Journal of Business Research 55 (2002) 687 – 696

Traditional malls vs. factory outlets: comparing shopper typologies and

implications for retail strategy
Kristy E. Reynolds*, Jaishankar Ganesh, Michael Luckett
Department of Marketing, College of Business Administration, University of Central Florida, Box 161400, Orlando, FL 32816-1400, USA

Abstract

The scholarly literature reflects the presence of numerous shopper typologies and taxonomies that classify shoppers into subgroups.
Unfortunately, the use of diverse methodological approaches has restricted the generalizability and comparability of the findings. The current
study seeks to fill this gap in our knowledge by means of an examination of shoppers at a traditional mall and a factory-outlet mall. A mall
intercept survey was used to collect the data from 1097 shoppers in the traditional mall and 827 shoppers in the outlet mall. Using a
multistep-cluster analysis, retail attribute importance ratings were used to derive shopper typologies in both retail formats. The shopper types
are profiled on attitudes toward shopping, satisfaction, repeat visit intentions, and other variables. Five shopper subgroups (Basic, Apathetic,
Destination, Enthusiasts, and Serious) are described in both retail formats and one additional shopper subgroup exclusive to the factory-outlet
mall (Brand Seekers). Future research might focus on other retail formats, including online shopping, to fully understand the similarities and
differences between shopper types. D 2002 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Retail patronage behaviour; Shopper typologies; Shopping behaviour

1. Introduction Another factor threatening traditional mall/department

Understanding patronage behavior is one of the keys to
success for today’s retailers. Increasingly, it is necessary
that managers know which retail attributes are important to
which shoppers so that the appropriate retail strategy can
be developed. Past studies have done a commendable job
in developing shopper profiles or typologies. However,
because different retail formats have been studied using
very different approaches, comparability and generalizabil-
ity across these studies is low (Westbrook and Black,
1985). Furthermore, most research in this area dates back
to the 1970s, 1980s, and the early half of the 1990s. The
retail landscape and consumer-shopping behavior have
both changed considerably during the past few years. In
fact, in recent studies, shoppers reported that they are
shopping less frequently and spending less time in the
mall each visit. They also report that they feel that malls
are too expensive and that they simply do not have as
much time to shop at malls (cf. Burns and Warren, 1995;
Marketing News, 1997).
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-407-823-5974; fax: +1-407-823-
3891.
E-mail address: kristy.reynolds@bus.ucf.edu (K.E. Reynolds).
store shopping is the growing availability of an immense
array of retail offerings for the ever-increasing number of
bargain-hunting, time-impoverished consumers. These
include category killers, warehouse clubs, discount stores,
supercenters, factory-outlet malls, and nontraditional retail
formats, such as online, television, and catalog shopping.
The factory-outlet mall is one popular alternative to the
traditional shopping mall. Comprised of stores operated by
brand-name manufacturers of apparel, shoes, electronics,
and other products, factory-outlet malls offer an additional
outlet for their inventory. According to the International
Council of Shopping Centers (Bird, 1997), since 1993, the
number of factory-outlet centers has grown to approxi-
mately 350, a 27% increase. From the consumer’s perspect-
ive, factory-outlet centers offer brand names at lower prices
in a one-stop shopping environment. In addition, these malls
are often located near major highways and tourist sites,
providing a form of recreation for many consumers (LaBay
and Comm, 1991).
In essence, the retail environment in the United States
seems to be undergoing a metamorphosis influenced by: (a)
changing consumer preferences, (b) an increase in tra-
ditional, as well as nontraditional retail competition, and
(c) the onset of trends, such as ‘‘demalling’’ — which
involves either the demolition of existing shopping malls

