Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467

www.elsevier.com/locate/joep

The role of stimuli in a virtual shopping

environment: A test of predictions derived
from conditioning models of marketing firms
Phil Reed *, John McCarthy, Nermen Latif, Julie DeJongh
Department of Psychology, University of College of London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
Received 7 November 1999; received in revised form 10 May 2001; accepted 20 February 2002

Abstract

Two experiments examined the function served by cues presented to subjects shopping in a
virtual supermarket. The aim was to explore whether such cues possessed the properties of
conditioned stimuli (CS), which can attract consumers to the product with which the cues were
associated, or whether the cues served as discriminative stimuli (S d ), signalling that a purchase
would receive reinforcement. To tease apart these functions, a blocking design was employed.
A contingency was arranged so as to embue a stimulus with a particular function (CS or S d ) in
a first stage of the study. In the second stage, that stimulus was presented in compound with a
second stimulus, and the compound served as a CS. As with experiments on associative learn-
ing, stimuli which served as CSs blocked the acquisition of CS properties by other stimuli, but
S d s did not block the acquisition of CS properties (Experiment 1). Likewise, stimuli which
served as S d s blocked the acquisition of S d properties in other stimuli, but CSs did not block
the acquisition of S d properties (Experiment 2). This demonstrated that cues in a virtual super-
market can acquire either of these associative properties. It also implies that marketing firms
should concentrate upon different aspects of the relationship between the environment and
product when attracting costumers to an area (classical conditioning), and encouraging pur-
chase (instrumental conditioning). Ó 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

PsycINFO classification: 2343; 2420; 3940

JEL classification: C92; D12; M30; M31; M37
Keywords: Marketing; Learning; Discriminative stimuli; Pavlovian conditioning; Blocking

*
Corresponding author. Fax: +44-171-4364276.
E-mail address: p.reed@ucl.ac.uk (P. Reed).

0167-4870/02/$ - see front matter Ó 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 6 7 - 4 8 7 0 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 9 6 - X
450 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467

1. Introduction

The influence of learning theory on marketing has long been made explicit; start-
ing with the work of J.B. Watson, who attempted to endow products with particular
properties by pairing them with emotionally charged images (see Malone, 1990). Al-
though the use of conditioning principles by marketing forms was then, and remains
today, largely crude, the use of conditioning principles to understand the processes
of marketing has become rather more sophisticated (e.g., Foxall, 1999). In particu-
lar, the use of principles derived from the study of conditioning and associative
learning have begun to illuminate the manner in which a marketing firm may forge
an influence over consumer behaviour.
Foxall (1999) produced a model of the manner in which a marketing firm operates
to influence consumer behaviour. This model draws on concepts derived from the
analysis of instrumental conditioning. In this model, marketing firms were viewed
as capitalising upon the instrumental nature of the consumer’s behaviour. The key
idea in Foxall’s (1999) analysis of the role of the marketing firm, is the way in which
the firm manipulates the discriminative stimuli (S d s) that are present during a con-
suming episode. If a response is made in the presence of a stimulus, and that response
receives reinforcement, then that stimulus may become a discriminative stimulus for
that response. A discriminative stimulus can be described as setting the occasion
upon which a response will be reinforced (Skinner, 1938); that is, an S d is a stimulus
which serves to increase the likelihood that similar responses will be emitted in its
presence in the future. Foxall (1999) argued that marketing firms manipulate the
stimuli present when consumers are in a shopping environment in order to increase
the probability that a consummatory response will be emitted. Any stimulus that has
been associated with a rewarded purchasing response in the past will, when subse-
quently presented to the consumer, make it more likely that a similar purchasing re-
sponse will be emitted by the consumer. Manipulation of the cues present during a
consuming episode by a marketing firm will alter the likelihood of a purchasing re-
sponse, due to those cues setting the occasion for such responses. The left-hand panel
of Fig. 1 presents this relationship schematically.
Of course, it is also possible that consumer behaviour can be conceived of in a
somewhat different manner, and this would alter the analysis of the marketing firm’s
behaviour. For example, Reed (1999) suggested that the behaviour emitted during a
shopping episode could be classically conditioned, rather than instrumentally condi-
tioned. When such a classical conditioning view is applied to consumer behaviour,
the stimuli associated with the retail environment are viewed as conditioned stimuli
(CS), the item or the service can be viewed as the unconditioned stimulus (US), and
the act of buying is the resulting conditioned response (CR). This model owes more
to the earlier conceptual work of Watson (1936), than to Skinner (1938). Within a
classical conditioning framework, buying an item would result from the establish-
ment of an association between the retail environment and the benefits that accrue
from that item, rather than being dependent upon the reinforcement that item would
provide for the buying response. If this classical conditioning model of consumer be-
haviour is accurate, then the marketing firm can be seen as setting up a powerful US,
 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467 451

Fig. 1. Schematic representation of two conceptions of the relationship between stimuli in a consuming
episode. Left panel: instrumental conditioning view (Foxall, 1999); Right panel: classical conditioning view
(Reed, 1999).

