JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCE, VOL.64, NO. 1, FEB. 2017, PP.

21- 43
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING, CAIRO UNIVERSITY

INVESTIGATING USERS’ PREFERENCES IN EVOLVING AND CREATED

SHOPPING ENVIRONMENTS OF CAIRO

M. YASSER1, S. ELFIKI2, & A. FAHMY3.

ABSTRACT
With the vast diversity in retail environments, and huge investments poured into
the construction of shopping places, it is becoming of prime importance to investigate
factors influencing users’ preferences in shopping destinations, to be well considered
by designers and developers. However, there has been some lack of studies that
address this topic in Cairo, Egypt. This paper studies the attributes influencing users’
preferences in a sample of shopping streets and malls in Cairo, as representatives to
evolving and created shopping environments. Towards this objective, the study adopts
a mixed method approach. It first employs qualitative theoretical investigations
distilling attributes influencing preferences in shopping environments from the
literature. Then, it undertakes quantitative analyses to a purpose-designed
questionnaire involving 207 participants in two shopping streets and two shopping
malls and supported with field observations. The survey addressed 52 attributes
grouped under nine categories. The analyses concluded that physical environmental
qualities, together with entertainment and leisure activities were significant key factors
in users’ preferences of shopping destinations in Cairo. The findings should help
practitioners and developers make more enlightened decisions when designing retail
environments, towards achieving better responses to the genuine preferences of the
local community in Cairo, hence realize more feasible outcomes.

KEYWORDS: Users’ Preferences, Shopping Streets, Shopping Malls, Retail

Environments, Cairo, Egypt.

1. INTRODUCTION
The phenomenon of shopping is something that every man and woman has been
involved in, thus can create many different preferences [1]. It is important to address
the notions of choice, patronage and preference when studying shopping destinations
1
Postgraduate Researcher, Dep. of Arch. Engineering and Envi. Design at AASTMT, Cairo, Egypt.
E: [email protected]
2
Associate Prof., Dep. of Arch. Engineering and Envi. Design at AASTMT, Cairo, Egypt.
3
Assistant Prof., Dep. of Arch. Engineering and Envi. Design at AASTMT, Cairo, Egypt.
 M. YASSER ET AL

[2]. However, this study’s main objective is to understand shopping preferences of

certain retail settings in Cairo, Egypt; namely shopping malls and shopping streets; as
representatives to evolving and created shopping environments.
In our modern days, with the vast diversity of shopping destinations, it is
becoming quite substantial to consider shoppers’ preferences in different retail
settings. When factors influencing preferences are well investigated, designers and
planners are likely to develop better understanding to the nature of these commercial
landscapes, and to improve their designs in a way that is more appealing to users [3].
‘Preference’ is defined as “the act, fact, or principle of giving advantages to
some over others” [4]. In economic domains, ‘preferences’ refers to some
characteristics that consumers want to have in a commodity or a service to make it
more appealing to them. These could be expressed in terms of the degree of happiness,
satisfaction or utility [5].
Preference of shopping destination is depicted as a consumer’s statement of
positive effect about a given store, which may or may not result in the choice of that
shopping destination [2]. It is also based on the usefulness to the users of the space [6],
and is formed by culture, education, personal factors and individual tastes, among a
bundle of other parameters that directly influence the tendency to purchase [7].
In brief, understanding preferences is a main step to comprehend users’ choice
to certain retail destinations, which clearly influences their purchasing intentions [7].

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Past experiences are the foundation of consumers’ preferences, which develop

over the course of time [8]. Enjoying a shopping experience has a positive influence
upon customers’ repatronage intentions. The quality of shopping experience also has a
positive effect on users’ behavioral intentions [9-11]. When shopping becomes
enjoyable it is usually associated with higher expenditure rates [12]. Shopping
behavior is influenced by satisfaction, retention proneness and patronage intention,

