ARTICLE IN PRESS

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780 www.elsevier.com/locate/jretconser

Proling consumers: A study of Qatari consumers shopping motivations

Cardiff Business School, Aberconway Building, Column Drive, CARDIFF, CF10 3EU, UK b Bristol Business School, UK c University of Qatar, Qatar

Abstract The paper investigates reasons consumers go shopping in Doha, Qatar. Four hundred supermarket shoppers completed selfadministered surveys regarding their attitudes toward 57 individual shopping motivation items. The paper rst uses both exploratory (EFA) and conrmatory (CFA) factor analysis to examine the factor structure and psychometric properties of these items. Using cluster analysis, the paper then identies and discusses six homogeneous groups with different emphasis on specic reasons for shopping. The paper proles clusters on demographics and ethnic group membership to examine similarities and differences among cluster members. The paper discusses implications for brand managers and suggests future research directions. r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Shopping motivations; Proling; Retail shoppers; Retail strategy

1. Introduction The purpose of this study is to prole shoppers based on their reasons for shopping and to examine similarities and differences among shopper segments based on demographics and ethnic group membership. A stream of research has sought to segment consumers using their motivations for shopping. In doing so, this research has provided deep insights into the consumer psyche and subsequently into retail strategy formulation (Bloch et al., 1994; Reynolds et al., 2002; Reynolds and Beatty, 1999). While some of this research has focused on investigating the perceived personal shopping value (Babin et al., 1994), others have investigated the hedonic reasons people go shopping and focused on developing some taxonomy of shoppers based on their hedonic shopping motivations (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982). Still others have
Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 29 208 76 838; fax: +44 29 2087 44 19. E-mail address: [email protected] (A. Jamal).

attempted to segment consumers on the basis of their decision-making styles, which are considered to be mental orientations characterizing a consumers approach to making choices (Lysonski et al., 1996; Sproles and Sproles 1990; Sproles and Kendall, 1986). The underlying idea is that consumers engage in shopping with certain fundamental decision-making styles including rational, brand conscious, quality conscious and impulsive shopping. While such proling and segmentations provide deep insights into the shopping behaviour of consumers, most of this research is North American in origin and application. There is a paucity of research examining shopper proling in non-Western contexts. The need for such a research is highlighted through the fact that the aggressive, geographic market expansion of successful retail organizations, the internationalization of retail practices and the development of a global consumer market (Dawson, 1994; Severin et al., 2001) has led many to call for investigating consumer behaviours in specic cultural contexts (de Mooij and Hofstede, 2002; McCracken, 1986). Others argue that the management of retail rms in other cultures requires

0969-6989/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2005.08.002

ARTICLE IN PRESS
68 A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780

an understanding of, and responding to, the local consumers motives, value, lifestyles, perceptions, attitudes and needs (Byoungho and Kim, 2003; Hofstede, 1980; Prahalad and Doz, 1987). The paper makes two important contributions to the existing literature. First, with the help of an empirical research, the paper extends our knowledge of consumer proling to a non-Western context (i.e., Qatar) for which no related research has been published. Qatar is currently attracting considerable international interest and investments. Almost all of the large European retail chains (e.g. Carrefour, Marks and Spencer, Debenhams) have a presence there and a large number of modern shopping malls with up-to-date recreational facilities including restaurants, cafes and themed children play areas have emerged in recent years competing with the traditional souqs or Arab markets. From a managerial perspective, an understanding of consumer proling schemes is likely to provide an essential understanding of the way Qatari shoppers can be effectively segmented and targeted. Second, the paper proles consumers on the basis of shopping motivations, shopping value and decision-making styles. This is signicant because most of the existing literature has sought to develop typologies of shoppers based either on shopping motives, shopping values or on decision-making styles. The paper combines the three perspectives together to seek a better understanding of the reasons consumers go shopping. The remainder of this paper is organised in ve sections. Section 2 reviews the relevant literature. Section 3 describes the data collection procedure along with measures adopted for the current study. Section 4 reports exploratory (EFA) and conrmatory (CFA) factor analysis and a discussion of Cluster Analysis results. This is followed by the fth section, which discusses ndings and reports conclusions and implications for brand managers.

2. Conceptual background In order to investigate reasons consumers go shopping, three different but related streams of research were identied: shopping motivations, shopping value and consumer decision-making styles. This is because consumers are driven by their personal and/or social needs (Tauber, 1972) or it can be that the value that consumers seek out of their total shopping experience makes them go shopping (Babin et al., 1994). Alternatively, consumers are thought to approach the retail marketplace with certain decision-making styles which is dened as a mental orientation characterising a consumers approach to making shopping choices (Lysonski et al., 1996; Sproles and Kendall, 1986; Walsh et al., 2001). Motivation is normally dened as an inner drive that reects goal-directed arousal (Arnould et al., 2002, p.

378). In a shopping context, motivation can be described as the driving force within consumers that makes them shop. In a widely acknowledged study of shopping motivations, Tauber (1972) identied a number of shopping motivations with the premise that consumers are motivated by two types of psychosocial needs: personal and social. The personal motives include the needs for role-playing, diversion, self-gratication, learning about new trends, physical activity and sensory stimulation. The role-playing motive reects activities that are learned and are expected as part of a certain role or position in society such as mother, housewife or husband. Diversion highlights shoppings ability to present opportunities to the shopper to escape from the routines of daily life and therefore represents a type of recreation and escapism. Self-gratication underlines the shoppings potential to alleviate depression as shoppers can spend money and buy something nice when they are in a down mood. Physical activity focuses on consumers need for engaging in physical exercise by walking in spacious and appealing retail centres, particularly when they are living in urban and congested environments. Sensory stimulation emphasizes the ability of the retail institutions to provide many sensory benets to consumers as they can enjoy the physical sensation of handling merchandise, the pleasant background music and the scents. The social motives identied by Tauber (1972), on the other hand, include the needs for social experiences, communication with others, peer group attractions, status and authority, and pleasure in bargaining. The social and communication motives features the shoppings potential to provide opportunities to socialise, meet and communicate with others with similar interests. The peer group attraction stresses consumers desires to be with their reference group, whereas status and authority reect shoppings ability to provide opportunities for consumers to command attention and respect from others. The pleasure of bargaining reects consumers desires and abilities to make wiser decisions by engaging in comparison shopping and special sales. Advancing Taubers (1972) work on shopping motives, Westbrook and Black (1985) suggested seven dimensions of shopping motivations: anticipated utility (the benets provided by the product acquired via shopping), role enactment (identifying and assuming culturally prescribed roles), negotiation (seeking economic advantage via bargaining), choice optimization (searching for and securing precisely the right products to t ones demands), afliation (with others directly or indirectly), power and authority (attainment of elevated social position), and stimulation (seeking novel and interesting stimuli). Similarly, Arnold and Reynolds (2003) while focusing on motivations that are primarily hedonic and non-product in nature, identied and validated six broad categories of hedonic shopping

ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780 69

motivations. These included adventure shopping (to seek stimulation, adventure, and feelings of being in a different world), social shopping (for enjoyment of shopping with friends and family, socializing while shopping and bonding with others), gratication shopping (for stress relief, to alleviate a negative mood and as a special treat to oneself), idea shopping (for keeping up with trends and new fashions and to seek new products and innovations), role shopping (for getting enjoyment as a consequence of shopping for others) and value shopping (reecting shopping for sales, looking for discounts, and hunting for bargains). Value is an enduring belief that a specic mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence (Rokeach, 1973, p. 5). According to Shim and Eastlick (1998), values are responsible for the selection and maintenance of the goals (or ends) toward which individuals strive, while simultaneously regulating the manner in which this striving takes place (p. 142). Peter and Olson (2005) state that values are consumers broad life goals and they often involve the emotional affect associated with such goals and needs (see also Grifn et al., 2000). In the context of shopping, a stream of research has focused on the value provided by a complete shopping experience (Babin et al., 1994; Michon and Chebat, 2004). Recognising that a shopping experience can be valuable or valueless in more than one way, Babin et al. (1994) developed and validated a scale which assessed consumers evaluations of a shopping experience along two dimensions: utilitarian and hedonic value (see also, Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Batra and Ahtola, 1991; Langrehr, 1991; Roy, 1994; Wakeeld and Baker, 1998). Citing previous literature, Babin et al. (1994) argued that a shopping experience could produce both a utilitarian (e.g., functional utility and tangible consequences) as well as a hedonic value (subjective experiences and emotional worth) for consumers. A shopping experience can evoke value for consumers either through successfully accomplishing its intended goals (e.g., buying a present for a loved one) or by providing enjoyment and/or fun (Babin et al., 1994). According to Babin et al. (1994), the utilitarian value reects shopping with a work mentality whereas hedonic value is more subjective, personal and results more from fun and playfulness associated with a shopping experience. Others have made similar points by characterising utilitarian aspects of shopping as task-related, rational and whether or not a product acquisition related mission is accomplished (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Batra and Ahtola, 1991). According to Babin et al. (1994), the hedonic aspects of shopping experience reect shoppings potential entertainment and emotional worth and can involve increased arousal, heightened involvement, perceived freedom, fantasy

fullment, and escapism (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Babin et al., 1994; Bloch and Richins, 1983; Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982). Therefore, recreational shoppers are likely to expect high levels of hedonic value from their shopping experience (Babin et al., 1994). In a related domain and while contemplating mental orientations that characterise consumers approaches to making choices including shopping, Sproles and Kendall (1986) proposed a consumer style inventory, which identied eight major characteristics of consumer decision-making. These included: quality consciousness (the tendency to seek perfection or highest possible quality in products while shopping; they are expected to shop more carefully, more systematically and are not likely to be satised with good enough brands), brand consciousness (the tendency to seek the more expensive, well known famous brands; they are likely to perceive pricequality link, are likely to have positive attitudes towards departmental and speciality stores selling expensive and popular brands and may prefer best selling, heavily advertised brands), novelty-fashion consciousness (tendency to buy novel and fashionable items; they are likely to seek pleasure and excitement out of seeking and discovering new things and are likely to keep up to date with style with variety seeking as part of their orientation), recreational shopping (the tendency to seek pleasure, fun, recreation and entertainment out of shopping), and value consciousness (tendency to seek bargains and look for deals; they are likely to be concerned about getting best value for money and may engage in comparison shopping), impulsiveness (tendency to buy on impulse; they are likely not to plan their shopping and remain unconcerned about how much they spend), confusion (tendency to get confused by over-choice of brands and information; they are likely to experience information overload) and brand loyal orientation (tendency to like and buy same brands again and again; they are likely to have favourite brands and stores and to have formed habits in choosing them). A number of studies investigated and assessed the applicability of Sproles and Kendalls (1986) inventory to examine major characteristics of consumer decisionmaking in New Zealand (Durvasula et al., 1993), in Korea (Hafstrom et al., 1992), in Germany (Walsh et al., 2001) and in US, Greece, New Zealand and India (Lysonski et al., 1996). Since shopping values and motives are, in part, consequences of culture and ethnicity (Phinney, 1992; Rokeach, 1973), the study investigates the role of ethnic group membership in determining similarities and differences between consumer segments. Previous research indicates that ethnic group membership can inuence shopping orientations (Eastlick and Lotz, 2000; Shim and Gehrt, 1996). For instance, Shim and Gehrt (1996) reported ndings in relation to the shopping approaches of Hispanic, White and Native

ARTICLE IN PRESS
70 A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780

adolescents in the USA. According to Shim and Gehrt (1996), Hispanic adolescents depicted a greater tendency to the social/hedonic shopping orientation than did the White and Native American adolescents. The White adolescents, on the other hand, manifested a greater tendency towards the utilitarian approach to shopping than did Hispanic and Native American adolescents. Hispanic adolescents also manifested a greater tendency towards novelty/fashion consciousness, recreational and brand-loyal orientations as compared to their White and Native American counterparts. Similarly, research on different ethnic groups in the USA reveals that the Hispanic Americans are different from Anglo-Americans in their price consciousness, brand loyalty, store patronage, emphasis on product quality, style and social shopping orientations (Eastlick and Lotz, 2000; Valencia, 1989). The rapid development of shopping malls in Qatar in recent years and the multi-ethnic nature of Dohas population represent a suitable avenue for the study. On the basis of the review of the literature, a number of research questions can be raised. For instance, within the food and grocery sector; rst, what are the shopping motivations, shopping value and decisionmaking styles that drive consumers to shop in a non Western context? second, what are the consumer segments that could be developed on the basis of shopping motives, values and decision-making styles? third, what are the similarities and differences between consumer segments based on demographics, ethnic background and store satisfaction? and nally, what are the guidelines for retail strategy formulation. Answers to these questions should be of help to retail brand managers and consumer researchers interested not only in Qatar but also in other markets with similar consumer lifestyles, cultural values and retail market structures. We argue that an understanding of the reasons consumers go shopping is important for retailers strategic marketing activities involving different consumers groups. Similarly, effective communication with different consumer groups could be improved by developing a proper understanding of shopping motives, perceived shopping value and decision-making styles (Walsh et al., 2001).

3. Method First, a questionnaire in English was drafted containing Likert-scaled items scoring from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) to measure 13 shopping motivations: utilitarian shopping, hedonic shopping, social shopping, role playing, gratication seeking, adventure shopping, brand loyal orientation, value seeking, confusion, impulsiveness, high quality consciousness, brand consciousness and novelty seeking

