from perfectionism to fadism: measuring consumers ... · and the comparison shopper orientation. in...
TRANSCRIPT
FROM PERFECTIONISM TO FADISM:
MEASURING CONSUMERS' DECISION-MAKING STYLES
1 George B. Sproles, University of Arizona
ABSTRACT _C_o_n_s_u_m_e_r_s--m-a..,..k-e--c..,..h-oices usi_n_g_p_a_r_t_i_c_u_l_a_r __ d_e_c_i--
sion-making styles. This paper develops a conceptualization of consumer decision-making styles based on nine hypothesized decisionmaking style traits. A 50 item instrument which empirically measures the hypothesized traits is developed and tested in an exploratory study. Based on factor analysis of the instrument, six consumer decision-making style traits are identified and validated: perfectionism, valueconscious - "value for money" orientation, brand consciousness, novelty-fad-fashion consciousness, shopping avoidance - satisficing style, and confused-support seeking decision-maker . A method for presenting a Profile of Decis ionMaking Style, based on measures of the individual style traits, is then described. Four unique findings of the research are discussed, and applications of the test for consumer decision-making styles are suggested for consumer education, consumer r esearch, and family financial counseling.
The literature on consumer decision-making s uggests that consumers approach the market us ing a certain "decision-making style" , That is, consumers make choices using a particular purchasing strategy and perhaps certain related rules guiding decision- making. For example , consumers may be characteri zed as information seekers, information processors, maximizers (the classical idea of the economic man), satisficers (buyers of the "good enough"), noveltyfashion seekers, and rational comparison shoppers (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 , 6).
Thus the analysis of s uch identifiable consumer decision-making styles is an important subject in the literature of consumer-interest studies. Yet the formal conceptualization and empirical meas urement of these styles has not advanced significantly. Based on these observations, the objective of this paper is to develop an analytical approach to identifying and meas uring consumer decis i on-making styles. A consumer decision- making s tyle is defined as a patterned, mental, cognitive orientation towards shopping and purchasing, which consist ently dominates the consumer ' s choices . The concept implies t hat most or all the consumer ' s choices of product s and services are influenced by one or more specific decision-making traits that ultimately control decision-making, and that these traits are ever-present, predictable, central driving forces in decision-making. In essence we are s peaking of a relatively enduring consumerpersonality, analogous to the more general concept of human personality in psychology.
1Associate Professor
79
OBJECTIVES AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
The principle objective of this paper is to develop a simple method for analyzing decisionmaking styles that can be quickly and easily applied both in research and educational situations. Such a test should meet several requirements:
1. It should identify a typology of realistic decision-making traits or characteristics of consumers that can be seen in "real world" consumer behavior as well as in theory; that is, it should be founded both in theory and application.
2. Such a typology should be parsimonious, that is, it should identify a relatively small number of consumer decision-making style traits.
3. Each trait tested should be as closely associated with the final, actual consumer decision as possible.
4. It should be able to identif y how high or low a consumer rates on each decisionmaking style trait. This recognizes the fact that a cons umer may have several meas urable decis ion- making traits comprising his or her basic style.
5. The test of traits should have reliability and validity.
The first and most important step is to establis h a conceptual framework for analyzing consumer decision-maki ng styles. Though the literature on this subject is conceivably endless, the references cited earlier s ugges t some of the most fundamental styles consumers are thought to follow. Without elaborating extensively on this, we may derive a t l east nine major
1decision-making style traits of con
sumers:
1The number of trait s may be smaller or larger, but this appears as a relatively comprehensive yet parsimonious number for an initial exploratory investigation .
DECISION-MAKING STYLE TRAITS --
1. Aesthetic/style/fashion conscious. 2. Economy conscious/price sensitive. 3. Economy conscious/high quality, high
f unctional orientation 4. Socially conscious/other influenced/
shopping narcissist. 5. Perfectionist/maximizer. 6. Satisficer/buyer of the "good enough. " 7. Decision simplifier/time saver/shop
ping efficiency-conscious. 8. Shopping hedonist/shopping enjoyer/ 9. Comparison shopper/rational shop-
per/ systematic-planned shopper/information seeker.
A consumer ' s decision-making style is the sum of the particular traits he or she possesses . (Similarly one ' s total personality is their particular combination of specific personality traits, e.g. , assertiveness, extraversion, confidence). This is elaborated on further in the "Discussion" section . We turn now to the methodology for measuring and validating the traits.
