You are on page 1of 14

December 2010, Volume 9, No.12 (Serial No.


China-USA Business Review, ISSN 1537-1514, USA

Impulse buying: An Iranian model

Kambiz Heidarzadeh Hanzaee1, Fariz Taherikia2
(1. Islamic Azad University, Tehran Science and Research Branch, Tehran 1419615741, Iran; 2. Islamic Azad University, Firouzkooh Branch, Tehran 1419615741, Iran)

Abstract: According a model that presenting from Beatty and Ferrell tested with data drawn at one point in time (post shopping interviews) from 20 small shopping in Tehran, Iran. Analysis of data utilizing LISREL 8.5 is supporting all hypotheses, but some of them have negative effect like impulse buying tendency to in store browsing or from money available to impulse buying. Situational variables (time available and money available) were found to influence endogenous variable like positive and negative effect, in store browsing, urge to buy impulsivity and impulse buying. But it is interesting that impulse buying tendency were found to direct effect on impulse buying, like finding Beatty and Ferrell in 1998. Key words: consumer behavior; impulse buying; in-store browsing; Iran

1. Introduction
Marketer has long recognized the significance of impulse buying. One study has reported that 38.7% of department store purchases are bought on impulse as discussed by Bellenger, Robertson and Hirishman (1978). Retailers are continually trying to increase the number of impulse purchases through, store design, product displays, package design, and sales (Hoyer & Macinni, 1997). Some studies have been developed to examine impulse buying. One of them presented a model that we considered in Iran.

2. Impulse buying
Researchers agree that impulse buying occurs when an individual makes an unintended, unreflective and immediate (Rook, 1987; Rook & Fisher, 1995). Some researchers believe that impulse purchase by definition is unplanned, but it is more, too. It involves experiencing an urge to buy. This urge is felt suddenly and strongly and is often irresistible, Rook (1987) declined impulse buying as when, a consumer experiences a sudden, often powerful and persistent urge to buy something immediately. Beatty and Ferrell (1998) defined impulse buying as when, a sudden an immediate purchase with no pre shopping intentions either to buy the specific product or to fulfill a specific buying talk. The behavior occurs after experiencing. An urge to buy and it tends to be spontaneous and without a lot of reflection. It does not include the purchase of a simple reminder item, which is an item that is simply out of stock at home. 2.1 Impulse buying model and hypothesis Beatty and Ferrell (1998) proposed a model that is a snapshot view of impulse buying behavior. This model contains endogenous variables and exogenous variables. We first endogenous variables.
Kambiz Heidarzadeh Hanzaee, Ph.D., associate professor, Islamic Azad University, Tehran Science and Research Branch; research field: marketing. Fariz Taherikia, Ph.D., assistant professor, Islamic Azad University, Firouzkooh Branch; research field: marketing. 31

Impulse buying: An Iranian model

2.2 The influence of in-store browsing and felt urge to buy impulsivity In store browsing is a central component in the impulse buying process. In store browsing is in-store examination of a retails merchandise for recreational and/or informational purposes without an immediate intent to buy (Bloch, Ridgway & Sherrell, 1989). Shopping has singled out as providing both taskrelated or product acquisition and hedonic value through responses evoked during the experience. Hedonic shopping value reflects shoppings potential entertainment and emotional worth. The purchase of goods may be incidental to the experience of shopping. People buy so they can shop, not shop so they can buy. In this sense hedonically rewarding shopping experiences are not akin to negative sense of work. Increased arousal, heightened involvement, perceived freedom, fantasy fulfillment and escapism all many indicate a hedonically valuable shopping experience (Bloch & Richins, 1983; Hirischman, 1982). Vicarious consumption can provide hedonic value by allowing a consumer to enjoy a benefit without purchasing it (MacInnis & price, 1987). Certainly perceived enjoyment itself is an important hedonic benefit provided through activity. Babin, William and Mitch (1994) paid attention to hedonic value of shopping and suggested that it reflects emotional worth. Watson, Clark and Auke (1998) conceptualized positive affect which reflects the extent to which a person feels enthusiastic, active and alert. It is a state of high energy, full concentration and pleasant engagement (Watson, et al, 1988). The opposite of positive affect is negative effect, which involves a feeling of distress and non-pleasurable engagement that subsumes a variety of aversive mood states, including anger, disgust, gilt, etc (Beatty & Ferrell, 1998). Jorboe and McDaniel (1987) said that browsers made more unplanned purchases than non browsers in a mall. Because if he or she will tend to encounter more stimuli, he or she would tend to increase the likelihood of experiencing impulse buying urges (Beatty & Ferrell, 1998). According to them, felt urge to buy impulsively is a state of desire that is experienced upon encountering an object in the environment, but urge take priority of actual purchase. The final dependent variable is impulse buying and consists of actual purchase of product or completion of the urge. The linking of browsing to urge and urge to impulse buying based from the idea of physical proximity. Hoch and Loewenstein (1991) suggest that once desire occurs, the consumers reference point changes. Thus, in store browsing, consumer encounter to a product and that produces an urge to purchase it. As Hoch and Lowenstein (1991) found, if a person encounter to stimuli in store browsing, it can be difficult to resist due to physical proximity of the product. Thus, the first set of hypotheses follow: H1: The greater the level of in-store browsing: (1) The greater the levels of positive affect; (2) The greater the frequency of felt urge to buy impulsivity. H2: The higher the frequency of felt urges to buy impulsivity, the greater the likelihood of making an impulse purchase. 2.3 The influence of positive and negative affect Affect is a variable that influence to impulse buying (Gardner & Rook, 1988; Rook, 1987). According to Watson and Tellgen (1985) positive and negative affect are orthogonal to each other. Beatty and Ferrell (1998) utilized this constructs in that study. They focused on the affect created in the environment, although the pre-shopping mood is to be meaningful, but Jeon (1990) found that it could be distinguished from affect in the environment. Some research findings suggested that positive mood cause people to reward themselves. People on that time feel more freedom to act. They aim to maintain positive mood (Isen, 1984; Isen & Levin, 1972). Negative effect, experienced simultaneously, may negatively affect ones urge to buy impulsively, that is,

