influenced by ads found in brochures/catalogs, magazines and newspapers as
compared to other medium of advertisements. For fashion clothing and branded
perfume, most of the respondents stated that their decisions were influenced by
ads found in magazines and brochures/catalogs, and also influenced by TV ads,
such as Silky brand for perfume. For most low involvement products, such as
instant noodle, instant coffee, and detergent, their decisions were influenced by
TV ads as compared to other medium of advertisements. The opinion of
significant others (such as family members, friends, spouses, siblings, children,
salespersons and the like) that influenced on the decisions of the respondents to
purchase or not to purchase a personal computer/laptop were influenced by
133
Akir & Othman
friends, followed by family members and salespersons. Decisions on fashion

clothing and branded perfume were influenced by friends, spouses, family
members and salespersons. In contrast, for low involvement products such as
instant noodle, instant coffee, and detergent, their decisions were influenced by
their spouses, followed by family members and lastly, friends. Please refer to
Appendix 3 for the summary of the respondents‟ shopping behaviour pattern.
4.3 Descriptive Statistics, Correlation Coefficients and

Significance Level
A number of statistical tests were conducted to determine the basic information
on mean, standard deviation, and N, which are useful to identify the presence of
outliers and the adequacy of sample size. The univariate descriptive statistic was
conducted and the results revealed that there was non-existence of outliers with
standard deviation for all the sets of variables lay within +3 and -3 range
(Zikmund, 2000; Malhotra, 2004). The correlation coefficients and significance
level were tested to determine the strength of linear relationships between the
pairs of variables. The results showed that all the sets of variables correlated well
and the results yielded correlation coefficient between 0.30 and below 0.70
among variables (Pallant, 2007), and had positive significant relationship at 0.01
level (sig.- 1-tailed). This information is important to determine whether variables
that are not correlated should be excluded for factor analysis. The determinant of
the correlation matrix provided the information on multicollinearity. The presence
of highly correlated variables will lead to a problem of multicollinearity. However,
a check on Tolerance (TOL) indicates a value of more than 0.10 and the
Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) is less than 10 for all the independent variables,
which confirms that the possibility of multicollinearity is not detected (Pallant,
2007) - see Table 2 and Table 3 below.
4.4 Standardized Multiple Regression Analysis – Testing the

Relationship between Explanatory/Dependent Variables
and Criterion/Dependent variable
To determine which of the explanatory/dependent variables (quality, price, brand
name, product information, household income, number of children and
interpersonal influence) included in the model contributed to the prediction of the
criterion/dependent variable (repurchase intention), a standardized multiple
regression analysis using enter method was conducted for the different products
categories used in the research. The detailed results of the tested model are
explained and provided in Table 2 and Table 3. Column (i) depicts the product
category used in the research and column (ii) shows the sets of explanatory
variables/independent variables. Column (iii) shows the beta value which
indicates the importance of each explanatory variable in terms of the contribution
of each variable in predicting the criterion variable, when the variance explained
by all other variables in the model is controlled for. Column (v) shows the
significant value of the relationship between the explanatory variables and the
criterion variable. This column shows whether or not each of the explanatory
variable, is making a statistically significant unique contribution to the equation.
Column R-squared shows how much of the variance in the dependent variable is
134
Akir & Othman
explained by the model. This R-squared is multiplied by 100 and will yield the
percentage of the variance.
The resulted standardized multiple regression as shown in Table 2, for fashion

clothing, beta values in the model showed that quality contributed 0.192, price
contributed 0.096, brand name contributed – 0.280, product information
contributed 0.208 and household income contributed – 0.082 in explaining the
consumers‟ repurchase intention, indicating that these variables made a unique
contribution to explaining the dependent variable, when the variance explained by
all other variables in the model is controlled for. The other variables, that is,
normative influence (beta value -0.048; p-value = -0.933), informational influence
(beta value -0.067; p-value = 0.155) and number of children (beta value -0.017;
p-value = 0.635) and the relationship between these variables and repurchase
intention was not significant, indicating that these variables made less
contribution in explaining the repurchase intention. As depicted in the same table
(Table 2), the relationship between quality, price, brand name, product
information, household income and repurchase intention was significant (p-value
for quality = 0.000, p-value for price = 0.001, p-value for brand name = 0.000, p-
value for product information = 0.000 and household income p-value = 0.027),
indicating that these variables made a unique, statistically significant contribution
to the prediction of repurchase intention. The R-squared shows that 59.9% of the
variance in the dependent variable is explained by the model.
Meanwhile for personal computer, as shown in Table 2, beta values revealed that
quality contributed – 0.235, brand name contributed – 0.239, product information
contributed – 0.238 and informational influence contributed – 0.239 in explaining
repurchase intention and the relationship was significant (quality p-value = 0.000,
brand name p-value = 0.000, product information p-value = 0.000 and
informational p-value = 0.000), indicating that quality, brand name, product
information and informational influence made a unique, and statistically
significant contribution to the prediction of repurchase intention. The other
variables such as price, normative influence, household income, and number of
children made less contribution and did not contribute significantly in explaining
repurchase intention. The R-squared shows that 64.1% of the variance is
explained by the model. On the other hand, as depicted in Table 2, for branded
perfume, beta values showed that brand name contributed 0.301, price
contributed 0.153, quality contributed 0.120, and product information contributed
0.119 in explaining repurchase intention. The result also revealed that there was
a significant relationship between the independent variables and dependent
variable (brand name p-value = 0.000, price p-value = 0.001, quality p-value =
0.004 and product information p-value = 0.027), indicating that these variables
made a unique, statistically significant contribution to the prediction of repurchase
intention. The other variables such as informational influence, household income
and number of children made less contribution and did not statistically have a
significant contribution in explaining repurchase intention. The R-squared shows
that 55.3% of the variance in the dependent variable is explained by the model.
Hence, for high involvement products, the hypotheses H1a, H1b, H1c, H1d, H1f
and H1g below were supported for the types of product category as specified in
the brackets.
135
Akir & Othman
H1a: There is a relationship between quality attribute importance and a

consumer‟s repurchase intention (fashion clothing, personal computer and
branded perfume).
consumer‟s repurchase intention (fashion clothing and branded perfume).
branded perfume).
H1d: There is a relationship between product information attribute importance
and a consumer‟s repurchase intention (fashion clothing, personal
computer and branded perfume).
repurchase intention (personal computer).
H1g: There is a relationship between a household income and a consumer‟s
repurchase intention (fashion clothing).
However, it was also indicated that the relationship between normative influence,
number of children in a household, informational influence, household income
and repurchase intention was not significant, indicating that the hypotheses
below were not supported for the types of product category being investigated in
the research as specified in the brackets.
H1e: There is a relationship between normative influence and a consumer‟s

repurchase intention (fashion clothing, personal computer and branded
perfume).
H1h: There is a relationship between a number of children in a household and a
branded perfume).
repurchase intention (Fashion clothing and branded perfume)
As depicted in Table 2, it can be concluded that when a consumer decides to

