Singaporean

family purchase
201
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing
and Logistics
Vol. 18 No. 3, 2006
pp. 201-222
#Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1355-5855
DOI 10.1108/13555850610675661
Spousal influence in
Singaporean family purchase
decision-making process
A cross-cultural comparison
Yang Xia
Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania, Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania, USA
Zafar U. Ahmed
Texas A&M University Commerce, Texas, USA
Morry Ghingold
Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania, Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania, USA
Ng Kuan Hwa, Tan Wan Li and Wendy Teo Chai Ying
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Abstract
Purpose Although considerable consumer research has focused on family purchase
decision-making in families in Western countries, only limited attention has been paid to family
purchase decision-making within Eastern cultures. This study was designed to explore for the
possible differences and similarities in spousal influences in different cultural environments by
comparing Singaporean family purchase decision-making process to that of US families.
Design/methodology/approach Quota sampling was adopted to generate primary data for the
examination of Singaporean spousal influence in family purchase decision-making; data previously
reported on US spousal families was used to compare with the primary data collected in Singapore.
Findings Differences in marital values between Singaporean husbands and wives were found to be
associated with differences in perceived patterns of influence throughout the family decision-making
process. The findings indicate that family purchase decision-making is a culture-specific
phenomenon. The study found that the level of egalitarianism, which usually indicates a more
syncratic or cooperative family purchase decision-making, was associated positively with higher
levels of education and income.
Research limitations/implications This study revealed a positive relationship between joint
decisions and the level of egalitarianism, however, such evidence is still limited. To depend the
understanding of spousal influences in family purchase decision-making in different cultural
environments, future research may need to go beyond demographics to include more cognitive,
psychological as well as social environmental factors, such as the involvement level, the time a
spouse spent alone for shopping, the love, affection, trust and confidence a spouse would have for
or earned from another spouse, the importance a spouse would attach to his or her marriage and
family, etc.
Originality/value The paper offers insight into family purchase decision-making within Easlern
countries.
Keywords Consumer behaviour, Family, Spouses, Cross-cultural studies, Singapore
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The importance of the family as a unit of analysis in consumer purchase decision-
making is well established. Although social and demographic changes in the last 50
years have triggered the growth of the non-family (or co-habiting) households and
single-parent families in different countries or societies, the traditional family
households (i.e. a family which consists of a married couple with or without children)
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1355-5855.htm
APJML
18,3
202
are still significantly greater than the number of non-traditional or unconventional
household. According to the US Department of Commerces statistics, by 1998, the
portion of the traditional families married couples with child/children is still at 56
per cent, excluding the families in which married couples do not have or live with child/
children. In Singapore, the portion of traditional families in the total population is more
than 80 per cent. Singaporeans who think that people should get married and the
married couples should have children are as high as 82 per cent and 90 per cent,
respectively, in the total population. Such being the case, family as a consuming and
decision-making unit remains a central phenomenon in marketing and consumer
research.
Tremendous efforts have been made in the research concerning or relating to family
purchase decision-making in the last six decades (e.g. Ferber, 1955; Boot, 1957; Blood
and Wolfe, 1960; Safilios-Rothchild, 1969; Davis and Rigaux, 1974; Wilkes, 1975; Green
and White, 1975; Bonfield, 1978; Woodside and Motes, 1979; Zeithaml, 1981; Green
et al., 1983; Qualls, 1987; Rosen and Granbois, 1983; Spiro, 1983; Seymour and Lessne,
1984; Ford et al., 1993; Webster, 1994; Stafford et al., 1996; Martinez and Polo, 1999;
Webster and Reiss, 1999; Thorntone and White-Means, 2000; Webster, 2000; Kaufman-
Scarborough, 2000; Commuri and Gentry, 2000; Piron, 2002; Su et al., 2003;
Mano-Negrin, 2003; Cotte and Wood, 2004; Commuri and Gentry, 2005).
Although children have an influence in certain unique product categories (e.g. toys,
breakfast cereals), their impact on day-to-day family decision-making is most often
limited (Spiro, 1983). In comparison, the spousal influence on individual family
members purchase decisions (as opposed to household) has remained as the most
examined areas in family consumer behavior research (Howard, 1989; Commuri and
Gentry, 2000).
The spousal influence in family purchase decision-making process is a complex
issue. It encompasses cross-disciplinary inquiries and explorations, including
sociology, psychology, economics, etc., in addition to marketing. Even from a consumer
behavior perspective, the relative roles of husband and wife in the family purchase
decision-making process have been shown to vary not only with the product category
but also with spousal resources (Davis, 1976; Olshavsky and King, 1984; Commuri and
Gentry, 2005) and the stage of the decision-making process ( Jaffe and Senft, 1966;
Davis, 1976; Nelson, 1988; Piron, 2002; Su et al., 2003).
Notwithstanding the extant body of family purchase decision-making research,
important gaps exist in our understanding of family and social environment influence
(Cotte and Wood, 2004). In particular, only limited data have been reported on
husband wife decision-making for households in cross-cultural settings (Hempel,
1974; Cheng and Swinyard, 1991). In light of the major socio-economic and social
changes that have occurred in many countries and regions, and based on the reality
that consumer demands in many product and service categories overseas are often far
greater than demands in domestic Western markets, this study attempts to compare
family decision-making behavior between Asia Pacific families and Western families,
highlighting differences and similarities in family consumption behaviors in
different social and cultural environments, which can be identified for further
examinations.
Prior research on family decision-making
A family exerts a complex influence on the behaviors of its members (Cotte and Wood,
2004). The influence that individual family members exercise over each others
Singaporean
family purchase
203
behavior can determine the activities that form part of consumer decision-making
(Cox, 1975). Research on family purchase decision-making can help further marketers
knowledge of how family households make decisions. A better knowledge of spousal
influence patterns and purchase-decision processes, in particular, can enable marketers
to develop effective marketing segmentation strategies (Davis and Rigaux, 1974) as
well as communication strategies and programs (Su et al., 2003).
Early research on family purchase decision-making considered decisions made by
the family to be simplistic, with the assumption that responsibility for any decision
could be attributed to a single member of the family. Over time, it became apparent that
individual spouses exerted influence over each others behavior across different
product categories (e.g. Strodtbeck, 1951; Ferber and Lee, 1974; Davis and Rigaux,
1974; Bonfield, 1978; Woodside and Motes, 1979; Putman and Davidson, 1987).
Gradually, researchers came to realize that it was important to determine the relative
influence of each spouse in family decision-making. Subsequently, most research
included the participation of both spouses in studies of family purchase decision-
making (e.g. Qualls, 1987; Plank et al., 1994; Webster and Reiss, 1999; Commuri and
Gentry, 2000; Piron, 2002; Mano-Negrin and Katz, 2003; Su et al., 2003; Commuri and
Gentry, 2005).
The commonly accepted role structure of family purchase decision-making is
(1) husband-dominated decisions, (2) wife-dominated decisions, (3) autonomic decisions
(in which either the husband or wife is the primary or sole decision maker, but
not both), and (4) syncratic or joint decisions (in which both are influential) (Herbst,
1952).