Impulse buying: An Iranian model

Negative mood may cause to reduce approach behavior. Rook and Gardner (1993) found that 85% of their survey respondents indicate a positive mood would be more conducive to impulse buying that a negative mood. Respondent felt that when they are in positive mood they have on unconstrained feeling, they feel higher energy level. Donovan and Rossiter (1982) found that pleasure was positively associated with a likelihood of overspending in the shopping environment. Beatty and Ferrell (1998) assumed that when someone experience greater number of urges to buy, it is direct effect on impulse buying. Bellenger and Korgaonker (1980) found that impulse purchase may be result of ones attempt to relieve depression, but the others found that it cheer oneself up (Mike & DeMoss, 1990). There appears to be both a positive and negative influence of negative affect at work on approach behavior, which may produce only a minimal overall influence of this variable on urge, which may be negative. Thus: H3: The greater the positive effect, the greater the felt urge to buy impulsivity. H4: The greater the negative effect, the less they felt urge to buy impulsivity. 2.4 The influence of the exogenous individual difference variable Shopping enjoyment is defined as the pleasure one obtains in the shopping process. Some shoppers may enjoy some shopping context more, but it is important, this define may cause in shopping mall. This variable is conceptualized as an individual difference variable. Bellenger and Korgaonkar (1980) found that individual who enjoys shopping, spent more time shopping. West broke and Blacke (1985) found that if a person enjoy shopping, he or she likely to browse longer. Thus: H5: individual who enjoy shopping more will: (1) Tend to engage in more in-store browsing; (2) Tend to experience more positive affect in the shopping environment. The second individual difference variable, impulse buying tendency (IBT), addresses the differential proclivity of individuals to buy on impulse (Rook, 1987). Just as psychologists believe that individuals may vary in there proclivity to act impulsivity, consumer researchers contend that consumers vary in their impulse buying tendency (Beatty & Ferrell, 1998; Rook, 1987; Rook & Fisher, 1995; Rook & Gardner, 1993). For example, Rook and Fisher (1995) argue that individuals impulse buying tendencies can be conceptualized as consumer trait. Rook (1987) state that the data from this study suggest that people vary in their impulse buying proclivities. It is useful to think of consumer impulsivity as a life style trait. Beatty and Ferrell (1998) defined IBT as both the tendencies (1) to experience spontaneous and sudden urges to make on-the-spot purchases, and (2) to act on these felt urges with little deliberation or evaluation of consequence. Rook and Gardner (1993) found that 75% of their sample, upon reflecting on a pervious impulse purchase, reported feeling better after that purchase, while only 98% reported feeling worse. It is assumed that high IBT individual is likely to experience more urges to buy impulsivity and will tend to act more frequently on those urges. Impulse buying tendency is an individual variable. Beatty and Ferrell (1998) assumed that the IBT variable will primarily influence the felt urge variable rather than directly influencing the impulse purchase. We offer the following hypothesis: H6: The higher the impulse buying tendency (IBT): (1) The greater the level of in store browsing; (2) The greater the frequency of urges felt to buy impulsivity.