22
 INVESTIGATING USERS’ PREFERENCES IN EVOLVING ….

which turn the place into a favorable destination for consumers over other competing
shopping environments [13].
The attractiveness of shopping places is influenced by accessibility, parking
facilities, retail tenant mix, non-retail tenant mix, merchandise value, sales personnel,
atmosphere, orientation within the agglomeration and infrastructure on site [14]. Other
variables were also mentioned such as comfort, entertainment, diversity, mall essence,
convenience and luxury are the major attributes for the attractiveness of shopping
malls [15]. On another hand, the attributes defining the image of a shopping center are
merchandising, accessibility, services and atmospherics [16].
A more detailed model was found which gathered all variables that influence
retail image under the following seven groups:
1. Merchandising that is influenced by assortment, quality, pricing, styling or fashion.
2. Accessibility regarding the ease of getting in and out, and ease of navigating inside.
3. Services, e.g. escalators, restrooms, ambulance etc.
4. Atmospherics, referring to ambience, color, decoration, music and layout.
5. Entertainment, like movie theatres, gaming places, kids-only areas etc. As well as
celebrating special occasions and holidays, (ex. Santa Claus, Christmas trees, etc.).
6. Food courts, cafes and restaurants; and
7. Security that is meant with making it a “Safe place” [17].
The preference of shopping destinations is also attributed to accessibility by
public transports, parking tariff, length of main shopping streets, type of supplies, type
of anchor stores, type of traffic allowed within, design style, scale of shopping streets,
and type of activities in the shopping environment [18].
Another study referred shoppers' patronage of a specific shopping place to
store-related and product-related factors. Store-related factors include location,
appearance and hygiene, service quality, convenience of trading hours, and
consistency in store layout and store size. While product-related factors are quality,
price, product range and convenient packaging and product assortment [19]. Other
studies highlighted more variables, including quality, store brand, location [20], in

23
 M. YASSER ET AL

addition to ease of access, cleanliness, courtesy of personnel, price, crowding, and

store environment [21, 22].
Preference factors were divided in another model into social and physical
factors. The social factors included the opportunity to linger, feelings of ownership,
ability to territorialize, trust and respect, anonymity, productivity, opportunity to
socialize, and support. While the physical factors comprised cleanliness, nice odors,
adequate lighting, comfortable furniture, access to a view, pleasant acoustics, access to
natural light and appealing decoration [23].
Attributes such as the selection of market outlet, atmosphere, convenience,
sales people, refreshments, location, promotional activities and merchandising policy
were found to be criteria for patrons’ satisfaction in enclosed shopping centers [24].
Also aspects influencing store preferences were mentioned in a study and
encompassed store name – as an indicator of store quality and price range, the store
size, opening hours, distance from home / off route and store density, bearing in mind
that people with different backgrounds may have dissimilar preferences [25].
The literature revealed as well another valuable research that defined five major
factor groups, namely situational factors, spatial factors, store selection factors,
demographic and socio-economic factors, and the attitudes towards shopping. Each of
these factors comprises sub-categories. First, situational factors include the type of
goods, amount of goods, type of requirements, accompanying structure, shoppers’
mood, weather conditions, and time of shopping. Whereas the spatial factors address
the store competition variable defined by the inter-zonal separation of individuals and
stores, the intra-zonal separation of individuals and stores and the spatial separation
between stores. The third group is store selection criteria, which includes merchandise
brands, prices, quality and variety; as well as the store atmosphere, service, and
location. The buyers’ demographic and socio-economic characteristics refer age, sex,
marital status, income, household size, household number, dependents’ age and car
ownership [2]. The fifth factor which is attitudes towards shopping are considered to
be a property of an individual personality, less enduring than temperament, but more
enduring than a motive or a mood [26].

24
 INVESTIGATING USERS’ PREFERENCES IN EVOLVING ….

Lastly, a study used twenty variables to measure consumers’ preferences in

retail centers, divided into six main groups. The first is spatial convenience, addressing
design compactness, retail concentration, size and ‎compatibility of the center. The
second factor is temporal convenience which includes one-stop shopping, trading
hours, enclosure and proximity to home/work. The third factor is car convenience. It
outlines three attributes regarding parking facilities and two attributes regarding
accessibility. The fourth factor was the hedonic factor that includes entertainment,
‎social and aesthetic attributes. The fifth factor was effort convenience, which is ‎related
to shopping services and the provision of pedestrian areas. The last factor addressed
public transport and price [27].‎