The classic study conducted by Davis and Rigaux (1974) was the first to elaborate
different stages in the family purchase decision-making process. Specifically, they
divided the process into three stages: (1) problem recognition, (2) search for internal
and external information, and (3) final decision. Based on the data collected from 73
Belgian couples, Davis and Rigaux found that dominant marital roles in family
purchase decision-making vary according to the phase of the decision process (with a
tendency to move towards joint final decisions) and the consumption category being
considered. A comprehensive replication of the Davis and Rigaux (1974) study by
Bonfield (1978) examined the family purchase decision-making process with a sample
of 60 US married couples. Bonfields research confirmed Davis and Rigauxs findings,
concluding that role specialization exists in family purchase decision-making and that
movement towards syncratic final decisions is evident.
Other research considered more elaborate process models (e.g. Wilkes, 1975;
Woodside and Motes, 1979; Putnam and Davidson, 1987; Webster, 1994). As a result,
depending on the methodology employed, the number of stages into which the
decision-making process is divided varied. However, too many different stages often
resulted in reducing respondents capability to distinguish many different stages in
their assessments of their family purchase decision-making processes. Hence, the
general tendency in research has been to examine three or four stages in the decision
process to avoid lengthy and complicated questionnaires.
Family decision-making for a variety of goods and services has also been contrasted
in the extant research. For example, involvement in family purchase decision-making
was found to vary by service categories and decision stages (e.g. Davis, 1976;
Krishnamurthy, 1983). Differences were also reported in search, decision, and
evaluation processes for products and services (e.g. Turley and LeBlanc, 1993;
APJML
18,3
204
Zeithaml, 1981). In addition, it was found that the decision process could differ by
different types of service (Hill and Neeley, 1988).
Additional research efforts have considered the impact of resources that a spouse
possesses on family purchase decision-making (e.g. Dahl, 1957; Blood and Wolfe, 1960;
Conklin, 1973; Green and Cunningham, 1976; Rank, 1982; Blumstein and Schwartz,
1983). The resource variables, such as a spouses education, income, and occupation,
on family decision-making were tested. Generally speaking, the resource-based
approach proposes that the greater the resources or assets of a family member (i.e.
education, income, etc.), the greater would be the power or influence of that family
member. However, no strong evidence has been found to support the proposition
(Tichenor, 1999; Commuri and Gentry, 2005).
Due to the increasing importance of multiculturalism and the global marketplace,
more emphasis has been placed on social and cultural aspects of family decision-
making (e.g. Gardiner, 1968; Conklin, 1973; Hempel, 1974; Green et al., 1983; Chin and
Farley, 1987; Sullivan and O Connor, 1988; Cheng and Swinyard, 1991; LaTour et al.,
1993; Webster, 1994; Ford et al., 1995; Stafford et al., 1996; Henthorne et al., 1997; Piron,
2002; Mano-Negrin, 2003). One important social factor that has consistently been
shown to be important is the role of egalitarianism in family purchase decision-making
(Green et al., 1983, Sullivan and O Connor, 1988).
Egalitarianism is defined as a value system emphasizing equality in marital
relations (Bott, 1957). Blood and Wolfe (1960) have contended that the degree of
influence attributed to either the husband or wife in a family decision is a function of
the level of traditional values existing in the family. In Asia, for example, if the family
is more oriented towards traditional marital-role values, the husband will be expected
to make the majority of decisions and the wifes role will usually be limited to
domestically oriented tasks (Qualls, 1987). Conversely, a higher level of egalitarianism
would predict more joint, more wife-dominated, and fewer husband-dominated,
decisions (LaTour et al., 1993; Ford et al., 1995).
Rodman (1972) has noted that while some societies are characterized by patriarchal
norms, having relatively inflexible decision-making rules, some others by more
egalitarian norms. Based on this observation, Rodman developed four types of
societies, each represents a different stage in societal development, namely:
(1) Patriarchy: with a high level of paternal authority, and with no variation in
paternal authority fromone stratified group to another.
(2) Modified patriarchy: with patriarchal family norms that have been
modified by egalitarian norms at the upper strata. Rapid modernization is
occurring in these societies, and the ideas associated with modernization (e.g.
egalitarianism) are becoming more accepted.
(3) Transitional egalitarianism: in which egalitarian family norms are replacing
patriarchal norms (and) in which there is normative flexibility about marital
power. These societies are transitional in nature. Power roles are achieved
through the attainment of goals that the society deems important (i.e.
education, high-status occupation, and income in Western societies).
(4) Egalitarianism: The last stage, with strong egalitarian family norms of
husband wife sharing of power. Here, egalitarian norms have permeated all
strata of society.
Singaporean
family purchase
205
Prior research showed that the allocation of purchasing decision roles within families
tends to conform to the decision-making patterns suggested in the four stages of
Rodmans typology (e.g. Green et al. (1983).
Jacobsons 28-item marriage-role attitude scale has been widely used to measure
the degree of egalitarianism in a society ( Jacobson, 1950). Some sample statement
in the 28-item marriage-role attitude scale include: The husband should help with
the housework; If the husband insists, the wife should quit a needed job; If a
husband runs around, so can his wife; The husband should wear the pants; and
Its okay for the wife to earn as much as her husband. Although developed and
used in 1950s, we still consider these attitudinal items highly useful instruments to
measure spousal attitudes towards marital roles and influences in various families.
Low scores of the scale would indicate the traditional male-dominant or
conservative attitude, and high scores would indicate the emergent feminine-
egalitarian or liberal attitude. The lowest possible score on the 28-item scale is 28,
or a completely male-dominant attitude, compared to the highest possible score of
140, indicating the opposite extreme. Table I summarizes the major research
orientations and views of the extant research on family purchase decision-making
processes.
Towards Asia Pacific conceptualization of family purchase
decision-making
The vast majority of research on family decision-making has used Western
respondents. Eastern cultures have received less attention. And, although significant
economic and social changes have occurred in the Asia Pacific region, which make this
region more modernized or Westernized, a number of differences in family purchase
decision-making can still be anticipated, as compared to the Western families. This
study focused the examination of these possible differences in Singapore, a city-state
that is commonly regarded as a model of successful economic and social development
in the Asia Pacific region. More specifically, the research was designed to explore for
the possible differences in spousal influences by comparing Singaporean family
purchase decision-making process (using the primary data generated through a survey
in Singapore) to that of US families (using previously reported data on US families
obtained through secondary research). We believed that although Singapore has been
successful in its social as well as economic developments, its unique social
environment, different cultural values, traditions, and norms tend to create different
spousal attitudes and behaviors in family purchase decision-making process. The
discussion which follows presents our conceptualization and associated research
propositions.