METHODOLOGY
An instrument was developed to measure a consumer 's general orientations toward shopping and buying. The instrument consisted of 50 Likert Scale items. Each of the nine hypothesized decision-making style traits had at least three items in t he instrument; in addition, a variety of related items that were thought to be related to these nine hypothesized traits were included in the inventory. These included such items as atti tudes toward consumer information, attitudes toward shopping, "market signals" used ( e .g., price equals quality), and orientations toward brand names and product quality.
To conduct an initial test of the instrument for analyzing decision-making styles, an exploratory s tudy was conducted . A sample of 111 undergraduate women in two classes of the School of Family and Consumer Resources, University of Arizona, was administered the instrument. The sample included freshmen through senior students, predominantly between 19 and 25 years of age. The use of such student samples for exploratory r esearch of this type is appropriate, gi ven t he objective which i s to analyze decision-making styles rather than to generalize to larger populations.
Reliability of the instrument was assessed using a test-retest procedure. Six weeks following administration of the original instrument, a random sampling of 14 items from the original 50 items was readministered to 100 of the 111 original subjects . Pearson Correlations were calculated on each pair. The 14 test- retest correlations averaged . 50 and ranged from +.34 to +.70 . All were statistically significant (P adequate reliability; given the nature of the sample and the opportunity for training effects
80
to enter during the test-retest interval , the reliability is viewed as very satisfactory .
To establish construct validity, two factor analyses were run using the principle factors methods with varimax rotation of factors. One factor analysis forced a nine factor solution to conform to the initial hypothesis of nine decision-making style traits. A second , more parsimonious factor analysis forced a six factor solution. Since a factor analysis solution is indeterminant (i. e ., several solutions can be equally correct mathematically), this experimentation with alternative factor structures is appropriate when theory building is the principle objective. These factor analysis results show excellent construct and content validity , as will become evident in the "Findings" section.
FINDINGS
The following findings focus on the result of two factor analysis solutions: the nine factor solution testing the initial hypothesis , and the six factor solution . The nine factor solution explained 55 percent of the variance in the correlation matrix , and the six factor solution 45 percent; thus both solutions provide relatively parsimonious yet complete representation of the data. In the nine factor solution, six of the nine initially hypothesized factors were confirmed. These were as follows:
1. Fashion conscious 2. Economy conscious (with a value con
scious, price orientation 3. Socially conscious (influenced by
others) 4. Perfectionist (maximizer orientation) 5. Satisficing-"good enough" orientation
(however, this proved to be a more complex factor as discussed later)
6. A process efficiency-time efficiency shoppe r (this factor appears to measure shopping avoidance).
Factors not confirmed from the original hypothesis were the economy conscious orientation (having the high quality or functional orientation as well) , the shopping hedonist orientation and t he comparison shopper orientation. In place of t hese were factors interpreted as follows : national brand conscious, national brand conscious with a high price orientation , and an "information-satisfied" orientation (a f actor measuring consumers ' perceptions of being well informed and having enough information about products) .
An examination of the nine factor structure suggested there were similarities among several of the factors. For instance, there were two factors measuring sli ghtly different aspects of national brand consciousness, and two s imilar factors measuring satisficing strategies and a more parsimonious factor structure r epresented the data effectively . Thus, the six factor
solution was calculated as the final solution. The six factor solution is presented in Table 1. The table reports the Likert scale items loading Each factor is also titled with an appropriate phrase indicating the interpretation of the decision-making trait measured by that factor .
Each of the six factors represents a relatively unique, separate and potentially very important consumer decision-making style trait. These traits can be described as follows-:~~
1.
2.
3.
4.
PERFECTIONISM. This trait measures a consumer's search for the highest or very best quality in products. Those who score high on it appear to be seekers of the very best, while those scoring low are less quality or functionally oriented in purchasing. Those higher in perfectionism would also be expected to be more careful, systematic shoppers, or comparison shoppers. They are not satisfied with the "good enough" product . If the true economic man" or maximizer exists, as some normative theorists posit, those scoring high on his factor would appear to fit that model.
VALUE CONSCIOUS, "VALUE FOR MONEY" ORIENTATION . Those scoring high on this trait are very conscious both of low price and receiving the " best value for the money", They appear to shop for lower price, sale prices, and shop carefully. I n all liklihood they are comparison s hoppers. They are neither style conscious nor brand conscious. This could be cons idered the archetype of the economy conscious consumer.