Impulse buying: An Iranian model

2.5 Time available and money available They offer two situational variables that can influence to impulse buying behavior. One of them is time available or the amount of time the shopper feels she or he has available that day. Iyer (1989) found that the time pressure reduces unplanned purchases in the experiment. While time availability has been positively linked to search activity in a retail setting (Beatty & Smith, 1987). They assumed that individuals, who have more time available, will browse more but possessing limited time to purchase, browse might produce negative reaction to the environment. If someone does not attain her/his goals, it may cause reaction or related to associated to negative effect. (Babin, et al., 1994). The other variable that influence to Beatty and Ferrell (1998), and they present it, is money available. It means the amount of budget or extra money the individual perceives she or he has to spend on that day (Beatty & Ferrell, 1998). Jeon (1990) found that a marginal association between perceived extra money and impulse purchasing. Beatty and Ferrell (1998) connected available money directly with impulse purchasing rather than with browsing or felt urge because they saw it as a facilitator for purchasing the direct object. They believe that available money will produce more positive affect and less negative effect in shopping enjoyment (Beatty & Ferrell, 1998). Thus: H7: The more time an individual feels she or he has available: (1) The higher the level of in store browsing; (2) The lower the degree of negative effect. H8: The more available money the individual feels she or he has: (1) The higher the degree of positive affect; (2) The lower the degree of negative affect; (3) The higher the likelihood of making an impulse purchase.

3. Data collection
Based on the conceptual model (see Fig. 1), First of all, we conducted a thorough pre-test in two malls in west and east in Tehran, Iran. This pretest for 3 hours in a day (Tuesday). Then, we determined that no manner problem existed in the method and minor problem were corrected through instruction changes. We divided the Tehran into 5 district, collected malls in regions. We found 101 malls in all restricted. Interviews with customers at 2 regional malls in eastern and western city constituted the primary data collection effort. The data collected over a 5 days period including one weekend during the month, October. Table 1 presents the final demographics criteria. 3.1 Sample Data were collected in 5 days period. 852 initials contacts were made, 496 (58.3%) agree to participate, and complete forms. The demographic profile of this sample is presented in Table 1. 3.2 Measures Item in all scales used seven point agree-disagree statements with the exception impulse purchase measures. We decided to treat this variable as a three point measures in which 1 represents on impulse purchase, 2 represents planned or reminder purchase, and 3 represents both of them. The level of impulsiveness was measured with an impulsivity scale (Jeon, 1990). This seven-point


Impulse buying: An Iranian model

agree-disagree scale had five items, all of which were retained, with a coefficient alpha of 0.95. In the sample, 160 individuals, classified as making an impulse purchase, 207 individuals were classified as having made planned purchase. The final group, composed of 129 individuals, did make planned and unplanned purchase the polychoric correlation matrix was used for these analyses (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1993). The shopping enjoyment items were from Ellis (1995). Four items remained after our item deletion process based on the measurement model. The IBT scale came directly from Weun, Jones and Beatty (1998). Six items remained after item elimination. The time available items were drawn from Jeon (1990), Beatty and Smith (1987) and Iyer (1989). The money available items were a modification of items from Beatty and Ferrell (1998). The felt urge items were drawn from discussion in the literature (e.g., Jeon, 1990; Rook, 1987; Weun, Jones & Beatty, 1998; Beatty & Ferrell, 1998). Three items remained in the time and two items in the money available scales, while five remained in the felt urge scale. In-store browsing items were drawn from Jeon (1990), as well as from the conceptual discussion in Bloch, et al (1986, 1989) and Beatty and Ferrell (1998). Five items remained after elimination procedures based on pretest results and the measurement model. The affect items were drawn directly from the PANAS scale (Watson, et al., 1988). After item deletion, six items remained for positive affect and six for negative effect.

Time available Negative affect

Money available In-store borwsing Shopping enjoyment Felt urge to buy impulsivity

Impulse buying

Positive affect Impulse buying

Fig. 1

Conceptual model


Impulse buying: An Iranian model

Table 1 Gender Male Female Age 13-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 Material status Single Widows Married Divorced Education Under diploma Diploma Some college Bachelor Master PhD Student of theology No answer

Demographics criteria Frequency 228 268 39 220 137 64 26 8 2 224 2 256 14 52 198 77 120 32 8 2 7 Percentage 46 54 7.9 44.4 27.6 12.9 5.2 1.6 0.4 45.2 0.4 51.6 2.8 10.5 39.9 15.5 24.4 6.5 1.6 0.4 1.4

