A Study on Impulse Buying Behavior with the Influence of Cross

Culture on Herding in Greater China

Hua-Ching Cheng, Quan-Chang Hsieh

Department of Business Administration, Da-yeh University
112, Shan-Jiau Rd, Da-Tusen, Chang-Hua, Taiwan
[email protected]

ABSTRACT
This study proposes a social influence perspective to compare the consumers’
impulse buying behaviors between Taiwan and China. The social herding impulse
buying factors are pursuing fashion, social norm, self- identity, and consumer
experience. We use binomial and multinomial logistic model to understand how
consumers influenced by social herding factors so that they became impulse buying
behavior and estimate the relationship between the frequency of impulse buying and
herding factors. The results are the consumers’ impulse buying influenced by social
herding factors both in Taiwan and China. The consumers’ impulse buying in China
and Taiwan would be influenced from different social herding factors. With the
frequency of purchasing, consumers would be influenced from different social
herding factors
Keywords: Impulse Buying, Herding, Culture

INTRODUCTION

This study proposes a social influence perspective to compare the consumers’

impulse buying behaviors between Taiwan and China. China has opened door to
absorb western information since1979, has already became the most hot and popular
economical market all over the world (DeGrandi, 2001).
Culture comparative analysis has been a primary concern of marketing
researchers. Although Taiwan and China are culture similarities in many fields, they
do some great differences in culture. For example, Taiwan was a Japan colony, elderly
people touched more Japan education, it now influence deeply by Japan, the youth
crazy for fashion which comes from Japan. Under some circumstances, China has
opponent motion to Japan.（Sun, Horn and Merrit, 2004）.
In this paper, we investigate the impulse buying behavior of the individual
when he is shopping on the department stores. Comparative to Taiwan and China
consumers, we do concern there are different culture impacts on consumers impulse
buying behavior.

1
 Previous research have classified impulse buying as a personal characteristic（as
funny, impulse buying potential et al） and consumer usually do impulse buying after
get a suddenly and unresisting urge in-store , they do it to satisfy their spontaneous
desire to own the product（Rook and Hoch,1985; Iyer,1989 Piron,1991; Beatty and
Ferrel,1998; Roberts and Pirogs,2004; Wood, 2005）.
However, some researcher has noticed consumers also be influenced by social
factors（Hausman, 2000）, the influence on impulse buying by different culture（Tai
and Tam,1997；Mattila and Wirtz, 2001；Wood,2005）
Compared to previous research, we propose a impulse buying model as a
function of social herding （Burnkrant and Cousineau, 1975 ； Lascu and Zinkhan,
1999 ） , includes fashion pursuing, social norm, self-identity （ Bikhchandani and
Sharma, 2000 ； Sias, 2002 ） and consumer experience （ Crawford and Melewar,
2003；Phau and Lo, 2004 ； Woods, 2005）, rather than with the view of individual
impulse buying behaviorist.
In this paper, we take a first step to quantitatively measure a consumer‘s response
to different herding factors of impulse buying in department stores shopping both
Taiwan and China. We use binomial logistic model to analyze how consumers
influenced by social herding so that they became impulse buying behavior. Using
multinomial logistic model to estimate the frequency of impulse buying by individual,
we found the relationship between the frequency of impulse buying and herding
factors.
The second part is literature review, it apart previous literature from traditional
and recent research in impulse buying, herding and culture literature; the third part is
research design; results and conclusions. The final is study implications and limits.