3. THE CONCLUDED ATTRIBUTES

In this section, the study concludes the main shopping-preference attributes to

be examined in the research, as distilled from the preceding literature. They come
under nine main groups, with several attributes under each, as shown hereunder.
 “Accessibility” has eleven attributes, which are {1} ease of getting to and from the
shopping destination; {2} location proximity to home and work; {3} one-stop vs.
multi-stop shopping; {4} opening hours, {5} ease of navigating within the shopping
area; {6} sense of direction; {7} crowdedness; {8} advertisement and signage; {9}
adequacy of walkways; {10} public transport / parking spaces availability and
adequacy; and {11} the cost of public transports and parking fees.
 “Shopping motivation” is a main variable meant with examining the functional as
well as the hedonic motives; however, it is dealt with as a variable on its own in the
coming analyses.
 .“Entertainment and leisure” is another main variable addressing the availability and
quality of recreational and leisure facilities provided. As the previous group, it is
dealt with as a variable on its own in the subsequent sections of the study.
 “Merchandise/store-related attributes”. This comes in eight variables, namely {1}
number of stores; {2} diversity and variety in stores; {3} assortment of merchandise;

25
 M. YASSER ET AL

{4} commodity availability; {5} price range and sensitivity; {6} merchandise
quality; {7} sales and comparative gains; and {8} merchandising policies.
 “Social attributes” that refer to {1} social gathering; {2} social coherence; {3} sense
of belonging; and {4} allowing a longer stay.
 “Physical environmental attributes”. For that the main scope of the research is
addressing the main attributes influencing shopping preference, and for that the sub-
criteria under this title overlap and cannot be easily identified by the non-specialized
sample involved in this study – it was decided to introduce it as variable on its own
to make it easier for the respondents to complete the questionnaire survey. However,
such attributes refer to the quality of lighting, noise, odors, decoration, aesthetic
appearance, architectural layout, building condition, modernity, enclosure and scale.
 “Safety and security”. This category addresses in this research {1} sense of security;
{2} safety from bad conduct; {3} presence of sufficient security personnel; {4}
safety of people with disabilities, elders and children; and {5} general cleanliness
and hygiene.
 “Personal attributes”, which address the demographic features of shoppers, including
{1} age; {2} gender; {3} marital status; {4} household number; {5} educational
level; and {6} mode of transportation.
 “Services” were sub-divided into {1} personal assistance; {2} restrooms availability
and adequacy; {3} availability and appropriateness of waiting areas; and {4}
friendliness and expertise of sales personnel.

4. RESEARCH DESIGN

Due of the exploratory nature of the research, and in order to realize its
objectives, the study adopted a mixed method approach consisting of two phases. The
first phase of the study adopted a qualitative theoretical research approach, to derive
the attributes that influence preference in the shopping environments. The second
phase employed a quantitative survey analyses to examine the fulfillment of the
concluded attributes in the studied shopping streets and malls. Towards this purpose, a

26
 INVESTIGATING USERS’ PREFERENCES IN EVOLVING ….

purpose-designed structured questionnaire was statistically analyzed, first, by

performing linear regression analyses [in pairs] to identify the attribute(s) which are
closer predictor(s) of shopping preference.
.Afterwards, ANOVA test was performed on all cases following four scenarios:
 The four studied cases separately,  Shopping malls combined,
 Shopping streets combined,  The whole sample together.
However, as a shortcoming of adopting this positive research approach, some
qualitative differences in the field work that could describe different experiences
between the four case study locations were not addressed in the research.
Finally, the results were discussed and interpreted in the light of the findings of
preceding literature, as well as field observations.

4.1 Survey Design

The purpose-designed questionnaire was structured following the nine main
groups concluded from the theoretical study, together with their fifty two attributes.
An Arabic version was then developed to ease communication with prospect
participants, being the common medium for interface in the studied region. The
questionnaire was meant to use different types of questions, like ‘degree of
agreement’, ‘rating items’ and ‘semantic deferential questions’ to avoid redundancy
and boredom.

4.2 Studied Destination

It is known from literature that the main classification of shopping
environments encompasses evolved, created and hybrid agglomeration formats. While
shopping streets is the primary form of evolved shopping environments, shopping
malls and shopping centers are the main form of created shopping environments. One
study went further classifying evolved agglomeration formats into street markets,
historic bazaars, central business districts and inner-city locations [14]. Other studies
classified created shopping agglomerations according to their different forms, concepts