(Babin et al., 1994; Lysonski et al., 1996; Reynolds et al., 2002). Appendix A lists these items. Measures were also included in the questionnaire to capture store satisfaction, frequency of shopping, amount of money spent, ethnic background and demographics. For the purpose of this study, store satisfaction was considered as a composite of overall consumer attitude towards a particular store that incorporated a number of measures (Jones and Sasser, 1995; Levesque and McDougall, 1996; Jamal and Naser, 2002). To capture store satisfaction, the questionnaire rst included a question whereby the respondents were required to identify (from a list) the stores they generally visited for their food and grocery shopping. The next question then required them to identify the main store where they did most of their food and grocery shopping. The next question then required respondents to respond to three frequently used measures of satisfaction (e.g., after considering everything, I am extremely satised with my main store). Afterwards, an Arabic version of the questionnaire was drafted with the help of two bilingual experts uent in both English and Arabic. The questionnaire was rst translated into Arabic and then back translated into English to enhance translation equivalence (Hui and Triandis, 1985; Hair et al., 1998; Lysonski et al., 1996). Minor changes were made in the wording to clarify the semantics in the Arabic version. A total of 30 pilot tests were then conducted with consumers who were seen as similar to the population for the study. Pre-testing was also carried out with two prominent academic members of staff at a leading local university. The purpose of the pre-testing was to rene the questionnaire and to assess the validity and applicability of measures; corresponding amendments were made to the questionnaire after the pilot tests. For the purpose of this study, the product category of food and grocery was chosen. Food and grocery shopping is an effective context to study consumers and their shopping motivations, values and decisionmaking styles for a number of reasons. First, previous research has examined shopping motivations in a grocery context (e.g., Rohm and Swaminathan, 2004) enabling us to contrast our ndings against previous research. Second, grocery shopping is an ongoing and essential activity whereby consumer decision-making within the grocery environment can be highly involving (Smith and Carsky, 1996). Third, while grocery shopping in a Western context is often perceived as task oriented, routine, and non-recreational in nature (Machleit and Eroglu, 2000), our preliminary discussions with some of the local shoppers revealed that the grocery shopping in the local context (where supermarkets and shopping malls are a recent phenomenon) was associated with a number of hedonic feelings (e.g., enjoyment, excitement, and entertainment, feelings of freedom from domestic chores and heightened

ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780 71

involvement). However, we acknowledge the fact that some of the hedonic and emotional aspects of shopping may be less relevant to this particular context and therefore should be considered as a limiting factor of this study. The population of the study consisted of male and female food and grocery shoppers (18 and above) in Doha, Qatar. Ideally we wanted to use a mall intercept survey to collect the data because it had been used by previous research (see for instance, Reynolds et al. 2002; Babin and Darden, 1996). However, given the cultural sensitivities involved (e.g., it is not possible to ask a female shopper in a shopping mall to ll in a questionnaire as Qatar is traditionally a Muslim society), a convenience sample of 650 respondents was drawn using undergraduate students (business economics), academic and non-academic staff at a local university in Doha, Qatar, who took additional copies of the questionnaire back home and distributed them among family and friends. Inclusion in the sample required that the respondents were either male or female, aged 18 and above and did regularly purchase food and grocery items for their personal or family use. There was no monetary incentive for completing the questionnaire but all those willing to participate were briefed about the purpose and rationale of the study. The procedure resulted in 437 completed questionnaires with a response rate of 67%. However 37 questionnaires were incomplete resulting in 400 usable questionnaires. Overall, the sample is primarily aged 2039 (80%); 43.6% single and 54.4% married; highly educated (72% holding university degrees), mainly employed as professionals or senior management positions (48.5%), and 46% male and 54% females.

for novelty seeking, three items for quality conscious, two items for brand conscious, two items for hedonic shopping and one item for social shopping. The remaining 36 items were again subjected to EFA and a nal ten-factor model was estimated, while none of the items exhibited low factor loadings (o0.40) or high cross-loadings (40.40). The ten-factor solution accounted for 65.5% of the total variance, and exhibited a KMO measure of sampling adequacy of 0.816. In order to quantify the scale reliabilities of the factors identied, Cronbach alpha coefcients were computed; all of the alpha coefcients easily passed the minimum level of 0.70 recommended by Nunnally (1978) indicating acceptability and reliability of all of the scales. Results of factor analysis together with the percentage of total variance for each of the factor and calculated Cronbach alpha scores are shown in Table 1. As a point of comparison, factor loadings reported by some signicantly relevant studies (i.e., Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Lysonski et al., 1996) are also reported in Table 1. According to Table 1, our ndings are largely similar to those reported by Arnold and Reynolds (2003) and Lysonski et al. (1996). 4.2. Conrmatory factor analysis In order to further test the validity of the measures used in the study, CFA using Amos 4.01 was conducted (Byrne, 2001). A measurement model was set to have ten factors (latent variables) and one latent variable per indicator was allowed. In other words, each item was prescribed to be loaded on one specic latent variable; thus, a gratication-seeking item was related to the gratication factor and not to any other factor. A completely standardised solution produced by Amos 4.01 using maximum likelihood method showed that all of the 36 items loaded highly on their corresponding factors, conrming the unidimensionality of the constructs and providing strong empirical evidence of their validity. The t (CR) values for the loadings were high demonstrating adequate convergent validity. The resulting measurement model was w2 400 962:692, p 0:000, degrees of freedom (df) 549; Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) 0.88; Adjusted Goodness-of-Fit Index (AGFI) 0.86; Comparative-Fit-Index (CFI) 0.92; Incremental Fit Index (IFI) 0.92; Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) 0.043, which indicated a good t. The measurement model and the standardized loadings along with critical ratios (t values) are presented in Table 2. Furthermore, as reported in Table 2, the scale composite reliability for each construct was quite satisfactory (Hair et al., 1998; Fornell and Larker, 1981). The composite reliability, which is an internal consistency reliability measure as a further evidence of convergent validity computed from Amos solutions, ranged from 0.71 to 0.90.

4. Findings 4.1. Exploratory factor analysis The 57 items used to measure the 13 shopping motivations were all subjected to EFA with principal axis factoring and varimax rotation with screen test criterion and Eigen values used to conrm the number of factors to extract (Hair et al., 1998). The main purpose of the EFA was to conrm whether items loaded correctly to the corresponding factors as identied by previous research. The purpose was also to assess the dimensionality, measurement and psychometric properties of scale items used in the study. However, this produced a 15-factor solution, which was difcult to interpret for our sample. Therefore, after inspecting the factor solution, the item loadings and the anti-image correlation matrix, a total of 21 items were deleted: all of the three items for adventure shopping, all of the ve items for impulsiveness, all of the ve items

ARTICLE IN PRESS
72 A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780 Table 1 Exploratory factor analysis results Items Factor loadings (n 400) a % Variance Reported factor loadings Lysonski et al. (1996) Arnold and Reynolds (2003)

Factor 1Gratication seeking When I am in down mood, I go shopping to make me feel better To me shopping is a way to relieve stress I go to shopping when I want to treat myself to something special While shopping I can normally forget my problems Factor 2Social shopping I like shopping with my friends or family to socialize I enjoy socializing with others when I shop Shopping with others is a bonding experience Factor 3High quality seeking When it comes to purchasing products, I try to get the very best or perfect choice In general I usually try to buy the best overall quality I make special effort to choose the very best quality products My standards and expectations for the products that I buy are high Factor 4Confused by choice There are so many brands to choose that often I feel confused Sometimes its hard to choose which stores to shop at The more I learn about products, the harder it seems to choose the best All the information I get on different products confuses me Factor 5Value shopping For the most parts, I go shopping when there are sales I enjoy looking for discounts when I shop I enjoy hunting for bargains when I shop Factor 6Brand loyal/habitual I have favourite brands I buy over and over Once I nd a product or brand I like, I stick with it I go to the same store each time I shop I like to buy the same brand Factor 7Brand conscious The more expensive brands are usually my choice The higher the price of the product, the better is its quality Nice department and specialty stores offer me the best products The most advertised brands are usually the very good choices Factor 8Utilitarian I make shopping trips fast While shopping, I try to accomplish just what I want to as soon as possible While shopping I try to nd just the items that I am looking for Factor 9Hedonic shopping Going shopping is one of the enjoyable activities for me I enjoy shopping just for the fun of it I enjoy shopping more than most people do I love to go shopping when I can nd time Factor 10Role playing I like shopping for others because when they feel good, I feel good I enjoy shopping for my family and friends I enjoy shopping around to nd a perfect gift for someone Total variance