LITERATURE REVIEW

1. Personal impulse buying

It began to investigate impulse buying in the beginning of 1950.
Baum（1951）addressed that consumer was stimulated to impulse buying after they
came into the store. Stern（1962）was the first scholar to suggest “impulse mix” to
classify four kinds of impulse buying: pure, remind, suggest, and plan. Although most
of research thought the mean of impulse buying was the same with unplanned buying.
Rook （ 1987 ） argued successfully that impulse buying should be depicted it as
extraordinary, exciting, hedonically complex and compelled buyer action. Beatty and
Ferrell（1998）constituted a model as a precursors of impulse buying. They argued
that situational variables （ time available and money available ） and individual
difference variables（shopping enjoyment and impulse buying tendency）were found
to influence a set of endogenous variables, including positive and negative affect and
so on. Thomas （ 1997 ） also points to two emotional shifts that affect the buying
habits. One is an increase in stress levels because consumers are out of their daily
routine. The other is an increase in levels of anticipation and excitement.
Crawford and Melewar （ 2003 ） explained retailers must create an

2
environment that minimizes inherent stress and accentuates or at least maintains
natural levels of excitement ,while also virtuously motivating impulse purchasing by
reducing or eliminating barriers to purchase.
In decades, scholars started to transfer the views on the characteristics of
different consumers’ buying trends（Engle, Blackwell and Miniard,2001；Beatty and
Ferrell,1998；Wood,2005）； the influence on impulse buying by different situation
or culture（Tai and Tam,1997；Mattila and Wirtz, 2001；Wood,2005）；.and began
to try how to predict the potential of consumers’ impulse buying （ Kelly and
Smith,2000 ， Omar and Kent,2001 ； Crawford and Melewar,2003 ； Robert and
Jones,2001）.

2. Social view of impulse buying

Hausman （ 2000 ） argues that impulse buying is a hedonic need
predominantly motivated by achievement of higher order needs loosely grouped
around Maslow’s （ 1968 ） hierarchy of needs’. Efforts to satisfy the higher order
needs in his hierarchy lead to different types of impulse buying behavior. He
suggests that normative evaluations can reduce impulsive purchase behavior.
Consumers act to suppress their nature impulsive traits to act in accordance with
social norms.
Omar and Kent （ 2001 ） study impulse buying behavior in the international
airports shopping. They elaborated that consumers’ normal evaluations have the
potential to influence their impulse buying behavior.
Crawford and Melewar（2003）proposed that given consumer’s basic value,
attitude and behavior norm transform slowly, consumer would alter their view about
surroundings and lifestyle. It means that consumer was devoted to be in the cycle of
fashion and fad.
Fashion oriented impulse buying occurs as consumers see the product in a new
style and decide to buy it as refer to the awareness of the fashionability on an design
or style and express their self-identity （ Phau and Lo,2004 ） With the exposed
frequency of fashion, different groups result to conformity and make fad be accepted
by social members. As a matter of fact, all things what consumers care are the social
function and meaning, nor the value and essential function of products （Phau and
Lo,2004 ） . Consumers usually be influenced because of chasing fad and get
pressure by social members so that they would make herding behaviors（Freidman ,
1984；Dreman, 1979；Barberis and Shleifer, 2001）.
Wood （ 2005 ） proposed that retailers should not only care about the
purchasing behavior in retail environment, but also understand consumer’s society
more . Impulse buying would be influenced from discretionary income positively.

3
 Due to satisfy individual’s social needs, consumer would make more impulse buying
which make them feel excited and gratification. Consumer’s society includes
consumers purchasing experience and characteristics of shopping environment.
Peck and Childers（2006）started to address the times of touching with people by
people would make more impulse buying, they found customers touch more with
salesmen, they would increase the possibility of impulse buying. It explains impulse
buying should relate with touch between people by people.

3. Herding view of impulse buying

Asch (1952) was the first psychologist scholar who proposed the herding
behavior. However, most research investigates it on psychology and finance. Then,
there are few researches on the marketing. Herding is defined as a group of consumers
following each other into the same behavior over some period of time (Sias, 2002)
Although all decisions they decide don’t follow what they think on their mind.,
consumers would be influence more or conformity from other people and increase the
frequency of impulse buying behavior (Lascu and Zinkhan, 1999 ； Burnkrant and
Cousineau, 1975).