repurchase a high involvement product, they would consider the quality of the
product, the price of the product, the brand name of the product, product
information and as well as seeking information from others who are significant to
them especially when they purchase expensive items, in this case, purchasing a
personal computer. The other attributes such as normative influence, income and
number of children do not dominantly influence their decision to repurchase. In
terms of low involvement products, as depicted in Table 3, beta values showed
that quality (beta value –0.165, p-value = 0.002), price (beta value – 0.183, p-
value = 0.006), brand name (beta value – 0.293, p-value = 0.000), and number of
children (beta vale – 0.096, p-value = 0.011) made a unique, statistically
significant contribution to explaining the dependent variable, when the variance
explained by all other variables in the model is controlled for. This is particularly
true for instant noodle but for instant coffee and detergent only price (beta value –
0.222, 0.272; p-value = 0.001, 0.000) and brand name (beta value – 0.172,
0.340; p-value = 0.001, 0.000) made a unique, statistically significant contribution
to the prediction of repurchase intention. The other variables made less
contribution and did not statistically significantly contribute to the prediction of
repurchase intention. The R-squared showed that 56.5% (instant noodle), 53.6%
136
Akir & Othman
(instant coffee) and 49.9% (detergent) of the variance were explained by the
model. In contrast, for low involvement products, the following hypotheses were
supported particularly for instant coffee and detergent except for instant noodle
which showed hypotheses H1a and H1h were also supported. The other
hypotheses (H1a, H1d, H1e, H1f, H1g and H1h) were not supported (instant
coffee and detergent).

consumer‟s repurchase intention (instant coffee and detergent).
consumer‟s repurchase intention (instant coffee and detergent).
As shown in Table 3, it can be concluded that when a consumer decides to

repurchase a low involvement product the most important factors that influence
his or her decision are price and brand name, besides quality. In this specific
case, other factors such as product information, interpersonal influence, income
and number of children did not significantly influence a consumer‟s purchase
decision. This finding is found to be inconsistent with Jones and Zufryden (1980)
in which demographic variables were reported to significantly contribute to the
prediction of brand choice or purchase. This could be due to the limited number
of explanatory variables entered in their model equation.
137
Akir & Othman
Table 2: Standardized Regression Coefficients Model
Products Variables Standardized Collinearity Statistics

Category Coefficients
Beta t-value Sig. Tolerance VIF
p-value
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii)
Quality 0.192 4.319 0.000** 0.659 1.517
Fashion Price 0.096 2.170 0.031* 0.670 1.493
clothing Brand Name 0.280 4.873 0.000** 0.396 2.528
Product Information 0.208 4.873 0.000** 0.522 1.918
Normative Influence -0.046 -2.933 -0.933 0.546 1.831
Informative Influence -0.067 -1.421 0.156 0.580 1.724
Household Income 0.082 2.225 0.027* 0.959 1.042
Number of Children 0.017 0.474 0.635 0.989 1.011
R-squared = 0.599 (59.9%) F-value=34.372

Beta t Sig. Tolerance VIF
p-value
Personal Quality 0.235 5.126 0.000** 0.569 1.758
Computer Price 0.033 0.712 0.477 0.561 1.784
Brand name 0.239 4.488 0.000** 0.423 2.364

Product Information 0.238 4.680 0.000** 0.463 2.160
Normative Influence 0.056 1.267 0.206 0.635 1.574
Informative Influence 0.239 5.464 0.000** 0.629 1.591
Household Income 0.048 1.381 0.168 0.974 1.027
R-squared = 0.641 (64.1%) F-value=42.908
p-value
Quality 0.120 2.879 0.004* 0.812 1.231
Branded Price 0.153 3.439 0.001* 0.710 1.483
Perfume Brand Name 0.301 5.443 0.000* 0.462 2.166
Product Information 0.119 2.222 0.027* 0.531 1.885
Normative Influence 0.059 1.135 0257 0.552 1.812
Informative Influence 0.056 1.110 0.268 0.678 1.474
R-squared = 0.553 (55.3%) F-value=27.097
*Dependent variable - repurchase intention; ** Significant at <0.01; * Significant at <0.05
138
Akir & Othman
Table 3: Standardized Regression Coefficients Model

p-value
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv)
Quality 0.165 3.115 0.002* 0.495 2.022
Instant Noodle Price 0.183 2.740 0.006* 0.311 3.216
Brand Name 0.293 4.906 0.000** 0.388 2.578
Product Information -0.014 -0.261 0.794 0.489 2.045
Normative Influence -0.081 -1.287 0.199 0.353 2.835
Number of Children 0.96 2.554 0.011* 0.982 1.018
R-squared = 0.565 (56.5%) F-Value=28.854
p-value
Quality 0.066 1.168 0.243 0.458 2.183
Price 0.222 3.321 0.001** 0.325 3.076
Instant Coffee Brand Name 0.272 4.334 0.000** 0.368 2.720
Product Information 0.040 0.732 0.465 0.487 2.054
R-squared = 0.536 (53.6%) F-value=24.699
p-value
Quality 0.076 1.751 0.081 0.804 1.243
Price 0.172 3.749 0.000** 0.730 1.371
Detergent Brand Name 0.340 6.461 0.000** 0.552 1.810
Product Information 0.019 0.390 0.697 0.638 1.567
Informative Influence -0.010 -1.176 0.860 0.465 2.151
R-squared = 0.499 (49.9%) F-value=20.383
*Dependent variable - repurchase intention; ** Significant at <0.01; * Significant at <0.05
In conclusion, since F-values are well above 1 and at least one of the
independent variables is significantly related to dependent variables, hence the
model can be considered as valid (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, and Black, 1995;
Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson and Tatham, 2006; Pallant, 2007). In addition, inter-
item consistency reliability test (Cronbach‟s alpha coefficient) was performed to
identify the consistency of the respondents‟ answers to all the research items.
The result reveals high reliability scores among all factors with Cronbach‟s alpha
coefficient well above the recommended threshold of 0.70 and 0.80 (Nunally,
1978; Malhotra, 2004) - Please refer to Appendix 4. Principal component factor
analysis was conducted and the overall measure of sampling adequacy for the
set variables included in the analysis for each product category met the Kaiser‟s
criterion (KMO) and all the sets of variables exceeded the minimum requirement
of 0.50 and significant Barlett‟s Test of Sphericity was revealed (see Appendix 5).
5. Summary and Conclusions

Essentially, the research indicated that the majority of the consumers who
patronize the departmental stores, supermarkets, malls and hypermarkets were
young executives, single people with an income between RM2000 to RM4999.
139
Akir & Othman
The findings of the research also suggested that consumers were consistently
brand conscious and preferred to buy established brands especially for
expensive products, for example, personal computer and branded perfume and
also if the product that they bought was highly visible and displayed status
connotation such as fashion clothing (Asseal, 1987; Sheth and Mittal, 2004).
Similarly, besides price, consumers also considered brand name as one of the
driving forces in their decision to purchase or repurchase a product even if the
products that they purchased were inexpensive items such as instant noodle,
instant coffee and detergent. Interestingly, when the consumers decided to
repurchase certain products, regardless of whether those products were
categorized as low or high involvement products, normative and informational
influence did not greatly influence their repurchase decision except for personal
computer in which informational influence strongly influenced the consumers
repurchase decision. This scenario could be due to the consumer‟s prior product
knowledge or past experiences with the products and these two factors were not
considered in the objective of this research.
It was also indicated that consumers emphasized more on product information