a salient CS, and manipulating the contingencies which relate the CS to the US in
ways that will produce a maximal CR (see right panel of Fig. 1 for a schematic rep-
resentation).
To summarise the different views: the instrumental conditioning model (Foxall,
1999) suggests that the stimuli associated with the retail environment serve as occa-
sion setting cues for a response; in contrast, the classical conditioning model sug-
gests that these stimuli serve as a CS for a consummatory CR. Each of these
models leads to a different conception of the role of the marketing firm. Of course,
these two models are not mutually exclusive, and under various circumstances either
instrumental or classical conditioning may dominate a consumer’s behaviour. Before
attempting to tease apart these two models as accounts of the role of the marketing
firm, it is important to establish in the first instance, that cues in a retail environment
could play the role in consumer behaviour that is suggested by conditioning models.
Foxall (1999) notes that other types of relationship, such as informational cues, may
well serve to generate much human behaviour. If this were the case, then it would be
expected that learning about these cues would be influenced by factors known to af-
fect the course of conditioning. The first aim of the present report is to document
that manipulations of the stimulus functions noted to control nonhuman behaviour
in the conditioning laboratory, can also be seen to control the behaviour of consum-
ers in a retail environment.
It should be noted that it is very difficult to distinguish between the two stimulus
functions noted above (i.e. S d or CS). In all of the situations in which a stimulus
could serve as an S d , there are embedded classical conditioning contingencies be-
tween that stimulus and the US. That is the discriminative stimulus for the delivery
452 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467

of a reinforcer upon the emission of an instrumental response, also itself predicts the
occurrence of the US. The existence of this stimulus–reinforcer relationship means
that stimuli could serve to promote behaviour by virtue of classical conditioning.
To investigate the role that a stimulus is playing in any given situation, subtle exper-
imental designs are needed. Such experiments have been performed within a learning
theory framework in order to separate these two possible stimulus functions (e.g.,
Bonardi, 1988; Holman & Mackintosh, 1981). It is to these designs that any inves-
tigation into the manner in which consumers’ behaviour is controlled must turn.
The principle of blocking, in the context of learning theory, concerns the effect on
the course of conditioning to one element of a compound stimulus, of prior experi-
ence with the other stimuli constituting that compound. Prior independent establish-
ment of one element of a compound stimulus as a CS for a particular US, interferes
with (or blocks) subsequent conditioning to the other elements of the compound
(Kamin, 1968). For example, if a rat learns that a tone predicts food, and is subse-
quently exposed to a compound stimulus comprising a tone and light which is fol-
lowed by food, the rat will not learn much about the light, compared to rats that
only experience the compound stimulus followed by food. The prior training with
the tone is said to block acquisition of a light-food association.
Holman and Mackintosh (1981) carried out two experiments using a blocking de-
sign in order to dissociate the functions of CS and occasion setting cues. In Exper-
iment 1, they found that if a rat were exposed to a clicker–light compound,
conditioning to the light would be blocked if the clicker had previously served as
a classical conditioned signal for food. Such learning about the light, in a clicker–
light compound, was not blocked if the clicker previously had been established as
a discriminative stimulus for an instrumental food-reinforced leverpress. In Experi-
ment 2, reported by Holman and Mackintosh (1981), a clicker–light compound
served as a discriminative stimulus for food-reinforced lever pressing. Control over
the response by the light was blocked, if the clicker had previously been established
as a discriminative stimulus in an earlier phase of the experiment. However, if the
clicker had previously been established as a classically conditioned signal for food,
it did not block learning about the occasion setting properties of the light (when
the clicker and light were presented in compound, as an occasion setter, in a subse-
quent phase of the study). Thus, an S d for an instrumental response will not block
the acquisition of the CS properties of a cue, and a CS will not block acquisition
of S d properties of a stimulus.
Such a design could be applied to determine the function of stimuli in a retail en-
vironment. The outcome of such a study could show if stimuli present in a retail en-
vironment have associative properties, and which functions these stimuli serve under
various conditions. When the situation that prevails during a purchasing episode is
analysed, it is apparent that a number of stimuli and events occur: a particular stim-
ulus array confronts the shopper; a purchase is made (in the presence of this array),
and some benefit accrues (presumably) to the purchaser. One possibility is that the
stimuli could become directly associated with the benefits accruing from the product;
that is, classical conditioning could occur. If this were the case, then the stimuli pre-
sent during the episode would come to serve as CSs, eliciting the purchasing response
 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467 453