The herding research can be divided into four categories- informational

cascades, investigative herding, reputation herding, fads, and characteristic
herding（Bikhchandani and Sharma, 2000；Sias, 2002）

Baron and Byrne（1998）find consumer’s herding was due to people hope to

be accepted and liked so that they make two conditions, one is ‘Normative social
influence’, the other is ‘Information social influence’. Normative social influence
means people expected to be accepted, admired and attempt to alter their behavior to
satisfy others exceptions. Information social influence means when consumers come
into a complex situation they would seek information or others’ ideas as the reference
for deciding, due to simplify deliberating decision, and cause to rely on members and
conform to members’ behavior.

As a matter of fact, individual ponders on their purchasing decision, they

usually adopt members or take a similar plan with social members in the cause of
getting recognitions and satisfy the expectation which social members put on the
role（Wilkie,1994；Macinnis,1997）. That was the behavior pattern of consumers’
herding.

4
4. Culture study

Tai and Tam（1997）compares the lifestyles of female consumers in Hong Kong,

Taiwan, and China, which together make up Greater China. Their investigation
revealed that significant differences exist among the three groups of female
consumers in nine different areas. Taiwanese female consumers are especially brand-
conscious and their consumption choices were not always based on function, but more
on the prestigious image of imported foreign brands. Women in China, especially the
younger ones, were quickly adopting new values and Western ideas.
Luna and Gupta (2001) use the measures of evaluation most representative of ethic
thought process to elaborate consumer’s culture, and proposed national culture is the
most suitable way to discuss. Chinese culture advocates everything should stand in
harmonious, judging the hour and sizing up the situation. it eliminate to bite more one
can chew and consider to restrain their affection and emotion. Aaker and Maheswaran
(1997) classify Chinese culture for four groups: （ a ） Integration: To emphasize on
tolerance , harmonious, non-competition and intimate relationship;
（b）Confucianism : to emphasize on respecting for seniority, shame and pay much
attention to reputation; （c）A sense of compassion: empathy, patience polite and a
sense of justice; and （ d ） Moral :To emphasize on moderate and utter innocence.
Chinese traditional culture emphasizes thrift, diligence, and value consciousness.
China’s ruling party over the past four decades has also been extolling the virtue of
thriftiness and discouraging a hedonic life style. As a result, it is socially desirable to
save money and be a meticulous shopper in China..Above all, we take the hypothesis :
H1： The consumers’ impulse buying would be influenced by social herding factors
both in Taiwan and China.
Taiwan is also influenced from Chinese culture. The people in Taiwan were
reported to be more traditional, more nationalistic, and heavily influenced by Japanese
culture because of their colony by Japanese. Above all, we take the hypothesis:
H2 ： The consumers impulse buying in China and Taiwan would be influenced
from different social herding factors.
H3 ： With the frequency of purchasing, consumers would be influenced from
different social herding factors.

5
 RESEARCH METHOD

1. Model and Estimation methods

According to foregoing literature, our study hypothesize the main factor which
consumer impulse buying comes from social herding Our study argued that
consumers are usually influence by social members and make impulse buying, when
they make the purchasing decision because they exposed themselves on the
purchasing situation. These social herding factors are pursuing fashion, social norm,
self-identity, and consumer experience（Baron and Byrne,1998；Hausman, 2000；
Crawford and Melewar, 2003；Phau and Lo,2004; Bikhchandani and Sharma,
2000；Sias, 2002; Wilkie,1994；Macinnis,1997）.. Pursuing fashion is defined as a
consumer is interest to enhance his fashion knowledge, spending on fashion products.
The self identity concept represents the totality of individual’s thoughts and feelings,
made up of self-esteem and self-image. Social norm comes from normative and
information social influence, other social members, culture moral of thrift and
diligence. Consumer experience means a consumer shopping experience in
department store.