0148-2963/02/$ – see front matter D 2002 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 4 8 - 2 9 6 3 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 2 1 3 - 7
688 K.E. Reynolds et al. / Journal of Business Research 55 (2002) 687–696
or the conversion of closed malls into open-air shopping
areas, and ‘‘entertailing’’ — which refers to the addition of
entertainment-oriented services and retail stores in an effort
to lure back shoppers (Wakefield and Baker, 1998). These
changes call for a reexamination of patronage motives and
shopper typologies that would provide retailers with critical
insights for developing strategies to attract and keep today’s
shoppers. More importantly, retailers need to understand the
similarities and differences in shopper profiles among com-
peting retail formats to design effective segmentation and
target marketing strategies. Given this, the objectives of this
study are:
1. To develop shopper typologies in both a traditional
mall and an outlet mall using the same set of measures
— retail attribute importance ratings;
2. To provide profiles of the shopper subgroups based on
additional characteristics, such as attitudes toward
shopping, satisfaction, repeat purchase intentions, and
word of mouth;
3. To identify the similarities and differences between
the shopper subgroups patronizing traditional malls
vs. factory outlets; and,
4. To provide guidelines for retail-strategy formulation.
This report is organized as follows. First, we briefly
review the related patronage behavior research and posi-
tion the current study in light of past research findings.
Next, we describe the data collection and methodology,
followed by a discussion of the findings. Finally, we
discuss the managerial and strategic implications, identify
the limitations, and offer guidelines for future research in
this area.
2. Literature review
The patronage behavior literature is vast. Researchers
have sought to identify customers’ motivations for shop-
ping and the store attributes most important to various
segments of shoppers. The earliest study on profiling
shoppers was Stone’s (1954) examination of urban shop-
pers. Numerous other researchers have developed shopper
typologies in various settings (cf. Darden and Reynolds,
1971; Darden and Ashton, 1975; Bellenger et al., 1977;
Darian, 1987; LaBay and Comm, 1991; Bloch et al., 1994;
Roy, 1994). Further, the various shopper typologies result-
ing from these studies have been developed based on a
number of different methods (cf. Stephenson and Willet,
1969; Moschis, 1976; Bellenger and Korgaonkar, 1980;
Bellenger et al., 1977; Westbrook and Black, 1985).
Although such typologies and taxonomies provide tre-
mendous insights into the shopping behavior of consum-
ers, they offer very little in terms of generalizability and
comparability (see Westbrook and Black, 1985 for a
review of this research).
Research most relevant to the current study that
specifically examines shopping-behavior patterns and
shopper typologies in the context of the traditional
shopping mall and the factory-outlet mall are few. Bel-
lenger et al. (1977) examined the importance of certain
patronage motivations of shopping-center customers and
found two shopper segments: recreational shoppers and
economic/convenience shoppers. A later study by Bel-
lenger and Korgaonkar (1980) verified the existence of
these two shopper types. Specifically, this study revealed
that recreational shoppers are more likely to shop with
others, to spend more time shopping, and to continue to
shop after making a purchase, compared to the economic/
convenience shopper.
A more recent study by Roy (1994) focused on
profiling the frequent mall shopper based on motivations
for shopping, degree of deal proneness, and demo-
graphics. The frequent mall shopper is more likely to be
a recreational shopper, to be older, to have a larger
household, and is less likely to be deal prone. Another
recent study conducted by Bloch et al. (1994) profiled
shoppers on their mall behaviors, perceived mall benefits,
and mall activities. This analysis revealed four clusters of
shoppers. Enthusiasts engaged in the highest number of
mall activities, perceived that the mall offered a high
number of benefits, stayed in the mall the longest, visited
the greatest number of stores, and made a relatively large
number of purchases. Traditionalists scored higher than
average on activities and made a large number of pur-
chases, but did not tend to browse, eat, or patronize
services in the mall or rate experiential benefits very
highly. Grazers were the most likely to browse, thus
making higher than average purchases and the most
impulse purchases. Finally, the Minimalists were low
across all mall activities, spending the least time in the
mall, visiting the lowest number of stores, and scoring the
lowest on all mall-benefit factors.
The factory-outlet mall has been the setting of far fewer
examinations compared to the traditional mall. In one of the
limited number of studies, LaBay and Comm (1991) pro-
filed light vs. heavy factory-outlet consumers, discovering
that heavy users place more emphasis on price, brand
names, shopping convenience, and store location. Karande
and Ganesh (1998) profiled outlet-mall shoppers on their
shopping motivations, attitude toward shopping, and
importance of mall attributes. Three segments emerged from
their analysis: recreational shoppers, serious economic shop-
pers, and time-conscious/deal-prone shoppers.
Because past research has used different methods in
different settings, the findings are not comparable. Thus, a
significant gap in the literature exists in that we know very
little about how shopper segments, formed based on a
common set of factors, differ from one mall format to
another. The current study seeks to fill this gap by
profiling traditional mall and factory-outlet-mall shoppers
using identical measures in each setting.
 K.E. Reynolds et al. / Journal of Business Research 55 (2002) 687–696
3. Research method
3.1. Data collection
A mall intercept survey was used to collect the data in
this study. Undergraduate marketing research students, who
were trained and instructed in mall intercept interview
techniques, administered the survey questionnaire as part
of the course requirements. This method of data collection
has been used in previous studies (cf. Babin and Darden,
1996). One large regional mall and one large factory-outlet
mall, both in the Southeast region of the country, agreed to
participate in the study. Students intercepted customers who
were shopping, qualifying them to ensure that they were
over the age of 18. In addition, the students surveyed only
shoppers who were either leaving the mall after finishing
their shopping or had completed the majority of their
shopping for the day so that valid measures of time spent
shopping, purchases, and satisfaction could be obtained.
Students also told respondents that completing the survey
qualified them for a drawing for a cash prize.
Respondents who agreed to participate were given a
clipboard, pencil, and survey, and directed to a sitting area
where they could complete the survey. The students col-
lected the surveys upon completion and thanked the
respondents. Throughout the survey project, the course
instructor, a faculty colleague, and two marketing graduate
students assisted and supervised the students. A project
schedule was developed to ensure that all times of the
day/evening and days of the week were represented. The
interviewers approached 2078 shoppers in the traditional
mall, 1134 met the criteria and agreed to participate, result-
ing in a 55% response rate. Data editing revealed 1097
usable surveys. For the outlet mall, 1561 shoppers were
approached, 868 met the criteria and agreed to participate,
yielding a 56% response rate. Usable surveys for the outlet
mall analysis totaled 827 after data editing.
4. Measures
To measure the importance of various attributes of the
malls, a list of store attributes originally developed by
Bellenger et al. (1977) was adapted to make the list
applicable to a mall environment. Respondents were asked
to rate each attribute in terms of its importance in their
decision to shop at the mall on a seven-point scale ranging
from not at all important (1) to extremely important (7). To
measure attitude toward shopping in general, respondents
were asked to rate the extent they agree or disagree with
statements about shopping-related activities on a five-point
scale. Measures were developed based upon scales used
previously in the literature (cf. Traylor and Joseph, 1984;
Salma and Tashchian, 1985; Beatty and Ferrell, 1998).
Respondents were also asked to rate their agreement or
disagreement with statements relating to their overall sat-
689
isfaction with their experience at the mall, their intentions to
shop at the mall in the future, and their likelihood of
recommending the mall to friends. Responses ranged from
strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). Finally, the
survey instrument concluded with demographic questions.
The average shopper in the traditional mall was between
the ages of 18 and 25 (33%) and female (64%). The
shoppers were split evenly on marital status (49% single
and 51% married). All income ranges are well represented,
but most respondents had annual incomes of over
US$70,000.00. Twenty-seven percent had completed some
college and 34% had earned at least an undergraduate
degree. The largest percentage of the shoppers in the outlet
mall was between the ages of 36 and 49 (30%). Slightly
more shoppers were female (54%) and married (56%).
Income was almost evenly distributed. Finally, the sample
was fairly well educated, with 26% of shoppers having
completed some college and 37% having earned at least an
undergraduate degree. Overall, the data revealed ample
variance in response for all items.
5. Data analyses, results, and discussion
As mentioned earlier, the attribute importance ratings
were used to derive the shopper typologies in both the
traditional mall as well as the factory-outlet mall. First, the
attribute importance items were factor analyzed to assess
their psychometric properties. For both samples, a scree plot
of the eigenvalues indicated a four-factor solution. Table 1
presents the results of the exploratory factor analyses with
varimax rotation.
The seven items loading highly on the first factor relate
to the importance of the various facilities and other basic
offerings of the mall. Thus, this factor is referred to as ‘‘mall
essentials’’ (Cronbach’s a=.89). The second factor is termed
‘‘entertainment’’ (Cronbach’s a=.81) because the five items
loading highly on it refer to the importance of the mall’s
recreational value and the presence of entertainment-type
services. Three items loaded highly on the third factor
(Cronbach’s a=.76). Because these items relate to the
importance of the presence of brand-name stores in the mall
and the availability of current fashions, the factor is labeled
‘‘brand-name merchandise.’’ Finally, the two items loading
highly on the forth factor (Cronbach’s a=.94) involve the
importance of the mall’s distance to home/work and its
accessibility. Therefore, it is termed ‘‘convenience.’’
The respondents were then classified into shopper sub-
groups based on their importance ratings on the four factors
described above. To form the shopper groups, importance
scores on the four factors were used in a multistep-cluster
analysis (Hair et al., 1998). The shopper clusters were
formed based on factor scores, using Ward’s method. A
five-cluster solution for the traditional mall and a six-cluster
solution for the outlet mall resulted based on an examination
of the changes (scree plots) in the root-mean-square stand-
690 K.E. Reynolds et al. / Journal of Business Research 55 (2002) 687–696