BRAND CONSCIOUSNESS . This trai t mea-sures consumers ' orientations towards buying the most expensive, well -known national brands. Cons umers scoring high on this would likely bel ieve in the consumer decision rule that t he higher the price of the product, the better its quality. They appear t o prefer the better department and s pecialty stores , and have some amount of fashion consciousness , though not necessarily the highest level. Those scoring highest on this trait would probably buy little beyond the bes t known brands.
NOVELTY- FAD-FASHION CONSCIOUSNESS . Those scoring high on this trait are novelty seekers , and are fad and fas hion conscious. They gain excitement and pleasure from seeking out new things. They are up to date in styling, and being in style is important to them. There ar e some indications tha t those scoring high on this trait may be l ess careful in s hopping, and perhaps impulsive at times. They
81
6.
appear less price conscious when high style is involved.
This interesting trait s uggests t hat some consumers dislike shopping and t hus make s hopping trips rapidly. They definitely do not view shopping as fun. Those scoring high on this trait may be the true "satisficers", those who are willing to make some sacrifices in quality in order to save time or achieve convenience.
CONFUSED, SUPPORT-SEEKING DECISIONMAKER. Those scoring high on this trait can be described as confused about the marketplace and the quality of different brand names. They view brands as little different from each other, and information confuses them. This may be why they indicate friends influence their choices and they seek information from friends. Support from such "significant others" reduces the confusion and makes decisionmaking easier for this type .
DISCUSSION
A parsimonious, six factor model of consumer decision-making traits has been identified quantitatively. The composition of these six factors suggests the construct validity of the six style traits of consumer decision-makers that are identified in the literature on consumer decision-making . However, though discussion of such consumer decision-making traits has precedent, r arely are traits actually measured in empirical research. The instrument us ed in this study i s the firs t time that a measuring instrument has been developed to measure this range of decision-making s tyle traits.
From t he factor analysis results on such style traits, a profile of the consumer ' s dec isionmaki ng style can be developed for a consumer. This i s---siffiilar to developing a personality profile as done in psychological testing. A hypothetical profile of a consumer' s complete decision-making styl e (a summary of style traits) might l ook like this:
PROFILE OF DECISION-MAKING STYLE
Sub j ect ' s Name:
Deci sion-Making Traits (Summary of Test Scores): 1. PERFECTIONISM: moderate 2. VALUE CONSCIOUSNESS: high 3. BRAND CONSCIOUSNESS: very high 4. NOVELTY-FASHION CONSCIOUSNESS: very low S. SHOPPING AVOIDANCE, SATISFICING STYLE:
mod erate 6. CONFUSED , SUPPORT-SEEKING DECISION-MAKER:
low
TABLE 1 SIX FACTOR MODEL OF CONSUMERS ' DECISION- MAKING STYLE TRAITS
Factor Perfectionist - "Maximizer" Style Loading
I make speci al effort to choose the very best quality products. .84
Getting very good quality is very important to me . .78
In general , I usually try to buy the best overall quality. .67
When it comes t o purchasing good produc t s , I am a perfectionist. . 61
My standards and expectations for good products ar e very high . .58
A product doesn 't have to be perfect , or "the best", to satisfy me. -. 56
I take the time to shop carefully. .43
I am often careless or impulsive when buying. -. 40
I am a well organi zed, systematic shopper . . 40
As long as a product is satisfactory, it doesn't have to be the best. -. 39
I am more concerned with the function and quality of products , rather than price and s tyling . . 37
I usually buy the first product or brand I find that seems "good enough. " -. 35
Factor 2 -- Value-Conscious , "Value for Money", Low Price Style Loading
I look carefully to find the "best value for the money." • 78
I carefully watch how much I s pend . .66
The lower price products are us ually my choi ce . .57
If you s pend the time to shop, you 'll save money and make better buys. . 55
I buy as much as pos sible a t "sale" prices. . 53
I take the time to shop carefully. .53
I prefer lower price products over stylish expensive ones. . 45
I am often careless or impulsive when buying. -.42
I usually buy well-known , national or designer brands. -. 39
I only shop stores that are close and convenient to me. .35
I usually compare at least t hree brands before choosing. . 32
Private brands or lesser-known brands are of ten as good as national or designer brands. .30
(Continued)
82
TABLE 1 (Continued)
Factor 3 -- Brand Conscious, High Price Payer Style
Expensive brands are usually the best.
The well-known national brands are best.
The higher the price of a product, the better its quality.
Highly advertised brands are usually very good.
Nice department and specialty s t ores offer the best products.
I usually buy well-known, national or designer brands.