(see Reed, 1999). Alternatively, the purchase response may become associated
with the benefits accruing from the product; that is, instrumental conditioning
could occur, and the stimuli could come to serve as discriminative cues for that re-
sponse.
Given the first of the above possibilities, a subject can be presented with a stim-
ulus that is associated with a product. Subsequently, this stimulus could be presented
in compound with a second stimulus, and the compound could be associated with
the product. In the absence of the shopper making a purchasing response (or if
the response does not enter into the associative structure concerning the situation),
then the expected result would be blocking of learning about the added stimulus in
the compound. A classically conditioned stimulus will serve to block the acquisition
of CS properties by another CS compounded with it (Kamin, 1968). In contrast,
such a CS should not block the acquisition of S d functions of a second cue, when
both cues are presented in compound, and signal that a purchasing response will
be reinforced (Holman & Mackintosh, 1981).
If the subject made a purchasing response in the presence of the product (or that
response is encoded into the associative structure produced by the situation), then it
is possible that the cue would serve as a discriminative stimulus for the purchasing
response, as suggested by Foxall (1999). If this were the case, then such a cue, serving
as an S d , should block acquisition of learning about additional S d s, when those cues
are presented in compound with the first stimulus and when both stimuli signal that
a purchasing response will be reinforced. In contrast, such an S d should not block
acquisition of knowledge about a second cue presented in compound with it, when
those cues are associated with a product, but where no response is required.
The second aim of this report is to assess whether these predictions are borne out,
and to illustrate the conditions under which stimuli may serve as CSs and S d s in the
retail environment (as these stimulus functions are not mutually incompatible). In
order to determine how stimuli guide behaviour in a retail environment, a computer
game was used, which served as a virtual shopping environment. In this environ-
ment, the subject was required to navigate around a supermarket, and sometimes
was also required to make particular acquisitions. This allowed investigation of
the stimulus functions of the retail environment cues when purchases were, and were
not, made. The functions of the stimuli associated with those purchases were as-
sessed with a blocking design. Such a virtual environment has the advantage of al-
lowing precise control to be obtained over the relationship of the stimuli,
purchasing response, and product.

2. Experiment 1

As noted above, the role of the cues associated with a product was investigated
using a virtual supermarket. To simulate the act of buying a product, a subject was
required to locate the product within a supermarket, and ‘pick up’ that product from
the supermarket shelf. If the cues associated with the product guided this performance
through their discriminative nature, then training in this environment should mean
454 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467

that the cues associated with the purchase, would not block acquisition of knowledge
about other cues when they, along with the former stimulus, were placed in a purely
Pavlovian relationship to an outcome (i.e. one in which no response was required). In
contrast, if cues present when a purchase was made only served a Pavlovian function,
then blocking should occur just as when the cues had been trained initially in a purely
Pavlovian procedure. These cues would serve to block the acquisition of knowledge
about subsequently added Pavlovian cues in the environment.
To test the above hypotheses, subjects were required to explore a virtual super-
market, and to locate, and (for some subjects) to purchase some coffee. The coffee
was placed in an aisle (on which some of the jars were labelled ‘‘coffee’’), and the task
was to locate this aisle as quickly and efficiently as possible. To simulate a purchase,
the subject had to make a response by picking up a coffee pod. Cues were associated
with aisle containing the coffee, and the subjects could use these cues to locate this
product. It was hypothesised that if these cues were associated with the product in
a condition where the subject had to make a purchasing response, and the subject
learned a relationship between the response and the benefit from that product (in this
virtual context the benefit was to ‘win’ or complete the game), then those cues be-
come discriminative cues for that response. In this case, getting to the aisle would
be controlled by S d s. The stronger the learning about these cues, the greater their
control over behaviour, and the faster they should allow location of the aisle and
purchase of the product. Consequently, these stimuli would not subsequently inter-
fere with learning about other cues, presented along with the former stimuli, and as-
sociated with the product when no response was required. In this latter case,
performance is assumed to be controlled by Pavlovian mechanisms (the CS for a par-
ticular product eliciting approach behaviour). The greater the degree of classical con-
ditioning, the greater the approach behaviour (CR), and the faster the product will
be located. However, if no response were initially required (i.e. the subjects only had
to locate the coffee, but not purchase it), then these cues would interfere with subse-
quent learning about other cues signalling the coffee’s location.

2.1. Method

2.1.1. Subjects
Thirty subjects were used in the present experiment. They were drawn from the
student population at University College London, and all were volunteers. There
were 11 males and 19 females (mean age ¼ 21:7 years, age range ¼ 19–28 years).

2.1.2. Apparatus
A modified version of the computer game ‘‘Duke Nukem’’ was run on two PCs. On
PC1, the game was run for the subject to play. On PC2, the experimenter viewed the
subject’s movements through the virtual environment. The environment consisted of
a virtual supermarket, containing a number of aisles. Fig. 2 shows the plan of the en-
vironment, with the entrance and position of the coffee marked.
 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467 455

Fig. 2. Outline of the supermarket-maze environment used in Experiments 1 and 2, showing the entrance,
and location of the coffee product.

On the ends of each aisle were squares of a particular colour, and the produce was
found marked on the selves. The subjects moved themselves through the environ-
ment by the use of four assigned keys: ‘‘a’’, ‘‘z’’, ‘‘<’’ and ‘‘>’’.

2.1.3. Procedure
The subjects were divided into three equal sized groups ðn ¼ 10Þ. All of the sub-
jects had first to perform in a training environment, to accustom them to moving in
the 3-D display. This training phase involved using the assigned keys to move
through a slalom course. All the subjects had three attempts at the training course.
Prior to performing in this part of the experiment, the subjects were given the follow-
ing printed instructions to read:

This experiment requires you to move in between the red and the blue
poles in this training room. The keys which help you to move are: a: for-
ward; z: back; <: right; and >: left. There will be three trials in this train-
ing room. A large circular sign on the wall signals the end of the trial.
Move towards this and press the space bar when you reach it to end
the trial. When you have completed all three trials, wait for the experi-
menter to give you further instruction.

Following this pretraining, the subjects were transferred to the virtual supermar-
ket. Written instructions were given to the subjects as below:
456 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467

This part of the experiment consists of a set of mazes, set in a computer sim-
ulated 3-D supermarket. Your task is to find the coffee in the supermarket.