We propose the research model on Figure1:

Social Herding

1. Pursuing fashion
Consumer Impulse Buying
2. Social norm
purchase
3. Self- identity

4. Consumer experience

Figure1: Social herding impulse buying

This study involves the administration of an instrument designed to measure

social herding impulse buying intentions to samples in the China and Taiwan.
Binomial and multinomial logistic regressions are used to test the hypotheses. By the
way of logistic model, we put the social herding factors on the model; we will know
the possibility and frequency of impulse buying.
At first, we use binomial logistic model to evaluate the impact of a consumer’s
reaction to social herding impulse buying factors; pursuing fashion, social norm, self-

6
identity, and consumer’s experience on the department stores shopping. We use the
formula:
.
Prob（y=1）＝Λ（ β' xi）＝ exp ( β0 + β1Xi1 + β2 Xi 2 +（1） ... + βnXin )
1 + exp ( β0 + β1Xi1 + β2 Xi 2 +... + βnXin )

Where Λ（ β' xi）＝exp（ β' xi）/〔1+exp（ β' xi）〕 （2）

β' xi=β0+β1xi1+β2xi2+…+βnxin （3）

y = 1is consumer y has impulse buying to purchase something on the department

stores shopping and y=0 otherwise. Xin is the value of the n-th explanatory variables
for a consumer i.
Exp（B）is the predicted change in odds for a unit increase in the corresponding
independent variable （ impulse buying behavior ） . Odds ratios less than 1.0
correspond to decreases and odds ratios more than 1.0 correspond to increases in
odds. Odds rations close to 1.0 indicate that unite change in that independent variable
do not affect the dependent variable. All exogenous variables are fitted in with linear
relationships.

Second, we use multinomial logistic model to assess how these issues affect not
only a consumer impulse buying behavior but also impulse buying frequency as well:

Prob（y=k）= exp（β’kxi）/〔1+ Σkj=1 exp（β’kxi）〕，for k=1,2,…, j （4）

The term k stands for distinct purchase frequencies and

β’kxi=βk0+βk1xi1+βk2xi2+…+βknxin （5）

Xin is the value of the n-th explanatory variable for consumer i. Since k=4 is the base
group in the study, we set β4 = 0，且 β’4xi = 0 then

Prob（y=4）= 1 /〔1+ Σkj=1 exp（β’kxi）〕

2. Samples and variables

During January to February, 2007, we did this questionnaire interview in China
and Taiwan separately. We extracted those consumers who came to department stores
randomly and answered the questionnaire In China; we were engaged to this
investigation in Guangzhou, Shenzhen and Zhuhai, where were seen fastest region of
advancing economics in recent years. That is the reason why we choose as sampling
location.
We got 170 samples data after hard working and effective 152 samples, 89%
effective ratio.

7
 In Taipei, sampling location were Sogo Department Store and Breeze Center.
We got 220 samples data and effective 206samples, effective ratio is 94%.
Table 4 provides the summary of statistics for the entire sample as well as
China and Taiwan consumers.

3. Reliability analysis
We have to affirm our study that is high reliability and effectiveness. The
Cronbach’s alpha of Taiwan parts is 0.8548 and the Cronbach’s alpha of China parts
is0.8979. And each parts of questionnaire are greater than 0.7（see as Table 1）. It
means that this study has good reliability.

Table1：Reliability analysis
Taiwan
Impulse Buying 0.7351
Social Herding 0.8151
Total 0.8548
China
Impulse Buying 0.7831
Social Herding 0.8602
Total 0.8979

Besides, we get KMO-value of Taiwan is 0.768, and it can explain 69.808%

variances; KMO-value of China is 0.602, and it can explained about 72.781%
variances. It means that this study construct validity is acceptable.
In correlations were computed among six domains of consuming variables. In
China parts, the frequency of purchasing was related to pursuing fashion and social
norm. We don’t have the evidences to support self-identity and Consumer’s
experience is related to frequency of purchasing. Similarity, we also don’t have
evidence to support the relationships in all parts in Taiwan.（Table2, 3）

Table 2: key variables Correlations (China)

Frequency Times Pursuing Social norm Self-identity Consumer
Fashion Experience
Frequency Pearson 1 .574(**) -.315(**) -.364(**) .044 -.148
Correlation
Times Pearson .574(**) 1 -.008 -.044 .065 .130
Correlation
Pursuing Pearson -.315(**) -.008 1 .668(**) -.109 .407(**)
Correlation
fashion
Social norm Pearson -.364(**) -.044 .668(**) 1 .175(*) .683(**)
Correlation
Self identity Pearson .044 .065 -.109 .175(*) 1 .256(**)
Correlation