Private brands or lesser-known brands are often as good as national or designer brands.
Loading
.64
.63
. 59
.55
.54
.44
-.39
A brand recommended in a consumer magazine is an excellent choice for me. .38
I usually have one or more outfits of the very latest style . .33
Today people realize that well-known brands are most desirable. .33
Factor 4 -- Novelty, Aesthetic, Fad and Fashion-Conscious Style Loading
Buying something new gives me a lift. • 72
It's fun to buy something new and exciting. .70
Fashionable, attractive styling is very important to me. .61
I often notice the styles and brands chosen by my friends. .43
I prefer lower price products over stylish expensive ones . - .38
Consumers need better i nformation on products than they have now. . 35
I am often careless or impulsive when buying. .33
I usually have one or more outfits of the very latest style . .31
Factor 5 -- Shopping Avoider, Time Saver , Satisficer Style Loading
Shopping t he stores wastes my time. .67
I make my shopping trips fast. . 55
I enjoy shopping just f or the f un of it. -.55
I usually buy t he first product or brand I find that seems "good enough". .50
Factor 6 -- Confused , "Support-Seeker" Style
If a good friend recommended a brand, I would probably try it.
My friends influence many of my choices of products and styles.
All brands are about the same in overall quality.
All the information I get on different products confuses me.
The more I learn about products, the harder it seems to choose the best .
(End)
83
Loading
. 56
.45
. 42
.39
. 31
Interpretation of Style:
"(Subject ' s) style of purchasing is dominated by value-consciousness and especially brand-consciousness. Other decision-making traits appear less important though tendencies toward satisf icing-maximizing behavior may appear in isolated decisions."
Categorizations of "high-moderate-low" scores on decision-making traits ~ be calculated from factor scores computed for each respondent. Calculation of factor scores by standard computational procedures are available in factor analysis computer programs on the market (e.g., SPSS, BMD). Appropriate norms and comparisons to the subject ' s own population (e.g., age group, grade level) could be calculated as well. This is parallel to the methods used in personality testing and psychographic-lifestyle measurement used by consumer and marketing researchers. Further categorization of decisionmaking styles could also be constructed by cluster analysis of the factor scores from the style trait data.
There are four especially notable findings from this research. First is the existence and potential importance of a "perfectionist" or maximizer decision-making style trait. The concept of maximizing behavior is central to economics and is a founding concept to consumer economists as well. This research documents the existence of this decision-making trait with more substance than done in many previous studies. However, the idea of perfectionism or maximization is to some consumer behaviorists what socialism is to a capitalist and alcohol to teetotalers: some believe that such normative concepts are inherently wrong, or at least territory to avoid. Therefore, a continued clash between economists and behaviorists on this controversial aspect will likely continue, thoug2 empirical data can mediate this disagreement.
The second notable finding is t he existence of a satisficing decision-making trait. What is particularly unique is that findings imply the satisficer is not simply a "good enough" or "value for money" buyer as sometimes thought. Instead, the satisficer may accept satisficing purchases because he or she is a time-saver and doesn't enjoy shopping. It follows that satisficing is the tradeoff that these consumers choose to make in order to conserve their more valued resource time. Thus, satisficing is just one aspect of a fundamental decision-making
2In the Fall 1984 ACR Newsletter editorial , Jag Sheth , current president of the Association for Consumer Research and a noted behaviorist, advocated increased emphasis on normative approaches to the study of consumers. Thus discussion of this controversial facet of consumer decisionmaking is receiving renewed interest from the behaviorist community.
84
style trait to these consumers: the attempt to shop quickly and efficiently while obtaining moderate (satisfactory) quality in products. All of this suggest the satisf icing concept as
applied to consumers needs to be broadened to note the more subtle motives underlying satisficing consumer choices.
Another particularly unique findings is the nonexistence of a comparison s hopper trait as hypothesized originally. Of course, comparison shopping is something done by many consumers , perhaps all at one time or another. However , the findings of this research suggest that comparison shopping is imbedded in other decisionmaking traits , especially perfectionism and value for the money, but is not necessarily a separable or uniquely identified decision-making trait by itself. Thus, comparison shopping is one facet of more fundamental decision-making traits , and it is a means by which consumers achieve the more salient traits of perfectionism or value for the money. Comparison shopping is a means to an end , but it is not an end of itself.