Prior research has already indicated a significant positive relationship between the
number of perceived joint decisions at each stage of the family purchase process and
the egalitarianism-orientation of the respondent. This would be expected to be true
across cultures. Hence, it is reasonable to anticipate that in both Singaporean and US
families:
P1. The more egalitarian a spouse is, the greater the propensity for that spouse to
perceive less husband-dominant, and more joint decision-making in his/her
family.
APJML
18,3
206
Table I.
Factors identified and
examined in prior
research for examining
family purchase
decision-making
behaviors
Extant research Variables examined Major views
Strodtbeck (1951)
Sharp et al. (1956)
Davis and Rigaux (1974)
Cunningham and Green (1974)
Ferber and Lee (1974)
Bonfield (1978)
Woodside and Motes (1979)
Krishnamurthy (1983)
Putman and Davidson (1987)
Robertson (1991)
Turley and LeBlanc (1993)
Hopper (1995)
Martinez and Polo (1999)
Product categories Family role structure changed from
product to product.
Generalizations of the role structure
cannot be made to the other
products.
Spousal involvement in family
purchase decision-making varies by
service categories and decision
stages.
Jaffe and Senft (1966)
Davis and Rigaux (1974)
Davis (1976)
Nelson (1988)
Webster (1994)
Henthorne et al. (1997)
Martinez and Polo (1999)
Piron (2002)
Su et al. (2003)
Decision processes Family role structure varied from
decision phase to decision phase.
The extent of joint decision-making
was greatest at the stage of the final
decision and the husbands were most
active at the information stage
phase.
Spousal decision behaviors can be
affected by prior decision
experiences, and they could form the
basis for future interactions.
Dahl (1968)
Davis (1976)
Conklin (1973)
Rank (1982)
Olshavsky and King (1984)
Commuri and Gentry (2005)
Spousal resources The greater the resources
(income, educational level, and
occupation level) of one family
member, the greater the decision-
making power of that family
member.
Hempel (1974)
Green et al. (1983)
Cheng and Swinyard (1991)
Ford et al. (1995)
Stafford et al. (1996)
Thorntone and White-Means
(2000)
Webster (2000)
Piron (2002)
Mano-Negrin (2003)
Cotte and Wood (2004)
Subcultural or
cross-cultural
factors
In some societies where
patriarchal/modified patriarchal
norms prevail, purchase decisions
were more autonomously (less
jointly) made than in societies that
were classified as transitional
egalitarianism.
Because of shared group history and
collective beliefs, race and ethnical
heritage may perform equally well as
predictors of family economic
decision behaviors.
Marital decision-making is a
culturally situated phenomenon that
resists explanation by theories and
concepts that have been imported
and applied in wholesale fashion.
The degree of influence
attributed to either husband or wife
in a family decision is a function of
the level of traditional value existing
in a family.
Singaporean
family purchase
207
However, we also expected that some marital values would be different between
cultures. This expectation is based on the findings that Singapore is a masculine
society, as compared to the US (Hofstede, 1997). Moreover, the mainstream of the
Singaporean society is deeply influenced by the Confucian philosophy a male-
dominant philosophy. Hence:
P2a. Singaporeans will have a lower level of egalitarian marital values, as
compared to US families.
P2b. In comparison to Singaporean families, American families purchase decision-
making would be more syncratic.
Additionally, we also anticipate that differences in marital values between Singaporean
and US families would be associated with differences in the observed patterns of
influence in decision-making process for specific product/service categories. Therefore:
P3. Marital roles will differ between American and Singaporean families across
specified product and service categories.
The methods for testing these propositions are presented below.
Methods
Instrumentation
Data were collected from Singaporean family dyads (i.e. husbands and wives), using
self-administered questionnaires. The questionnaires comprised three sections. The
first section of the questionnaire was designed to measure the relative influence of
husbands and wives for each stage of the decision-making process. Three questions
were developed to measure the existence/relevance of the three principal stages of the
family purchase decision-making process (i.e. initiation, negotiation, and outcome)
which were proposed by Davis and Rigaux (1974). To facilitate comparisons between
US and Singapore samples, a three-point scale was adopted to examine the three types
of relative influence (i.e. husband-dominant, syncratic, and wife-dominant). These
influence patterns were coded as 1 for husband-dominant, 2 for syncratic, and 3 for
wife-dominant. Using an approach adopted in prior research (e.g. Davis and Rigaux,
1974; Ford et al., 1995), respondents were assigned to one of the three mutually
exclusive categories for each stage of the decision process. Coding in this manner
simplifies the assignment of respondents into each category for each subdecision.
The product and service categories for the survey were selected to replicate Davis
and Rigauxs (1974) testing method. Certain products and services categories were
modified by substituting the original ones with new ones for a better match to the
Singaporean cultural context and evolution of consumer product technologies since
1970s. For example, eating out and computer were added since they are nowcommonly
purchased categories of products and services in both Western and Asia Pacific
marketplaces. The full listing of product and service categories used in our survey is
shown in Appendix 1.
The second section of the questionnaire was Jacobsons 28-item marriage role
attitude scale (Jacobson, 1950). The Jacobson scale serves to reflect the degree of
equality within a marriage. Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which
they agree with the 28 attitudinal statements on a five-point scale, with (1) strongly
disagree and (5) strongly agree. Higher scores obtained on the scale obtained from the
test were interpreted to reflect a more egalitarian attitude towards marriage and lower
scores a less egalitarian attitude. Egalitarianism scores were then compared to the
APJML
18,3
208
three types of family purchase decision-making process (i.e. husband-dominant, wife-
dominant, and syncratic) to determine possible associations. Although one may
question a marriage role instrument developed more than 50 years ago, the Jacobson
scale has an established record of validity and reliability ( Jacobson, 1952; Gardiner,
1968). The validity and reliability were further evidenced by the results of our
survey, in which the reliability coefficients for husbands and wives were 0.9365 and
0.9401, respectively, well above the pre-determined acceptable range.
The third section of the questionnaire was developed to collect demographic data
from participants, which in turn was used for a dual purposes: creating the sample
profile and assessing possible linkages with egalitarianism.
The entire questionnaire was first drafted in English, based on the questionnaire
used by Davis and Rigaux (1974). As about 78 per cent of the Singaporean population
are Chinese, the questionnaire was also translated into Mandarin. After the Chinese
translation was completed, the back-translation method (Green and White, 1976;
Henthorne et al., 1997 ) was used to translate the questionnaire in Mandarin back to
English again to eliminate possible discrepancies or dissimilarities. As an additional
measure, a pilot test was undertaken before the formal survey was operated. The pilot
test involved a sample of nine couples that included the major three ethnic groups in
Singapore (i.e. Chinese, Malays, and Indian). Upon the completion of the questionnaire
by all husbands and wives in the pilot sample, the nine couples were invited to provide
their comments about the design and wording of the questionnaire. Feedback from the
pilot test was positive and precipitated, only modest changes in the questionnaire.
Ultimately, the formal version was developed and used.
Sampling and data collection
Singaporean data used in this comparative study were obtained from a survey of
married couples residing in Singapore. As Singapores population is made up of three
major subculture groups, (i.e. Chinese, Malay, and Indian), quota sampling was
adopted to ensure that the sample resemble the ethnic composition of Singapore.