and acquired information from others for high involvement products particularly
personal computer as well as perfume which they thought might contain
substances that are prohibited by their religious beliefs. This could be due to the
fact that the consumers in the research were generally religious people,
especially Muslims who are very sensitive to the issue of “halal” products and as
such they would like to know the contents of the products either through their own
experiences or by getting the information from others whom they admire or trust.
The findings of this research supported the notion that consumer behavioural
theories may be applicable globally but consumers‟ tastes, preferences and
purchase decisions could be regionally or locally oriented and further influenced
by their cultural background and norms (Schutte and Ciarlante, 1998).
In addition, consumers tend to be quality conscious specifically for high

involvement products and price sensitive when it concerns low involvement
products. They would prefer to buy low involvement products which are locally
manufactured. In contrast, they would prefer foreign products when they decided
to buy high involvement products because they believed that products such as
personal computer, fashion clothing and branded perfume, besides established
brand names, are also of high quality as compared to locally made products. The
results of this research suggested that the forces that motivate consumers‟
intention to repurchase were driven by established brand names, quality, product
information and informational influence from significant others such as friends,
spouses, and family members, particularly for high involvement products
(personal computer). For low involvement products (such as instant noodle and
instant coffee) consumer repurchase intention were mainly driven by the quality
and the price of the products, besides conforming to spouses‟ choices. It was
also noted that consumers tend to purchase high involvement products mostly
during sales promotion and their purchase decision was partly influenced by
advertisements in magazines, catalogs and brochures. On the other hand, the
consumers‟ decision to purchase low involvement products was mainly
influenced by TV advertisements.
140
Akir & Othman
The findings of this research implied that, regardless of whether the products
that the consumers purchase are low involvement products or high involvement
products, prior concerns of the businesses and managers or marketers are: (1)
consumers‟ involvement in the purchase process; (2) the importance that they
place on certain product attributes; and (3) how significantly others influence their
decision making process prior to the purchase, after the purchase is completed
and the post-purchase behaviour. Hence, this research is beneficial to managers
and marketers to streamline their marketing plans and strategies, in order to
capture the mind and heart of the consumers at large. As such, it is imperative for
marketers and managers to understand consumer behaviour beyond the
marketing stimuli but at the same time should also consider the consumers‟
cultural diversity, customs and norms. Nonetheless, there is an indication that this
research supports the general conception that consumers pay less attention to
price if: (1) other alternatives such as brand names, quality and other more
influential attributes are available (Dodds and Monroe, 1989; Dodds, Monroe, and
Grewal, 1991); and (2) they consider the importance of seeking others‟ opinion in
their choice decision.
In conclusion, the findings of this research has potential input to management

and marketing decision process as well as contribute to the body of knowledge in
terms of exploratory model building, methodology application, consumer
behaviour and marketing management fields.
References
Aaker, J.L 1997, „Dimensions of brand personality‟, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 34 (3), pp. 347-356.
Aggarwal, P 2003, „The effects of brand relationship norms on consumer
research‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 31 (1), pp. 87-101.
Assael, H 1987, Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action, Third Edition, Kent
Publishing Company, Boston, Massachusetts.
Al-Hawari, M and Ward, T 2006, „The effect of automated service quality on
Australian bank‟s financial performance and the mediating role of
customer satisfaction‟, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 24 (2), pp.
127-147, Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0263-4503.
Aliman, K 2005, Consumer brand choice, Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Faculty
of Business and Accountancy, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur.
Alreck, PL and Settle, RB 1999, „Strategies for building consumer brand
Preference‟, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 8 (2), pp. 130-
144.
Andaleeb, SS and Conway, C 2006, „Customer satisfaction in the restaurant
industry: an examination of the transaction-specific model‟, Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol. 20 (1), pp. 3-11, Emerald Group Publishing
Limited ISSN 0857-6045.
Attaman, B and Ulengin, B 2003, „A note on the effect of brand image on sales‟,
Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 12 (4), pp. 237-250.
Avery, RJ 1996, „Determinants of search for non-durables goods: an empirical
assessment of the economics of information theory‟, The Journal of
Consumer Affairs, Vol. 30 (2), pp. 390-420.
Baker, W, Hutchinson, JW, Moore, D and Nedungadi, P 2004, „Brand
141
Akir & Othman
familiarity and advertising: effects on the evoked set and brand

preference‟, Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Global, August 8, 2004.
Banks, S 1950, „The relationships between preference and purchase of brands‟,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 15, pp. 145-157.
Beatty, SE and Smith, SM 1987, „External search effort: an investigation across
several product categories‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14, pp.
83-95.
Bearden, WO, Netemeyer, RG and Teele, JE 1989, „Measurement of
consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence‟, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 15, pp. 473-481.
Bearden, WO, and Etzel, MJ 1982, „Reference group influence on product
and brand purchase decisions‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9
(2), pp. 183-197.
Beharrel, B and Dension, TJ 1995, „Involvement in routine food shopping
context‟, British Food Journal, Vol. 97 No. 4, pp. 24-29. MCB University
Press Limited, 0007070X.
Belk, KH 1979, „The effects of positive and negative arousal upon attitude, belief
acceptance, behavioral intention, and behavior‟, Journal of Social
Psychology, pp. 239-251.
Belk, RW and Clarke, K 1979, „The effects of product involvement and task
definition on anticipated consumer effort‟, Journal of Advances in
Consumer Research, Vol. 6 (1), pp. 313-317.
Bistow, DN and Asquith, JAL 1999, „What‟s in a name? An intra-cultural
investigation of Hispanic and Anglo consumer preferences and the
importance of brand name‟, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol.
8 (3), pp. 185-203.
Biswas, A and Sherrell, LD 1993, „The influence of product knowledge and brand
name on internal price standards and confidence‟, Psychology and
Marketing, Vol. 10 (1), pp. 31-46.
Blackwell, RD, Miniard, PW and Engel, JF 2004, Consumer Behavior, Ninth
Edition, South-Western Thomson Learning, Ohio, USA.
Blair, ME and Innis, ED 1996, „The effects of product knowledge on evaluation of
warranted brands‟, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 13 (5), pp. 445-456.
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
Bloch, PH and Bruce, GD 1980, „Product involvement as leisure behavior‟,
Louisiana University, California State University-Fullerton, USA. Retrieved
August 8, 2004, from EBSCOHOST/Business Source Premier database.
Bloch, PH 1981, „An exploration into the scaling of consumers‟ involvement with a
product class‟, Portland State University, in K. Monroe (ed.), Advances in
Consumer Research, Vol. 8, pp. 61-65.
Bloch, PH 1986, „Product Enthusiasm: many questions, a few answers‟, Journal
of Advances in Consumer Behavior, Vol. 13 (1), pp. 539-542.
Bloch, P, Sherrel, D and Ridgeway, N 1986, „Consumer search: an extended
Framework‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 13, pp. 119-126.
Brady, MK and Heskel, J 2005, „The importance of brand cues in tangible
services industries: an application to investment services. Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol. 19 (6), pp. 401-410.
Bristow, DN, Schneider, KC and Schuler, DK 2002, „The brand dependence
142
Akir & Othman
scale: measuring consumers‟ use of brand name to differentiate among