4. Results
4.1 Measurement properties The properties of the items of the nine scales (four exogenous and five endogenous) in the model and the hypotheses were assessed using the LISREL 8.53 structural equation analysis package (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1993) in combination with the processes recommended by Sethi and King (1994) and Anderson and Gerbing (1988). The adequacy of the individual items and the composites were assessed by measures of reliability and validity. The composite reliability, as calculated with LISREL estimates, is analogous to coefficient alpha and is calculated by the formula provided by Fornell and Larcker (1981). In this instance, the unidimensionality of each construct was assessed individually (Sethi & King, 1994), and then submitted to the overall measurement model of Anderson and Gerbing (1988). Further, convergent validity was assessed by the significance of the ij loadings (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988), while discriminant validity was assessed by comparing the variance extracted to the square of the correlation (2) between the two latent variables. Evidence of discriminant validity is provided when the variance extracted estimate exceeds the indicated correlation coefficient. 4.2 Structural model Fig. 2 presents the final (analytical) model with the path coefficients and the associated t-values for each of the hypothesized paths.


Impulse buying: An Iranian model

4.3 Final structural model Twelve of the fourteen hypothesized paths were statistically significant and in the direction predicted. The overall model fit statistics indicate that the model fits the data within established guidelines: 2800=3,771.22 (p-value>0.0); GFI=0.74; AGFI=0.70; CFI=0.74; NNFI=0.72; RMR=0.099 and RMSEA=0.086. Based on an examination of the modification indices, we found that there was only two unspecified linkage that proved to be significant. These path is the path between impulse buying tendency and impulse purchase (=0.38; t-value=7.78) and the path between money available and felt urge to buy impulsivity (=-0.03; t-value=-2.84).

Time Available

V = 0.10 (1.98)


V = 0.18 (-3.64)

V = 0.21 (4.47)
Money Available

=0 .15 (-4.49) = 0.09 (-1.91)

Impulse Buying

V =0.01 (0.30) = 0.20 (-5.04) V =0.11 (1.79)

In-Store Borwsing

= 0.38 (7.78)

Felt Urge to Buy Impulsivity

Shopping Enjoyment

= 0.11 (2.98)
V = 0.09 (-6.48) Positive Affect V =0.63 (13.95) Impulse Buying Tendecy Fig. 2 Analytical model


There were five paths hypothesized among the endogenous variables in the model, four of which were predicted to be positive, and one negative. One of these paths was in the expected direction and that one, from negative affect to felt urge is statistically significant (H4; =-0.17; t-value=-4.49). Unexpectedly, in-store browsing decreases the felt urge to buy impulsively (Hlb; =-0.20; t-value=-5.04), this relationship will be addressed in discussion section. As does ones positive affect (H3; =0.11; t-value=2.98). Positive affect is also


Impulse buying: An Iranian model

directly affected by in-store browsing, but it was not predicted by Hla (=-0.1; t-value=-1.95). And, as expected, felt urge had a significant effect on making an impulse purchase (H2; =0.38; t-value=7.78). Next, results related to the effect of the exogenous variables will be discussed. Enjoyment of shopping, an individual difference variable, was hypothesized to increase both positive affect and in-store browsing. Both direct effects are positive; the path from shopping enjoyment to positive affect is =0.27 (t-value=4.86) while that from enjoyment to in-store browsing (=0.11; t-value=1.79) did not have a significant t-value associated with it. Thus, the data support H5a, but not H5b. The tendency to purchase impulsively was hypothesized to have positive paths to both in-store browsing (H6a) and the felt urge to buy impulsively (H6b). One of these hypotheses was supported. The path from the IBT to in-store browsing was =-0.38 (t-value=-6.48) and from IBT to felt urge, the path was 0.62 (t-value=13.95). Analysis of the modification index for the path directly from IBT to the impulse purchase construct demonstrated that a direct path would be of significant magnitude (=0.27). We had hypothesized that the time available for this particular shopping trip would impact the amount of time spent browsing (H7a), but time available did have a negative and significant, direct effect on the amount of in-store browsing (=-0.18; t-value=-3.64), while also increasing ones negative affect (H7b; =0.10; t-value=1.98). The final exogenous variable, the perception of having money, or financial resources, available for this shopping trip was hypothesized to increase both the impulse purchase itself (H8c) and the perception of positive feelings (H8a), while it was predicted to have an inverse relationship with negative affect (H8b). One of these relationships was supported. Path from money available to impulse purchase is (=-0.09, t-value=-1.93); from money available to positive affect is (=0.01, t-value=0.3); and, from money available to negative affect is (=0.21, t-value=4.47). Each of the dependent variables has associated with the structural equation that predicts it, an R2 value, reflecting the proportion of variance in that variable explained by the equation. The R2 for our ultimate dependent variable, the prediction of impulse purchasing was 0.16. As we pointed out in our literature review, however, the prediction of a single behavior is difficult. The R2 for felt urge to buy impulsively, perhaps a truer measure of this model, was 0.52, leading us to conclude that this model does provide considerable insight in regard to impulsive purchase behavior.

