The Impact of Consumer Innovativeness, Prestige Price Sensitivity and Need for Emotion on Impulse Buying and Satisfactio
Impulse buying (IB) refers to unplanned purchases without much reflection (Bellenger et al. 1978; Youn and Faber 2000; Beatty and Ferrell, 1998) and it is defined by Rock (1987: 191) as a state of “sudden, often powerful and persistent urge to buying some
- PDF / 155,273 Bytes
- 3 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 91 Downloads / 170 Views
nsitivity impacts the relationship between product involvement and IB. Price sensitivity is also linked to CI, with Goldsmith and Newell (1997) suggesting that innovative consumers are price insensitive; while Park et al. (2010) argue that cognitive innovative consumers are price conscious as opposed to sensory innovative consumers. This study focuses on the ‘prestige’ element of price (see Lichtenstein et al. 1993) and argues that PPS impacts IB. On this basis, consumers act on impulse in their purchases to satisfy their need to impress others. Based on the extant literature, a model has been developed (figure 1) showing the relationships among NFE, PPS and CI with IB and satisfaction. METHOD A questionnaire was used to collect data from a sample of 304 respondents in a metropolitan city in the UK. Respondents were asked to complete a set of questions measuring the model’s constructs. In doing so, respondents were instructed to choose a product of interest for which IB is likely to occur. The products selected by the participants ranged from electronic items (e.g. games machines/consoles, mobile phones, mp3 and music players, computers, and digital cameras) to non-entertainment household products, sporting goods, clothing, accessories, food and newspapers. Existing measures were used to capture product category specific CI (Goldsmith and Hofacker 1991) and product category specific IB (Donthu and Gilliland 1996). PPS was measured by a nine-item scale from Lichtenstein et al. (1993), while a twelve-item scale from Raman et al. (1995) was used to measure NFE. Finally, satisfaction was measured using a four-item scale developed by Spreng, et al. (1996). RESULTS We used AMOS 19 to run CFA to assess the reliability and validity of the scales. The overall fit of the CFA is good: Ȥ2(395) = 807.1; rmsea = .059; TLI = .92; CFI = .92 (Hu and Bentler 1999). All constructs have both alpha and construct reliability (CR) values above .7, and most are with AVE .5 or above, with the lowest AVE very close to .5. Also, all items’ loading are significant (p< .001) and substantive (standardized loading .5 or above, Hair et al 2010: 709) demonstrating the convergent validity of the measures. All AVEs are greater than the squared correlation coefficients between corresponding constructs, providing good evidence of discriminant validity of the measurements (Hair et al 2010). The SEM analysis produced good fit results: Ȥ2(400) = 872.0; rmsea = .062; TLI = .91; CFI = .91 (Hu and Bentler 1999). The results give support for 4 of the 9 hypotheses (table 1). NFE only influences CI (H3: ȕ=.14, p
Data Loading...