product alternatives‟, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 11 (6),
pp. 343-356.
Brown, WF 1950, „The determination of factors influence brand choice‟, Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 14, pp.699-706. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Global,
August 8, 2004.
Brucks, M 1985, „The effects of product class knowledge on information search
Behavior‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 12, pp. 1-16.
Burnkrant, RE and Cousineau, A 1975, „Informational and normative social
influence in buyer behavior‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 2 (3),
pp. 206-211.
Calder, BJ and Burnkrant, RE 1977, „Interpersonal influence on consumer
behavior: an attribution theory approach‟, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 4, pp. 29-38.
Catherine, C, Richard, E, Suzanne, R and Tracy, S. 1990, „The elaboration
likelihood model (EML): replications, extensions and some conflicting
findings‟, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 17 (1), pp. 231-236.
Chen, TY, Chang, PL and Chang, HS 2005, „Price, brand cues, and banking
customer value‟, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 23 (3), pp.
273-291.
Churchill, Jr GA 1979, „A paradigm for developing better measures of
marketing constructs‟, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. xvi, pp. 64-73.
Clarke, K and Belk, RW 1979, „The effects of product involvement and task
definition on anticipated consumer effort‟, Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 6 (1), pp. 313-318.
Clarke, P 2006, „Christmas gift giving involvement‟, Journal of Consumer
Marketing, Vol. 23/5, pp. 283-291. Emerald Group Publishing Limited,
ISSN 0736-3761.
Corfman, KP and Lehmann, DR 1987, „Models of cooperative group
decision-making and relative influence: an experimental investigation of
family purchase decisions‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14, pp. 1-
13.
Curry, DJ and Riesz, PC 1988, „Prices and price / quality relationships: a
longitudinal analysis‟, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52, pp. 36-51.
Dahlen, M, Rasch, A and Rossengren, S 2003, „Love at first sight: A study of
website effectiveness‟, Journal of Advertising Research, pp. 25-33.
Dazed and confused, Businessworld, March 26, 2001. Retrieved from
http://www.yahoo.com, August 28, 2004.
Dean, DH 2004, „Evaluating potential brand associations through conjoint
analysis and market simulation‟, Journal of Product & Brand Management,
Vol. 13 (7), pp. 506-513.
Dickson, PR and Sawyer, AG 1990, „The price knowledge and search of
supermarket shoppers‟, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, pp. 42-53.
Dodds, WB and Monroe, KB 1985, „The effect of brand and price information
on subjective product evaluations‟, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol.
12, pp. 85-90.
Dodds, WB, Monroe, KB and Grewal, D 1991, „Effects of price, brand, and
store information on buyers‟ product evaluation‟, Journal of Marketing, Vol.
28, pp. 307-319.
Encalas, JE and Bettman, JR 2004, „Self-construal, reference groups, and
143
Akir & Othman
brand meaning‟, Retrieved August 8, 2004, from EBSCOHOST/Business

Source Premier database.
Encalas, JE and Bettman, JR 2003, „You are what they eat: the influence of
reference groups on consumer connections to brands‟, Journal of
Consumer Psychology, Vol. 13 (3), pp. 339-348.
Erdem, T, Swait, J and Louviere, J 2002, „The impact of brand credibility on
consumer price sensitivity‟, International Journal of Research in Marketing,
Vol. 19, pp. 1-19. Elsevier Services.
Erickson, GM and Johansson, JK 1985, „The role of price in multi-attribute
product evaluation‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 12, pp. 195-199.
Engel, F and Blackwell, RD 1982, Consumer Behavior, 4th ed., New York:
The Dryden Press.
Feltham, TS 1998, „Leaving home: brand purchase influences on young adults‟,
Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 15 (4), pp. 372-385.
Foxall, GR and Pallister, JG 1998, „Measuring purchase decision involvement
for financial services: comparison of the Zaichkowsky and Mittal scales‟,
International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 16 (5), pp. 180-194.
Fraizer, PA, Tix, AP and Baron, KE 2004, „Testing moderator and mediator
effects in counseling psychology research‟, Journal of Counseling, Vol. 51
(1), pp. 115-134.
Fugate, DL 1986, „The effects of manufacturer disclosure on consumer
perceptions of private brand grocery product attributes‟, The Journal of
Consumer Affairs, Vol. 20 (1), pp. 118-130.
Greenwald, AG and Leavitt, C 1984, „Audience involvement in advertising: four
Levels‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 11, pp.581-592.
Gensch, DH and Javalgi, RG 1987, „The influence of involvement on
disaggregate attribute choice models (1987)‟, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 14, pp. 71- 82.
Gordon, ME, McKeage, K and Fox, MA 1998, „Relationship marketing
effectiveness: the role of involvement‟, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 15
(5), pp. 443-459.John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Hair, JF, Anderson, RE, Tatham, RL and Black, WC 1995, Multivariate Data
Analysis with Readings, Fourth Edition, Prentice Hall International Edition,
Upper Saddle, New Jersey, USA.
Hair, JF, Black, WC, Babin, BJ, Anderson, RE and Tatham, RL 2006, Multivariate
Data Analysis, Sixth Edition, Pearson International Edition, Upper Saddle,
New Jersey, USA.
Hansen, T 2005, „Perspective on consumer decision making: an integrated
Approach‟, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 4, pp. 420-437.
Hawkin, DI, Best, RJ and Coney, KA 2004, Consumer Behavior: Building
Marketing Strategy, New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Hughes, D, Hutchins, R and Karathanassi, V 1998, „Purchase involvement
methodology and product profiles: the case of cheese products in Greece,
British Food Journal, Vol. 100 (7), 343-350.
Hussey, M and Duncombe, N 1999, „Projecting the right image: using

projective techniques to measure brand image‟, Qualitative Market
Research: An International Journal, Vol. 2 (1), pp. 22-30.
144
Akir & Othman
Jamal, A and Naser, K 2002, „Customer satisfaction and retail banking: an

