I have an article I have read a couple of times and it seems the reading is going through one ear and out the other because I am not absorbing the information to answer the questions I need to for my class. I need help with answering the following questions:

1.   What is the hypothesis of this study?

2.   Was the sample chosen for this study adequate? Why or why not?

3.   What was the independent variable?

4.   What was the dependent variable?

5.   What kind of study design was used?

6.   Was the study design appropriate for this type of research? Why or why not?

7.   What elements or potential problems have the researchers tried to control and how have they done so?

8.   What are the findings and implications of the study and how has this study advanced our knowledge on the subject?

Impulse buying and cognitive dissonance:
a study conducted among the spring break
student shoppers
Babu P. George and Gallayanee Yaoyuneyong Babu P. George and
Gallayanee Yaoyuneyong
are Assistant Professors at
the University of Southern
Mississippi, Hattiesburg,
Mississippi, USA. Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine certain aspects of the relationship between impulse
buying and resulting cognitive dissonance in the context of spring break student shopping.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper employs exploratory analysis utilizing a quantitative
approach. The sample population was drawn from college students who went on shopping trips during
their spring break. The survey instrument measures the cognitive dissonance construct and the
impulsive trait, among other things. Because spring break shopping by students differs from typical
adult shopping, some context specific nuances are also explored.
Findings – The first hypothesis tested was that the level of cognitive dissonance resulting from
impulsive buying would be significantly greater than that which occurred after a planned purchase.
Additionally, informed by prior theory, it was expected that more impulsive individuals would experience
a higher level of cognitive dissonance after an unplanned purchase than less impulsive individuals.
However, the empirical data were found to directly contradict these hypotheses. Impulsive buyers seem
to experience rather lower levels of cognitive dissonance than planned buyers. Likewise, when a
typically non-impulsive buyer makes an impulsive purchase, the cognitive dissonance experienced by
him is seen to be significantly higher than when a typically impulsive buyer makes such a purchase.
These findings lead to a new theory, according to which, impulse buying behavior may be a coping
strategy used to avoid discomfort associated with the possible disconfirmation of expectations.
Originality/value – Understanding present generation college students’ consumption-related behavior
may give vital clues about the changing nature of consumption, as well as offering predictors for the
consumption behavior of the adult population in the near future. In addition, by testing certain so far
unexplored aspects of the relationship between impulse buying and cognitive dissonance, the paper
enriches consumer research literature.
Keywords Purchasing, Buying behaviour, Students, Shopping
Paper type Research paper Introduction
The growth of shopping has been tremendous since the second half of the twentieth century,
evidenced by the mushrooming of shopping hubs, known variedly as shopping malls, town
squares, flea markets, and bazaars, even in small towns (Dommermuth and Cundiff, 1967).
Especially in the USA, spending has far exceeded disposable income and replaced saving
as a revered value (Zuckerman, 2000). Received November 2009
Revised April 2010
Accepted July 2010 DOI 10.1108/17473611011093925 Shopping, traditionally defined as the act of examining of goods or services from shops and
gathering purchase-related information with or without the intent to purchase, has become a
characteristic feature of the present day society (Buttle, 1992). With a blend of hedonic and
utilitarian values, it is simultaneously a leisure activity and an economic activity. Shopping is
a social event and is one of the major triggers of the current consumer culture (Belk, 1988).
For many individuals, shopping is a means to gain membership in an aspired social class
and hence shopping reflects more of the nuances of contemporary social relationships than
the utility of the products purchased (Miller, 1998). Thus, shopping is both descriptive and VOL. 11 NO. 4 2010, pp. 291-306, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1747-3616 j YOUNG CONSUMERS j PAGE 291 ascriptive. Arnold and Reynolds (2003) unearthed the following six shopping related
motivations and associated behaviors: adventure shopping, social shopping, gratification
shopping, idea shopping, role shopping, and value shopping.
In the context of student shopping, the present researchers propose some relationships so
far unnoticed by consumer researchers: it is hypothesized that the level of cognitive
dissonance in the aftermath of impulsive buying is significantly greater than the same after a
planned purchase and that individuals with higher impulsiveness trait experience a higher