27
 M. YASSER ET AL

and layouts [14, 28, 29]. A third hybrid type was introduced which encompasses retail
parks [14, 30].
However the purpose of this study is exploring the users’ preferences in
evolving and created shopping environments, for that the hybrid type is under-
represented in Egypt. In this respect, the literature suggests that shopping streets and
malls are the most typical of the two agglomeration formats that offer extensive and
varied general merchandise and services to the same urban customer groups [14, 31].
Based on the above, and with reference to the principle of occurrence in the city
of Cairo, the study is applied to two super-regional shopping malls. This type gains
particular significance due to the fact that it addresses larger populations, it consumes
huge investments and it is being the trendiest in Egypt nowadays. Therefore, the
selected malls are Citystars Mall in Nasr City which is built with a vertical extension
around a series of focal atria; and the Mall of Arabia in the 6th of October City which
extends horizontally and follows the open and enclosed mall category.
On the other hand, the choice of shopping streets was meant to include main
streets in different Cairene districts. The selected category is known to serve large
populations with diverse profiles. Hence, the study was conducted in Road 9 in Maadi
district – south Cairo, and Abbas Al-Akkad Street in Nasr-city district to the east.

4.3 Sampling Process

In the four studied sites, respondents were selected randomly in order to create
a representative sample of all ages, genders and personal characteristics. A total of 293
participants took part in the survey. Only 207 of them were selected for the subsequent
analyses, while the rest were excluded due to incompletion and/or lack of seriousness
detected by the researchers.

5. ANALYSIS OF THE COLLECTED DATA

“SPSS” software program; version 17.0; was used as a tool for statistical
analysis, the software name stands for “Statistical Package for the Social Sciences”.

28
 INVESTIGATING USERS’ PREFERENCES IN EVOLVING ….

The program was utilized to initially perform a linear regression analysis between
‘experience’ and ‘convenience’ to determine which has the bigger effect and is a
closer predictor of ‘shopping preference’. The regression equations for both are
outlined in Equation (1) and Equation (2) hereunder.
- (1)
Equation (1): The Linear regression between shopping agglomeration as an
independent variable and experience as dependent variable.
- (2)
Equation (2): The Linear regression between shopping agglomeration as an
independent variable and convenience as dependent variable.
Afterwards, one-way ANOVA tests were performed on all cases following the
four scenarios previously mentioned in the research design, to determine the
significance of each of the 52 variables on preference, using ‘experience’ as the factor
and entering all the other variables in the dependent list. Significance is determined at
the 0.05 level (p < 0.05, 2-tailed). All tables of mean values and standard deviations
for significant attributes are shown in the appendix. All terms and abbreviations are
indicated and explained in a glossary following the appendix.

5.1. One-way ANOVA Test of Road 9 in Maadi

Road 9 is famous for the large number of stores, restaurants and cafés. Six
variables showed significance with experience as seen in Fig. 1. ‘Merchandising
policies’ revealed a significant difference F(5, 38) = 3.619, p = 0.009. ‘Price
sensitivity’ ranked second in regards to its significance value F(5, 38) = 2.794, p =
0.030. ‘Entertainment and leisure’ had the third highest significance value F(5, 38) =
2.733, p = 0.033. ‘Physical environmental qualities’ was significant as a well with a
value F(5, 38) = 2.674, p = 0.036. ‘Allowing a longer stay’ in the shopping area also
showed significance F(5, 38) = 2.608, p = 0.040. Last, Atmospheric stimuli was
significant as well and had a significance value F(5, 38) = 2.492, p = 0.048.

29
 M. YASSER ET AL

0.009 Merchandising Policies 3.619

0.030 Price range and Sensitivity 2.794
0.033 Entertainment and Leisure 2.733
0.036 Physical Environmental Qualties 2.674
0.040 Allowing a longer stay 2.608
0.048 Atmospheric Stimuli 2.492
0 0.05 0 1 2 3 4
Xx Significance Value “p” Xx ANOVA Value “F-Ratio”

Fig. 1. The ANOVA of significant criteria affecting experience in Road 9

5.2 One-way ANOVA Test of Abbas Al-Akkad Street, Nasr City

Abbas Al Akkad Street is a vital shopping street in the heart of an urban district.
The ANOVA test revealed six significant variables. These are ‘availability and
adequacy of waiting areas’ F(6, 48) = 4.176, p = 0.002; ‘physical environmental
qualities’ F(6, 48) = 3.531, p = 0.006; ‘entertainment and leisure’ F(6, 48) = 3.106, p =
0.012; ‘allowing a longer stay’ F(6, 48) = 2.943, p = 0.016; ‘social coherence’ F(6, 48)
= 2.690, p = 0.025 and ‘merchandising policies’ F(6, 48) = 2.347, p = 0.046. As
shown in Fig. 2, the variable with the highest significance in this street is ‘availability
and adequacy of waiting areas’. This is explained by the 1.618km length of the street
and its 50m width with difficult crossing due to high traffic and numerous streets
branching off the street with extremely high pavements that are quite hard to climb.
Moreover, all restaurants and cafés are either indoor or off-street take-away outlets
with no casual street seating. This entails exerting more effort while shopping, which
was probably why many participants highlighted its significance.