assessment of some of the key antecedents of customer satisfaction in
retail banking‟, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 20 (4), pp.
146-160, MCB University Press, ISSN 0265-2323.
Johansson, K 2003, Global Marketing, Third Edition, McGraw Hill, USA.
Johnson, E and Russo, JE 1984, „Product familiarity and learning new
Information‟, Journal of Consumer research, Vol. 11, pp. 542-550.
Jones, JM and Zufryden, FS 1980, „Adding explanatory variables to a consumer
purchase behavior model: an exploratory study‟, Journal of Marketing, Vol.
xvii, pp. 323-334.
Jones, JM and Zufryden, FS 1982, „An approach for assessing demographic
and price influences on brand purchase behavior‟, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 46, pp. 36-46.
Kapferer, JN and Laurent, JN 1985/1986, „Consumer involvement profiles: a new
practical approach to consumer involvement‟, Journal of Advertising
Research, Vol. 5 (6), pp. 48-56.
Kassarjian, Harold, H 1981, „Low involvement: a second look‟, Advances in
Kelman, HC 1958, „Compliance, identification, and internalization: three
processes of attitude change‟, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 2
(1), pp. 51-61.
Kim, HS 2005, „Consumer profiles of apparel product involvement and values‟,
Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 9 (2), pp. 207-220.
Kinard, BR and Capella, ML 2006, „Relationship marketing: the influence of
consumer involvement on perceived service benefits‟, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 20/6, pp. 359-368. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.45.
Kinnear, T., and Taylor, J. (1996). Marketing Research: An Applied Research.
Fifth Edition, McGraw Hill, USA.
Krejcie, RB and Morgan, DW 1970, „Determining sample size for research
activities‟, Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 30, pp. 607-
610.
Kress, G 1988, Marketing Research, Third edition, Prentice Hall International,
USA.
Kropp, F, Lavack, AM and Holden, SJS 1999, „Smokers and beer drinkers:
values and consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence‟, Journal of
Consumer Marketing: Santa Barbara, Vol. 16 (6), pp. 536.
Kropp, F, Lavack, AM and Silvera, DH 2005, „Values and collective self-
esteem as predictors of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence
among university students‟, International Marketing Review, Vol. 22 (1),
pp. 7-33.
Kotler, P and Armstrong, G 1996, Principles of Marketing, Seven Edition,
International Edition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle, New Jersey, USA.
Kotler, P 2003, Marketing Managemen, Eleventh Edition, Prentice Hall, New
Jersey, USA.
Krugman, HE 1965, „The impact of television advertising: learning without
involvement‟, Public Opinion Quarterly, 29 (Fall), pp. 349-356.
Kwak, H, Zinkhan, GM and French, WA 2001, „Moral orientation: its relation to
product involvement and consumption‟, Advances in Consumer Research,
Vol. 28, pp. 431-436.
Latin, JM and Bucklin, RE 1989, „Reference effects of price and promotion on
145
Akir & Othman
brand choice behavior‟, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26, pp. 299-
310.
Latour, SA and Manraj, AK 1989, „Interactive impact of informational and
normative influence on donations‟, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 26
(3), pp. 327-335.
Lamb, CW, Hair, JF and McDaniel, C 2000, Marketing, South-Western
Thompson Learning, USA.
Lastovicka, JL and Gadner, DM 1978, „Low involvement versus high involvement
cognitive structures‟, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 5, pp. 87-92.
Laurent, G., and Kapferer, J.N. (1985). Measuring consumer involvement
profiles. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 22 (1), pp. 41-53.
Leavitt, C, Greenwald, AG and Obermiller, C 1981, „What is low involvement low
in?‟, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 8, ed. Kent Monroe,
Arlington, Va: Association for Consumer Research.
Levesque, T and McDougall, GHG 1996, „Determinants of customer satisfaction
in retail banking‟, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 14 (7), pp.
12-20.
Li, WK, Monroe, KB and Chan, DKS 1994, „The effects of country of origin,
brand, and price information: a cognitive-affective model of buying
intentions‟, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 21, pp. 449-456.
Lichtenstein, DR, Bloch, PH and Black, WC 1988, „Correlates of price
Acceptability‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15, pp. 243-252.
Lichtenstein, DR, Netemeyer, RG and Burton, S 1990, „Distinguishing
coupon proneness from value consciousness: an acquisition-transaction
utility theory perspective‟, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, pp. 54-67.
Lichtenstein, DR, Ridgway, NM and Netemeyer, RG 1993, „Price perceptions
and consumer shopping behavior: a field study‟, Journal of Marketing
Lippa, RA 1990, Introduction to Social Psychology, Wadsworth Incorporation,
California, USA.
Malhotra, NK 2002, Basic Marketing Research: Application to Contemporary
Issues, Prentice Hall, International Edition, Upper Saddle, New Jersey,
USA.
Malhotra, NK 2004, Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation, Fourth Edition,
Prentice Hall, International Edition, Upper Saddle, New Jersey, USA.
Mallalieu, L 1999, „An examination of influence in consumption and non-
consumption domains‟, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 26, pp.
196-202.
Martin, CL 1998, „Relationship marketing: a high-involvement product attribute
approach‟, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 7 (1), pp. 6-26.
Mittal, B 1994, „A study of the concept of effective choice mode for consumer
decisions‟, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 21, pp. 256-263.
Mittal, B and Lee, YS 1988, „Separating brand choice involvement from product
involvement via consumer involvement profiles‟, Advances in Consumer
Mittal, B 1989, „Measuring purchase decision involvement‟, Psychology and
Mitchell, A and Olsen, JC 1981, „Are products attributes beliefs the only mediator
of advertising effects on brand attitude‟ Journal of Marketing Research,
Vol. 18 (3), pp. 318-332.
146
Akir & Othman
Mitchell, AA 1981, „The dimensions of advertising involvement‟, Advances in

McDonald, WJ 1994, „Psychological associations with shopping: a moderator
variable perspective‟, Psychological and Marketing, Vol. 11 (6), pp. 549-
568, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
McDougall, GHG and Levesque, T 2000, „Customer satisfaction with services:
putting perceived value into equation‟, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol.
14 (5), pp. 392-410, MCB University Press, 0887-6045.
McColl-Kennedy, JR and Fetter Jr, RE 2001, „An empirical examination of the
involvement to external search relationship in services marketing‟, Journal
of Services Marketing, Vol. 15 (2), pp. 82-98. MCB University Press.
McWilliam, G 1997, „Low involvement brands: is the brand manager to blame?‟,
Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 15 (2), pp. 60-70.
Md. Sidin, S, Zawawi, D, Yee, WF and Hamzah, ZL 2004, „The effects of sex role
orientation on family purchase decision making in Malaysia‟, Journal of
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 21 (6), pp. 381-390. Emerald Group Publishing
Limited, 0736-3761.
Moore, WL and Lehmann, DR 1980, „Individual differences in search
behavior for a nondurable‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 7, pp.
296-307.
Mourali, M, Laroche, M and Pons, F 2005, „Individualistic orientation and
consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence‟, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 19 (3), pp. 164-173.
Mowen, JC and Minor, MS 2001, Consumer Behavior, Fifth Edition, Prentice Hall
Incorporation, New Jersey, USA.
Mueller, W 1991, „Who reads the labels?‟, American Demographics, January,
Vol. 13 (1), pp. 36-40.
Mueller, RD and Broderick, AJ 1995, „East European retailing: a consumer
Perspective‟, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,
Vol. 23 (1), pp. 32-40.
Muncy, JA 1990, „Involvement and perceived brand similarities/differences: the
need for process oriented models‟, Journal of Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 17 (1), pp. 144-147.
Netemeyer, RG, Bearden, WO and Teele, JE 1992, „Consumer susceptibility to
interpersonal influence and attributional sensitivity‟, Psychology &
Nunally, J 1978, Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.
Obermiller, C and Wheatley, JJ 2001, „Price effects on choice and perceptions
under varying conditions of experience, information, and beliefs in quality
differences‟, Retrieved August 8, 2004, from EBSCOHOST/Business
Source Premier database.
Ofir, C 2004, „Reexamining latitude of price acceptability and price threshold:
predicting basic consumer reaction to price‟, Journal of Consumer
Research Inc., Vol. 30, pp. 612-621.
Ogden, DT 2005, „Hispanic versus Anglo male dominance in purchase decision‟,
Journal of Product and Brand Management Vol. 14 (4), pp. 98-105.
Olsen, SO 2007, „Repurchase loyalty: the role of involvement and satisfaction‟,
Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 24 (4), pp.315-341, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
O‟Cass, A and Frost, H 2002, „Status brands: examining the effects of non-
147
Akir & Othman
product-related brand associations on status and conspicuous