The task is divided into blocks, of which there will be five trials in each block. [In
block one, you must pick up the pod by the coffee to exit the maze.] When you have
successfully completed a trial, the screen will return to the start of the next trial,
which you may begin when you feel ready. The experimenter will come and see
you between blocks.
Thank you for taking part in this experiment.
Each group performed three phases of the experiment (with the exception of the
control group, who performed only in Phases 2 and 3). There were five trials in each
phase. The subjects were told that their task was to find the coffee in the supermarket.
Depending upon which phase and group they were in, different coloured signs, located
at the end of each aisle, signalled the aisle in which the coffee was placed. The stimulus
at the end of the target aisle was either a blue, or a grey, or both a blue and a grey,
coloured square. All of the other aisles also had displayed other coloured markers.
In the first phase of training, for one group (Group Discrim), the cues were ar-
ranged so that they had the potential to serve as discriminative stimuli for an instru-
mental response. In this group, the subjects had to navigate to the appropriate aisle,
marked with a particular coloured sign (blue or grey), and make the response of
picking up a coffee pod in that aisle. Once the experimenter had seen that the subject
had made the correct response, the trial was terminated, and the time taken to com-
plete the trial (as well as the number of aisles entered in total) was recorded. For a
second group (Group Class), the subjects only had to navigate to the location of the
coffee, but did not have to make a response. That is, there was no instrumental re-
sponse required; the cues served only a classical function. All other components of
the trial were as for Group Discrim. The third group (Group Control) did not par-
ticipate in this phase of the study.
In Phase 2, all three groups performed the navigation part of the task again (with
no group having to make a response in this phase of the study). Once the subject had
located the coffee in the appropriate aisle, the experimenter terminated the trial.
However, during the five trials of this phase of the experiment, the aisle was marked
with both a blue and grey square.
Finally, in the test phase of the experiment, the subjects had to navigate to the ap-
propriate aisle, as in Phase 2 (i.e. no response was involved). The aisle was marked
with the coloured square that had not been used in Phase 1 (for Group Control, half
the subjects navigated to the blue square aisle, and half to a grey square marked
aisle). Once the subjects had located the coffee, the experimenter terminated the trial.
The top panel of Table 1 schematically displays the design of the experiment.

2.2. Results

2.2.1. Time
The time taken to find the product by all groups in the first two phases of the
study is shown in Table 2. Inspection of the data from Phase 1, reveals that Group
 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467 457

Table 1
Schematic representation of the experimental designs
Group Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
Experiment 1
Discrim S1d CS1 þ CS2 CS2
Class CS1 CS1 þ CS2 C2
Control – S1 þ CS2 CS2

Experiment 2
Discrim S1d S1d þ S2d S2d
Class CS1 S1d þ S2d S2d

Table 2
Time taken (s) to complete task for all groups during Phases 1 and 2 of Experiment 1
Group Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5
Phase 1
Discrim 44.80 25.10 23.40 17.90 15.80
Class 117.20 82.60 24.20 18.80 20.80
Phase 2
Discrim 139.50 97.10 42.70 26.30 22.70
Class 149.20 68.50 28.10 21.60 20.40
Control 129.50 84.20 32.40 25.10 21.30

Discrim was initially faster than Group Class, but that both groups took successively
less time to locate the product over the course of training. An analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was performed on these data, with group as a between-subject factor,
and trial as a within-subject factor. A rejection criterion of p < 0:05 was adopted
for this, and all subsequent studies. This analysis revealed a statistically significant
main effect of group, F ð1; 18Þ ¼ 20:86, a significant main effect of trial, F ð4; 72Þ ¼
11:77, and a significant interaction between these two factors, F ð4; 72Þ ¼ 4:64. Sim-
ple main effect analysis of group on Trial Five (i.e. the end of training) revealed no
statistical difference between the two groups, F < 1.
During Phase 2, there was very little difference between the groups, and all groups
came to navigate through the maze, and locate the coffee, much faster on the last
trial, than they had on the first trial. An ANOVA (group  trial) revealed no signif-
icant main effect of group, F < 1, a significant main effect of trail, F ð4; 108Þ ¼ 59:58,
but no significant interaction between the two factors, F < 1.
Fig. 3 displays the mean time taken to find the target product by the three groups
during the test phase of the study. Inspection of these data reveals that Group Class
initially took longer than either of the other two groups to locate the product,
and that all groups finally took very little time to find the target. An ANOVA
(group  trial) revealed no main effect of group, p > 0:20, but a significant main ef-
fect of trial, F ð4; 108Þ ¼ 82:13, and a significant interaction between group and trial,
458 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467

Fig. 3. Experiment 1. Mean time taken to locate the coffee product during Phase 3 of Experiment 1. Dis-
crim: group with training of S d in Phase 1 then exposure to CSs; Class: group with training of CS in Phase
1, then exposure to CSs; Control: group with no training in Phase 1, then exposure to CSs.

F ð8; 108Þ ¼ 3:04. Simple effect analysis of group on Trial One, revealed a significant
difference between the groups, F ð2; 265Þ ¼ 5:01. Tukey’s honestly significant differ-
ence (HSD) tests conducted on this trial, revealed that Group Class took longer than
each of the other two groups to locate the coffee. The other two groups did not differ
from one another.