0.002 Waiting Areas 4.176

0.006 Physical Environmental Qualties 3.531
0.012 Entertainment and Leisure 3.106
0.016 Allowing a Longer Stay 2.943
0.025 Social Coherence 2.69
0.046 Merchandising Policies 2.347
0 0.05 0 1 2 3 4 5
Xx Significance Value “p” Xx ANOVA Value “F-Ratio”

Fig. 2. The ANOVA of significant criteria in Abbas Al-Akkad Street.

30
 INVESTIGATING USERS’ PREFERENCES IN EVOLVING ….

5.3 One-way ANOVA Test of Citystars Mall, Nasr City.

Citystars is a super-regional mall, in a busy area between Heliopolis and Nasr
City districts. The ANOVA test showed many significant variables that likely
influence shoppers’ experience. These variables are: ‘entertainment and leisure’, F(4,
49) = 14.012, p = 0.000; ‘sales and comparative gains’, F(4, 49) = 4.937, p = 0.002;
‘ease of reaching and leaving’, F(4, 49) = 4.592, p = 0.003; ‘restrooms availability’,
F(4, 49) = 4.152, p = 0.006; ‘allowing a longer stay’, F(4, 49) = 4.033, p = 0.007;
‘Aesthetic appearance’, F(4, 49) = 3.819, p = 0.009; ‘quality sensitivity’, F(4, 49) =
3.814, p = 0.009; ‘commodity availability’, F(4, 49) = 3.710, p = .010; ‘public
transport and parking cost’, F(4, 49) = 3.176, p = 0.021; ‘assortment of merchandise’,
F(4, 49) = 3.052, p = 0.025; ‘one-stop vs. multi-stop shopping’, F(4, 49) = 2.972, p =
0.028; ‘physical environmental qualities’, F(4, 49) = 2.924, p = 0.030; ‘ease of
navigation’ within the mall, F(6, 47) = 2.790, p = 0.036 and ‘atmospheric stimuli’,
F(6, 47) = 2.615, p = 0.046. As shown in Fig. 3, the variable with highest significance
is ‘entertainment and leisure’, quite a characteristic feature of this mall with its 18
cinema screens, more than 100 restaurants, cafés in addition to an indoor children’s
funfair which collectively designates it as a leisure destination as much as it is for
shopping.

0.000 Entertainment and Leisure 14.012

0.002 Sales and Comparative gains 4.937
0.003 Ease of Reaching and Leaving 4.592
0.006 Restrooms Availability 4.152
0.007 Allowing a longer stay 4.033
0.009 Aesthetics Appearance 3.819
0.009 Merchandise Quality 3.814
0.010 Commodity Availability 3.71
0.021 Public Transport / Parking Cost 3.176
0.025 Assortment of Merchandise 3.052
0.028 One-Stop Vs Multi-Stop Shopping 2.972
0.030 Physical Environmental Qualities 2.924
0 0.05 0 5 10 15
Xx Significance Value “p” Xx ANOVA Value “F-Ratio”

Fig. 3. The ANOVA of significant criteria affecting experience in Citystars mall.

31
 M. YASSER ET AL

5.4. One-way ANOVA Test of Mall of Arabia, 6th of October City.

Mall of Arabia is another super regional mall located in a new urban settlement
in Greater Cairo. It is currently the largest mall in Egypt at 180,000m2 gross leasable
area. The analysis of variance revealed the following significant variables:
‘entertainment and leisure’, F(4, 49) = 9.898, p = 0.000; ‘physical environmental
qualities’, F(4, 49) = 4.000, p = 0.007; ‘social gathering’, F(4, 49) = 3.894, p = 0.008;
‘ease of navigation’ within the mall, F(6, 47) = 3.496, p = 0.014; ‘gender’, F(4, 49) =
3.349, p = 0.017; ‘architectural layout’, F(4, 49) = 3.138, p = 0.022; ‘advertisement
and signage’, F(4, 49) = 3.046, p = 0.025; ‘public transport and parking cost’, F(6, 47)
= 2.809, p = 0.035 and the ‘assortment of merchandise’, F(4, 49)= 2.643, p = 0.045.
As shown in Fig. 4, the variable with the highest significance is ‘entertainment and
leisure’, which is typical to the case in Citystars mall.