5. Discussion
5.1 General discussion Our objective was to model the impulse buying process, focusing on important precursors. Drawing from current literature and theory in the area especially from Beatty and Ferrell, we proposed a series of hypotheses involving 14 paths. Using data collected in the shopping environment, after a shopping experience, all but two of these paths were supported and the model fit within established criteria. This study provides some preliminary groundwork for future studies examining this important issue. Discussions of specific findings are as follows. 5.2 In-store browsing In-store browsing appears to be negatively affected by ones available time and impulse buying tendency, and, has a negative impact on ones positive feelings and impulse buying urges. It is surprising. Perhaps this is because the variable is a perception or recall of actual behavior rather than a truly latent construct, such as an attitude. Thus, it would tend to suffer from the measurement problems of behaviors referred to earlier (Epstein,


Impulse buying: An Iranian model

1980; Beatty & Ferrell, 1998). Maybe it was caused from encounters or environment in shops. In any case, we have provided a useful operationalization of the construct, as well as showing its potential usefulness in understanding impulse buying. Jarboe and McDaniel (1987) suggest that not only are browsers important to the study of impulse buyers, they are also likely to be effective word-of-mouth advertisers, peer influencers, and trend setters, especially for socially visible products. 5.3 Felt urge to buy impulsively and impulse purchase Beatty and Ferrell (1998) believed that the distinction made between urge and impulse purchase is important. Their model and our model assessment provided evidence of the distinction between these two constructs (although highly correlated), while the literature and our definitions provide further justification for the distinction. The felt urge or desire to buy derives from the physical proximity with the object, due to in-store browsing, a tendency to engage in impulse buying, and positive feelings experienced while shopping. Further, it is this urge which precedes the actual impulse purchase. There has been little effort put forth to describe or model urges or desires with a few exceptions (cf. Hoch & Loewenstein, 1991). Thus, our efforts should aid research in this area for future. Felt urge is an important variable between an actual impulse purchase and other variables: browsing, positive effect, and possessing a tendency to engage in impulse buying. 5.4 Individual difference variables Our study indicated that individual difference variables do influence to the impulse buying process. Some variables played important roles in this process, but neither has received attention in the literature, or has not recognized influence to that process. Some variable like shopping enjoyment influences ones urges to buy impulsively. Ones tendency to engage in impulse buying tends to produce more in-store browsing as a shopping strategy, as well as to directly affect the number of urges experienced to buy impulsively while browsing. The failure of shopping enjoyment to impact in-store browsing was disappointing. Theoretically, these variables should be linked. We think the problem may have been the result of several factors. First, perhaps this occurred because of the lack of a clean distinction between browsing and shopping. Beatty and Ferrell (1998) operationalized browsing primarily as just looking around. But it is differ from true shoppers. Because it may feel all shopping has some purpose even if it isnt related to an immediate purchase. Further difficulty of predicting single behavior is an important subject. Besides, we do not forget that the situational variables or various possible tasks involved in a specific shopping trip may more prominently influence browsing behavior that day. 5.5 Situational variables Our situational variables did not act as expected. Time available, an exogenous variable, is a fairly known quantity for the individual upon entering the shopping environment. It influences the length of time the shopper will stay in the environment, and appear to especially influence his/her discretionary use of time in regards to browsing. Further, available resources tend to affect individuals moods at the time. Lack of time and money producing negative effect. 5.6 Affect variables It can be suggested that one comes into a shopping environment in a particular mood, engages in emotional reactions in the environment while shopping, and leaves the environment in a similar or changed mood. In this study, we tried to obtain a sense of shoppers combined pre-shopping mood and emotional reactions in the shopping environment. We did not measure pre-shopping mood because Jeon (1990) was unable to obtain discriminate validity between the two reference points. On the other side, when we tested effect on the

Impulse buying: An Iranian model

post-shopping affect measures, we chose not to measure affect prior to the shoppers buying experiences. In our study positive affect was affected by ones shopping enjoyment, in-store browsing, but money available as unexpected, and produced less felt urges to buy impulsively. On the other hand, negative affect influence negatively on impulse buying urges. Thus, the effect of positive effect on urge is consistent with previous findings suggesting that positive moods produce greater approach behavior (in this case the experiencing of urges). As we noted in the results section however, negative affect did have a significant and negative loading on impulse purchase in a respecified mode. Thus, perhaps negative affect tends to reduce an individuals tendency to actually act on their urge. These results require further study since this linkage was not specified in the original model and thus, were not included in the final model presented here. Given the lack of clear findings in the past on negative effect, the lack of clear, interpretable results is not surprising.