8
 Consumer Pearson -.148 .130 .407(**) .683(**) .256(**) 1
experience Correlation
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Table 3: key variables Correlations (Taiwan)

Frequency Times Pursuing Social-norm Self-identity Consumer
fashion experience
Frequency Pearson 1 .015 .046 .060 .035 .093
Correlation
Times Pearson .015 1 -.001 .046 .021 .029
Correlation
Pursuing Pearson .046 -.001 1 .302(**) .520(**) -.008
fashion Correlation
Social- norm Pearson .060 .046 .302(**) 1 .683(**) -.100
Correlation
Self- identity Pearson .035 .021 .520(**) .683(**) 1 -.026
Correlation
Consumer Pearson .093 .029 -.008 -.100 -.026 1
experience Correlation

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

RESULTS

1. Demographics data

This study included 358 samples totally, 42.2% were male and 57.8% were
female. In Taiwan, most samples were 18~35 years old and university students hold
the greatest portion.（Table 4）

It is apparent that browsing or shopping in department stores is the most

popular leisure in these two sample location. It included 86.8% of the sample
consumer who usually or frequent to shop in department store, and Taiwan included
about 94.1%. It’s so interested that the frequency of browsing department store in
Taiwan are higher than China, the times of shopping are lower than China. Among
47.1% consumer who usually go to department store without shopping, only35.9%
consumer would shopping. However, 81.6% consumers who almost buy when they
come into department store. It is indicated consumer in these places have different
shopping intentions. China consumers are satisfied primarily through a utilitarian
orientation, due to they have the need for products. But, they are driven by hedonic or
social concerns factors in Taipei. Sometimes Taipei consumers browse department
store just for their leisure time without needs for something (Table 5).

9
 Table 4：Demographics data of Taiwan and China
Taiwan China
Time Percentage Time Percentage
Gender
Male 95 46.1 56 36.8
Female 111 53.9 96 63.2
Total 206 100.0 152 100.0

China Taiwan
Age
Time Percentage Time Percentage
0~10 0 0 0 0
11~20 21 13.7 58 28.0
21~30 79 51.6 118 57.0
31~40 50 32.7 30 14.5
41~50 3 2.0 1 0.5
51~60 0 0 0 0
60~ 0 0 0 0
Total 153 100 206 100
Education
Time Percentage Time Percentage
Elementary 1 .7 0 0
Junior 55 35.9 1 0.5
Senior 89 58.2 41 19.8
University 9 5.2 147 71.0
Graduate 0 0 18 8.7
Total 153 100 206 100

Table5: Frequency of browsing

Time Percentage
Taiwan
Never 3 1.5

Frequency Seldom 9 4.4

Usually 157 76.2
persistently 37 17.9

10
 Total 206 100
China Time Percentage
Never 12 7.9

Frequency Seldom 8 5.3

Usually 87 57.2
persistently 45 29.6
Total 152 100

2. Logistic model analysis

Table 6 Binomial logistic estimation results（1）

Taiwan China
B S.E Sig. Exp(B) B S.E Sig Exp(B)

Gender .481 .340 .157 1.618 .056 .673 .934 1.057

Age .327 .342 .339 1.387 -.503 .495 .310 .605

Marriage -1.013 .495 .041 .363 1.070 .729 .142 2.916

Occupation -.165 .196 .399 .847 .115 .219 . .599 1.122

Education .238 .324 .463 1.269 -.696 .568 .220 .499

Constant .579 1.810 .749 1.784 3.730 2.397 .120 41.679

Overall Percentage（%） 75.7 92.1

-2 Log likelihood 219.621 79.791

Cox & Snell R Square .031 .027

Nagelkerke R Square .046 .064

Table 6 provides the result of binomial logistic estimation. Table6 contains both
coefficient estimations , the ratio of the logistic coefficient B , standard error SE, and
exp（B）.Exp(B) is the effect of the independent variable on the odds ratio, we use
exp（B）as measures of effect size.
The model in table 6 contains only demographic characteristics on
individuals（i.e., gender, age, education）in two areas. All coefficient estimates in
Taiwan and China are statistically insignificant greater than 0.05 except for the
coefficient of marriage variable in Taiwan.