level of cognitive dissonance than their counterparts with lower impulsiveness trait. Taking in
to account the nuances of spring break shopping, the researchers also explore a few other
important issues about shopping behavior among college students such as the preference
for national versus foreign brands, media influence, the impact of the current economic
downturn, and student spending across the academic levels.
Empirically verifying the relationships proposed in this paper will give vital clues to
marketers: for instance, if impulse buying is capable of generating more cognitive
dissonance, the same calls for post-purchase dissonance reducing marketing interventions.
If marketers do not actively intervene in the dissonance resolution process and channelize its
direction, the post-purchase regret could make the customer a defector forever.
Alternatively, looking from the point of a competitive-reactive marketing paradigm, a
customer undergoing dissonance is an easy target for a competitor: the effort it takes for a
competitor to make the customer switch loyalty is likely to be much less at this stage.
Similarly, the proposed relationship between the impulsiveness trait and cognitive
dissonance is also important from a marketing managerial standpoint: if this relationship
holds, psychographic segmentation of customers based on their impulsiveness will give
anticipatory information about their possible post-purchase regret scenario. If highly
impulsive buyers are more ‘‘vulnerable’’ customers and if we know them in advance based
on statistical profiles, dissonance reducing interventions may be begun even at the stage of
product advertising. During the sales stage, such customers may be provided with more
purchase reinforcing information. Also, in the post-purchase situation, customer services
agents can become more proactive and contact these customers to assist them navigate the
dissonance crisis. Theoretical background
Previous research on shopping behavior
Shopping related issues have claimed a great deal of academic attention. Woodruffe-Burton
et al. (2002) comment that the theory of shopping is already subsumed in the consumer
behavior literature and the major task remaining is to separate its strands. Consumers
expect shopping experiences to be ‘‘frictionless’’, defined as their perceived ease of the
overall shopping process, especially with regard to the availability, competence, and
friendliness of store (Wagner, 2007). According to this author, in addition to the perceived
ease, shoppers rate shopping experiences based on pleasure, value, and quality as well.
They balance the costs of time spent commuting to the store and in the store with storage
costs and other non-time costs of shopping in order to minimize their overall costs (Umesh
et al., 1989). Hui et al. (2009) empirically verified the popular wisdom that consumers
become more purposeful when they spend more time in a shopping environment.
A study conducted by Amanor-Boadu (2009) indicates that locations closest to the
consumer’s residence offer the highest shopping value for groceries and other low-order
goods and that increasing gasoline prices favor local retailers. Arnold and Reynolds (2003)
observed that shoppers focused on promotions modulated their moods better than their
counterparts. While one purchase leads to another purchase by means of what is called ‘‘the
shopping momentum’’, consumers do not do this with conscious awareness (Dhar et al.,
2007).
Kwon et al. (2010) investigated how the expectation of a deeper discount in the future
affected the evaluation of the present discount and concluded that the negative effect of the
future discount could substantially offset the positive perception toward the present deal. j j PAGE 292 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 11 NO. 4 2010 Bava et al. (2009) explored how different product placement related cues in the shopping
environment affect shoppers’ behavior. Kaltcheva and Weitz (2006) found that shopping
motivation (utilitarian versus hedonic) moderates the relationship between arousal and
shoppers’ behavior in the store environment. Quite interestingly, those driven by utilitarian
motivational orientation were suspicious of arousal and they deliberately kept themselves
away from shopping environments offering arousal. In a similar study, Eroglu et al. (2005)
found that shopping values mediated the relationship between perceived retail crowding
and shopping satisfaction. However, this relationship was moderated by factors such as
personal tolerance for crowding, time spent shopping, shopping intention, and whether a
purchase was made.
In the context of tourist shopping, Yu¨ksel and Yu¨ksel (2007) highlighted the role of perceived
risk in affecting tourists’ emotions, satisfaction and future shopping intentions. Along with
quality and attractiveness, safety of the shopping environment too is vital in attracting
shoppers. A straightforward consequence in an unsafe shopping environment is that the
shopper reduces the time he or she will spend for shopping, resulting in lower spending. It