6. Conclusion
This research has the traditional limitations associated with survey research, such as selection error, measurement error, interviewer effects, and non-response error. There are also the concerns involved with a post-measurement design. Additionally, another concern was the time pressure of the respondents. As the shopping environment is a harried environment and the scales somewhat tiresome, which could introduce considerable noise to our data. We noted potential measurement problems throughout this study. It is difficult to obtain measurements of all of these variables at the most appropriate time and in the most appropriate setting. For example, we chose not to measure pre-shopping mood. We measured this affect after the shopping experience rather than during the shopping experience. Also, we did not explore those variables that influenced to variables in shopping environment, such as sales or helpful sales clerks. These measurement problems indicate potential problems in this study. Further, we have assumed causality here based on theory, analysis and the temporal sequencing of the data. However, only experimentation provides unequivocal assessment of causality. Another issue of concern here is that we concentrated on the main effects of the variables examined in the model. There are a number of possible interactions, which, in fact, may be more interesting than the main effects. As several reviewers pointed out, however, there are a number of important interactions in this area worthy of study. For example, the interaction between IBT and the situational variables on browsing or urge may be relevant. That is, money available may be more relevant to high IBTs than to low IBTs? How do the situational variables interact with felt urge to produce impulse buying? How do they interact with shopping enjoyment to affect browsing? Perhaps, this interaction would explain why shopping enjoyment and browsing werent associated in the model. Further, a number of these constructs need additional attention in regards to operationalize, like money, in store browsing, shopping enjoyment and impulse buying. Future studies need to assess the generalizability of these findings to other groups in other contexts. For example, how similar is the impulse buying process in the mall environment to the process involved in food shopping or in other contexts? Are individuals who tend to be heavy impulse buyers in the mall also heavy impulse buyers in grocery stores or other settings? There are a number of unanswered questions in this area. Rook and Gardner (1993) indicate that the study of impulse buying is in a relatively immature state compared to other areas (such as attitude research). For example, what strategies do shoppers use to repress the urges felt to buy impulsively and which strategies are most effective?


Impulse buying: An Iranian model

Are impulse buyers more vulnerable to store atmospherics or to others in the environment (Rook & Gardner, 1993)? In what ways is positive affect engendered most easily in shoppers? How are the experiencing of urges and actual impulse buying influenced by companions in the shopping environment? Are high impulsive more likely to make impulse purchases regardless of mood than others, as suggested by Rook and Gardner (1993)? Also, we need to know much more about the consequences of impulse buying. When and how do guilt or negative reactions to the buying experience affect respondents perceptions of the experience, as well as their satisfaction and future purchasing and shopping strategies? Finally, given the relevance of in-store browsing noted here, research efforts should be focused on this behavior.
References: Anderson, J. C. & David, W. G.. (1988). Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(May), 411-423. Applebaum, W.. (1951). Studying consumer behavior in retail stores. Journal of Marketing, 16(October), 172-178. Babin, B. J., William, R. D. & Mitch, G.. (1994). Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(March), 644-656. Baggozi, R. P. & Robert, E. B.. (1979). Attitude organization and the attitude-behavior relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 913-929. Batra, R.. (1986). Affective advertising: Role processes, and measurment. In: Peterson, R. A., Hoyer, W. D. & Wilson, W. R. (Eds.), The role of affect in consumer behavior: Emerging theories and application, 53-85. Beatty, S. E. & Ferrell, M. E.. (1998). Impulse buying: Modeling its precursors. Journal of Retail Marketing,74(2). Beatty, S. E. & Smith, S. M.. (1987). External search effort: An investigation across several product categories. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(June), 83-95. Belk, R. W.. (1984). Application of mood inducement in buyer behavior: Comments. Advances in consumer research, XI. In: Kinnear, T. (Ed.), Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 544-547. Bellenger, D. & Korgaonkar, P. K.. (1980). Profiling the recreational shopper. Journal of Retailing, 56(3), 77-92. Bellenger, D., Robertson, D. & Hirishman (1978). Impulse buying varies by product. Journal of Advertising Research, 18(December), 15-18. Bettman, J. R.. (1979a). An information processing theory of customer choice, reading. MA: Addison-Wesley. Bettman, J. R.. (1979b). Memory factors in consumer choice: A review. Journal of Marketing, 43, 37-53. Bloch, P. H. & Marsha, L. R.. (1983). Shopping without purchase: An investigation of consumer browsing behavior. Advances in Consumer Research, 10, 383-393. Bloch, P. H., Daniel, L. S. & Nancy, M. R.. (1986). Consumer search: An extended framework. Journal of Consumer Research, 13. Bloch, P. H., Ridgway, N. M. & Sherrell, D. L.. (1989). Extending the Concept of Shopping: An investigation of browsing activity. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 17(Winter), 13-21. Bloch, P. H.. (1982). Involvement beyond the purchase process: Conceptual issues and empirical investigation. Advances in Consumer Research, 9. Carroll, I. E.. (1977). Human emotions. New York: Plenum Press. Clark, M. S. & Isen, A. M.. (1982). Toward understanding the relationship between feeling states and social behavior. In: Hastorf, A. & Isen, A. (Eds.), Cognitive social psychology. New York: Elsevier/North Holland, 73-108. Clover, V. T.. (1950). Relative importance of impulse buying in retail stores. Journal of Marketing, 25(July), 66-70. Cobb, Cathy J. & Wayne D. Hoyer. (1986). Planned versus impulse purchase behavior. Journal of Retailing, 62(Winter), 384-499. Cunningham, M.. (1979). Weather, mood, and helping behavior: Quasi experiments with the sunshine Samaritan. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 1947-1956. Dittmar, H., Beattie, J. & Friese, S.. (1996). Objects, decision considerations and self-image in mens and women impulse purchases. Acta Psychologica, 93. Donovan, R. J. & John, R. R.. (1982). Store atmosphere: An environmental psychology approach. Journal of Retailing, 58(spring). Duncan, F., Margaret, C., Judson, M. & Isen, A.. (1979). Helping as a function of feeling state and nature of the helping behavior. Motivation and Emotion, 3(2), 161-169. 41