Within the quota limits of each subculture group in the sample, households were
randomly selected and solicited via mail and personal interviewing. Each spouse in a
household was required to complete the questionnaire separately. A total of 342
questionnaires were distributed to 171 husband wife dyads; 304 questionnaires were
returned, of which 296, representing 148 dyads, were determined as usable. Table II
shows the composition of the sample.
Table II.
Composition of ethnic
groups in Singapore
Ethnic
group
Number of couples
in sample
% of
sample
% of Singapore
population
Chinese 115 77.7 76.8
Malay 21 14.2 13.9
Indian 12 8.1 7.9
Others 0 0 1.4
Total 148 100 100
Source: Singapore Department of Statistics (2000)
Singaporean
family purchase
209
Assessing spousal influence
Given the possibility that spouses might disagree about each others involvement in the
purchase decision process (e.g. Davis, 1976; Davis et al., 1986), a spousal agreement
table was prepared to assess differences between responses provided by each spouse
participated in the survey. Matched-pair t-tests were conducted to determine if the
responses provided by pairs of spouses show any differences that are statistically
significant.
Current practice in reporting family decision-making (e.g. LaTour et al., 1993, 1995;
Henthorne et al., 1997) proposes that the clearest representation of a households
response is achieved by separating the analysis for husbands and wives rather than
taking the average of disagreeing responses that occur at times, because merging
spouses responses tend to reduce the insight gained from analysis of the spousal dyad
(Hadock, 1979). In our study, the mean response from husbands and wives for the
twenty-two products/services examined were first plotted in a series of feasibility
triangle charts, and then summarized in tables (refer to Tables III-V).
The feasibility triangle is a commonly accepted conceptual and analytical method in
examining family members roles in family purchase decision-making (refer to
Appendix 2). It helps document and report husband wife influence and agreement
(refer to Appendix 2). In a feasibility triangle chart, the vertical axis represents a scale
of relative influence between husbands and wives, and the horizontal axis shows the
percentage of the husband or the wife in joint decisions.
Table III.
Extent of husbandwife
agreement about roles in
product decisions
(in percentages)
Product
categories
Stage 1:
initiation (%)
Stage 2:
negotiation (%)
Stage 3:
outcome (%)
Furniture 83.11 89.19 83.11
Refrigerator 70.95 86.49 81.76
Television 81.76 88.51 75.00
Air conditioner/fan 81.08 77.03 79.05
Stereo/HI-FI 82.43
a
68.24
a
79.05
Eating out 83.11 87.16 79.73
Wifes clothing 98.65 89.86 95.27
Cleaning supplies 97.30 92.57 93.24
Alcohol/wine 91.89 90.54 91.22
Childrens wear and accessories 86.49 80.41 83.78
Kitchenware 90.54 77.03 87.16
Childrens toys 73.65 75.00 71.62
Education 75.68 85.81 80.41
Entertainment 85.81 88.51 85.14
Husbands clothing 89.86 79.73
a
86.49
Joint savings account 93.24 87.16 91.22
Insurance 89.19 76.35 84.46
a
Non-prescription drugs 73.65 68.24 70.95
Buy/rent home 85.14 87.84 83.11
a
Travel/holiday 83.11 92.57 78.38
Automobile 84.46 75.68 78.38
Computer 87.16 85.14 87.84
Note:
a
Significantly different responses on matched-pair t-tests (two-tailed; p < 0.025).
APJML
18,3
210
Findings
Based on the results of the survey, husband wife dyads evidenced high levels of
agreement. As shown in Table III, more than 92 per cent of the reported patterns
of influence were similar for husbands and wives. In aspects of the family
purchase decision-making process, only five out of 66 possible paired comparisons
(matched-pair t-tests) showed differences that were statistically significant in spouses
perceptions of the locus of influence.
A possible explanation for the few differences shown by the survey could be that
these husband wife disagreements are a function of differing subjective realities
where each spouse perceived the situation differently according to their own needs,
beliefs, and values (Safilios-Rothchild, 1969). For instance, husbands could be
influenced by the negative self-image if they acknowledged non-husband-dominant
decisions (Butterfield, 1982; Lee, 1984).
The results of the survey also documented certain product categories in which
spousal roles differed throughout the three stages. As indicated in Tables IV and V,
certain product/service categories appear to be distinctly the domain of husbands and
wives, respectively. The product categories that were reported by both husbands and
Table IV.
Products and services
showing spousal
influences during
different stages
of purchase
decision-making
process: the feasibility
triangle (husbands)
Types of spousal
influence in family
purchase decision-
making
Products and services showing spousal influences during
Different stages of purchase decision-making process
Stage 1: initiation Stage 2: negotiation Stage 3: outcome
Wife-dominant
purchase
decision-making
Wife clothing
Cleaning supplies
Childrens wear
Kitchenware
Non-prescription drugs
Wife clothing
Cleaning supplies
Childrens wear
Kitchenware
Non-prescription drugs
Wife clothing
Cleaning supplies
Childrens wear
Kitchenware
Non-prescription drugs
Husband-dominant
purchase
decision-making
TV set
Stereo
Air conditioner/fan
Wine/alcohol
Husband clothing
Insurance
Automobile
Computer
TV set
Stereo
Wine/alcohol
Husband clothing
Automobile
Computer
TV set
Stereo
Wine/alcohol
Husband clothing
Insurance
Automobile
Computer
Syncratic
Purchase
decision-making
Furniture
Eating out
Education
Entertainment
Joint savings account
Buy/rent home
Travel
Furniture
Refrigerator
Air conditioner/fan
Eating out
Toys
Education
Entertainment
Joint savings account
Insurance
Buy/Rent home
Travel
Furniture
Refrigerator
Eating out
Education
Entertainment
Joint savings account
Buy/rent home
Travel
Autonomic
Purchase
decision-making
Refrigerator
Toys
None Air conditioner/fan
Toys
Singaporean
family purchase
211
wives as husband-dominated include the purchases of television, wine/liquor,
husbands clothing, and computer. The two product categories that husbands alone
regarded as husband-dominated were stereo/hi-fi and automobile. Product categories
that were agreed as being wife-dominated include wifes clothing, cleaning supplies,
childrens wear and accessories, kitchenware, and non-prescription drugs.
Joint decisions were reported for a number of product/service categories. These
appear to be categories of product/service usually that: involve high cost and low
frequency of purchase (furniture and buy/rent house), involve family instead of
individual experiences (eating-out, entertainment, and travel), and are significant for
the future of the family (education and joint savings account). On the other hand, there
were certain product categories in which marital roles differed throughout the three
stages of the family purchase decision-making process. For husbands, the product
categories in which the pattern of influence in decision-making varied include
refrigerator, air conditioner/fan, childrens toys, and insurance. For wives, the pattern
of influence during the three stages of family purchase decision-making process varied
includes refrigerator, air conditioner/fan, stereo/hi-fi, childrens toys, insurance, and
Table V.