may also lead to negative word of mouth and result in lack of interest to come back.
Shopping is an integral part of leisure and has got four leisure related aspects (Jackson,
1991). According to this author, these are: independence (shopping as purchasing);
shopping for leisure (the purchase of goods for use in subsequent leisure time); shopping
and leisure (when shops and leisure facilities are juxtaposed in a single place); and
shopping as leisure (when shopping begins to take on the attributes of leisure as an
experience). Qualitative insights from the present study makes us think that spring break
students’ shopping behavior may be seen mostly as a combination of shopping as leisure
and independence.
Seven shopping oriented constructs have been identified by Seock and Bailey (2008) as
defining the student shopping spectrum: these are; shopping enjoyment, brand/fashion
consciousness, price consciousness, shopping confidence, convenience/time
consciousness, in-home shopping tendency, and brand/store loyalty. Research by Lester
et al. (2005) indicates that motivating factors vary by product and generation when it comes
to student shopping. Customer appearance through dress influences customer service
quality in retail stores (Paulins, 2005) in another study conducted on student shoppers.
Student shoppers with a tendency towards compulsive buying are more likely and those with
greater social support are less likely to hold credit card debts (Wang and Xiao, 2009). Ying
and Davidson (2008) identified natural scenery/attractions and agreeable
environment/climate as contributing to the idea of a favorable shopping destination for
student travelers. The intention to use multiple channels for shopping is high among
students though it reduces with age (Lu and Rucker, 2006). Research by Lammers et al.
(2003) reveals that online student shoppers are considered by others to be more trustworthy,
attractive, successful, and smart. Questions such as which factors of social culture and
subculture have affected the consumption behavior of university students, as well as the
consumption pattern and trend among them, are addressed in the study by Lieh-Ching
(2005). Students whose behavior is rooted in consumerism might be contributing
significantly to the deterioration of natural environment in many places (Roberts and
Jones, 2001). Cognitive dissonance: the shopper’s regret
Post-purchase review about the merits and demerits of purchase is a natural human
response. This review results in cognitive dissonance, which is a psychological
phenomenon that occurs when there exists a discrepancy between what a person
believes and information that calls this into question (Festinger, 1957). Cognitive dissonance
is some conscious way of rationalizing or articulating the dissonance reduction or attempts
at dissonance reduction which itself is a consequence of the level of cognitive dissonance
which itself is caused by conflicts between thoughts/beliefs and action. j j VOL. 11 NO. 4 2010 YOUNG CONSUMERS PAGE 293 The reason underlying cognitive dissonance is that it is psychologically uncomfortable to
hold contradictory cognitions. This psychological discomfort triggers a mental recovery
process in the affected individual that can lead to (Festinger, 1957): search for information
supportive of the held belief coupled with constant attempts to downplay the cognition that
resulted in the phenomenon of dissonance, or to a change in belief reflective of the new
condition. Egan et al. (2007) suggest that the mechanisms underlying cognitive-dissonance
reduction in human adults may have originated earlier than previously thought: both by
evolution over the course of human history and developmentally over the life course.
After a purchase, most purchasers tend to think that their cognitive consistency has been
compromised to the various marketing interventions made by the seller (Cummings and
Venkatesan, 1976). However, according to Sweeney et al. (2000), people have different
thresholds for dissonance and it is not necessary that all purchases should lead to cognitive
dissonance. Elliot and Devine (1994) notes that cognitive dissonance, even though
cognitive, is experienced more than anything through psychological discomfort. Thus, it has
got an emotional dimension, too.
Cognitive dissonance has the power to generate illusions (Balcetis and Dunning, 2007). The
motivation to overcome cognitive dissonance makes the human brain visually distort the
natural environment, according to these researchers. This is an important insight of
marketing practitioners, especially when it comes to how customers develop distorted views
of the service-scape. Matz and Wood (2005) observed that individuals in a group
experience higher cognitive dissonance when a large number of other members in the
group hold an opposing view.
One reason why cognitive dissonance in the original form has lost some of its charm could
be the introduction of alternative explanations such as self-perception theory (Bem, 1965),
impression management theory (Tedeschi et al., 1971), attribution theory (Weiner, 1980),
etc. While these theories explain particular aspects of the dissonance phenomenon better,