Table 1
Exploratory factor analysis of mall attributes
Mall essentials Entertainment Brand-name merchandise Convenience
Items TM FO TM FO TM FO TM FO
Cleanliness and maintenance 0.76 0.83 0.06 0.02 0.24 0.16 0.07 0.08
of the mall
Mall décor and ambience 0.63 0.70 0.12 0.11 0.33 0.25 0.04 0.01
Friendliness of 0.81 0.84 0.12 0.07 0.15 0.17 0.01 0.00
mall employees
Quality of service 0.84 0.86 0.06 0.04 0.16 0.13 0.02 0.09
Safety and security 0.82 0.84 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.11 0.12 0.13
within the mall
Availability of parking 0.62 0.74 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.10 0.39 0.16
Safety and security 0.80 0.77 0.00 0.03 0.06 0.08 0.20 0.16
of parking lot
Presence of ‘‘brand-name’’ stores 0.24 0.26 0.08 0.12 0.79 0.80 0.06 0.02
Availability of current fashions 0.29 0.28 0.15 0.15 0.79 0.80 0.08 0.14
and new products
Total number of stores 0.09 0.18 0.27 0.28 0.67 0.63 0.24 0.25
Distance from home/work 0.16 0.16 0.13 0.19 0.14 0.14 0.91 0.91
Accessibility of the mall 0.15 0.20 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.13 0.91 0.91
from home/work
Presence of fast food 0.10 0.18 0.68 0.69 0.07 0.06 0.15 0.16
and restaurants
Presence of a movie theatre 0.05 0.07 0.80 0.78 0.01 0.08 0.13 0.16
Presence of other service providers 0.10 0.09 0.82 0.80 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.06
such as a bank, hair specialist, etc.
Friends shop at this mall 0.02 0.05 0.69 0.67 0.28 0.31 0.07 0.05
Overall, recreational value 0.08 0.10 0.68 0.63 0.27 0.38 0.05 0.00
Eigenvalue 4.24 4.79 2.90 2.78 2.11 2.12 1.99 1.87
Cronbach’s a .89 .92 .81 .80 .76 .78 .94 .92
TM stands for traditional mall; FO stands for factory outlet.

ard deviation (RMSSTD), semipartial R-squared (SPR), R- 1996). Then, a K-means clustering procedure with the initial
squares (RS) and distance between two clusters, for a three-, seeds, provided by the hierarchical analysis solution, was
four-, five-, six-, and seven-cluster solutions (Sharma, performed to obtain the final clusters. Table 2a and b

Table 2
Results of the nonhierarchical cluster analysis for (a) traditional and (b) outlet malls (with initial seeds from the hierarchical analysis results)
Cluster meansa
Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4 Cluster 5 Cluster 6
Mall attributes (Basic) (Apathetic) (Destination) (Enthusiasts) (Serious) (Brand) F-value Significance
(a) Traditional malls
Mall essentials 0.41 2.01 0.38 0.22 0.10 60.95 .001
Entertainment 0.09 0.03 0.20 0.97 0.97 55.42 .001
Brand-name 1.40 0.44 0.40 0.42 0.50 90.39 .001
merchandise
Convenience 0.13 0.04 1.59 0.35 0.48 58.99 .001
Cluster size 193 116 159 305 258
Percentage of 19 11 15 30 25
respondents (%)