0.85 0.85 0.69 0.78 0.86 0.90 0.82 0.81 0.83 0.81 0.56

0.86

8.69

0.69 0.67 0.50 n.a.* 0.85 0.76 0.71 0.46 0.67 0.81 0.76

0.90

7.08

0.78

7.01

0.71 0.68 0.76 0.79 0.82 0.86 0.75 0.72 0.78 0.55 0.73 0.79 0.84 0.48 0.64 0.73 0.83 0.71 0.55 0.63 0.61 0.73 0.67 0.76 0.69 0.70 6.01 0.76 6.70

0.64 0.70 0.59 0.68 0.86 0.83 0.74 0.58 0.81 0.50 n.a.** 0.55 0.43 0.69 0.44 0.52 n.a.*** n.a.*** 0.84 0.82 n.a.**** n.a.**** 0.83 0.80 0.57

0.81

6.34

0.70

6.28

0.71

6.08

0.76

5.77

0.71

5.53 65.5

*Items from Babin et al. (1994), **Rohm and Swaminathan (2004), ***Michon and Chebat (2004), and ****Reynolds and Beatty (1999).

ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780 Table 2 Measurement model Items Standardized factor loadings Critical ratio (CR) 73

GF1 GF2 GF3 GF4 SOC1 SOC2 SOC3 QC1 QC2 QC3 QC4 CF1 CF2 CF3 CF4 VAL1 VAL2 VAL3 HB1 HB2 HB3 HB4 BC1 BC2 BC3 BC4 UT1 UT2 UT3 HD1 HD2 HD3 HD4 ROL1 ROL2 ROL3

Factor 1Gratication seeking (scale composite reliability 0.87) When I am in down mood, I go shopping to make me feel better To me shopping is a way to relieve stress I go to shopping when I want to treat myself to something special While shopping I can normally forget my problems Factor 2Social shopping (scale composite reliability 0.90) I like shopping with my friends or family to socialize I enjoy socializing with others when I shop Shopping with others is a bonding experience Factor 3High quality seeking (scale composite reliability 0.78) When it comes to purchasing products, I try to get the very best or perfect choice In general I usually try to buy the best overall quality I make special effort to choose the very best quality products My standards and expectations for the products that I buy are high Factor 4Confused by choice (scale composite reliability 0.76) There are so many brands to choose that often I feel confused Sometimes its hard to choose which stores to shop at The more I learn about products, the harder it seems to choose the best All the information I get on different products confuses me Factor 5Value shopping (scale composite reliability 0.81) For the most parts, I go shopping when there are sales I enjoy looking for discounts when I shop I enjoy hunting for bargains when I shop Factor 6Brand loyal/habitual (scale composite reliability 0.72) I have favourite brands I buy over and over Once I nd a product or brand I like, I stick with it I go to the same store each time I shop I like to buy the same brand Factor 7Brand conscious (scale composite reliability 0.72) The more expensive brands are usually my choice The higher the price of the product, the better is its quality Nice department and specialty stores offer me the best products The most advertised brands are usually the very good choices Factor 8Utilitarian (scale composite reliability 0.71) I make shopping trips fast While shopping, I try to accomplish just what I want to as soon as possible While shopping I try to nd just the items that I am looking for Factor 9Hedonic shopping (scale composite reliability 0.77) Going shopping is one of the enjoyable activities for me I enjoy shopping just for the fun of it I enjoy shopping more than most people do I love to go shopping when I can nd time Factor 10Role playing (scale composite reliability 0.72) I like shopping for others because when they feel good, I feel good I enjoy shopping for my family and friends I enjoy shopping around to nd a perfect gift for someone

0.85 0.90 0.62 0.76 0.86 0.91 0.83 0.74 0.77 0.71 0.52 0.56 0.59 0.75 0.75 0.77 0.87 0.65 0.71 0.71 0.42 0.64 0.66 0.80 0.43 0.60 0.67 0.80 0.54 0.70 0.83 0.67 0.48 0.67 0.79 0.58

17.65 18.60 12.38 1.000 20.40 21.67 1.0000 9.30 9.43 9.17 1.0000 9.76 10.21 12.15 1.0000 12.27 12.42 1.0000 10.01 10.02 6.83 1.0000 9.45 9.85 6.89 1.0000 8.68 8.74 1.0000 8.66 9.15 8.46 1.0000 9.18 9.51 1.000

4.3. Cluster analysis In order to classify respondents into groups based on their responses to the shopping motivations, a multi-step

cluster analysis was utilized (Hair et al., 1998; Reynolds and Beatty, 1999). Using Wards method in hierarchical clustering procedure, clusters were formed based on factor scores. An examination of the distance between

ARTICLE IN PRESS
74 A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780

two clusters for three, four, ve and six cluster solutions resulted in the determination of a six-cluster solution (Reynolds et al., 2002; Reynolds and Beatty, 1999). Then a K-means clustering procedure with the initial seeds provided by the hierarchical analysis solution was conducted to obtain the nal clusters. The results of cluster analysis are reported in Table 3. The Eta-squared statistics reported in Table 3 indicate that the partitioning involving the rst, second, third, sixth and the ninth factor was able to explain larger amounts of variance on these factors. We interpreted the clusters as follows: Socializing shoppers: This is the rst group of shoppers, which makes up the second largest percentage (21.5%) of the respondents scoring the highest on social, the second highest on utilitarian, the third highest on brand loyalty, above average on quality and role but scoring the lowest on gratication and below average on value and brand consciousness. Disloyal shoppers: This is the second group of shoppers, which makes up the third largest percentage (19.8%) of the respondents scoring the lowest on brand loyalty, below average on confusion, gratication, social and utility but scoring above average on value, quality and hedonic. Independent perfectionist shoppers: This is the third group of shoppers, which makes up 16.3% of the

respondents scoring the lowest on social, the second lowest both on gratication and value, third lowest on role shopping but scoring above average on quality, brand loyalty, confusion and utilitarian shopping. Escapist shoppers: This is the fourth group of shoppers, which makes up the largest percentage (22.5%) of the respondents scoring the highest on gratication, the second highest on hedonic shopping, above average on confusion and slightly above average on brand loyalty, role playing, brand consciousness and quality. Apathetic shoppers: This is the fth group of shoppers, which makes up the lowest percentage (8.3%) of the respondents scoring the lowest on quality, second lowest on utilitarian, the third lowest on gratication and below average on brand consciousness and role but slightly above average on hedonic and confusion. Budget conscious shoppers: This is the sixth group of shoppers, which makes up the second lowest percentage (11.8%) of the respondents scoring the least on hedonic, second lowest on confusion but the highest on value, second highest on gratication, third highest on brand loyalty, above average on brand consciousness but slightly below average on quality. It can be seen from Table 3, that the rst, fourth and sixth clusters (58.3%) tend to hold a positive view on