none of them is as comprehensive in approach as the theory of cognitive dissonance. Some
of the later researchers of cognitive dissonance took leads from the original work by
Festinger (1957) and proposed more sophisticated dissonance models: self-consistency
model (Aronson, 1992), self-affirmation model (Steele, 1988), and, the new look perspective
(Cooper and Russell, 1984), are noteworthy among them. Although cognitive dissonance
has had a long tradition in marketing theory, interest dedicated to empirical research
involving cognitive dissonance has been fluctuating (Koller and Salzberger, 2007). In fact, it
is likely that in the recent past this area of study has generated more attention among
biologists and neuroscientists than among applied psychologists or marketing theorists. In a
seminal work, the neural basis of cognitive dissonance and the neural prediction of attitude
change have been investigated by van Veen et al. (2009): this study helped to reveal the
neural representation of cognitive dissonance and supported the role of the anterior
cingulate cortex in detecting cognitive conflict.
Impulse buying
Impulse buying is the act of making unplanned or otherwise spontaneous purchases (Rook
and Fisher, 1995). According to Engel et al. (1982), impulse buying is a buying action
undertaken without a problem previously having been recognized or buying intention having
been formed before entering the store. It has got cognitive aspects such as lack of planning
and deliberation, and affective aspects such as feelings of pleasure, excitement,
compulsion, lack of control, and the probable regret (Verplanken and Herabadi, 2001).
Impulse buying gratifies intense hedonistic feelings (Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982). The
trait of impulsiveness is strong in certain individuals because, for them, it gives pleasure and
arousal that planned buying cannot give (Lee and Yi, 2008). O’Guinn and Faber (1989) note
that impulse buyers purchase not so much to obtain utility or service from a purchased
commodity as to achieve gratification through the buying process itself (i.e. consumption as
a self-completion strategy). In some cases, impulsive buying is a symptom of a deeper
mental condition called ‘‘oniomania’’, the uncontrollable addictive desire to shop (Black, j j PAGE 294 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 11 NO. 4 2010 2007). Roberts (1998) identified the presence of elevated levels of compulsive buying
among college students based in the USA.
A study by Rook and Fisher (1995) highlights that different individuals under the same
situational conditions do not show the same degree of impulsiveness: this means that
impulse buying behavior is at least partially a psychological trait. Baumeister (2002) argues
that impulse buying is rather a self concept and not an environmental concept since it is
about the capacity of the human self to change its states. An additional boost to this line of
thinking comes from the research conducted by Narasimhan et al. (1996) who disproved the
traditionally held idea that certain types of products are more likely to be purchased
impulsively. Dittmar et al. (1995) also note that impulsiveness is a way by which the selves of
certain individuals identify with themselves.
Finally, some scholars are of the opinion that the so-called impulsive purchases are not really
impulsive: consumers might not always be able to articulate their purchase selection
process but the same does not mean a selection process is not happening (Bayley and
Nancarrow, 1998). These complex intangible selection processes happen in the span of a
subjectively felt non-linear time. Linking impulse buying with cognitive dissonance: the proposed model
The present researchers propose that impulse buying leads to higher cognitive dissonance
than more planned purchases. The rational for such an assumption comes from the literature
on involvement (Zaichkowsky, 1985). Involvement refers to the study of how much time,
thought, energy, and other resources people devote to the purchase process (Beatty and
Kahle, 1988). Involvement is a cognitive response to overcome uncertainty. The involved
customer searches for information from within, from personal sources, and from media
sources like catalogs, consumer reports, consultants, etc., within the situational constraints,
before making a purchase (Beharrell and Denison, 1995).
Highly involved individuals, just because of their high involvement in the purchase decision,
are likely to be more stable in their preconceived cognitions that led to the purchase (Mittal,
1989). They might believe that their pre-purchase cognitions are well founded on intensive
information search, collection, and analysis (Smith and Bristor, 2006). Highly involved
customers have a greater ability to handle risks, notes Venkatraman (2006). This also means
that they will likely hold on to their pre-conceived position even if the same might be
perceived to be a risky position by others.
The preceding discussion on involvement suggests that impulse buyers may be less
involved in their purchase decision-making process than those who make planned