consumption‟, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 11 (2), pp.
67-88.
Pallant, J 2007, SPSS: Survival Manual, Third edition, Allen and Unwin, NSW,
Australia.
Park, J, Ekinci, Y and Cobanoglu, C 2004, „An empirical analysis of internet
users‟ intention to purchase vacations online‟, Retrieved from
http://www.google.com.my/search, on August 8, 2004.
Park, B and Lee, MS 1989, „A causal model of consumer involvement‟,
Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 10, pp.363-389.
Park, C W and Lessig, VP 1977, „Students and housewives: differences in
susceptibility to reference group influence‟, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 4, (5), pp. 102-111.
Park, WC and Mittal, B 1985, „A theory of involvement in consumer behaviour:
problems and issues‟, in Sheth, J.N. (Ed.) Research in Consumer
Behaviour, Vol. 1, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 201-232.
Petty, RE and Cacioppo, JT 1980, „Effects of issue involvement as a moderator
of the effects on attitude of advertising content and context‟, University of
Missouri-Columbia, USA and University of Iowa, USA. Retrieved August 8,
2004, from EBSCOHOST/Business Source Premier database.
Petty, RE, Cacioppo, JT and Schumann, D 1983, „Central and peripheral
routes to advertising effectiveness: the moderating role of involvement‟,
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 10, pp. 135-146.
Putrevu, S and Lord, KR 1994, „Comparative and non-comparative
advertising: attitudinal effects under cognitive and affective involvement
conditions‟, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 23 (2), pp. 77-90.
Olorunniwo, F, Hsu, MK and Udo, GJ 2006, „Service quality, customer
satisfaction, and behavioral intentions in the service factory‟, Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol. 20 (1), pp. 59-72, Emerald Group Publishing
Limited, ISSN 0887-6045.
Olorunniwo, F and Hsu, MK 2006, „A typology analysis of service quality,
customer satisfaction and behavioral intentions in mass services‟,
Managing Service Quality, Vol. 16 (2), pp. 106-123, Emerald Group
Publishing Limited, 0960-4529.
Quester, PG, Karunaratna, A and Lim, AL 2003, „The product involvement/brand
loyalty link: an empirical examination‟, Journal of Product & Brand
Management, pp.1-8, Retrieved from http;//www.google.com, on August 8,
2004.
Quester, PG and Smart, J 1998, „The influence of consumption situation and
product involvement over consumers‟ use of product attribute‟, Journal of
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 15 (3), pp. 220-238.
Quester, P and Lim, AL 2003, „Product involvement/brand loyalty: is there a link?
Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 12 (1), pp. 22-38.
Ram, S and Jung, HS 1989, „The link between involvement, usage

innovativeness and product usage‟, Advances in Consumer Research,
Vol. 6, pp. 160-166.
Rao, AR and Monroe, KB 1989, „The effect of price, brand name, and store
148
Akir & Othman
name on buyers‟ perceptions of product quality: an integrative review‟,

Marketing Science Institute [working paper series, report no. 89],
Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, MA.
Ratchford, BT 1987, „New Insights about the FCB grid‟, Journal of Advertising
Research, August/September Issue, pp. 24-38.
Richins, ML and Bloch, PH 1986, „After the new wears off: the temporal
context of product involvement‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 13,
pp. 280-285.
Rothschild, ML 1979, „Perspectives on involvement: current problems and future
directions‟, University of Wisconsin, USA.
Rosa-Diaz, IM 2004, „Price knowledge: effects of consumers‟ attitudes towards
prices, demographics, and socio-cultural characteristics‟, Journal of
Product and Brand Management, Vol. 13(6), pp. 406-428. Emerald Group
Publishing limited.
Sharma, S, Shimp, AT and Shin, J 1995, „Consumer ethnocentrism: a test of
antecedents and moderators‟, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 23 (1).
Schewe, CD 1973, „Selected social psychological models for analyzing buyers‟,
Schiffmann, LG and Kanuk, LL 1998, Consumer Behavior, Fifth Edition, Prentice
Hall International Incorporation, New Jersey, USA.
Shiffmann, LG and Kanuk, LL 2004, Consumer Behavior, Eight Edition, Prentice
Hall Incorp. USA.
Sherif, M and H. Cantril 1947, The Psychology of Ego-Involvement, New York:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Sheth, JN and Mittal, B 2004, Consumer Behavior: A Managerial Perspective,
South-Western Thomson Learning, Ohio, USA.
Schutte, H and Ciarlante, D 1998, Consumer Behavior in Asia, Macmillan Press
Ltd. London, UK.
Solomon, MR 2004, Consumer Behavior, Buying, Having, Being, Sixth edition,
Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA.
Solomon, MR, Marshall, GW and Stuart, EW 2006, Marketing: Real People,
Real Choices, Fourth Edition. Pearson Prentice hall, New Jersey, USA.
Sproles, GB and Kendall, EL 1986, „A methodology for profiling consumers‟
decision-making styles‟, The Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol. 20, pp.
267-279.
Stafford, JE and Enis, BM 1969, „The price-quality relationship: an extension‟,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 6, pp. 456-458.
Stigler, G D 1961, „The economic of information‟, The Journal of Political
Economy, Vol. 69 (3), pp. 213-225.
Stone, RN 1984, „The marketing characteristics of involvement‟, Advances in
Consumer Research, Vol. 11, ed.Thomas C. Kinnear, Provo, UT:
Association for Consumer Research, pp. 210-215. Retrieved August 8,
2004, from EBSCOHOST/Business Premier Source database.
Tabachnick, BG and Fidell, LS 2007, Using Multivariate Statistics, Fifth Edition,
Pearson International Edition, Boston, USA.
Tarkiainen, A and Sundqvist, S 2005, „Subjective norms, attitudes and intentions
of Finnish consumers in buying organic food‟, British Food Journal, Vol.
107 (11), pp. 808-822.
Tellis, GJ and Geath, GJ 1990, „Best value, price-seeking, and price
149
Akir & Othman
aversion: the impact of information and learning on consumer choices‟,

Swinyard, WR 1993, „The effects of mood, involvement, and quality of store
experience on shopping intentions‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.
20, pp. 271-280.
Urbany, JE and Dickson, PR 1991, „Consumer normal price estimation:
market versus personal standards‟, Journal of Consumer Research Inc.,
Vol. 18, pp. 45-51.
Urbany, JE, Dickson, PR and Kalapurakal, R 1996, „Price search in the retail
grocery market‟, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60, pp. 91-104.
Warrington, P and Shim, S 2000, „An empirical investigation of the relationship
between product involvement and brand commitment‟, Psychology &
Marketing, Vol. 17 (9), pp. 761-782. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Webster, C and Faircloth, JB 1994, „The role of Hispanic ethnic identification
on reference group influence‟, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 21,
pp. 458-463.
Wickliffe, VP and Pysarchik, DT 2001, „A look at product attributes as
enhancers of group integration among US and Korean consumers‟,
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 29 (2), pp.
99-108.
William, FB 1950, „The determination of factors influencing brand choice‟, Journal
of Marketing, April, 1950, Vol. 1, pp. 699-706.
William, KC 1982, Behavioural Aspects of Marketing, Charted Institute of
Marketing, Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd, Oxford, UK.
William, T 2002, „Social class influences on purchase evaluation criteria, Journal
of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 19 (3), pp.249-276.
Winer, RS 1986, „A reference price model of brand choice for frequently
purchased products‟, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 13, pp. 250-
256.
Witt, RE 1969, „Informal social group influence on consumer brand choice‟,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 6, pp. 473-476.
Vanhuele, M and Dreze, X 2002, „Measuring the price knowledge shoppers
bring to the shop‟, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66, pp.72-85.
Verlegh, PWJ 1999, „In-groups, out-groups and stereotyping: consumer
behavior and social identity theory‟, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol.
26, pp. 162-164.
Vaughn, R 1980, „How advertising works: a planning model: putting it all
together‟, Foote, Cone & Belding Inc. Vol. 20 (5), pp. 27-33.
Zaickowwsky, JL 1985, „Measuring the involvement construct‟ Journal of
Zaichkowsky, JL 1987, „The personal involvement inventory: reduction, revision
and application to advertising‟, Discussion paper series, Faculty of
Business Administration, Simon Frazer University, B.C. Canada.
Zaichkowsky, JL 1994, „The personal involvement inventory: reduction, revision
and application to advertising‟, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 23, pp. 59-70.
Zeithaml, VA 1983, „Issues in conceptualizing and measuring consumer