Products and services
showing spousal
influences during
different stages of
purchase decision-
making process: the
feasibility triangle
(wives)
Types of spousal
influence in
family purchase
decision-making
Products and services showing spousal influences during
different stages of purchase decision-making process
Stage 1: initiation Stage 2: negotiation Stage 3: outcome
Wife-dominant
purchase decision-
making
Wife clothing
Cleaning supplies
Childrens wear
Kitchenware
Non-prescription drugs
Wife clothing
Cleaning supplies
Childrens wear
Kitchenware
Non-prescription drugs
Wife clothing
Cleaning supplies
Childrens wear
Kitchenware
Non-prescription drugs
Husband-dominant
purchase decision-
making
TV set
Stereo
Wine/alcohol
Husband clothing
Insurance
Automobile
Computer
TV set
Wine/alcohol
Husband clothing
Computer
TV set
Stereo
Wine/alcohol
Husband clothing
Insurance
Automobile
Computer
Syncratic Purchase
decision-making
Furniture
Eating out
Education
Entertainment
Joint savings account
Buy/rent home
Travel
Furniture
Refrigerator
Air conditioner/fan
Stereo
Eating out
Education
Entertainment
Joint savings account
Buy/rent home
Travel
Toys
Automobile
Furniture
Refrigerator
Air conditioner/fan
Eating out
Education
Entertainment
Joint savings account
Buy/rent home
Travel
Autonomic purchase
decision-making
Refrigerator
Air conditioner/fan
Toys
Insurance Toys
APJML
18,3
212
automobile. In numerical terms, Tables IV and V also demonstrate the patterns of
influence for the entire twenty-two product/service categories for each of the three
decision-making stages (i.e. initiation, evaluation, and outcome). Overall, it seems that
joint decision-making was the most common form of decision-making in the Singapore
sample, and most frequently, joint decision-making occurred during the negotiation
stage. Quite a number of joint decisions occurred in the outcome stage as well.
Egalitarianism and spousal influence and/or resource
Past research points to a negative relationship between the level of egalitarianism and
the number of husband dominant decisions (LaTour et al., 1993; Ford et al., 1995).
In other words, more egalitarian spouses would be expected to make more syncratic
and/or wife-dominated decisions (Acock and Edwards, 1982; Schaninger et al., 1982).
The findings of this study clearly support this expectation. As documented in
Tables VI-VIII, a positive relationship between egalitarianism and the number of joint
decisions exists in each of the three decision-making stages as reported by husbands
(r = 0.440, r = 0.316, r = 0.414). This indicates that egalitarian Singaporean males
Table VI.
Pearson correlations
between the number of
joint decisions reported
in each stage and
Jacobsons scale
Need recognition Information search Final decision
Males 0.440**
p = 0.000
0.316**
p = 0.000
0.414**
p = 0.000
Females 0.266**
p = 0.001
0.086
p = 0.299
0.405**
p = 0.000
Notes: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01
Table VII.
Pearson correlations
between the number of
wife-dominated decisions
reported in each stage
and Jacobsons scale
Need recognition Information search Final decision
Males 0.004
p = 0.963
0.068
p = 0.414
0.023
p = 0.784
Females 0.224**
p = 0.006
0.218**
p = 0.008
0.179*
p = 0.030
Notes: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01
Table VIII.
Pearson correlations
between the number of
husband-dominated
decisions reported in
each stage and
Jacobsons scale
Need recognition Information search Final decision
Males 0.508**
p = 0.000
0.469**
p = 0.000
0.471**
p = 0.000
Females 0.550**
p = 0.000
0.385**
p = 0.000
0.552**
p = 0.000
Notes: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01
Singaporean
family purchase
213
perceive themselves to be involved in more joint decision-making at all three stages of
the decision-making process. Interestingly, this tendency was only reflected in the final
stage of the decision-making process (i.e. outcome) in prior studies (e.g. Green et al.,
1983; Chia et al., 1987). Strong associations were also found for wives in the first and
third stages of the process (r = 0.266 and r = 0.405). Hence, the proposition that
egalitarianism would be associated with more joint decision-making (P1) was
supported.
Findings from prior research suggested that wives of more egalitarian families
would wield influence over decisions previously made by husbands (Green and
Cunningham, 1975). This tendency was confirmed by our study. As reported by female
spouses in our sample, the correlations between egalitarianism and the extent of
wife-dominated decision-making for all the three stages of the decision-making process
were statistically significant (r = 0.224, p = 0.006; r = 0.218, p = 0.008; r = 0.179,
p = 0.03). It should be noted that no meaningful associations were found between
egalitarianism and wife-dominance in the husband data. This, and earlier findings (as
shown in Table III), adds weight to the view that Singaporean males today continue to
be influenced by patriarchal norms. As such, they may be very reluctant to admit to
wife-dominated decisions.
Significant negative correlations were found between the perceived number of
husband-dominated decisions and egalitarianism among husbands for all stages of the
decision-making process (r = 0.508, r = 0.469, r = 0.471). The same pattern was
observed among wives (r = 0.550, r = 0.385, r = 0.552). In contrast, previous
studies of family purchase decision-making in the Western countries reported that
such a pattern only existed in the final stage of the decision-making process, and the
stronger husband dominance was perceived only by female spouses (Ford et al., 1995;
Henthorne et al., 1997).
With respect to spousal resources or assets, the findings indicated a strong
correlation between the level of egalitarianism and the income of husbands (r = 0.463,
p = 0.000). This positive association was also found for wives (r = 0.466, p = 0.000).
The findings indicate that Singaporean spouses who have higher incomes were more
likely to hold more egalitarian attitudes. It should be noted that these findings were
contrary to the previously reported findings on American couples (LaTour et al., 1993;
Ford et al., 1995). Prior research has found that higher levels of egalitarianism tend to
be positively associated with higher levels of education (Skinner and Dubinsky, 1984;
Steil and Weltman, 1991). This tendency was confirmed in our study as well. The
survey results revealed that egalitarianism and education were positively correlated
for both husbands (r = 0.450, p = 0.000) and wives (r = 0.481, p = 0.000). Overall, this
study showed that females with a higher level of egalitarianism perceive less husband
dominance (which was manifested as more wife-dominated decisions) in all three
stages of the decision-making process. By contrast, more egalitarian males perceive
less husband-dominance in the form of more joint decisions for all three stages of the
decision-making process.