We use Binominal Logistic Regression to test whether social herding factors

11
influenced on consumers impulse buying behavior in China and Taiwan (table 7).
Taiwan consumers who have impulse buying due to pursuing fashion, self-identity
and consumer’s experience apparently. As to China consumers, it is only significant in
social norm and we don’t have enough evidence to support other factors. It means that
consumer in Taiwan was influenced from social members obviously and adopted
those product which were praised and pursued by others. Pursuing fashion is a main
social factor which was influence to consumer when they make purchasing decision.
Besides, self-identity was also a main social factor which influence to consumer in
Taiwan. Without needs and value of products, they make impulse buying because they
wish to get identity by themselves and satisfy the social role’s expectation by social
members. Consumer experience is also a key factor which influence on herding
impulse buying.

We consider that consumer in China influenced from social norm which social
members impose on individual normative influence. Perhaps Chinese traditional
culture on thrift, individual conforms to social members expectations. So, social norm
restricted consumer’s impulse buying decision in China. Thus, H1 hypothesis is
supportive that the consumers’ impulse buying influenced by social herding factors
both in Taiwan and China. H2 and H3 hypothesis are also supportive that the
consumers’ impulse buying behavior influenced from different social herding factors
as well as China and Taiwan.
Table7: Binomial logistic estimation results（2）

Taiwan China
B S.E Sig. Exp(B) B S.E Sig Exp(B)

Pursuing fashion 2.663 .781 . 001 14.344 .989 1.980 .618 2.687

Social norms .293 .611 .631 .746 5.906 2.617 .024 .003

Self-identification -1.150 .540 .033 .317 2.100 1.728 .224 8.166

Purchase experience 2.208 .905 .015 9.100 -.322 1.227 .793 .725
Constant -9.714 4.708 .039 .000 17.782 6.379 .005 52806280
Overall Percentage（%） 96.7 96.7

-2 Log likelihood 24.185 38.635

Cox & Snell R Square .632 .258

Nagelkerke R Square .881 .608

Table 8 and Table 9 provide the estimations results for social herding impulse
buying factors. According to the results, the frequency of purchasing is influenced by

12
 social herding factors. At the part of China, we could find out when y= 2 and y= 3, it
prevail to relevant influence to pursue fashion and consumer’s experience. With the
increase of frequency of purchasing, consumers impulse buying in China influenced
by pursuing fashion and consumer’s experience. At the part of Taiwan, pursuing
fashion and self-identity are significant to frequency of purchasing when y=2.
However, when y=3, there were only consumer experience which was significant.
It prevails to an interesting thing that self-identity was negative significant. It
argued that individual who had higher standard of self-identity; the less impulse
buying. Otherwise, the lower standard of self-identity individual had, the easier
individual would be influence by social members.
As y=3, consumer are just only influenced by consumer experience
significantly. It meant when consumers increased their frequency of purchasing,
consumer’s experience would become the key factor which consumer’s reference of
purchasing decision..

Table8: Multinomial logistic estimates results（China）

P﹙y=1﹚ P﹙y=2﹚ P﹙y=3﹚
B S Sig Exp( B S.E Sig Exp( B S.E Sig. Exp(B)
. . B) B)
E
Intercept - . 3.800 1.863 .041
254. 0
665
Pursuing 22.0 b 1.0 1.492 .520 .004 .225 .979 .398 .014 .376
fashion 27 0
Social-norm 43.6 b . .740 .671 .270 2.096 .765 .556 .169 2.149
56 998
Self-Identity 20.6 b 1.0 -.154 .537 .775 .857 -.477 .454 .294 .621
15 0
Consumer 20.0 b 1.0 -1.691 .523 .001 .184 -.843 .436 .050 .430
02 0
experience

Pseudo R-Square

Cox and Snell .490

Nagelkerke ..557

McFadden .318

a.The reference category is y= 4.00.

b The number is assented for large.