Impulse buying: An Iranian model Eagly, A. H., Mladinic, A. & Otto, S.. (1994). Cognitive and affective bases of attitudes toward social groups and social policies. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 113-137. Engel, J. & Blackwell, R.. (1982). Consumer behavior. Chicago: Dryden Press. Epstein, S.. (1980). The stability of behavior: II. On predicting most of the people much of the time. American Psychologist, 35(September), 790-806. Fennell, G.. (1978). Consumers perceptions of poduct-use situation. Journal of Marketing, 42(April), 38-47. Festinger, L.. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117-140. Fisher, E. & Arnold, S. J.. (1990). More than a labor of love: Gender roles and Christmas shopping. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(December), 333-345. Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. F.. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(February), 39-50. Gardner , M. P.. (1987). Effects of mood states on consumer information processing. Research in consumer behavior. In: Jagdish, N. S. & Hirschman, E. (Eds.), Greenwich, CT: JAI Press Inc., 113-135. Gardner, M. P. & Rook, D. W.. (1988). Effects of impulse purchases on consumers affective states. In: Houston, M. J. (Ed.), Advances in consumer research, 15, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 127-130. Gerbing, D. W., Stephan, A. A. & Patton, J. H.. (1987). Toward a conceptualization of impulsivity: Components across the behavioral and self-report domains. Multivariate Behav-ioral Research, 22(July), 357-379. Hansen, R. & Deutscher, T.. (1977). An empirical investigation of attribute importance in retail store selection. Journal of Retailing, 53(Winter), 59-73. Hirschman, E. C.. (1980). Innovativeness, novelty seeking and consumer creativity. Journal of Consumer Research, 7(12), 283-295. Hoch, S. J. & Loewenstein, G. F.. (1991). Time-inconsistent preferences and consumer self-control. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(March), 492-507. Holbrook, M. B. & Hirschman, E. C.. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumer behavior: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(Sep), 132-140. Holbrook, M. B. & Rajeev, B.. (1987). Assessing the role of emotions as mediators of consumer responses to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(12), 404-420. Hoyer, W. D. & Macinnis, D. J.. (1997). Consumer behavior. New York: Houghton Miflin. Isen, A. & Levin, P.. (1972). Effects of feeling good and helping: Cookies and kindness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 384-388. Isen, A.. (1984). The influence of positive affect on decision-making and cognitive organization. In: Kinnear, T. (Ed.), Advances in Consumer Research, 11. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 534-537. Isenberg, D. J.. (1981). Some effect of time-pressure on vertical structure and decision making in small groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 27, 119-134. Iyer, E. S.. (1989). Unplanned purchasing: Knowledge of shopping environment and time pressure. Journal of Retailing, 65(spring), 40-57. Janis, I. L. & Mann, L.. (1977). Decision making. New York, NY: Free Press. Jarboe, G. R. & Carl, D. M.. (1987). A profile of browsers in regional shopping malls. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 15(spring), 46-53. Jeon, J. O.. (1990). An empirical investigation of the relationship between affective states. In-store browsing, and impulse buying (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Tuscaloosa, AL: The University of Alabama). Jolson, M. A. & Spath, W. F.. (1973). Understanding and fulfilling shoppersrequirements: An anomaly in retailing? Journal of Retailing, 49(summer), 38-50. Jones, M. A., Reynolds, K. E., Weun, S. B., Sharon, E.. (2003). The product- specific nature of impulse buying tendency. Journal of Business Research, 56, 505-511. Joreskog, K. & Dag, S.. (1993). LISREL VIII manual. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software, Inc. Kantona, G. & Mueller, E.. (1955). The dynamics of consumer reactions. New York University Press, 30-88. Kollat, D. T. & Willet, R. P.. (1967). Customer impulse purchase behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 4(February), 21-31. Kristy, E.. (1995). The determinants of the nature and types of customer-salesperson relationships in a retail setting: An empirical study. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Tuscaloosa, AL: The University of Alabama. Levy, S. J.. (1987). The avid consumer. Speech Presented to The Northwestern University Kellogg Graduate School of Management Alumni Association, Chicago.