(b) Outlet malls

Mall essentials 0.46 1.93 0.44 0.39 0.32 1.31 76.11 .001
Entertainment 0.05 0.28 0.29 0.87 1.22 0.08 48.42 .001
Brand-name 1.42 0.83 0.29 0.40 0.43 0.53 38.81 .001
merchandise
Convenience 0.16 0.45 1.53 0.40 0.63 0.17 58.96 .001
Cluster size 130 72 127 234 154 89
Percentage of 16 9 16 29 19 11
respondents (%)
a
The cluster descriptions are based on factor scores that have a mean of zero and standard deviation of one.
 K.E. Reynolds et al. / Journal of Business Research 55 (2002) 687–696
presents the cluster analyses results for the traditional and
the outlet malls, respectively.
5.1. Shopper types
As mentioned earlier, the cluster analyses revealed a five-
cluster solution for the traditional mall and a six-cluster
solution for the outlet mall. Five of the six clusters obtained
in the outlet mall resemble the shopper subgroups obtained
in the traditional mall.
5.1.1. Common shopper subgroups
The first group of shoppers, ‘‘Basic’’ shoppers, makes up
19% of customers in the traditional mall and 16% of the
customers in the outlet mall. These shoppers have a strong
preference for mall essentials and convenience, but do not
care much for brand-name merchandise and entertainment.
They desire ample and safe parking, friendly employees,
and clean surroundings. Basic shoppers are concerned
somewhat with convenience of the mall, and are ambivalent
toward the recreational aspects. Interestingly, these shoppers
do not appear to be interested in current fashions, new
products, or brand names.
The next shopper type is the smallest segments in both
formats (11% in the traditional mall and 9% in the outlet
mall). This subgroup, the ‘‘Apathetic’’ shoppers, seem to be
disinterested in all aspects of the shopping process, rating
the importance of mall essentials, brand-name merchandise,
and convenience low and entertainment as average. How-
ever, the Apathetic shoppers in the outlet mall rate enter-
tainment as slightly more important than their counterparts
at the traditional mall.
The third group gives mall essentials and brand-name
merchandise above-average importance ratings, does not
seem to value entertainment highly, and assigns very low
ratings to convenience. In a sense, these shoppers seem to
perceive the mall as a ‘‘destination retailer’’ that they
consciously seek out and believe is worth a special shopping
trip (Berman and Evans, 1998). Hence, this group is termed
the ‘‘Destination’’ shoppers. Destination shoppers comprise
15% of the shoppers at the traditional mall and 16% at the
factory-outlet mall.
The largest group of shoppers at both the traditional mall
and factory-outlet mall is the ‘‘Enthusiasts,’’ who comprise
almost 30% of all shoppers. Enthusiasts rate all four
shopping factors as important, placing the strongest
emphasis on entertainment and the lowest on mall essen-
tials. While Enthusiast shoppers at traditional malls are
somewhat more concerned with brand-name merchandise
selection over convenience, these shoppers at the factory-
outlet mall rate these factors more similarly. The sheer size
of this segment makes the Enthusiasts an important segment
for both traditional and factory-outlet malls.
Shoppers comprising the fifth cluster are referred to as
‘‘Serious’’ shoppers. This cluster views entertainment as
least important and considers mall essentials, brand-name
691
merchandise, and convenience to be of above-average
importance. This group is not interested in the presence of
ancillary services and seems to be most concerned with the
distance of the mall from their homes or workplaces, as well
as the assortment of brand-name merchandise available. The
Serious shoppers represent a sizable portion of shoppers for
both traditional and factory-outlet malls, accounting for
25% and 19% of the market, respectively.
5.1.2. Shoppers unique to the outlet mall
This cluster, termed ‘‘Brand Seekers,’’ is unique to
factory-outlet malls. This shopper type constitutes 11%
of the market and rates brand-name merchandise as the
most important attribute, followed by convenience. This
group does not consider the entertainment aspects of the
mall very important. Additionally, these shoppers rate mall
essentials as the least important factor when compared to
the other groups.
6. Cluster validation
First, to validate the cluster solutions, a K-means
clustering procedure, taking random initial seeds to set
the cluster centers, was performed. Although some minor
departures from our original solution exist, overall the two-
cluster solutions are strikingly similar for both formats.
Subsequently, in order to demonstrate the predictive valid-
ity of our cluster solutions, we compared the clusters
(within each mall format) on three variables: the perception
of being a smart shopper and a reluctant shopper, and the
level of shopping enjoyment. Past research has shown that
different shopper segments vary in terms of their levels of
shopping enjoyment and whether or not they consider
themselves smart or reluctant shoppers. For example,
several studies have discovered shopper groups who tend
to shop for pleasure and the experience itself (Bellenger
and Korgaonkar, 1980; Bellenger et al., 1977; Sproles and
Kendall, 1986; Roy, 1994). These customers are charac-
terized by having the desire for affiliation with others
while shopping and for stimulation provided by the mall
environment (Westbrook and Black, 1985). In addition,
these particular shoppers tend to remain in the mall for
longer periods of time and are frequent mall patrons (Roy,
1994). Further, Bloch et al. (1994) found a segment of
Enthusiasts who make high levels of purchases, engage in
extensive use of the mall facilities, and rate experiential
consumption highly. These shoppers were also likely to
socialize while in the mall and perceive the mall as a
source of many benefits, such as escape, boredom relief,
and information.
Other shopper types identified in the literature include
Apathetic (Westbrook and Black, 1985) and ‘‘Minimalist’’
(Bloch et al., 1994) shoppers. These types of shoppers tend
to be low on most shopping motivations (Westbrook and
Black, 1985), do not remain in the mall for an extended
692 K.E. Reynolds et al. / Journal of Business Research 55 (2002) 687–696