response to price‟, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 10, pp. 612-
616.
150
Akir & Othman
Zeithaml, VA 1988, „Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-

end model and synthesis of evidence‟, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52, pp. 2-
22.
Zikmund, WG 2000, Business Research Methods, Sixth Edition, South-Western
Thomson Learning, USA.
Zinkhan, GM and Martin, CR 1982, „The attitudinal implications of a new
brand‟s name‟, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 9 (1), pp. 467-471.
Zinkhan, GM and French, WA 2001, „Moral orientation: its relation to product
involvement and consumption‟, Journal Advances in Consumer Research,
Vol. 28, pp. 431-436.
Zong, CT and Wildt, RA 1994, „Price, product information, and purchase
intention: an empirical study‟, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 22 (1), pp. 16-27.
Appendix
Appendix 1: Items used in the Research
Quality Dimension – 7 items
1. Getting very good quality is very important to me.

2. In general, I usually try to buy the best overall quality.
3. I make special effort to choose the very best quality products.
4. My standards and expectations for the products I buy are very high.
5. I shop quickly, buying the first product or brand I find that seems good enough.
6. A product doesn‟t have to be perfect, or the best, to satisfy me.*
7. I really don‟t give my purchases much thought or care.*
Price Dimension – 7 items
1. If other important factors remain the same, price is an important criterion for me.
2. Price is the most important factor on my decision to purchase or not to purchase.
3. The money saved by finding low prices is usually not worth the time and effort. *
4. I look carefully to find the best value for the money when selecting for a product/
brand.
5. The time it takes to find low prices is usually not worth the effort. *
6. It is important that I buy at sales prices.
7. The lower priced products/brands are usually my choice.
Brand Name Dimension – 7 items
1. When it comes to buying a product, I rely on brand names to help me choose

among the alternative products/brands.
2. I would be more likely to purchase a product that had a well-known brand name.
3. The brand name would play a significant role in my decision to purchase or not to
purchase.
4. When faced with deciding among two or more brands of product, I will depend on
the brand name of each product to help me make a choice.
5. If faced with choosing between two brands with similar features, I would select the
better known brand name.
6. The brand of a product is important to me when deciding which product/brand to
purchase.
7. Regardless of what features competing stores/shops may offer, I would buy the
brand of that I trust most.
151
Akir & Othman
Product Information dimension – 6 items
1. I will use the information provided by the shops when selecting for a product that I
want to purchase.
2. I am not willing to purchase without knowing the detailed information related to the
product that I buy.
3. The information regarding the products/brands that I buy usually helps me to make
decision on which products/brands to choose.
4. I think the availability of information provided by the shops is important to me when
purchasing a product/brand.
5. I often look at information about the products/brands that I buy before I purchase a
product/brand.
6. I will not purchase a product/brand if the shops fail to show me the information about
the product/brand.
Normative Influence dimension – 8 items
1. I rarely purchase the latest products/fashion styles until I am sure my friends

approve of them.
2. It is important that others like the products I buy.
3. When buying products/brands, I generally purchase those brands that I think others
will approve of.
4. If other people can see me using a product, I often purchase the brand they expect
me to buy.
5. I like to know what brands make good impressions on others.
6. I achieve a sense of belonging by purchasing the same brands that others
purchase.
7. If I want to be like someone, I often try to buy the same brands that they buy.
8. I often identify with other people by purchasing the same brands they purchase.
Informational Influence – 4 items
1. To make sure I buy the right product or brand, I often observe what others are
buying and using.
2. If I have a little experience with a product or brand, I often ask my friends about the
product/brand.
3. I often consult other people to help me choose the best alternative available from a
product class.
4. I frequently gather information from friends or family about a product before I buy.
Note: Measured using a 7-point Likert Like scales were used anchored with 1 =
strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree - adapted from Sproll and Kendall (1986),
Lichtenstein, Ridgway, and Netemeyer (1993), Bristow, Schneider, and Schuler
(2002), Aliman (2005), Bearden, Netemeyer, and Teele (1989), Kropp, Lavack, and
Silvera (2005)
Repurchase intention – 8 items
1. I feel a commitment to continue buying this product/brand.

2. I feel loyalty to this product/brand.
3. I intend to buy this product again.
4. I plan to buy this product/brand in future.
5. This product/brand pleases me.
6. This product/brand satisfies me.
7. I am happy with this product/brand.
8. Buying this product/brand in the future would be a wise choice.
Note: Measured using a 7-point Likert Like scales with 1 = strongly disagree,
and 7 = strongly agree - adapted from Levesque and McDougall (1996).
152
Akir & Othman
Appendix 2: Respondents‟ Profile
No. Demographic Variables Frequency (N) Percent (%)

1. Gender
Male 241 48.10
Female 259 51.80
500 100.00
2. Race
Malay 157 31.40
Chinese 127 25.40
Iban 92 18.40
Bidayuh 88 17.60
Indian 11 2.20
Others 25 5.00
500 100.00
3. Age
Below 20 years old 22 4.40
Between 20 to 24 years old 107 21.40
50 years old and above 14 2.80
500 100.00
4. Occupation
Clerical / supervisory 107 21.40
Managerial / Administrative 164 32.80
Professional 67 13.40
Academician 79 15.80
Self-employed / Entrepreneurs 53 10.60
Others 30 6.00
500 100.00
5. Employment Organizations
Private sectors 171 34.20
Government / public sectors 254 50.80
Self-employment / Entrepreneur 63 12.60
Others 12 2.40
500 100.00
6. Income (self)
Below RM1000 72 14.40
RM1000 to RM2999 254 50.80
RM3000 to RM3999 122 24.40
RM4000 to RM4999 33 6.60
RM5000 to RM5999 12 2.40
RM6000 to RM6999 3 0.60
RM7000 and above 4 0.80
500 100.00
7. Income (household)
Below RM2000 81 16.20
RM2000 to RM4999 197 39.40
RM5000 to RM6999 120 24.00
RM7000 to RM8999 52 10.40
RM9000 to RM9999 24 4.80
RM10000 and above 26 5.20
500 100.00
8. Education level
Primary 5 1.00
Secondary 108 21.60
HSC / STPM 57 11.40
153
Akir & Othman
College Diploma 169 33.80