Table 3 Results of the non-hierarchical cluster analysis Shopping motivations Cluster means Cluster 1 (Socializing shoppers) Cluster 2 (Disloyal shoppers) Cluster 3 (Independent perfectionist shoppers) 0.62309 1.12595 0.33844 0.24877 0.62560 0.38432 0.01492 0.20643 0.01813 0.44686 65 16.3% Cluster 4 (Escapist shoppers) Cluster 5 (Apathetic shoppers) Cluster 6 (Budget conscious shoppers) 0.52758 0.05772 0.16742 0.47041 0.85398 0.35389 0.27757 0.09515 1.44607 0.05686 47 11.8% F-value Po Eta2

Gratication seeking Social shopping High quality seeking Confused by choice Value seeking Brand loyal Brand conscious Utilitarian shopping Hedonic shopping Role playing Cluster size Percentage of respondents (%)

0.63270 0.97712 0.29502 0.04925 0.20753 0.34439 0.12826 0.39484 0.05186 0.16003 86 21.5%

0.31500 0.25927 0.27619 0.40959 0.38304 1.15560 0.06648 0.11545 0.18857 0.03861 79 19.8%

1.19280 0.09198 0.11839 0.31363 0.09852 0.19781 0.13180 0.09224 0.47164 0.16029 90 22.5%

0.37425 0.04102 2.18110 0.17680 0.09148 0.06842 0.29076 0.77214 0.22240 0.14746 33 8.3%

90.471 58.978 65.111 8.239 18.590 40.232 1.974 8.318 35.116 3.827

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.081 0.000 0.000 0.002

0.534 0.428 0.452 0.095 0.191 0.338 0.024 0.095 0.308 0.046

Bold type indicates that value is signicantly different from 0, the mean of each factor for the whole sample. Bold type signicant at 0.01 level, bold italic signicant at 0.05 level.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780 75

most aspects of shopping whereas the second, third and fth (46.2%) seem to hold a negative orientation towards most aspects of shopping. Similarly, gratication seeking is valued the most by the rst and the sixth clusters whereas social shopping is only valued the most by the rst cluster. On the other hand, high quality seeking is valued least by the fth cluster while most of the others valued it above average. Confusion is valued least by the second and sixth clusters whereas the third and the fourth clusters valued it above average. Value seeking is valued the most by the sixth cluster and above average by the second cluster. Similarly, brand loyalty is valued the least by disloyal shoppers but above average by rst, third, and sixth cluster. On the other hand, brand consciousness is valued above average by the sixth cluster and below average by the rst and fth clusters. Utilitarian shopping is valued least by the fth cluster but above average the rst and the third clusters. Hedonic shopping is valued above average by fourth, fth and second clusters but the least by the sixth cluster. Role-playing is valued the least by the third cluster but slightly above average by the rst and fourth clusters. 4.4. Cluster validation Following Reynolds et al. (2002), a K-means clustering procedure, taking random initial seeds to set the cluster centres was performed to validate the cluster solutions. Findings revealed more or less similar cluster solutions though there were some minor differences. The composition of each cluster in terms of demographic variables (age, gender, occupation, marital status, education) and ethnicity was then compared with that of the full sample, using chi-squared tests, while t-tests were used to compare each clusters store satisfaction with the mean for the whole sample. Findings are
Table 4 Cluster validation Full sample Cluster 1 (Socializing shoppers) Cluster 2 (Disloyal shoppers)

reported in Table 4. Only the signicant demographic differences, gender and occupation, and signicant ethnicity related differences are highlighted here. Table 4 indicates that the rst cluster, labelled as socializing shoppers, is composed of a slight majority of females, largely professionals and Qatari nationals but also other Arabs and scored highest on store satisfaction scores. The second cluster, labelled as disloyal shoppers, is composed of a slight majority of males, largely professionals, Qatari nationals but also other Arabs and Asians (50% of all Asians in the sample). The third cluster, labelled as independent perfectionist shoppers, is composed of a fair majority of males, largely professionals, Qatari nationals but also other Arabs. The fourth cluster, labelled as escapist shoppers, is composed of a signicant majority of females, largely Qatari nationals but also other Arabs and scored second highest on store satisfaction scores. The fth cluster, labelled as apathetic shoppers, is composed of a fair majority of females, mostly students, largely Qatari nationals but also other Arabs and scored lowest on store satisfaction scores. The sixth cluster, labelled as budget conscious shoppers, is composed of a fair majority of females, mostly Qatari nationals, other Arabs and Westerners (71% of all Westerners in the sample) and but also other Arabs. It is interesting to note that the majority of Westerners sampled in the study belonged to the sixth cluster whereas almost half of all Asians sampled belonged to the second cluster.

5. Discussion, conclusions and implications Prior research has called for identifying and investigating the shopping motivations, which are likely to vary across retail shopping formats and occasions (Westbrook

Cluster 3 (Independent perfectionist shoppers) 5.49 Male 57% Female 43% 66% 14% 20% 83% 14% 3%

Cluster 4 (Escapist shoppers)

Cluster 5 (Apathetic shoppers)

Cluster 6 (Budget conscious shoppers) 5.58 Male 43% Female 57% 34% 34% 32% 53% 17% 4% 26%

Store satisfaction Gender Occupation

5.57 Male 46% Female 54% Professionals Students Other Qatari Other Arab Asian Western 48% 30% 22% 74% 17% 5% 4%

5.82 Male 46% Female 54% 53% 29% 18% 79% 16% 2.5% 2.5%

5.49 Male 54% Female 46% 53% 29% 18% 67% 17% 13% 3%

5.74 Male 34% Female 66% 39% 36% 25% 77% 19% 4%

4.80 Male 42% Female 58% 36% 42% 22% 79% 18% 3%

Ethnicity

Bold type indicates that value for cluster is signicantly different from value for whole sample. Bold type signicant at 0.01 level, bold italic signicant at 0.05 level.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
76 A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780