2.2.2. Errors
The errors made, that is entries into an incorrect aisle, by all groups in the first
two phases of the study are shown in Table 3. Inspection of the data for Phase 1,
reveals that Group Class made more errors than Group Discrim, and that both
groups made successively fewer errors over the course of training. An ANOVA
(group  trial) revealed a statistically significant main effect of trial, F ð4; 68Þ ¼
10:02, no significant main effect of group, F < 1, but a significant interaction be-
tween these two factors, F ð4; 68Þ ¼ 5:06. Simple main effect analysis of group on
Trail Five revealed no statistical difference between the groups.
During Phase 2, Group Class made fewer errors than the other two groups, and
all groups came to locate the product with fewer errors on the last trial than they had
made on the first trial. An ANOVA (group  trial) revealed a significant main effect
of group, F ð2; 26Þ ¼ 3:64, a significant effect of trail, F ð4; 108Þ ¼ 71:55, but no sig-
nificant interaction between the two factors, p > 0:10.
Fig. 4 displays the mean number of errors made by three groups during the test
phase of the study. Inspection of these data reveals that Group Class initially made
more errors than the other two groups when locating the aisle, and that all groups
made very few errors on the last trial of training. An ANOVA (group  trial) revealed
no main effect of group, p > 0:10, but a main effect of trial, F ð4; 104Þ ¼ 82:80,
 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467 459

Table 3
Errors made (incorrect aisle entries) when completing task for all groups during Phases 1 and 2 of Exper-
iment 1
Group Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5
Phase 1
Discrim 6.33 3.00 8.00 0.67 0.22
Class 12.60 7.40 0.10 0 0

Phase 2
Discrim 20.33 10.44 5.11 2.44 1.89
Class 13.90 5.00 1.00 0.40 0.30
Control 14.00 10.00 3.70 2.30 1.70

Fig. 4. Experiment 1. Mean number of errors made when locating the coffee product during Phase 3 of
Experiment 1. Discrim: group with training of S d in Phase 1 then exposure to CSs; Class: group with train-
ing of CS in Phase 1, then exposure to CSs; Control: group with no training in Phase 1, then exposure to
CSs.

and a significant interaction between group and trial, F ð8; 104Þ ¼ 2:35. However,
simple effect analysis of group failed to revealed any significant differences on the
trials. Tukey’s HSD tests conducted on these trials revealed that Group Class
made more errors than each of the other two groups, which did not differ from one
another.

2.3. Discussion

These results demonstrate that, in the context of the present experiment, block-
ing of learning about an added element occurred in human subjects when they
used those cues to find a particular location. That Group Class responded more
460 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467

slowly than Group Control, is consistent with the occurrence of a blocking

effect. Prior training with a stimulus associated with a particular product and lo-
cation, blocked learning about an added element in a subsequent phase of the ex-
periment. However, no such blocking effect occurred when the subjects were
required to make a response in the presence of the cue in the first phase of the train-
ing. That is, when the subject made a response in the presence of the product, learn-
ing about the cue did not serve to block leaning about the cues in a second phase
where no response was required. This result is consist with that reported by Holman
and Mackintosh (1981) for nonhumans, who similarly showed no blocking of a sub-
sequent classical relationship by a stimulus previously established as instrumental
occasion setter. This suggests that if the consumer makes a purchase in the presence
of the cues associated with product, and this purchase is rewarded, then the cues
associated with that purchase do not appear to be serving as a classically CS. To
this extent, the model of consumer behaviour suggested by Foxall (1999) is vali-
dated.

3. Experiment 2

The results from the first experiment demonstrate that a stimulus that accompa-
nies a response will not serve to block learning about a stimulus subsequently pre-
sented in compound with it, that does not signal the occasion for a response. To
further demonstrate a failure of blocking between stimuli established as a CS and
as an S d , the second experiment investigated whether a classically conditioned stim-
ulus would block subsequent learning about an instrumental occasion setting stim-
ulus. If the purchase was encoded as part of the associative structure of the event,
then the cues present at the time the purchase was made could serve as S d s. If this
were the case, then performance in locating and purchasing the product would be
under their control, and would be proportional to the strength of learning about
the S d s. Subsequent learning about other S d would be blocked by such stimuli (lead-
ing to longer search times for the product and purchase). A stimulus presented along
with a cue when no purchasing response was required should, on the other hand, ac-
quire classically conditioned properties, and should not block the subsequent learn-
ing about the S d properties of additional added stimuli when a purchase is required.
However, if the purchase does not enter into the association, then cues in both
groups should acquire Pavlovian properties, and the time taken to learn about the
location of the product should be similar in both groups across all phases of the ex-
periment.

3.1. Method

3.1.1. Subjects and apparatus

Sixteen subjects were used in the present experiment. They were drawn from the
student population at University College London, and were volunteers. There were
 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467 461

six males and 10 females (mean age ¼ 20:5 years, age range ¼ 18–32 years). The ap-
paratus was as described in Experiment 1.