purchases. Less involvement presents a problem for rational choice model and is translated
into less informed purchases. Given lack of proper information in product selection, impulse
purchases are more likely to go wrong (Rook and Fisher, 1995). Once the product is
purchased, this will cause impulse purchasers to re-think more about their purchase
decision. In other words, it is possible that this very same pleasure and arousal associated
with impulse buying is also associated with high cognitive dissonance in the post purchase
situation. However, there is a strong counter-point to this view: impulse purchasers might be
more risk tolerant (or else, they would have planned more!) and consequently they might
take any disconfirmation of expectations more lightly. Given these contradictory possibilities,
we consider it worthwhile to empirically examine the following relationship:
H1. The level of cognitive dissonance in the aftermath of impulsive buying is
significantly greater than the same in the aftermath of planned buying. Impulse buying trait and impulse buying behavior have to be distinguished: impulse buying
trait refers to the attribute of certain individuals to be generally impulsive in their purchase
behavior (Friese and Hofmann, 2009). However, impulsive buying as a behavior may
occasionally be exhibited by even those who do not have high impulsiveness trait scores.
The relatively higher levels of arousal and pleasure felt by those who have higher
impulsiveness trait scores might enhance their post purchase contrast propensity as well. j j VOL. 11 NO. 4 2010 YOUNG CONSUMERS PAGE 295 Consequently they are more likely to regret more about the purchase decision than others. It
is interesting to note that, in consumer research, repentance frequently emerges as an
important characteristic of impulsive buying trait (Wood, 1998).
Again, according to the reflective-impulsive model (RIM), impulsiveness trait is preceded by
lack of self control (Strack and Deutsch, 2004). This condition may prolong to post-purchase
scenario as well. If so, individuals scoring high on impulsiveness trait might turn out to be a
segment that is more prone to cognitive dissonance. In other words, more impulsive
individuals might feel a higher degree of cognitive dissonance than others:
H2. Individuals with higher impulsiveness trait experience a higher level of cognitive
dissonance than individuals with lower impulsiveness trait. A model depicting the hypothesized relationships is presented in Figure 1. The study
Spring break is a major season of shopping trips for US students. College students are
attractive targets for travel-related consumption for a number of reasons (Hsu and Sung,
1997). Unlike employees, semester breaks give them weeks with nothing else to do other
than to travel and have fun. According to Hobson and Josiam (1992), student travel
contributes billions of dollars to the shopping industry every year. In addition to domestic
students, international students also travel during the breaks: spring break gives
international students a unique opportunity to see the varied cultural and natural
landscapes of their educational destination country (Babin and Kim, 2001). Also,
international students find spring break as the time to shop for items to take back home
and to buy gifts for their family and relations. Given all these, spring breaks provide
researchers a unique opportunity to understand the behavior of young consumers.
Sample characteristics
A total of 105 individuals responded to the survey posted online using a proprietary survey
instrument during April-May 2009. Out of them, only 58 did actually take a spring vacation
during 2008-2009. For most of the questions in the survey instrument, these 58 respondents
constituted the sample size. The various responses given by the excluded 47 respondents
to a question on why they did not go on a spring break holiday were: working during the
spring break (19), going back home (11), financial difficulty (9), need some rest rather than
Figure 1 The proposed model j j PAGE 296 YOUNG CONSUMERS VOL. 11 NO. 4 2010 travel (3), not feeling well (2), have already taken another vacation recently (2), and last
minute cancellation (1).
The respondents were from the following ethnic groups: Caucasians (53 percent), African
Americans (27 percent), Asians (13 percent), Hispanics (4 percent), and miscellaneous
others (3 percent). There was no respondent from the Pacific Islander ethnic group, which
has a significant percentage of members in the US population. Around 78 percent of the
respondents were either born or naturalized US citizens and the remaining 22 percent were
foreign nationals. The gender distribution was not equal: a vast majority of the respondents
were females (78 percent). The respondent age varied from 17 to 35, median age being 21.
Of the total number of respondents who initially agreed to participate in the survey, 37 were
married and 21 had at least one child.
The researchers hope the traditional criticism about student samples (Wells, 1993) does not
wholly apply to this study since one of the purposes of this study itself was to ex...

 

Attachments:

• 1506952913-out2.pdf