and Black, 1985). While ours is not a cross-cultural comparative study, our ndings reveal gratication seeking, social shopping, high quality seeking, confused by over choice, value seeking, brand loyal, brand consciousness, utilitarian shopping, hedonic shopping and role playing to be important factors that drive consumers to shop in a non-Western context such as that of Doha. Furthermore, the six segments that emerged from our analysis are quite different from one another and are signicant for marketers in a number of important ways. For example, the largest segment called the escapist shoppers report their primary shopping motivations to be gratication and hedonism. To some extent, however, they do appear to become confused by the overwhelming variety of brands offered. Like respondents in Babin et al.s (1994) study, our respondents recognise the shopping activity as a self-gratifying and therapeutic activity. This suggests that these customers view shopping as an escape mechanism to get their minds off their problems and as a way for relieving stress and alleviating negative mood. Since this segment is composed of a signicant majority of females, largely Qatari nationals but also other Arabs, it is highly likely that some of the traditional values associated with the role of men and women in the society appear to be applicable here. Men in traditional Arab societies such as that of Qatar, mostly go out for work whereas women tend to stay home taking care of children and the domestic chores. This, along with the harsh desert weather conditions during most parts of the year, might have a negative impact on the moods of female consumers, who therefore, perceive shopping to be an alternative activity whereby they can forget the daily routines of their lives by indulging in shopping related social experiences outside their homes (Tauber, 1972). Since these customers appear to actively seek redress for their problems, retail managers need to focus on improving store atmospherics, introducing recreational and fun activities adding to the entertainment and emotional worth of shopping experiences (Wakeeld and Baker, 1998). The fact that this segment attaches signicant importance to the hedonic dimension of shopping is also signicant for retailers and brand managers because individuals driven largely by hedonism are likely to pay more attention to retail and brand attributes (merchandise quality, in store promotions). They are also likely to have a larger number of inputs in their brand evaluation and decisionmaking (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Dawson et al., 1990). Those who value hedonic dimension of shopping are also likely to experience increased arousal, heightened involvement, perceived freedom, fantasy fullment and escapism (Babin et al., 1994). Therefore, such a segment can best be targeted using experience-based advertising by focusing on what it feels to use a brand or service as these customers are likely to focus on messages that are perceived to be self-relevant, selffullling and idealistic.

Similarly, the second largest segment, socializing shoppers, report their primary shopping motivations to be social, habitual brand loyal and utilitarian with least value attached to gratication seeking. Therefore, these shoppers appear to see shopping as a leisure activity (Martin and Mason, 1987), fullling some important role in family and social life. The segment also appears to perceive shopping to be a routine and habitual as well as task related activity. Grounded in McGuires (1974) collection of afliation theories of human motivation, social shopping reects consumers tendency to be altruistic, cohesive, and seeking acceptance and affection in interpersonal relationships (cf. Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; see also, McGuire, 1976; Westbrook and Black, 1985). This also reects the afliation motive (Tauber, 1972) whereby individuals seek to afliate with friends and other shoppers because shopping is treated as a social process. Given the fact that this segment is fairly balanced in terms of gender (though a slight majority is female), is largely composed of professionals and Qatari nationals but also other Arabs, the segment appears to represent working men and women, who despite their professional work load, continue to retain the traditional juggling lifestyle involving care for the household and for family members (Thompson, 1996). On the one hand, they appear to be highly sociable consumers seeking friendships, solidarity with the group and opportunities for engaging in relationships (McAdams, 1988). However, at the same time, they also prefer to choose the same favourite brands and stores repeatedly and consider shopping to be a routine activity that needs to be accomplished as smoothly as possible. In other words, while high on social agenda, these consumers try to nish off their shopping quickly by patronizing same brands and stores to minimize their cognitive efforts. The implication is that the brand managers have to make sure that they allow ample space and time for shoppers to communicate with other shoppers. This could be achieved by improving the layout, catering and other get together activities within the shopping mall areas. Furthermore, the store managers can train staff encouraging them to develop personal rapport and dialogue with such customers. Also, the segment could best be targeted using messages that reect the social dimension of shopping presenting it as a pleasurable and enjoyable activity. Furthermore, the third largest segment, disloyal shoppers, does not appear to patronize same brands or stores (as the same brands/stores are less likely to be on offer all the time). They are rather driven by value seeking, and in doing so, also watch out for highest quality and tend to enjoy the hedonic aspects of their shopping experience. In other words, while they are seeking value, they are also price-equals-quality conscious consumers who are watching out to buy

ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780 77

well-known, normally expensive brands. However, they are not confused by over choice and do not appear to experience any information overload. Their shopping experience is therefore, nothing but a challenge or a game that needs to be won. The segment is gender balanced (though there is a slight majority of males), is composed of largely professionals, and is multicultural (Qatari nationals, other Arabs and many Asians). Marketing communication messages that could reinforce brand quality and yet offer price promotions are likely to be effective for this segment. The fourth largest segment, independent perfectionist shoppers, represents perfectionist, high-quality-conscious consumers who search carefully and systematically for best quality in brands and stores. These are brand loyal, high quality seekers who also attach some value to utilitarian aspects of shopping. In other words, they have strong preference for brands and stores that they visit on a repeated basis to minimize their cognitive efforts as they also treat shopping as a task related activity. They do not appear to be socially oriented, are not interested in role-playing and attach little value to seeking self-gratication and value seeking. The segment is composed of a fair majority of males, and has a large number of professionals who are mostly Qatari nationals but also represents some other Arab groups. In comparison with escapist shoppers, this segment does not appear to value the liberal ethos of the marketplace (Firat and Venkatesh, 1993; van Raaij, 1993) due to their traditional views about the gender roles in the society. Since these customers are highly conscious of the quality of the brand, marketing communication messages that could utilise strong brand imagery reinforcing brand values and quality perceptions (Aaker, 1991, 1992) are likely to be effective here. The fth largest segment, budget conscious shoppers, places a lot of emphasis on seeking value and selfgratication and a moderate emphasis on brand loyalty and brand consciousness. In other words, they watch out for value, use the shopping as a self-gratifying activity and visit the same brands and stores. However, they care least for the hedonic side of their shopping experience and are not confused by over-choice. The segment is composed of a fair majority of females who are mostly Qatari nationals but also represent other Arabs and Westerners. The segment compares very well with the functional or economic shopper reported by Westbrook and Black (1985) who scored high on the motivation to search for the right product and make product/price comparisons to obtain value. Marketing communication messages with typical sales promotional offers and price reductions are likely to be very effective for this segment. This is because the price promotion based messages are likely to provide savings, quality and convenience benets to these consumers improving their overall shopping experience (Chandon et al., 2000; Davis et al., 1992).

The sixth largest segment, apathetic shoppers, does not care much about most aspects of shopping except that there is some moderate value attached to the hedonic aspect of shopping and confusion. The segment appears to be fairly similar to Reynolds et al.s (2002) apathetic shoppers who were uninterested in all aspects of the shopping process, rating the importance of mall essentials, brand name merchandise and convenience low whereas rating entertainment as average. The segment also appears to be very similar to the apathetic (Westbrook and Black, 1985) and minimalist (Bloch et al., 1994) shoppers who tended to score low on most shopping motivations. It is, however, possible that this segment might be characterised by some other motivations not included in this study. Since the segment is mainly composed of students, it might be that they do not feel a need to be involved in shopping behaviour as shopping is done by someone else in the family. Our ndings also reveal that men appear to dominate disloyal and independent perfectionist shoppers segments whereas women appear to dominate other segments such as those of socializing shoppers, escapist shoppers, apathetic shoppers and budget conscious shoppers. This may be due to the reason that grocery shopping and the task of maintaining social ties is considered to be womens work putting some extra pressure and load on women shoppers (Fischer and Arnold, 1990). In terms of ethnic group membership, our ndings reveal that while a majority of all Asians in the sample were classied as disloyal shoppers, a signicant majority of Western shoppers were classied as budget conscious shoppers. Our ndings, therefore, support the notion that ethnic group membership can inuence shopping motivations, decision-making styles and the likely value experienced by shoppers (Shim and Gehrt, 1996). It implies that retailers can tailor their strategies to meet the needs of ethnic minority segments in Qatar and may wish to design special formats to reach these segments. They can also produce customer communications in ethnic languages and adapt advertising messages and loyalty schemes to reect the cultural aspirations of ethnic minority groups (Jamal, 2003). However, our ndings do not support three important factors commonly attributed to reasons why consumers shop: adventure shopping, impulsiveness and novelty seeking. This might be due to the specic nature and structure of retail environment and consumer lifestyles in Qatar (see Lysonski, et al., 1996). However, given the context of this study, perhaps the notions of adventure shopping and novelty seeking were subsumed within the hedonic aspect of shopping experience. It might also be that food and grocery shoppers did not feel any sense of adventure and novelty seeking because grocery shopping is an ongoing and a repetitive activity (Rohm and Swaminathan, 2004; Smith and Carsky, 1996). However, the lack of emphasis on impulsiveness