Cross-cultural analysis
The cross-cultural analysis comparing Singaporean family decision-making with the
Western (by using the existing secondary data of US family purchase decision-making)
was the focus of this study (refer to research propositions P2a, P2b, and P3). Through
our secondary research, we identified 20 product/service categories analyzed in
previously conducted studies of family purchase decision-making and egalitarianism
APJML
18,3
214
in the USA. This list was used to identify the 22 product and service purchase situations
examined in this study (Cheng and Swinyard, 1991; Ford et al., 1995; Green et al., 1983;
Hopper, 1995; Robertson, 1990; Stafford, 1996; Stafford et al., 1996). The egalitarianism
scores from the US data and the Singaporean data generated by our survey (segmented
by subculture group) are presented in Tables IX. The two sets of data in the table indicate
that both male and female spouses in Singapore achieved lower mean scores on the
Jacobson scale than Americans. In other words, Singaporeans have less egalitarian views
of marriage than Americans. Using Rodmans societal development typology (Rodman,
1972), Singapore society appears to be in the stage of the late modified patriarchy,
moving towards transitional egalitarianism. Hence, the findings provide evidentiary
support for research proposition P2a, indicating that, in terms of perceived marital roles,
Singapore still remains as a more traditional society when compared to the USA.
The data derived from US-based studies and the findings of the present study
are contrasted in Tables X and XI. The data summarized in Table XI shows that for the
20 comparable product/service purchase situations, American couples made 11
decisions jointly, compared with eight by Singaporean couples. This finding is in line
with the higher level of egalitarianism reported for the American families (refer to
Table X). The findings support the notion that more joint family purchase decision-
making would take place in American families. Hence, the research proposition P2b
was supported.
As shown in Table XI, six products (television set, stereo equipment, wine,
childrens toys, husbands clothing, and automobile) demonstrate different influence
patterns between American and Singaporean families. Stereo, childrens toys, and
television set purchases are all jointly made decisions in US families. However, in
Singapore, the purchase decisions for both stereo equipment and television set are
husband-dominant, while those for childrens toys are autonomic. As for wine,
husbands clothing, and automobile, the purchase decisions are reported to be
autonomic in the USA but found to be husband-dominant in our Singapore sample.
The data support our expectation that spousal influence would differ between
Table IX.
Scores on the Jacobson
scale for the American
and Singaporean couples
Singaporean couples
US couples
a
Chinese Malay Indians Overall
Males 110.54 84.17 65.81 66.0 80.09
Females 109.54 94.56 72.90 79.67 90.28
Note:
a
Results obtained from Ford et al. (1995)
Table X.
Influence patterns for
the American and
Singaporean families
Number of products
Influence Pattern American Singaporean
Wife-dominant 5 5
Husband-dominant 1 6
Autonomic 3 1
Joint 11 8
Total 20 20
Singaporean
family purchase
215
American and Singaporean families across a variety of product and service categories.
Hence, it confirms the research proposition P3.
Discussion
Managerial implications
This comparative study demonstrated that Singaporean spousal roles and influence
differ from US spousal roles and influence throughout the decision-making process for
many product and service categories. The specific findings from this study add
credence to the cross-cultural perspective of consumer purchase decision-making.
International marketers must appreciate and understand the social and cultural
environments in every targeted country market. Evidenced by this study, it is advisable
for international marketers to develop specific marketing strategies (e.g. product, price,
promotion, and distribution) that best match the buyer behavior and family
decision-making situations (i.e. husband-dominated; wife-dominated; joint; autonomic)
that are likely to be encountered in markets overseas.
Table XI.
Locus of influence for
products and services in
US and Singaporean
families
American Singaporean
Wife-dominant Wifes clothing
Cleaning supplies
Childrens wear and accessories
Kitchenware
Non-prescription drugs
Wifes clothing
Cleaning supplies
Childrens wear and accessories
Kitchenware
Non-prescription drugs
Husband-dominant Insurance Television
Stereo/Hi-Fi
Alcohol/wine
Husbands clothing
Insurance
Automobile
Autonomic: wife Childrens toys
Autonomic: husband Alcohol/Wine
Husbands Clothing
Automobile
Joint Furniture
Refrigerator
Television
Stereo/Hi-Fi
Eating out
Childrens toys
Childrens education
Entertainment
Joint savings account
Buy/rent home
Holiday/travel
Furniture
Refrigerator
Eating out
Childrens education
Entertainment
Joint savings account
Buy/rent home
Holiday/travel
Notes: The grand mean of the three decision stages was used to classify each product; the data
of the American families were obtained from literature review; computers and air conditioner/fan
were excluded from this table due to unavailability of US limited data for these products
APJML
18,3
216
Given our findings, it is also clear that to increase the effectiveness of international
marketing programs, marketers who are willing or driven to compete in cross-cultural
environments need to determine the relative influence that male and female spouses
tend to exert at each stage of the family purchase decision-making process for products
likely to be used or consumed. Doing so will not only enable the international marketer
to identify optimal target markets, hence never fail to take unique international
marketing opportunities, but also develop effective marketing communication
strategies after the target markets are identified. In more egalitarian societies, for
instance, women should be portrayed in advertisements with men (husbands), given
that wives play increasingly significant societal roles and exert greater influence in
family decision-making than in less traditional, patriarchal societies. Product
positioning strategies and promotional strategies should be targeted at the appropriate
spouses for product/service categories that distinguish themselves with different or
unique family purchase decision-making characteristics. For example, our study
indicated that female heads of households in Singapore could be considered as the
optimal targets for promotion for cleaning supplies, kitchenware, childrens clothing,
and non-prescription drugs. For purchase situations that are characterized by joint
influence, such as financial products/services (e.g. joint savings account), housing
decisions, childrens education, etc., advertising messages should be relevant to each
spouses informational needs and be able to portray their spousal influence as well as
their self-images.
Our findings also confirmed that higher levels of education and income are
associated positively with higher levels of egalitarianism. Based on this finding, more
syncratic and fewer husband-dominated decisions would be anticipated in target
markets with such spousal resources. Communication efforts must be tailored to suit
the preferences of the well-off and educated consumers. For instance, marketers serving
upscale households may consider sending advertising messages to married women,
instead of couples or men (husbands) alone; executions of messages in promotional
campaigns may include spokeswomen, instead of using only spokesmen, to attract the
more affluent and educated married female consumers.
Research implications
Given our sample design and the method used to compare the Singapore data to
the data derived from previous marketing studies on US family purchase decision-
making, the findings of this study are still preliminary. Yet, they are also encouraging,
because they suggest potentially important implications for international marketing
research:
(1) This study showed that spousal influence differs between American and
Singaporean families across a number of product/service categories. This
indicates that family purchase decision-making is a culture-specific
phenomenon. Hence, the spousal roles, attitudes, and behaviors in different
countries and/or regions should be carefully examined. The challenging task
which requires enormous efforts is to identify the unique family purchase
decision-making processes inherent in different country markets. Along the
same line, childrens or adolescents role and influence should be equally
examined, as they may exert considerable influence in specific household
decision-making situations (e.g. restaurants, toys, etc.). Hence, future research
should examine the influences of other family members.
Singaporean
family purchase
217
(2) Although this study revealed a positive relationship between joint decisions
and the level of egalitarianism, it only provides limited evidence of such a
co-relationship. Given that Singapore is more westernized than many of the
countries in the Asia Pacific region, more evidence is definitely needed.