3.1.2. Procedure
The subjects were divided into two equal sized groups ðn ¼ 8Þ. All the subjects
had first to perform in a training environment, as described in Experiment 1, in order
to accustom them to moving in the 3-D supermarket display. The subjects were then
transferred to the virtual supermarket. Written instructions were given to the sub-
jects as described in Experiment 1.
Each group performed in three phases of the experiment. There were five trials in
each phase. The subjects were told that their task was to find the coffee in the super-
market. Depending upon which phase and group they were in, different signs sig-
nalled the aisle in which the coffee was placed. As in Experiment 1, the stimulus
located on the target aisle comprised a blue square, or a grey square, or both squares
of both colours. Other aisles had different coloured squares associated with them.
The instrumental condition required that the subject made the response of picking
up a coffee pod in the aisle which contained the coffee. The classical component re-
quired no such response.
For Group Class, Phase 1 involved the subjects having to find coffee located in the
aisle with the blue (or grey) sign on the end of it (a classical stimulus). Phase 2 in-
volved the subjects locating the aisle with a blue and a grey stimulus on it, and pick-
ing up a coffee pod from that aisle. Phase 3 was the test, involving locating the aisle
with the grey (or blue) stimulus on it, and picking up a pod. For the second group
(Group Discrim), the stimuli and tasks were identical, except a response of picking
up the pod was required during Phase 1. The design for this experiment is shown in
the bottom panel of Table 1.

3.2. Results

3.2.1. Time
The time taken to find the product by both groups, in the first two phases of
the study, is shown in Table 4. Inspection of the Phase 1 data, reveals that both
groups took successively less time to locate the product over the course of training.
An ANOVA (group  trial) revealed a statistically significant main effect of trial,
F ð4; 56Þ ¼ 18:81, no significant main effect of group, and no significant interaction,
p’s > 0:10.
During Phase 2, both groups came to navigate the maze much faster on the last
trial than they had on the first trial. An ANOVA ðgroup  trialÞ revealed no signif-
icant main effect of group, F < 1, a significant effect of trial, F ð4; 56Þ ¼ 36:04, but no
significant interaction between the two factors, F < 1.
Fig. 5 displays the mean time taken to find the target by the groups during the test
phase of the study. Inspection of these data reveals that Group Discrim initially took
much longer than Group Class to locate the aisle, and that by the end of training,
both groups took very little time to find the target. An ANOVA ðgroup  trialÞ re-
vealed no significant main effect of group, p > 0:08, a significant effect of trial,
462 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467

Table 4
Time taken (s) to complete task for all groups during Phases 1 and 2 of Experiment 2
Group Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5
Phase 1
Discrim 173.50 101.87 43.88 33.13 20.88
Class 110.13 88.88 39.88 50.00 24.75
Phase 2
Discrim 147.25 67.50 44.25 30.00 21.13
Class 173.75 58.25 34.63 34.25 29.25

Fig. 5. Experiment 2. Mean time taken to locate the coffee product during Phase 3 of Experiment 2. Dis-
crim: group with training of S d in Phase 1 then exposure to S d s; Class: group with training of CS in Phase
1, then exposure to S d s.

F ð4; 56Þ ¼ 25:10, and a significant interaction between the two factors, F ð4; 56Þ ¼
5:50. There was a significant simple main effect of group on Trial One, F ð1; 65Þ ¼
24:13.

3.2.2. Errors
The mean errors made, entering an incorrect aisle, by both groups in the first two
phases of the study are shown in Table 5. Inspection of the data for Phase 1, reveals
that both groups made successively fewer errors over the course of training. An AN-
OVA ðgroup  trialÞ revealed no main effect of group, p > 0:06, but a main effect of
trial, F ð4; 56Þ ¼ 20:48, and a significant interaction between group and trial,
F ð4; 56Þ ¼ 2:69. Simple effect analysis of group on Trial One revealed a significant
difference between the groups, F < 1.
 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467 463

Table 5
Errors made (incorrect aisles entered) when completing maze for all groups during Phases 1 and 2 of Ex-
periment 2
Group Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5
Phase 1
Discrim 23.50 11.38 3.75 1.63 1.00
Class 11.63 7.38 2.63 2.63 0.13

Phase 2
Discrim 15.13 6.63 3.50 1.88 0.88
Class 10.63 3.50 1.00 1.00 0.88

During Phase 2, all groups came to navigate the maze with fewer errors on the last
trail than they had on the first trial. An ANOVA ðgroup  trialÞ revealed no signif-
icant main effect of group, p > 0:10, a significant main effect of trial, F ð4; 56Þ ¼
24:13, but no significant interaction between the two factors, F < 1.
Fig. 6 displays the mean number of errors made by groups during the test phase of
the study. Inspection of these data reveals that Group Discrim initially made more
errors than Group Class when locating the aisle, and that both groups finally made
very few errors. An ANOVA (group  trial) revealed a significant main effect of
group, F ð1; 14Þ ¼ 6:82, a significant main effect of trial, F ð4; 56Þ ¼ 11:03, and a sig-
nificant interaction between group and trial, F ð4; 56Þ ¼ 5:08. Simple effect analysis of
group on Trial One revealed a significant difference between the groups, F ð1; 67Þ ¼
26:76.