Table9: Multinomial logistic estimates results（Taiwan）

P﹙y=1﹚ P﹙y=2﹚ P﹙y=3﹚

13
 B S.E Sig Ex B S.E Sig Exp( B S.E Si Exp(
. p(B B0 g. B)
)

Intercept 4.50 4.0 .264 .264 5.30 2.96 . 1.12 2.79 .

3 36 3 3 07 3 1 68
3 7
Pursuing 0.03 . . 1.38 .489 . 4.00 .068 .329 . .934
7 35 911 7 00 3 83
fashion
2 5 6
Social- norm 4.56 . . .276 .402 . 1.31 .580 .448 . 1.78
5 49 278 49 7 19 6
6 3 5
Self-identity .342 . . - .454 . .999 -.51 .482 . .599
56 525 1.15 01 3 28
3 0 1 7
Consumer .345 . . .354 .270 . .059 -.60 .280 . .163
38 532 70 4 03
experience
5 2 1
Pseudo R-Square

Cox and Snell .432

Nagelkerke .456

McFadden .192

The reference category is y= 4.00.

CONCLUSIONS
We use binomial logistic model to analyze how consumers would be
influenced by social herding so that they became impulse buying behavior. Using
multinomial logistic model to estimate the frequency of impulse buying by individual,
we found the relationship between the frequency of impulse buying and herding
factors.
We proposed a social herding impulse buying model to discuss the difference
between Taiwan and China with questionnaire interview. The study found that both of
China and Taiwan consumers influenced by social herding factors become impulse
buying
According to the results, the consumers in China were influenced by social norm.
And consumers in Taiwan were influenced by fashion and the standard of self-
identity. Furthermore, the consumer’s purchasing decisions were influenced by
different frequency of purchasing, revealed that consumers affected by different social
herding factors. That is an important finding.

IMPLICATION, LIMITATION AND FUTURE RESEARCH

This research attempts to open a new direction in the field of impulse buying
behavior. The previous research focus on the individual impulse buying behavior,
however, in actual life, consumers are influenced by other social groups easily.
With restriction of manpower and material resource, our study still has many ways
to improve such as increase sampling size and sampling cities. More herding factors

14
or different research methods can probe consumer impulse buying behaviors deeply.
Cross culture comparative analysis to impulse buying behaviors between China and
other countries is still an interesting orientation.

REFERENCES
Aaker, J, & Maheswaran, D.1997. The Effect of Cultural Orientation on persuasion,
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24(3); 315-328
Asch, S. E.1952. Social Psychology, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.：Prentice-Hall
Banerjee, A. 1992. A simple model of Herding behavior, American Economic Review,
88,724-748
Barberis, N. & Shleifer, A. 2001. Style Investing, Working paper, University of
Chicago and Harvard University
Baron, R. A. and Byrne D.1997. Social Psychology, Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-
Hall
Beatty, S. E. and Ferrell, M.E. 1998. Impulse Buying ： Modeling its Precursors,
Journal of Retailing, 74（2）, 169-191
Bikhchandani, S. &Sharma, S. 2000. Herd Behavior in Financial Markets ： A
Review, Working paper, IMF Institute
Bikhchandani, S., D. Hirshleifer, and I. Welch 1992. A theory of Fads, Fashion,
Custom, and Culture Change as Information Cascades, Journal of Political
Economy, 100（5）,992-1026
Burnkant, R. E. and Cousieneau, A. 1975. Informational and Normative Social
Influence in Buyer Behavior , Journal of Consumer Research, Gainesville,
2（3）, 206-215
Crawford, G. and Melewar, T.C. 2003. The Importance of Impulse Purchasing
Behavior in the International Airport Environment, Journal of Consumer
Behavior, 3（1）,85-98
DeGrandi, M. 2001. Carrefour to Resume Chinese Expansion, Financial Times, 9
November
Dreman, D. 1979. Contrarians Investment Strategy：The psychology of Stock Market
Success, Random House, N.Y.
Engel, J., Blackwell, R.D., & Miniard, P.W.. 2001. Consumer Behavior, Dryden press,
Chicago, IL.
Friedman, B. M. 1984. A Comment ： Stock Price and Social Dynamics, Brooking
Paper on Economic Activity, 2, 504-508
Hausman, A. 2000. A Multi-method Investigation of Consumer Motivations in
Impulse purchasing Behavior, Journal of Consumer marketing, 17 （ 5 ） ,