The fourth intriguing finding regards the exi s tence of a confused decision-making trait not previously hypothesized. Those scoring high on this trait see little difference between products and may not be helped by traditional consumer information or education. This is overcome by seeking advice and support from friends or other opinion leaders. Such consumers could be especially important targets for programs of consumer education.
The next step in the development of consumer decision-making styles is to expand the inventory of style traits to consider other personality characteristics or s tyle traits not completely covered in this study. For example , measures of consumers' propensity to seek information, process information, or avoid information might be added to the inventories. Such decision-making traits may exist, and though measured in this research, they did not yield unique factors. Othe r decision-making trait which may be important, but which did not appear as unique traits in this study, are impulsiveness and habitual buying. Finally, it may prove desirable to add measures of cons umers ' interest and involvement with specific products, such as foods, interior design, leisure, entertainment and so on. The present study focused attention towards novelty-fashion consciousness, which implies a certain set of products as well as a general decision-making style dealing with novelty-seeking behavior. Perhaps expansion of measures to a broader selection of consumer products may be desirable. It is also possible that some decision-making traits may not be general or may not influence al l product categories , but apply to just specific product categories .
In short , we have not yet determined the optimal number of decision-making style traits to measure. Clearly this research shows there are at
least six traits, but perhaps there are more. Personality tests used by psychologists often include far more than six or nine characteristics, and it may be necessary to do so in consumer studies as well in order to obtain complete profiles of decision-making styles.
It is also necessary to validate measures against actual consumer behaviors. For example, do those measuring high in perfectionism make optimal choices when several brands of varying qualities are available? Do those high in fashion-consciousness actually buy the most innovative styles? Such validations of decision styles can be done and is a part of this research program.
When the preceding types of work have been completed, and studies of reliability and validity are expanded along lines done in this present study, it will be possible to standardize a t est of decision-making styles. This standardizati on would be similar to the types of standardization and norming done in personality testing and vocational testing, areas familiar to most readers. Having s uch a standard t est or profile of consumer decision-making styles could have broad application to work in consumer education, consumer research, family financial counseling, and personal self-assessment of one's decisionmaking style. For example, just as counseling psychologists use a variety of standardized personality tests with their clients, consumer or financial counselors could find tests valuable in counseling their clients on financial matters. Consumer researchers could add these decision-oriented t raits to their broader inventories of psychographic and lifestyle traits. Consumer educators in the classroom could also measure decision-making s tyles of students, thus revealing to students their patterns of choice making and giving them a basis for changing or improving their decision-making styles to meet personal goals. Since much of consumer education is oriented towards helping i ndividuals meet their goals, it would appear that having a standardized test to show students what their styles and goals are would be particularly helpful.
SUMMARY
This exploratory study conceptualized an initial nine trait model of consumer decision-making styl es. An inventory of 50 Likert scale meas ures of the hypothesized nine decision-making traits was constructed and administered in an exploratory setting to 111 college student subjects from all class levels. Factor analysis of the inventories yielded a parsimonious six factor structure identifying six major decisionmaking traits: perfectionism, value consciousness, brand consciousness, novelty-fashion consciousness , shopping avoidance - satisficing style , and confused, support seeking decisionmaking. The six factors identifying decisionmaking traits appear to have high construct validity in explaining consumers' orientations toward market behavior. From these style
85
traits, a profile of a consumer's decisionmaking style can be constructed.
Profiles of consumers decision-making styl es can be useful to consumer educators, consumer researchers, and family financial counselors in a variety of settings. The measurements reported in this research provide a foundation for a standardized test or profile of consumers' decision-making styles that can be applied to these needs. Such a test would be unique to the consumer field, since no test or measurement of consumer beqavior currently assesses the combination of consumer decision-making style traits including perfectionism, satisficing decisionmaking, and other aspects of decis ion-making integrated in this research.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5,
6.
REFERENCES
Bettman, James R., An Information Proces_s_i_n~g~T_h_e_o_r~y~_o_f~C_o_n_s_u_m_e~r Choice, Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1979.
Maynes, E. Scott, Decision-Making for Consumers: An Introduction to Consumer Economics, New York: Macmillan, 1976.
Miller, Roger LeRoy, Economic Issues for Consumers, New York: West Publishing Co., Third Edition, 1981.
Simon, Herbert A., Models of Man, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1957.
Sproles, George B., Fashion: Consumer Behavior Toward Dress, Minneapolis: Burgess Publishing Company, 1979.
Thorell!, Hans B., Helmut Becker, & Jack Engeldow, The Information Seekers, Cambridge, Massachusetts : Ballinger, 1975.