University Degree 143 28.60
(undergraduate/postgraduate)
Others 18 3.60
500 100.00
9. Marital status
Single 246 49.20
Married without children 80 16.00
Married with children 167 33.40
Divorced / widowed (single- 7 1.40
parents) 500 100.00
10. Religion
Muslim 168 33.60
Hindu 11 2.20
Budhist / Taoist 67 13.40
Christian 248 49.60
Others 6 1.20
500 100.00
11. Number of Children in a
Household 82 16.40
1 to 2 children 223 44.60
7 children and above 500 100.00
12. Strength of religious orientation

Very weak 5 1.00
Weak 21 4.20
Average 209 41.80
Strong 202 40.40
Very strong 63 12.60
500 100.00
154
Akir & Othman
Appendix 3: Summary of Consumers‟ Shopping Behavior Pattern

Products Preferred Where When COO Why Amount Reasons Ads Significant
Category brand purchase purchase COO spent purchase influence others
purchase influence
decisions purchase
most decisions
Personal Acer Department Special Foreign Quality RM1000 Own use Brochures Friends
Computer Dell al occasion made Brand to and few Catalogs Family
Compact stores sales name RM3000 for “gifts‟ Magazines members
Specialty promotion Price giving Newspaper Salesperson
stores
Malls
Fashion Levi Departmental Special Foreign Quality RM100 Own use Magazines Friends
Clothing Nike stores occasion made Brand to and few Brochures Spouse
Adidas Malls sales name RM200 for „gifts‟ Catalogs Family
Nicole promotion Price giving TV ads members
salesperson
Branded Calvin Departmental Special Foreign Quality RM100 Own use Magazines Friends
Perfume Klein stores occasion made Brand to and few Brochures Spouse
Silky Malls sales name RM200 for „gifts‟ Catalogs Family
Avon promotion Price giving TV ads members
Body shop salesperson
Detergent Breeze Supermarkets Weekly Local Price RM10 Own use TV ads Spouse
Daia monthly made to RM21 Family
Fab members
Friends
Instant Maggie Supermarkets Weekly Local Price RM10 Own use TV ads Spouse
Noodle Indomee monthly made to Family
Mee RM21 members
Sedap Friends
Instant Nescafe Supermarkets Weekly Local Price RM10 Own use TV ads Spouse
Coffee Kapal Api monthly made to RM21 Family
Indocafe members
Friends
155
Akir & Othman
Appendix 4: Reliability Statistics and Cronbach‟s Coefficients Alpha
Products Category Variables No. of items Cronbach‟s

Alpha
Coefficient
Personal Computer Price 7 0.67
Quality 7 0.61
Brand 7 0.86
Product information. 6 0.89
Normative influence 8 0.76
Informative influence 4 0.77
Total 39 0.89
Repurchase intension 8 0.93
Fashion Clothing Price 7 0.68
Quality 7 0.68
Brand 7 0.88
Total 39 0.91
Branded Perfume Price 7 0.71
Quality 7 0.83
Brand 7 0.86
Total 39 0.92
Detergent Price 7 0.70
Quality 7 0.82
Brand 7 0.88
Total 39 0.89
Instant Noodle Price 7 0.66
Quality 7 0.77
Brand 7 0.92
Total 39 0.89
Instant Coffee Price 7 0.66
Quality 7 0.80
Brand 7 0.93
Total 39 0.91
156
Akir & Othman
Appendix 5: KMO and Barlett‟s Test of Sphericity
Products Variables KMO (Measure of Barlett‟s Test of

Category sampling adequacy Sphericity
[MSA])
Personal Quality 0.890 Sig. 0.000

Computer Price
Brand name
Product information
Normative Influence
Informative influence
Fashion Clothing Quality 0.877 Sig. 0.000
Price
Brand name
Product information
Normative Influence
Branded Perfume Quality 0.887 Sig. 0.000
Price
Brand name
Product information
Normative Influence
Detergent Quality 0.903 Sig. 0.000
Price
Brand name
Product information
Normative Influence
Instant Noodle Quality 0.929 Sig. 0.00
Price
Brand name
Product information
Normative Influence
Instant Coffee Quality 0.939 Sig. 0.000
Price
Brand name
Product information
Normative Influence
157

Detergents

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Detergents

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Journal of Business & Policy Research

Volume 5. Number 1. July 2010 Pp. 123 - 157

Consumers’ Shopping Behaviour Pattern on Selected

Oriah Akir* and Md. Nor Othman**

In the consumer behaviour literature, several perspectives on consumer decision

Field of Research: consumer behaviour and marketing

such as spouse, siblings, family members, friends, salespersons, relatives or

Specific research questions addressed by the research:

a) What are the general shopping behaviour patterns of consumers when

Specific objectives of the research:

a) To determine consumers‟ general shopping behaviour patterns when they

Prior to choice decision or repurchase intention, consumers place a number of

An economic theory of information was first proposed by George Stigler in 1961.

2.2 Research Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses

The framework of this research was developed based on stochastic models of

the number of children in a household) and marketing mix (price dimension) as

Explanatory Variables Criterion Variable

The Determinants that

H1: There is a relationship between products‟ attributes importance,

H1a: There is a relationship between quality attribute importance and a

H1b: There is a relationship between price attribute importance and a

3.1 Research Design and Sampling Procedure

3.2 Target Population and Sample Size

3.3 Data Collection Procedure

In order to address the research questions and objectives, a set of structured

Finally, section D required the respondents to state their personal information

3.5 Analysis Procedure

4. Findings and Discussions

4.1 Respondents’ Profile

4.2 Respondents’ Shopping Behaviour Pattern

Table 1: Most Important Purchase Decision Ranked According to Products‟ Category

No. Products‟ Category Mean Score Rank

friends, followed by family members and salespersons. Decisions on fashion

4.3 Descriptive Statistics, Correlation Coefficients and

4.4 Standardized Multiple Regression Analysis – Testing the

The resulted standardized multiple regression as shown in Table 2, for fashion

H1a: There is a relationship between quality attribute importance and a

H1e: There is a relationship between normative influence and a consumer‟s

As depicted in Table 2, it can be concluded that when a consumer decides to

H1b: There is a relationship between price attribute importance and a

As shown in Table 3, it can be concluded that when a consumer decides to

Table 2: Standardized Regression Coefficients Model

Products Variables Standardized Collinearity Statistics

Products Variables Standardized Collinearity Statistics

Brand name 0.239 4.488 0.000** 0.423 2.364

Table 3: Standardized Regression Coefficients Model

Products Variables Standardized Collinearity Statistics

5. Summary and Conclusions

It was also indicated that consumers emphasized more on product information

In addition, consumers tend to be quality conscious specifically for high

In conclusion, the findings of this research has potential input to management

familiarity and advertising: effects on the evoked set and brand

scale: measuring consumers‟ use of brand name to differentiate among

brand meaning‟, Retrieved August 8, 2004, from EBSCOHOST/Business

Hussey, M and Duncombe, N 1999, „Projecting the right image: using

Jamal, A and Naser, K 2002, „Customer satisfaction and retail banking: an

Mitchell, AA 1981, „The dimensions of advertising involvement‟, Advances in

product-related brand associations on status and conspicuous

Ram, S and Jung, HS 1989, „The link between involvement, usage

name on buyers‟ perceptions of product quality: an integrative review‟,

aversion: the impact of information and learning on consumer choices‟,

Zeithaml, VA 1983, „Issues in conceptualizing and measuring consumer

Zeithaml, VA 1988, „Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-