Impulse buying: An Iranian model Maclnnis, D. J. & Price, L. L.. (1987). The role of imagery in information processing: Review and extension. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(March), 473-491. Malter, A. J.. (1996). An introduce to embodied cognition: Implications for consumer research. Advances in Consumer Research, 23. Mehrabian, A. & Russell, J. A.. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. Cambrige, Mass.: MIT Press. Mick, D. G. & DeMoss, M.. (1990). Self-gifts: Phenomenological insights from four contexts. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(December), 322-332. Myriam, J. V.. (1987). Women shopping and leisure. Leisure Studies, 6, 71-86. Patterson, L. W.. (1963). In-store traffic flow. New York: Point of Purchasing Advertising Institute. Petorson, R. A. & Sauber, M.. (1983). A mood scale for survey research. In: Murphy, P., et al (Eds.), AMA educators proceeding, Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association, 409- 414. Punj, G. N. & David, W. S.. (1983). An interaction framework of consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(September), 181-196. Rook, D. W. & Fisher, R. J.. (1995). Normative influences on impulsive buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(December), 305-313. Rook, D. W. & Meryl, P. G.. (1993). In the mood: Impulse buyings affective antecedents. In: Janeen Arnold-Costa & Russell W. Belk (Eds,), Research in Consumer Behavior, 6, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1-28. Rook, D. W. & Stephen, J. H.. (1985). Consuming impulses. In: Morris, B. H. & Hirschman, E. C. (Eds.), Advances in consumer research, 12, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 23-27. Rook, D. W.. (1987). The buying impulse. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(September), 189-199. Sethi, V. & King, W.. (1994). Development of measures to assess the extent to which an information technology application provides competitive advantage. Management Science, 40(December). Srull, T. K.. (1984). The effects of subjective affective state on memory and judgment. Advances in consumer research, XI, In: Thomas, K. (Ed.), Prove, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 530-533. Stern, H.. (1962). The significance of impulse buying today. Journal of Marketing, 26(April), 59-62. Stevens, C. W.. (1980). K-mart stores try new look to invite more spending. The Wall Street Journal, 26(11), 29-35. Stone, G. P.. (1954). City shoppers and urban identification: Observations on the social psychology of city life. American of Sociology, 60(July), 36-45. Watson, D. & Auke, T.. (1985). Toward a consensus structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98(2), 219-235. Watson, D., Clark, L. A. & Auke, T.. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(June), 1063-1070. Westbrook, R. A. & William, C. B.. (1985). A motivation-based shopper typology. Journal of Retailing, 61(spring). Westbrook, R. A.. (1987). Product/consumption-based affective responses and post purchase processes. Journal of Marketing Research, 24(Aug), 259-270. Weun, S., Michael, A. J. & Sharon, E. B.. (1998). The development and validation of the impulse buying tendency scale. Psychological Reports, 82, 1123-1133. Winston, G. C.. (1980). Addiction and backsliding: A theory of compulsive consumption. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1, 295-324. Wysocki, B.. (1979). Sight, smell, sound: Theyre all arms in retailers arsenal. The Wall Street Journal, 17(11), 1, 35. Youn, S. & Ronald, J. F.. (2000). Impulse buying: Its relation to personality traits and cues. Advances in Consumer Research, 7, 179-185.

(Edited by Ruby and Chris)


Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.