Table 3
Results of predictive validity tests for (a) traditional and (b) outlet malls
Cluster meansa
Shopping attitude Number of items Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4 Cluster 5 Cluster 6
and perceptions (Cronbach’s a) (Basic) (Apathetic) (Destination) (Enthusiasts) (Serious) (Brand) F-value Significance
(a) Traditional malls
Smart shopper 4 (.83) 3.7 3.3 3.7 3.9 3.6 6.76 .001
Enjoy shopping 3 (.84) 2.9 2.9 3.4 3.5 3.1 5.58 .001
Reluctant shopper 3 (.77) 2.3 2.7 2.2 2.0 2.2 4.35 .005

(b) Outlet malls

Smart shopper 4 (.79) 3.5 3.1 3.7 3.8 3.8 3.6 5.53 .001
Enjoy shopping 3 (.83) 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.0 3.2 3.57 .005
Reluctant shopper 3 (.80) 2.6 2.8 2.3 2.3 2.4 2.6 3.22 .005
a
1 — Strongly disagree; 5 — Strongly agree.

period of time, and do not participate in many mall activities
(Bloch et al., 1994).
Finally, ‘‘Functional’’ or ‘‘Economic’’ shoppers have also
appeared in the various shopper typology studies in the
literature. Westbrook and Black’s (1985) Economic shopper
scored high on the motivation to search for the right product
and was highly motivated by the chance to conduct price
and product comparisons to obtain value. Roy (1994),
however, found that mall customers with functional moti-
vations for shopping were less likely to be a frequent mall
patron and more likely to be deal prone. The Economic
shopper discovered by Bellenger et al. (1977) and Bellenger
and Korgaonkar (1980) was less likely to enjoy shopping as
a leisure activity and more concerned with convenience.
Thus, based on these past findings, we expect the
Enthusiasts found in this study to rate their levels of
shopping enjoyment highly. In addition, because they enjoy
shopping, they may be more likely to consider themselves
smart shoppers and less likely to be reluctant shoppers. In
contrast, Apathetic shoppers are more likely to rate shop-
ping enjoyment low, more likely to be reluctant shoppers,
and less likely to consider themselves smart shoppers.
Basic, Destination, Serious, and Brand-Seekers subgroups
are likely to fall somewhere between Enthusiast and Apa-
thetic shoppers. Table 3a and b shows the Cronbach’s
alphas, group means, and MANOVA results for the tra-
ditional-mall and the outlet-mall samples, respectively.
Overall, there were significant differences between the
shopper subgroups regarding smart shopping, shopping
enjoyment, and reluctant shopping for both samples
(traditional and outlet mall). First, as hypothesized in
past studies, with regards to a shopper’s perceptions of
being a smart shopper, the Enthusiasts score high, with
Apathetic shoppers scoring the lowest. Also, the Apa-
thetic shoppers, not surprisingly, were the most likely to
perceive themselves as being reluctant shoppers. In con-
trast, the Enthusiast shoppers are the least likely to have
the perceptions of being reluctant shoppers, with the other
subgroups falling in the middle. Finally, as expected, the
Enthusiasts tend to score high on shopping enjoyment,
especially compared to the Apathetic shoppers who
scored relatively lower. The Basic shoppers appear to
be the least likely to enjoy shopping and do not consider
it to be relaxing or recreational. The other shopper

Table 4
Cluster profiles based on additional characteristics
Cluster means
Shopping Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4 Cluster 5 Cluster 6
behavior (Basic) (Apathetic) (Destination) (Enthusiasts) (Serious) (Brand) F-value Significance
(a) Traditional malls
Satisfactiona 3.8 3.4 4.0 4.0 4.0 8.14 .001
Repeat visita 4.0 3.7 4.1 4.2 4.1 4.02 .005
Positive WOMa 3.9 3.6 4.1 4.2 4.1 5.32 .001
Time spent (min) 81.6 83.1 98.6 95.4 86.5 2.59 .05
Dollars spent 81.52 78.13 119.66 87.27 76.62 1.31 n.s.