(3) The results of this study showed that some spousal resources, such as
education and level of income, are positively related to the level of
egalitarianism. This finding is in line with previous research (e.g. Dahl, 1968;
Rank, 1982) which found that the greater the resources of a family member, the
greater would be the power of that family member. However, this simplistic
generalization could be too simplistic and premature. A broader definition of
spousal resources could go far beyond demographics to include more emotional
and psychological factors, such as the time spent alone (Would the wife or
husband spend time alone for shopping?), the love, affection, trust, and
confidence a spouse would have for or earned from another spouse, the
importance a spouse would attach to his or her marriage and family, etc. (Piron,
2002). Some social environmental variables should also exert influences to
family purchase decisions. For instance, in some countries, such as China, the
government policies towards women have encouraged husbands to be actively
involved in many family chores, including shopping. All these factors could can
have an impact on spousal attitudes towards family purchase decision-making
process and, therefore, merit investigation.
(4) Involvement was not examined in this study, but could be an important factor
in family purchase decision-making process. For example, in Singapore as well
among Hispanic communities in the USA, shopping is commonly considered as
a way of socialization. In such a case, both husbands and wives tend to have
high involvement in shopping. To enrich our knowledge and deepen our
understanding of spousal influences on family purchase decision-making
process, we believe that future research needs to be geared towards the
exploration of these important issues.
References
Acock, A.C. and Edwards, J.N. (1982), Egalitarian sex-role attitudes and female income, Journal
of Marriage and the Family, August, pp. 581-89.
Blood, R.O. Jr., and Wolfe, D.M. (1960), Husbands, Wives: The Dynamics of Married Living, Free
Press, Glencoe, IL.
Blumstein, P.W. and Schwartz, P. (1983), American Couples: Money, Work, Sex, William Morrow,
NewYork.
Bonfield, E.H. (1978), Perception of marital roles in decision process: replication and extension,
in Hunt, H.K. (Ed.), Advances in Consumer Research, Association for Consumer Research,
pp. 303-07.
Boot, E. (1957), Family and Social Network, The Free Press, NewYork.
Butterfield, F. (1982), China: Alive in the Bitter Sea, Bantam, Toronto.
Cheng, P.S. and Swinyard, W.R. (1991), The influence of cultural dynamics on family purchase
roles: Chinese versus American husbands and wives, Singapore Marketing Review, Vol. 5,
pp. 5-18.
Chin, T.T. and Farley, J.U. (1987), The impact of cultural patterns on cognition and intention in
Singapore, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 13, March, pp. 540-43.
APJML
18,3
218
Commuri, S. and Gentry, J.W. (2000), Opportunities for family research in marketing, Academy
of Marketing Science Review, Vol. 2000, pp. 1-32.
Commuri, S. and Gentry, J.W. (2005), Resource allocation in households with women as chief
wage earners, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 32 No 2, pp. 185-95.
Conklin, G.H. (1973), Emerging conjugal role patterns in a joint family system:
correlates of social change in Dharwar, India, Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 35,
pp. 742-48.
Cotte, J. and Wood, S.L. (2004), Families and innovative consumer behavior: a triadic analysis
of sibling and parental influence, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 1, June,
pp. 78-86.
Cox, E.P. (1975), Family purchase decision-making and the process of adjustment, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 12, May, pp. 189-95.
Dahl, R.A. (1957), The concept of power, Behavioral Science, Vol. 2, July, pp. 201-18.
Davis, H.L. and Rigaux, B.P. (1974), Perception of marital roles in decision processes, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 1, June, pp. 51-62.
Davis, H.L. (1976), Decision-making within the household, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 2,
March, pp. 241-60.
Davis, H.L., Harry, L. Hoch, S.J. and Easton Ragsdale, E.K. (1986), An anchoring and adjustment
model of spousal predictions, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 13, June, pp. 25-37.
Ferber, R. and Lee, L.C. (1974), Husband wife influence in family purchasing behavior, Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 1, June, pp. 43-50.
Ford, J.B., LaTour, M.S. and Henthorne, T.L. (1995), Perception of marital roles in purchase
decision processes: a cross-cultural study, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 120-31.
Gardiner, H.W. (1968), Attitudes of Thai students toward marriage roles, Journal of Social
Psychology, Vol. 75, pp. 61-65.
Green, R.T. and Cunningham, I.C.M. (1975), Feminine role perception and family purchasing
decisions, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 12, August, pp. 325-32.
Green, R.T. and Cunningham, I.C.M. (1976), Employment status, feminine role perception,
and family purchasing decisions, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 4, November,
pp. 313-24.
Green, R.T. and White, P.D. (1976), Methodological considerations in cross-national consumer
research, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 7, pp. 81-87.
Green, R.T., Jean-Paul, L. Jean-Louis, C. Cunningham, I.C.M. Verhage, B. and Strazzieri, A. (1983),
Societal development and family purchasing roles: a cross-national study, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 9, March, pp. 436-42.
Hadock, C.L. (1979), Hadock cities pitfalls of marketing research, Marketing News, Vol. 12,
June, pp. 1.
Hempel, D.J. (1974), Family buying decisions: a cross-cultural perspective, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 11, August, pp. 295-302.
Henthorne, T.L., LaTour, M.S. and Hudson, T.W. (1997), Japanese couples marital roles in stages
of product purchase decision-making, International Marketing Review, Vol. 14 No. 5,
pp. 39-58.
Hill, C.J. and Neeley, S.E. (1988), Differences in the consumer decision process for professional
versus generic services, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 2, pp. 17-23.
Hofstede, G.H. (1997), Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind, 2nd ed., McGraw Hill,
NewYork, pp. 79-107.
Singaporean
family purchase
219
Hopper, J.S. (1995), Family financial decision-making: implications for marketing strategy,
Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 24-32.
Howard, J.A. (1989), Consumer Behavior in Marketing Action, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Eaglewood
Cliffs, NJ.
Jacobson, A.H. (1950), Astudy of conflict in attitude toward the roles of the husband and the wife
in marriage, unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University.
Jacobson, A.H. (1952) Conflict of attitudes toward the roles of the husband and wife in
marriage, American Sociological Review, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 146-50.
Jaffe, L.J. and Senft, H. (1966), The roles of husbands and wives in purchasing decisions, in
Adler, L. and Crespi, I. (Eds.), Attitude Research at Sea, pp. 95-110.
Kaufman-Scarborough, C. (2000) Asian-American consumers as a unique market segment: fact
or fallacy?, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 249-62.
Krishnamurthy, L. (1983), The salience of relevant others and its effect on individual and joint
preferences: an experimental investigation, Journal of Consumer Research, June, pp. 62-72.
LaTour, M.S., Henthorne, T.L. and Ford, J.B. (1993), Perception of martial roles in purchase
decision processes: a study of 100 Beijing couples, Asian Journal of Marketing, December,
pp. 45-60.
Mano-Negrin, R. and Katz, R. (2003), Money management patterns of dual-earner families in
Israel, Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Vol. 24 No. 1, Spring, pp. 49-72.
Martinez, E. and Polo, Y. (1999), Determining factors in family purchasing behavior: an
empirical investigation, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 461-81.