Fig. 6. Experiment 2. Mean number of error made when locating the coffee product during Phase 3 of
Experiment 2. Discrim: group with training of S d in Phase 1 then exposure to S d s. Class: group with train-
ing of CS in Phase 1, then exposure to S d s.
464 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467

3.3. Discussion

That Group Class displayed fewer errors, and a faster time in navigating the maze
during the test trials suggests that blocking of the occasion setting function of the
cues had not occurred by the stimulus that functioned as a classically conditioned
stimulus during Phase 1. This contrasts with the longer time and greater number
of errors in the group in which the cues always served as an occasion setter. These
results mirror those reported in Experiment 1, and show that a stimulus initially serv-
ing as a CS will not serve to block the acquisition of S d properties in other cues.
Thus, if the stimuli are serving to control behaviour through their discriminative
properties, due to their association with a rewarded response, then the ability to nav-
igate the maze will depend on the strength of this stimulus function. The blocked
stimuli in Phase 2 will not acquire much strength as S d s, and maze navigation will
be poor on the basis of these cues when presented alone. In contrast, if the cue ac-
quired a role as a CS in Phase 1 (since no response to the product was reinforced),
this stimulus function would not effect the acquisition of S d properties subsequently.

4. General discussion

The present report investigated whether the cues present at the time when a pur-
chasing response was made in a virtual environment, controlled performance
through their classically conditioned properties, or via their function as a discrimina-
tive stimulus. The results demonstrated that, depending upon the situation, both
stimulus functions could be served by the cues present in the environment. When
the subject was required to make a response in the presence of the cues, these cues
appeared to act as discriminative cues, as suggested by the model outlined by Foxall
(1999). However, when the subject was required only to locate a particular item, and
not to make a response, the cues appeared to control behaviour though classically
conditioned properties.
These conclusions were arrived at by the demonstration that a cue which was set
up as a discriminative stimulus, would not block the subsequent acquisition of learn-
ing about cues that served as CSs (Experiment 1). Similarly, a stimulus that served as
classically conditioned stimulus (one that would elicit approach behaviour by virtue
of its being paired with the desired outcome) would not serve to block learning about
a second stimulus, with which it was presented in compound, when the compound
served to signal that a response would be reinforced (Experiment 2). However, an
established occasion setter would block learning about the occasion setting proper-
ties of a second stimulus when the two were presented in compound, and an estab-
lished CS would block learning about a second CS. To this extent, it can be
concluded that the function of occasion setting and classical cues are separable in
the virtual shopping environment. This demonstration that stimuli in a retail envi-
ronment could acquire associative properties, and be influenced by manipulations
that also influence the course of conditioning, was the main purpose of the present
experiment.
 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467 465

As both stimulus functions are demonstrable, it becomes a point of contention

about which of the functions are serving to control the consumer’s behaviour. How-
ever, on no other grounds than face validity of the shopping experience, it appears as
if the cues most important to controlling a purchases may well be discriminative
cues, as suggested by Foxall (1999). That is, when a response is involved which in-
cludes the item to be purchased, the cues present appear to serve as occasion setters,
since they will block the acquisition of knowledge about future occasion setters for
that response, but not will not block acquisition of learning about classically CS.
However, if the purpose of the cues is to generate approach behaviour only (i.e.
no purchase response is required or reinforced), then the cues appear to work as clas-
sically CS. They will block further learning about new CSs, but not about occasion
setters.
In practical terms, the results do have some implications about the types of
manipulations that marketing firms should conduct with respect to stimuli and
products. Currently, research concerning the role of extrinsic cues in retail environ-
ments has focused mainly on their general arousal properties (e.g., Spangenberg,
Crowley, & Henderson, 1996), or on their influence over product evaluation (Rich-
ardson, Dick, & Jain, 1994). The present report suggests that a more subtle analysis
is possible. If the intention is to attract customers to particular locations, then the
marketing firms should focus on manipulating the Pavlovian relationships between
cues and the products they signal. However, if a specific purchase is the aim, then
the manipulation should be aimed at maximizing the discriminative function of a
particular set of stimuli associated with a product. In both these scenarios, the term
stimuli is used to refer to any cue that is consistently associated with a product, and
could include the cues in the retail environment, the brand cues for that product, or
the cues associated with the product through advertising.
Of course, clarification of the functioning of the cues in a retail environment also
can aid consumers to avoid exploitation by those manipulations made by the mar-
keting firm. As Foxall (1999) has noted, the relationship between the marketing firm
and the consumer is a reciprocal one. The behaviour of the consumer forms the S d
that controls the marketing firm’s behaviour. Thus, to the extent that purchase is
controlled by instrumental discriminative stimuli, the consumer can exert on influ-
ence on the retail environment through their impact on the marketing firm’s behav-
iour. This will result from the consumer being able to perform a careful functional
analysis of the cues which appear to be associated with products during the pur-
chase. A similar awareness of the classical cues involved also can allow consumers
to control their behaviour within the retail environment. It has been established that
subjects can withhold a CR (in this case approach), when they become aware of the
contingency (e.g., Swensen & Hill, 1970). One obvious example of where such aware-
ness could be used by the consumer to protect themselves from marketing ploys is in
the ambush advert. Here the product is paired with a major event to endow the prod-
uct with positive affective properties (see McDaniel & Kinney, 1998). Awareness of
this could substantially reduce the impact of this ploy. The implications of recency
and gender effects in consumer response to ambush marketing. It should be noted,
however, that such a functional analysis of the controlling cues may be quite
466 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467