ARTICLE IN PRESS
78 A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780

is quite surprising given the fact that it is normally considered to be of strategic importance to retailers and is thought to be linked with hedonic consumption and sensory stimulation (Beatty and Ferrell, 1998; Rook, 1987; Arnold and Reynolds, 2003). As with all research projects, the ndings presented are characterized by limitations that restrict the extent to which they can be reliably generalized. For example, the data analysis was limited to some customer groups in Qatar only. Future research could incorporate data from customer groups from different countries and regions to seek the extent to which shopping motivations are valid and generalizable. Furthermore, the data related to grocery and food shopping was collected. Our choice of the retail context (grocery shopping) might limit the range of shopping motives (and the likely value experienced) that could be perceived as important and might be biased towards utilitarian elements of shopping experience. However, given our ndings, future research might examine the extent to which shopping motives differ across different retail environments (e.g., grocery stores, departmental stores, shopping malls). Similarly, all of the shopping motives were measured at one point in time, thus essentially from a static perspective. It may be worthwhile to study shopping motives over time in order to be able to take into account the dynamics in consumer behavioural and attitudinal patterns. Future research could also look into the extent to which different shopping motives relate to some important behavioural outcomes such as customer loyalty and satisfaction towards brands and retail stores. However, despite the limitations, the current study has provided signicant insights into the nature and type of shopping motives that drive consumers to shop in a different cultural context. This is highly signicant in the context of the recent geographic market expansion of successful retail organizations and the development of a global consumer market whereby marketers and retail brand managers are keen to learn and understand the dynamics of buying behaviour patterns of consumers of different cultural backgrounds (Jamal, 2003).

6. Shopping with others is a bonding experience 7. For the most parts, I go shopping when there are sales 8. I enjoy looking for discounts when I shop 9. I enjoy hunting for bargains when I shop 10. I like shopping for others because when they feel good, I feel good 11. I enjoy shopping for my family and friends 12. I enjoy shopping around to nd a perfect gift for someone 13. To me shopping is an adventure 14. I nd shopping stimulating 15. Shopping makes me feel I am in my own universe Babin et al. (1994): 16. While shopping I can normally forget my problems 17. While shopping at a store, I feel disappointed if I have to go to a different store to complete my shopping Michon and Chebat (2004) and Babin et al. (1994): 18. While shopping, I try to accomplish just what I want to as soon as possible 19. While shopping I try to nd just the items that I am looking for Reynolds and Beatty (1999): 20. I enjoy shopping more than most people do 21. I love to go shopping when I can nd time Rohm and Swaminathan (2004): 22. I always compare prices 23. I am cautious in trying new products 24. I enjoy exploring alternative stores 25. I like to try new products and brands for fun 26. I like to buy the same brand Lysonski et al. (1996): 27. Getting very good quality is important to me 28. When it comes to purchasing products, I try to get the very best or perfect choice 29. In general I usually try to buy the best overall quality 30. I make special effort to choose the very best quality products 31. I really do not give my purchase much thought or care 32. My standards and expectations for the products that I buy are high 33. A product does not have to be perfect, or the best to satisfy me 34. The well-known national brands are best for me 35. The more expensive brands are usually my choice 36. The higher the price of the product, the better is its quality 37. Nice department and specialty stores offer me the best products

Appendix A. Measures of shopping motivations, shopping value and decision-making styles used in the study Arnold and Reynolds (2003): 1. When I am in down mood, I go shopping to make me feel better 2. To me shopping is a way to relieve stress 3. I go to shopping when I want to treat myself to something special 4. I like shopping with my friends or family to socialize 5. I enjoy socializing with others when I shop

ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780 79

38. I prefer buying the best selling brands 39. The most advertised brands are usually the very good choices 40. Shopping is not a pleasant activity for me 41. Going shopping is one of the enjoyable activities for me 42. Shopping in many stores wastes my time 43. I enjoy shopping just for the fun of it 44. I make shopping trips fast 45. I should plan my shopping trip more carefully than I do 46. I am impulsive when purchasing 47. Often I make careless purchases I later wish I had not 48. I take the time to shop carefully for the best buys 49. I carefully watch how much I spend 50. There are so many brands to choose that often I feel confused 51. Sometimes its hard to choose which stores to shop at 52. The more I learn about products, the harder it seems to choose the best 53. All the information I get on different products confuses me 54. I have favourite brands I buy over and over 55. Once I nd a product or brand I like, I stick with it 56. I go to the same store each time I shop 57. Investigating a new store is generally a waste of time

References
Aaker, D.A., 1991. Managing Brand Equity. Free Press, New York. Aaker, D.A., 1992. Strategic Market Management. Wiley, New York. Arnold, M.J., Reynolds, K.E., 2003. Hedonic shopping motivations. Journal of Retailing 79 (2), 120. Arnould, E.J., Price, L.L., Zinkhan, G.M., 2002. Consumers. McGraw Hill, New York. Babin, B.J., Darden, W.R., 1996. Good and bad shopping vibes: spending and patronage satisfaction. Journal of Business Research 35 (3), 201206. Babin, B.J., Darden, W.R., Grifn, M., 1994. Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research 20 (4), 644656. Batra, R., Ahtola, O.T., 1991. Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes. Marketing Letters 2, 159170. Beatty, S.E., Ferrell, M.E., 1998. Impulse buying: modelling its precursors. Journal of Retailing 74 (2), 169192. Bloch, P.H., Richins, M.L., 1983. Shopping without purchase: an investigation of consumer browsing behaviour. Advances in Consumer Research 10, 389393. Bloch, P.H., Ridgway, N.M., Dawson, S.A., 1994. The shopping mall as consumer habitat. Journal of Retailing 70 (1), 2342. Byoungho, J., Kim, Jai-Ok., 2003. A typology of Korean discount shoppers: shopping motives, store attributes, and outcomes. International Journal of Service Industry Management 14 (3/4), 396419.