(b) Outlet malls

Satisfactiona 3.6 2.9 3.9 4.0 3.7 3.5 9.30 .001
Repeat visita 3.4 3.2 3.4 3.9 3.4 3.5 2.79 .05
Positive WOMa 3.7 3.1 3.8 4.0 3.7 3.6 9.59 .001
Time spent (min) 119.2 78.2 125.9 123.1 99.9 100.2 2.27 .05
Dollars spent 88.94 46.04 130.95 117.15 102.41 96.36 3.68 .005
a
1 — Strongly disagree; 5 — Strongly agree.
 K.E. Reynolds et al. / Journal of Business Research 55 (2002) 687–696
subgroups fall somewhere in the middle. These results
further support the validity of the cluster solutions for
both the traditional and the outlet mall.
7. Comparison of clusters on additional characteristics
In order to derive some interesting profiles of the
shopper subgroups, the clusters within each sample were
compared on their overall satisfaction with the mall, inten-
tion to shop at the mall in the future, inclination to provide
positive word of mouth regarding the mall, time spent in the
mall, and total purchases in the mall. Table 4a and b
provides the results for the traditional-mall and the outlet-
mall samples, respectively.
An examination of the results presented in Table 4a and b
suggests that overall, the Enthusiasts (in both retail formats)
enjoy shopping the most, were the most satisfied with
shopping at the mall, were most likely to shop at the mall
again in the future, and also the most likely to spread
positive word of mouth about the mall. In contrast, the
Apathetic shoppers (across both retail formats) were the
least satisfied with the mall, the least likely to visit the mall
in the future, and the least likely to recommend shopping at
the mall to others. Interestingly, the Destination shoppers
spent the longest amount of time in the mall and spent the
most in dollar value, followed by Enthusiasts. This is
understandable in that, as mentioned earlier, Destination
shoppers may travel longer distances to the mall, thus
shopping longer to receive maximum benefits from making
the trip.
8. Managerial implications, limitations, and directions
for future research
Traditionally, retailers have relied upon the various
elements, such as location, customer service, merchand-
ising, entertainment, and atmospherics, to create retail mixes
customers value. As the factory-outlet and traditional-mall
retail formats mature, it becomes more difficult to readily
distinguish between the two. The expectations many con-
sumers have for factory-outlet malls have increased; gone
are the days of warehouse style facilities with only discon-
tinued or irregular merchandise. Traditional malls, both old
and new, have begun to embrace the concept of demalling
by creating open spaces to house complimentary entertain-
ment/food-court attractions (Talpade and Haynes, 1997) and
adopting more aggressive pricing strategies (Consumer
Reports, 1998). The combination of factory outlets becom-
ing more like traditional malls, with traditional malls having
eroded some of the price advantage of outlet malls, has
increased the level of competition between these two retail
formats. This essentially means that these two competing
retail formats share common consumer franchises, which is
reflected in the findings of this study that five of the six
693
shopper types identified in the outlet mall are very similar to
those found in the traditional mall.
Although the lines that traditionally separated these two
formats are becoming blurred, differences between tra-
ditional malls and factory outlets do exist and consumer
expectations for these retail formats, while sharing many
common features, do show differences. The current study
shows that the factors valued today by consumers in both
traditional and outlet malls still coincide with traditional
retail-mix elements. Understanding which factors shoppers
value in combination with the various shopper typologies
can provide powerful insights for retailers in their fight to
attract a greater number and variety of shoppers, as well as
in their efforts to prevent the loss of current customers.
Table 5 provides a thumbnail sketch of shopper subgroups
for the traditional and the outlet mall.
8.1. Mall essentials
As detailed earlier, mall essentials is a broad construct
measuring the physical environment of the mall, as well
as additional items, such as the friendliness of mall
employees and service quality. The findings of this study
suggest that four of the five shopper subgroups in the
traditional mall, and four of six in the outlet mall,
consider these attributes important in their decision to
patronize the mall.
Prior research, primarily examining store-level data, has
shown both the physical and social features of the retail
environment to be important. A number of studies have
been conducted (cf. Babin and Darden, 1996; Darden and
Babin, 1994), which reveal that the physical environment of
the store can play a role in increasing positive customer
emotions or in minimizing negative moods. Consumers’ in-
store mood is important not only because of its influence on
spending but also for its impact on customer satisfaction
with the retailer (Babin and Darden, 1996). Donovan et al.
(1994) demonstrated that pleasure induced by store sur-
roundings appears to lead consumers to stay longer and
spend more than they had originally intended. Baker et al.
(1994) found that in-store ambient and social factors, such
as classical music, soft lighting, and more well-dressed,
friendly salespeople all positively impact customers’ infer-
ences of higher service and merchandise quality. Additional
evidence is supplied by Wakefield and Baker’s (1998)
findings that architectural design and interior décor play
roles in determining excitement and desire to stay at the
mall. While the majority of the studies in this area have been
conducted at the store level, this research examines many of
these issues at the mall level and gives some indication that
it may be appropriate to extend certain findings beyond the
individual store.
Mall essentials extend beyond the physical surroundings
of a mall to include aspects such as friendliness of employ-
ees and overall quality. Many stores and malls are enhancing
customer value by establishing patronage reward systems
694 K.E. Reynolds et al. / Journal of Business Research 55 (2002) 687–696

Table 5
Thumbnail sketches of shopper clusters for traditional and outlet malls
Retail
format Basic Apathetic Destination Enthusiasts Serious Brand seekers
Traditional Highest preference Indifferent and Concerned mostly Very involved shopper, Highest preference Not applicable
mall for mall essentials reluctant shopper, with mall essentials enjoys shopping, for brand-name
and convenience; enjoys shopping and brand-name and takes pride in being merchandise
lowest preference the least. merchandise. a smart shopper. and convenience.
for brand-name Least satisfied Consider themselves Highly satisfied Does not care
merchandise. and least likely to to be among the with the trip and much for the
Does not enjoy repeat visit smartest shoppers most likely to entertainment value.
shopping much or spread Enjoys shopping, repeat visit and spread Very satisfied and
and spends the least positive WOM. is very satisfied positive WOM. highly likely to repeat
amount of time and Among lowest and most likely to Second highest in visit and spread
money shopping. in both time repeat visit and terms of dollars and positive WOM.
and dollars spent. spread positive WOM. time spent shopping.
Spent the most
time and dollars of
all shopper types.
Factory Highest preference Indifferent and Concerned mostly Very involved shopper, Highest preference Most concerned
outlet for mall essentials reluctant shopper, with mall essentials enjoys shopping, for brand-name with brand-name
mall and convenience; enjoys shopping and brand-name and takes pride merchandise merchandise.
lowest preference the least. merchandise. in being a and convenience. Second most
for brand-name Least satisfied Consider themselves smart shopper. Does not care likely to
merchandise. and least likely to be among the Highly satisfied much for the enjoy shopping.
Does not enjoy to repeat visit smart shoppers. with the trip and entertainment value. Among the
shopping much. or spread Is satisfied with the most likely to repeat Consider themselves least likely to
positive WOM. trip but not very likely visit and spread to be among the be satisfied
Lowest in to repeat visit in the positive WOM. smart shoppers. or provide
both time and near future. Second highest in Satisfied with the positive WOM.
dollars spent. Spent the most time terms of dollars and trip but not very
and dollars of all time spent shopping. likely to repeat visit
shopper types. in the near future.