15
 403-419
Iyer, E.S. 1989 Unplanned Purchasing ： Knowledge of Shopping Environment and
Time Pressure, Journal of Retailing, 65（1）, 40-57
Kelly, J.P., Smith, S.M,.2000.Fulfillment of Planned and Unplanned Purchases of
Sales-and-Regular-Price Items ： A Benchmark Study, International Review
of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 10（3）,247-263
Lascu, D.N and Zinkhan, G.1999. Consumer conformity: Review and applications for
marketing theory and practice, Journal of Marketing Theory and
Practice,7（3）,1-13
Luna, D. & Gupta S.F.2001. An Integrative Framework for Cross-Cultural Consumer
Behavior, International Marketing Review, Vol. 18, (1); p. 45
Macinnis, H.1997. Consumer Behavior, NY: Houghton and Mifflin Co.
Mattila, A.S.,& Wirtz,J. 2001. Congruency of Scent and Music as a Driver of In-Store
Evaluation and Behavior, Journal of Retailing, 77,273-289
Naresh K, J., Daniel M. 2001. A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Behavior Intention
Models, International Marketing Review; 18(3), 235-272
Omart, O., & Kent,A.2001. International Airport Influences on Impulsive Shopping：
Trait and Normative Approach, International Journal of Retail and
Distribution Management, 29（5）, 266-235
Peck, J. and Childers, T.L. 2006. If I Touch it I Have to Have it ： Individual and
Environmental Influence on Impulse Purchasing, Journal of Business
Research, 1-5
Phau, I. & Lo, C.C. 2004. Profiling Fashion Innovators ： A Study of Self-Concept,
Impulse Buying and Internet Purchase Intent, Journal of Fashion Marketing
and Management, 8（4）, 399-411
Piron, F. 1991. Defining Impulse Purchasing, in Hofman, R., H. and Solomon, M.R.
（ed）Advances in Consumer Research, 12（1）, Association in Consumer
Research, 18, 509-514
Roberts, J and Jones, E.2001.Money Attitudes, Credit Cards Use, and Compulsive
Buying among American College Students, The Journal of Consumer
Affairs,35（2）,295-319
Rook, D. W. and Hoch, S. J. 1985.Consuming Impulses, in Hofman, R., H. and
Solomon, M.R. （ ed ） Advances in Consumer Research, 12 （ 1 ） ,
Association in Consumer Research, 23-27
Rook, D.W.,1987. The Buying Impulse, Journal of Consumer Research, 14（2）,189-
199
Scharfstein, D. S. and Stein, J.C. 1990. Herd behavior and Investment, American
Economic Review, 80,465-479

16
Sias, R. W. 2002.Institutional Herding, Working paper, Washington State University
Sun, T., Horn M and Merrit D. 2004.Values and Lifestyles of Individualists and
Collectivists, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 21,318-332
Tai S.H.C. & Tam, J. L .M.1997. A Lifestyle Analysis of Female Consumers in
Greater China, Psychology & Marketing, 14(3), 287-308
Thomas, D. 1997.Retail and Leisure Developments at London Gatwick, Commercial
Airport, 38-41
Wilkie, W.L. 1994, Consumer Behavior, NY: John Wiley and Sons Inc.
Wood, M. 2005.Discretionary Unplanned Buying In Consumer Society, Journal of
Consumer Behavior, 4（4）, 268-281

17