complex within a real life shopping environment, and it is often difficult to obtain
conscious awareness of the controlling cues.
As outlined in the General Introduction to this report, it is very difficult to isolate
the classically conditioned properties of any cue from its occasion setting functions.
This is a point that has been made in the context of studies of animal conditioning,
and the task is made doubly difficult in a complex situation such as the study of con-
sumer behaviour. The adoption of an experimental analogue of the shopping envi-
ronment allows some of the difficulties to be overcome, and the properties of the
cues present at any one time to be manifest. Of course, it could be argued that the
use of a virtual shopping experience necessitates a loss in validity of the findings.
It could be that the organisation of the present virtual environment contributed to
the present pattern of results. However, it is not clear how this would have occurred,
and it is believed that the potential loss of validity may be counteracted by an in-
crease in the reliability of the findings.
There is reasonably good evidence that experience in virtual environments can
transfer to behaviour emitted in their equivalent real environments. For example,
Wilson, Foreman, and Tlanker (1997) have demonstrated significant transfer of spa-
tial information between virtual and real environment, and many simulations run in
a virtual framework have proved effective in imparting skills to be exercised later in a
real situation (Wilson, Foreman, & Stanton, 1993). Thus, there is no reason, on the
basis of these data, that the results obtained from the use of virtual environments
should not transfer to real shopping experiences. Of course, in a real shopping envi-
ronment, there will always be great difficulty in accurately specifying the cues which
are controlling the consumers’ behaviour at any given point.
Although there may be reason for some optimism regarding the generality of the
results of the present experiment, it should be remembered that there are advances in
virtual shopping technology almost every week. Given this rapidly changing situa-
tion, more convincing virtual shopping simulations could be developed as the tech-
nology improves. These simulations using more recent technology may well have
greater validity for the shopping task simulated. Having acknowledged this problem,
it should also be mentioned that the laws of learning employed in designing this task
and explaining the results survived transition from the conditioning chamber with
rat subjects to the computer screen with humans. Given this successful transi-
tion, it seems a plausible suggestion that whatever the task, the results should be sim-
ilar.
It should also be noted that the present results are not only of potential interest to
those involved in the study of marketing. There are very few demonstrations of the
present phenomena in the nonhuman conditioning literature (see Holman & Mack-
intosh, 1981); and these results represent an important corroboration that classically
conditioned cues will not block instrumental occasion setting cues, nor vice versa.
Indeed, there are very few examples of blocking in the human literature (see Shanks,
1985). The fact that both of these phenomena have been demonstrated in the present
context suggests that the conditioning model derived from the animal laboratory
may have some potential in explaining human economic behaviour, whether the con-
ditioning model of marketing and consumer behaviour proposed by Foxall (1999) or
 P. Reed et al. / Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 449–467 467

the alternative presented by Reed (1999) ultimately comes to explain most of the
variance in the data.

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to Lisa A. Osborne for initiating discussion of these ideas. Re-
quests for reprints should be addressed to: Phil Reed, Department of Psychology,
University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK (e-mail:
p.reed@ucl.ac.uk).

References

Bonardi, C. (1988). Mechanisms of inhibitory discriminative control. Animal Learning and Behavior, 16,
445–450.
Foxall, G. R. (1999). The marketing firm. Journal of Economic Psychology, 20, 235.
Holman, J. G., & Mackintosh, N. J. (1981). The control of appetitive instrumental responding does not
depend on classical conditioning to the discriminative stimulus. Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 33B, 21–31.
Kamin, L. J. (1968). Attention-like processes in classical conditioning. In M. R. Jones (Ed.), Miami
symposium on the prediction of behavior: Aversive stimulation. Miami: University of Miami Press.
Malone, J. C. (1990). Theories of learning: A historical approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
McDaniel, S. R., & Kinney, L. (1998). The implications of recency and gender effects in consumer response
to ambush marketing. Psychology and Marketing, 15, 385–403.
Reed, P. (1999). Comments on Gordon Foxall: The marketing firm. Journal of Economic Psychology, 20,
235–243.
Richardson, P. S., Dick, A. S., & Jain, A. K. (1994). Extrinsic and intrinsic cue effects on perceptions of
store brand quality. Journal of Marketing, 58, 28–36.
Shanks, D. R. (1985). Forward and backward blocking in human causality judgment. Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 37B, 1–21.
Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Spangenberg, E. R., Crowley, A. E., & Henderson, P. W. (1996). Improving the store environment: Do
olfactory cues affect evaluations and behaviors? Journal of Marketing, 60, 67–80.
Swensen, R. P., & Hill, F. A. (1970). Effects of instructions and interstimulus interval in human GSR
conditioning. Psychonomic Science, 21, 369–370.
Watson, J. B. (1936). In C. Murchison (Ed.), A history of psychology in autobiography. Worcester, MA:
Clark University Press.
Wilson, P. N., Foreman, N., & Tlanker, M. (1997). Transfer of spatial information from a virtual to a real
environment. Human Factors, 39, 526–531.
Wilson, P. N., Foreman, N., & Stanton, D. (1993). Virtual reality, disability and rehabilitation. Disability
and Rehabilitation: An International Multidisciplinary Journal, 19, 213–220.