and other frequent-shopper programs to reward shoppers at
the point of sale. Additional trends directly impact malls
from a human resource management perspective. Training
and rewarding employees will result in more professional,
committed, and full-time workers. For many malls, this may
mean the development of performance incentives and career
paths for mall employees.
8.2. Entertainment
Consumer Reports (1998), in an examination of outlet
malls, found that while better bargains could be found most
often in the outlet malls, the price difference as compared to
traditional malls is shrinking. With this price advantage
evaporating, many factory-outlet centers are turning to other
ways to enhance their mall offerings. Many malls today are
placing an increased emphasis upon the entertainment ele-
ment of their retail offering. Results from the present study
show that entertainment is considered an important dimen-
sion by a number of shopper clusters. This is particularly true
for the Enthusiasts.
However, in their examination of 1592 consumers
from four traditional malls with large-scale entertainment
centers, Talpade and Haynes (1997) found that adding
entertainment centers did not increase a mall’s trading
area or induce consumers to spend more time or money.
However, mall entertainment appears to be effective in
attracting families with small children, and in the overall
attraction of shoppers with social goals as opposed to
shopping goals. Additionally, they found that nonanchor
stores within the mall benefit more from the presence of
entertainment centers than do anchor stores. This suggests
that traditional malls seeking to increase patronage of the
anchor stores should perhaps look for some joint pro-
motion efforts with the entertainment center. Food courts,
movie theaters, virtual reality arcades, or other amuse-
ments are not the panacea for all retail-mall ills and
should be approached with caution.
Particular care must be given to the type of entertain-
ment offered in these centers. Many developers have
expressed reluctance to build entertainment centers into
their facilities for fear of alienating more traditional
shoppers by attracting the wrong demographic, specif-
ically teenage males (Pacelle, 1996). Certain entertain-
ment features, however, can be used to attract a number
of shopper types. The inclusion of destination restaurants,
such as Rainforest Café and Dave and Buster’s, or other
entertainment-oriented retailers, may help both traditional
and outlet malls to fill the gap between pure retail and
pure entertainment.
 K.E. Reynolds et al. / Journal of Business Research 55 (2002) 687–696
8.3. Brand-name merchandise
Tenant variety and quality remain very important ele-
ments of the retailing mix for both traditional and factory-
outlet malls. The number and variety of mall tenants can
lead to greater consumer excitement and desire to stay
(Wakefield and Baker, 1998). Only two of the six clusters
examined in this study (Basic and Apathetic shoppers) are
below average in their preference for stores carrying the
latest fashions and products, indicating that the majority
(over 70%) of shoppers express above-average desire for
brand-name stores and merchandise. Malls should focus on
retaining the Enthusiasts by providing a wide range of
stores, both entertainment and product-based, to keep the
mall environment exciting and to encourage these avid
shoppers to remain in the mall. In the traditional mall,
Serious shoppers should be targeted with a wide variety of
brand name or fashion stores and/or merchandise. The outlet
mall should ensure that appropriate signage is available and
clear, as the Serious shoppers are willing to seek out
information while searching for a bargain. In addition,
frequent sales may also be a way to attract this type of
shopper. Further, appeals to Brand Seekers should focus on
the mall’s offerings of a wide array of brand name/fashion
merchandise and stores.
Soft lines, clothing, and apparel have traditionally domi-
nated the product selection at both factory outlets and
traditional malls largely due to the high proportion of female
shoppers at these centers (Hazel, 1997). While women’s
apparel may dominate the merchandise selection of both
types of malls, the introduction of hard lines may prove
important to attract male shoppers. Many hard-line manu-
facturers (furniture, electronics) have long been reluctant to
use outlet malls as distribution points. While this trend may
be showing some signs of changing, industry analysts have
suggested that this reluctance is due to the proximity of
some factory outlets to their traditional retail channels or
intense competition from other retail formats, such as
category killers (Hazel, 1997).
8.4. Convenience
Mall location, part of the convenience factor in this study,
emerged as a key factor for four of the six shopper
typologies examined in this study. Consumer demand for
time saving and convenience has led to the movement
toward one-stop shopping formats (Messinger and Narasim-
han, 1997). For both factory outlets and traditional malls,
the accessibility and convenience of the mall from the home
or workplace are considered to be important. In particular,
Enthusiasts, Serious, and Basic shoppers revealed higher
preference for the convenience factor for both formats in
this study. Additionally, Brand Seekers at factory outlets
also have above-average preference for convenience.
In contrast, Destination shoppers, across both retail for-
mats, indicate that convenience is unimportant. Destination
695
shoppers, who are most concerned with mall facilities and
merchandise, are willing to go out of their way to visit malls
with this combination. Recommendations to attract Destina-
tion shoppers include the use of targeted advertising (direct