Byrne, B.M., 2001. Structural Equation Modelling with Amos: Basic Concepts, Applications and Programming. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey. Chandon, P., Wansink, B., Laurent, G., 2000. A benet congruency framework of sales promotion effectiveness. Journal of Marketing 64, 6581. Davis, S., Inman, J., McAlister, L., 1992. Promotion has a negative effect on brand evaluationsor does it? Additional disconrming evidence. Journal of Marketing Research 29, 143148. Dawson, J.A., 1994. The internationalisation of retailing operations. Journal of Marketing Management 10 (3), 267282. Dawson, S., Bloch, P.H., Ridgway, N.M., 1990. Shopping motives, emotional states, and retail outcomes. Journal of Retailing 66 (4), 408427. de Mooij, M., Hofstede, G., 2002. Convergence and divergence in consumer behaviour; implications for international retailing. Journal of Retailing 78, 6169. Durvasula, S., Lysonski, S., Andrews, J.C., 1993. Cross-cultural generalizability of a scale for proling consumers decision-making styles. Journal of Consumer Affairs 27 (1), 5565. Eastlick, M.A., Lotz, S.L., 2000. Objective and multidimensional acculturation measures: implications for retailing to Hispanic consumers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 7 (3), 149160. Firat, A.F., Venkatesh, A., 1993. Postmodernity: the age of marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing 10, 227249. Fischer, E., Arnold, S.J., 1990. More than a labor of love: gender roles and Christmas gift shopping. Journal of Consumer Research 17, 333345. Fornell, C., Larker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research 18, 3950. Grifn, M., Babin, B.J., Modianos, D., 2000. Shopping values of Russian consumers: the impact of habituation in a developing economy. Journal of Retailing 76 (1), 3352. Hafstrom, J.L., Chae, J.S., Chung, YS., 1992. Consumer decisionmaking styles: comparison between United States and Korean young consumers. Journal of Consumer Affairs 26 (1), 146158. Hair Jr., J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., Black, W.C., 1998. Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th International Edition. PrenticeHall, London. Hirschman, E.C., Holbrook, M.B., 1982. Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing 46 (3), 92101. Hofstede, G., 1980. Cultures Consequences. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA. Holbrook, M.B., Hirschman, E.C., 1982. The experiential aspects of consumption: consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research 9 (2), 132140. Hui, C.H., Triandis, H.C., 1985. Measurement in cross-cultural psychology: a review and comparison of strategies. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology 16 (June), 131152. Jamal, A., 2003. Retailing in a multicultural world: the interplay of retailing, ethnic identity and consumption. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 10, 111. Jamal, A., Naser, K., 2002. Customer satisfaction and retail banking: an assesment of some of the key antecedents of customer satisfaction in retail banking. International Journal of Bank Marketing 20 (4), 146160. Jones, T.O., Sasser Jr., W.E., 1995. Why satised customers defect. Harvard Business Review 73 (6), 8899. Langrehr, F.W., 1991. Retail shopping mall semiotics and hedonic consumption. In: Rebecca, H.H., Solomon, M.R. (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 18. Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 428433.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
80 A. Jamal et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 13 (2006) 6780 Rook, D.W., 1987. The buying impulse. Journal of Consumer Research 14 (2), 189199. Roy, A., 1994. Correlates of mall visit frequency. Journal of Retailing 70 (2), 139161. Rokeach, M., 1973. The Nature of Human Values. Free Press, New York. Severin, V., Louviere, J.J., Finn, A., 2001. The stability of retail shopping choices over time and across countries. Journal of Retailing 77 (2), 185202. Shim, S., Eastlick, M.A., 1998. The hierarchical inuence of personal values on mall shopping attitude and behaviour. Journal of Retailing 74 (1), 139160. Shim, S., Gehrt, K.C., 1996. Hispanic and Native American adolescents: an exploratory study of their approach to shopping. Journal of Retailing 72 (3), 307325. Sproles, E.K., Sproles, G.B., 1990. Consumer decision-making styles as a function of individual learning styles. The Journal of Consumer Affairs 24 (1), 134147. Sproles, G.B., Kendall, E.L., 1986. A methodology for proling consumers decision-making styles. The Journal of Consumer Affairs 20 (2), 267280. Smith, M.F., Carsky, M.L., 1996. Grocery shopping behaviour: a comparison of involved and uninvolved consumers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 3 (2), 7380. Tauber, E.M., 1972. Why do people shop? Journal of Marketing 36 (4), 4649. Thompson, C.J., 1996. Caring consumers: gendered consumption meanings and the juggling lifestyle. Journal of Consumer Research 22 (4), 388407. Valencia, H., 1989. Hispanic values and subcultural research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 17 (1), 2328. van Raaij, W.F., 1993. Postmodern consumption. Journal of Economic Psychology 14 (3), 541563. Wakeeld, K.L., Baker, J., 1998. Excitement at the mall: determinants and effects on shopping response. Journal of Retailing 74 (4), 515539. Walsh, G., Henning-Thurau, T., Wayne-Mitchell, V., Wiedmann, K.-P., 2001. Consumers decision-making style as a basis for market segmentation. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing 10 (2), 117132. Westbrook, R.A., Black, W.C., 1985. A motivation-based shopper typology. Journal of Retailing 61 (1), 78103. Levesque, T., McDougall, G.H.G., 1996. Determinants of customer satisfaction in retail banking. International Journal of Bank Marketing 14 (7), 1220. Lysonski, S., Durvasula, S., Zotos, Y., 1996. Consumer decision making styles: a multi-country investigation. European Journal of Marketing 30 (12), 1021. Machleit, K.A., Eroglu, S.A., 2000. Describing and measuring emotional response to shopping experience. Journal of Business Research 49, 101111. Martin, B., Mason, S., 1987. Current trends in leisure. Leisure Studies 6, 9397. McAdams, D.P., 1988. Personal needs and personal relationships. In: Steven, W.D. (Ed.), Handbook of Personal Relationships. Wiley, New York, pp. 722. McCracken, G., 1986. Culture and consumption: a theoretical account of the structure and movement of cultural meaning of consumer goods. Journal of Consumer Research 13, 7184. McGuire, W., 1974. Psychological motives and communication gratication. In: Blummer, J.F., Katz (Eds.), The Uses of Mass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratication Research. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, pp. 106167. McGuire, W., 1976. Some internal psychological factors inuencing consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research 2 (4), 302319. Michon, R., Chebat, J.-C., 2004. Cross-cultural mall shopping values and habitats: a comparison between English- and French-speaking Canadians. Journal of Business Research 57 (8), 883893. Nunnally, J.C., 1978. Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill, New York. Peter, J.P., Olson, J.C., 2005. Consumer Behaviour & Marketing Strategy, seventh ed. McGraw Hill, New York. Phinney, J.S., 1992. The multi-group ethnic identity measures: a new scale for use with diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research 7 (4), 156176. Prahalad, C.K., Doz, Y., 1987. The Multinational Mission. The Free Press, New York, NY. Reynolds, K.E., Beatty, S.E., 1999. A relationship customer typology. Journal of Retailing 75 (4), 509523. Reynolds, K.E., Ganesh, J., Luckett, M., 2002. Traditional malls vs. factory outlets: comparing shopper typologies and implications for retail strategy. Journal of Business Research 55 (9), 687696. Rohm, A.J., Swaminathan, V., 2004. A typology of online shoppers based on shopping motivations. Journal of Business Research 57, 748757.