Nelson, M.C. (1988), The resolution of conflict in joint purchase decision by husbands and wives:
a review and empirical test, in Houston, M.J. (Ed.), Advances in Consumer Research,
Vol. 15, Provo. UT, Association for consumer research, pp. 436-41.
Piron, F. (2002), Singaporean husbands and grocery shopping: an investigation into claims of
changing spousal influence, Singapore Management Review, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 51-65.
Plank, R.E. et al. (1994), Understanding which spouse makes financial decisions, Journal of
Retail Banking, Vol. 16 No. 1, Spring, pp. 21-26.
Qualls, W.J. (1987), Household decision behavior: the impact of husbands and wives sex role
orientation, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 264-79.
Olshavsky, R.W. and King, M.F. (1984), The role of children in household decisionmaking:
application of a new taxonomy of family role structure, in Roberts, M.L. and Wortzel, L.H.
(Eds), Marketing in the Changing Household, Cambridge, MA, Balinger, pp. 41-52.
Rank, M.R. (1982) Determinants of conjugal influence in wives employment in decision-
making, Journal of Marriage and the Family, August, pp. 591-604.
Robertson, A.M. (1990), Spousal decision processes for financial/professional services, Journal
of Professional Services Marketing, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 119-35.
Rodman, H. (1972), Marital power and the theory of resources in cross-cultural context, Journal
of Comparative Family Studies, Vol. 1, pp. 50-61.
Rosen, D.L. and Granbois, D.H. (1983), Determinants of role structure in family financial
management, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 10, September, pp. 253-58.
Safilios-Rothchild, C. (1969), Family sociology or wives family sociology? a cross-cultural
examination of decision-making, Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 29, May,
pp. 290-301.
Schaninger, C.M., Buss, W.C. and Grover, R. (1982), The effects of sex roles on family economic
handling and decision influence, in Walker, B.J. (Ed.), An Assessment of Marketing
Thought and Practice, Proceedings of the 1982 Winter Educators Conference, American
Marketing Association, Chicago, pp. 43-47.
APJML
18,3
220
Seymour, D. and Lessne, G. (1984), Spousal conflict arousal: scale development, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 810-21.
Singapore Department of Statistics (2000), Singapore Census of Population 2000, Singapore
Department of Statistics.
Spiro, R.L. (1983), Persuasion in family decision-making, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9,
March, pp. 393-402.
Stafford, M.R. (1996), Marital influence in the decision-making process for services, Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 6-21.
Stafford, M.R., Ganesh, G. and Luckett, M.G. (1996), Perceived spousal influence in the service
decision-making process: a cross cultural investigation, Journal of Applied Business
Research, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 53-68.
Strodtbeck, F.L. (1951), Husband Wife Interaction over revealed differences, American
Sociological Review, Vol. 16, pp. 468-73.
Su, C., Fern, E.F. and Ye, K. (2003), A temporal dynamic model of spousal family purchase-
decision behavior, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. Xl, August, pp. 268-81.
Thorntone, M.C. and White-Means, S.I. (2000), Race versus ethnic heritage in models of family
economic decisions, Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Vol. 21 No. 1, Spring,
pp. 65-86.
Tichenor, V.J. (1999), Status and income as gendered resources: the case of marital power,
Journal of Marriage and the Family, August, Vol. 61, pp. 638-50.
Turley, L.W. and LeBlanc, R.P. (1993), An exploratory investigation of consumer decision-
making in the service sector, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 11-18.
Webster, C. (1994), Effects of hispanic ethnic identification on marital roles in the purchase
decision process, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 21, September, pp. 319-31.
Webster, C. and Reiss, M.C. (1999), The antecedents of relative influence on purchase decision-
making: married versus cohabiting couples, American Marketing Association Conference
Proceedings, Vol. 10, pp. 34-40.
Webster, C. (2000), Is spousal decision-making a culturally situated phenomenon? Psychology &
Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 12, pp. 1035-58.
Wilkes, R.E. (1975), Husband-wife influence in purchase decisions: a confirmation and
extension, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 7, May, pp. 224-27.
Woodside, A.G. and Motes, W.H. (1979), Perceptions of marital roles in consumer decision
processes for six products, in Beckwith et al., (Eds) Proceedings of American Marketing
Association, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL., pp. 214-19.
Zeithaml, V.A. (1981), How consumer evaluation processes differ between goods and services,
in Donnelly, J. and George, W. (Eds), Marketing of Services, American Marketing
Association, Chicago, IL.
Further reading
Burns, A. and Granbois, D.H. (1977), Factors moderating the resolution of preference conflict in
family automobile purchasing, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 14 No. 000001,
February, pp. 77-86.
Converse, P.D., Hugey, W.W. and Mitchell, R.V. (1958), Elements of Marketing, 6th ed., Englewood
Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall.
Ministry of Community Development and Sports, Singapore, Survey on Social Attitudes of
Singaporeans (SAS), 2001, 2002, 2003.
Park, C.W. (1982), Joints decisions in home purchasing: a muddling-through process, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 9, September, pp. 151-62.
Singaporean
family purchase
221
Appendix 1
Table AI.
List of product and
service categories
examined
Products and services examined
Replicated Modified Added
1. Furniture
p
2. Refrigerator
p
3. TV set
p
4. Air conditioner/fan
p
5. Stereo/Hi-fi
p
6. Eating out
p
7. Wifes clothing
p
8. Cleaning supplies (e.g. detergent)
p
9. Wine/liquor
p
10. Childrens wear and accessories
p
11. Kitchenware
p
12. Childrens toys
p
13. Childrens education
p
14. Entertainment (e.g. movies)
p
15. Husbands clothing
p
16. Join savings account
p
17. Insurance policy (for immediate family member)
p
18. Non-prescription drugs (e.g. panadol)
p
19. Buy/rent home
p
20. Holiday/travel
p
21. Automobile
p
22. Computer
p
Total 6 9 7
Notes: Replicate are products and services replicated from the Davis and Rigauxs (1974) study.
Modified are products and services adapted from the Davis and Rigauxs (1974) study. Slight
modifications were made to the definitions of these products. For example, Purchase of House was
changed to Buy/rent home. Added are products and services not included in the Davis and
Rigauxs (1974) study
APJML
18,3
222
Appendix 2
Corresponding author
Yang Xia can be contacted at: yxia@bloomu.edu
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
Feasibility Triangle
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0% 50% 100%
Autonomic
Syncratic
Wife-dominan t
Husband-Dominant
Notes: Feasibility triangles present husband and wife data separately for each
product/service category, indicating for each spouse the extent to which one
or the other spouse was perceived to be more influential during a specific
stage of the buying decision process (i.e. husband-dominant, wife-dominant,
etc.). The horizontal axis offers a measure of the degree of joint decision-
making reported by husbands (or wives) as a group for each product/service
category examined.
Figure A1.
A sample of feasibility
triangle
Reproducedwith permission of thecopyright owner. Further reproductionprohibited without permission.