mail) to secondary and fringe-trading areas to attract these
shoppers. Mail pieces should emphasize the variety of stores/
merchandise and presence of brand names. In addition, a
frequent mall-shopper program (percentage discounts at mall
stores based on number of trips or amount of purchases) may
entice these shoppers to visit the mall more frequently.
This study takes the first step in obtaining comparable
information on shopper profiles between retail formats. It is
critical to stress that this study is exploratory in nature, and
as a consequence, the conclusions drawn are rather broad in
scope. Future studies should include more retail formats,
such as department stores, discount stores, category killers,
and other nontraditional formats, such as in-home and
online shopping, to fully understand the similarities and
differences between shopper profiles among the various
formats. Also, some of the mall attributes measured in this
study, particularly convenience, needs to be defined more
broadly so as to encompass more than physical distance.
Furthermore, future studies should attempt to draw profiles
based on characteristics other than attribute importance,
such as shopping motivations. Use of higher-order con-
structs, such as consumer motivations across retail formats,
would help advance efforts to develop comprehensive
theories of retail-shopping behavior.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Diane Sadler-Diaz for her assistance in
preparation of this manuscript. The authors contributed
equally to the manuscript.
References
Babin BJ, Darden WR. Good and bad shopping vibes: spending and patron-
age satisfaction. J Bus Res 1996;35:201 – 6.
Baker J, Grewal D, Parasuraman A. The influence of store environment
on quality inferences and store image. J Acad Mark Sci 1994;22(4):
328 – 39.
Beatty SE, Ferrell ME. Impulse buying: modeling its precursors. J Retailing
1998;74(2):169 – 92 (Summer).
Bellenger ND, Korgaonkar PK. Profiling the recreational shopper. J Retail-
ing 1980;56:77 – 91 (Fall).
Bellenger ND, Robertson DH, Greenberg BA. Shopping center patronage
motives. J Retailing 1977;53(2):29 – 38.
Berman B, Evans JR. Retail management: a strategic approach 7th ed.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1998.
Bird L. Discounting discounters: outlet center stocks dip as customers go
elsewhere. Wall St J 1997;229:B1 (April 3).
Bloch HP, Ridgway NM, Dawson SA. The shopping mall as consumer
habitat. J Retailing 1994;70(1):23 – 42.
Burns DJ, Warren HB. Need for uniqueness: shopping mall preference and
choice activity. Int J Retail Distrib Manage 1995;23(12):4 – 12.
Consumer Reports: Outlet malls: do they deliver the goods? 1998;63:20 – 5
(August).
696 K.E. Reynolds et al. / Journal of Business Research 55 (2002) 687–696
Darden WR, Ashton D. Psychographic profiles of patronage preference
groups. J Retailing 1975;50:99 – 112 (Winter).
Darden WR, Babin BJ. Exploring the concept of affective quality: expanding
the concept of retail personality. J Bus Res 1994;29:101 – 10 (February).
Darden WR, Reynolds FD. Shopping orientations and product usage roles.
J Mark Res 1971;8:505 – 8.
Darian JC. In-home shopping: are there consumer segments? J Retailing
1987;63:163 – 86 (Summer).
Donovan RJ, Rossiter JR, Marcoolyn G, Nesdale A. Store atmosphere and
purchasing behavior. J Retailing 1994;70(3):283 – 94.
Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC. Multivariate data analysis
5th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1998.
Hazel D. Getting hardlines into the outlets. Chain Store Age 1997;73:145 – 6
(March).
Karande K, Ganesh J. Who shops at factory outlets and why?: an exploratory
study. In: Grewal D, Pechmann C, editors. American Marketing Asso-
ciation Winter Educators’ Conference. Marketing theory and applica-
tions, vol. 9. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1998, p. 22.
LaBay DG, Comm CL. An exploratory investigation of the factory outlet
shopper in the Northeastern United States. J Bus Econ Stud 1991;12:
25 – 37 (Fall/Winter).
Marketing News: Malls losing popularity with shoppers. 1997;31:10
(May 26).
Messinger PR, Narasimhan C. A model of retail formats based on consu-
mers’ economizing on shopping time. Mark Sci 1997;16(1):1 – 23.
Moschis GP. Shopping orientations and consumer uses of information. J
Retailing 1976;52:61 – 70 (Summer).
Pacelle M. Malls add fun and games to attract shoppers. Wall St J 1996;
227:B1 (January 23).
Roy A. Correlates of mall visit frequency. J Retailing 1994;70(2):139 – 61.
Salma ME, Tashchian A. Selected socioeconomic and demographic charac-
teristics associated with purchasing involvement. J Mark 1985;49:
72 – 82 (Winter).
Sharma S. Applied multivariate techniques. New York, NY: Wiley, 1996.
Sproles GB, Kendall EL. A methodology for profiling consumers’ decision-
making styles. J Consum Aff 1986;20:267 – 79 (Winter).
Stephenson RP, Willet RP. Analysis of consumers’ retail patronage strat-
egies. In: McDonald PR, editor. Marketing involvement in society and
the economy. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association, 1969. p.
316 – 322.
Stone PG. City shoppers and urban identification: observation on the social
psychology of city life. Am J Sociol 1954;60:36 – 45 (July).
Talpade S, Haynes J. Consumer shopping behavior in malls with large scale
entertainment centers. Mid-Atl J Bus 1997;33:153 – 62 (June).
Traylor MB, Joseph WB. Measuring consumer involvement with products:
developing a general scale. Psychol Mark 1984;1:65 – 77 (Summer).
Wakefield K, Baker J. Excitement at the mall: determinants and effects on
shopping response. J Retailing 1998;74(4):515 – 40.
Westbrook RA, Black WC. A motivation-based shopper typology. J Retail-
ing 1985;61:78 – 103 (Spring).