0.000 Entertainment and Leisure 9.898

0.007 Social Gathering 4.000
0.008 Ease of Navigating within 3.894
0.014 Gender 3.496
0.017 3.349
Architectural Layout
0.022 3.138
Advertisement and Signage 3.046
0.025
0.035 Public Transport / Parking Cost 2.809
0.045 Assortment of Merchandise 2.643
Physical Environmental Qualities
0 0.05 0 5 10 15
Xx Significance Value “p” Xx ANOVA Value “F-Ratio”

Fig. 4. The ANOVA of significant criteria affecting experience in Mall of Arabia.

5.5. One-way ANOVA Test of Shopping Streets as a single group.

Applying the variance analysis to the two studied streets together yielded to
seven significant variables; which are: ‘entertainment and leisure’, F(6, 92) = 4.834, p
= 0.000; ‘physical environmental qualities’, F(6, 92) = 4.847, p = 0.000;
‘merchandising policies’, F(6, 92) = 4.774, p = 0.000; ‘atmospheric stimuli’, F(6, 92)
= 3.528, p = 0.003; ‘sense of belonging’, F(6, 92) = 2.806, p = 0.015; ‘safety’ from
bad conduct, F(6, 92) = 2.622, p = 0.022 and ‘aesthetic appearance’, F(6, 92) = 2.515,
p = 0.027. As shown in Fig. 5, the variable with the highest significance is

32
 INVESTIGATING USERS’ PREFERENCES IN EVOLVING ….

‘entertainment and leisure’, while the variable with the least significant value is
‘aesthetic appearance’. Based on field observation, the research argues that both
highest and lowest significant attributes are mentioned due to their under-
representation in both streets. None of these streets has cinemas, play areas or leisure
places. Likewise, due to their ‘evolving’ nature and being owned /managed by
different bodies, shop fronts and street facades do not follow a unified harmonious
pattern.

0.000 Physical Environmental Qualities 4.847

0.000 Merchandising Policies 4.774
0.003 Atmospheric Stimuli 3.528
0.015 Sense of Belonging 2.806
0.022 Safety from Bad Conduct 2.622
0.027 Aesthetics appearance 2.515
0 0.05 0 2 4 6
Xx Significance Value “p” Xx ANOVA Value “F-Ratio”

Fig. 5. The ANOVA of significant criteria affecting experience in Shopping Streets

5.6. One-way ANOVA Test of Shopping malls as a single group

Performing the analysis of variance on both shopping malls together revealed
the following significant variables: ‘entertainment and leisure’, F(4,103) = 23.105, p =
0.000; ‘ease of navigation’ within the mall, F(4, 103) = 6.612, p = 0.000; ‘commodity
availability’, F(4, 103) = 5.774, p = 0 .000; ‘quality sensitivity’, F(4, 103) = 5.351, p =
0.001; ‘physical environmental qualities’, F(4, 103) = 5.135, p = .001; ‘sales and
comparative gains’, F(4, 103) = 4.845, p = 0.001, ‘atmospheric stimuli’, F(4, 103) =
4.233, p = 0.003; ‘allowing a longer stay’, F(4, 103) = 3.787, p = 0.006; ‘sufficient
security personnel’, F(4, 103) = 3.562, p = 0.009; ‘personal assistance’, F(4, 103) =
3.449, p = 0.011; ‘convenience’, F(4, 103) = 3.427, p = 0.011; ‘aesthetic appearance’,
F(4, 103) = 3.282, p = 0.014; ‘public transport and parking cost’, F(4, 103) = 3.234, p
= 0.015; ‘ease of reaching and leaving’, F(4, 103) = 2.916, p = .025; ‘social
coherence’, F(4, 103) = 2.898, p = 0.026; ‘one-stop shopping’, F(4, 103) = 2.776, p =
0.031; ‘sense of security’, F(4, 103) = 2.656, p = 0.037; ‘social gathering’, F(4, 103) =
2.644, p = 0.038 and the ‘number of stores’, F(4, 103) = 2.573, p = 0.042.

33
 M. YASSER ET AL

As shown in Fig. 6, the variable with the highest significance is ‘entertainment and
leisure’, as in earlier findings for both malls individually. It is interesting that people
appear to find leisure a major component in both types of shopping environments.

0.000 Entertainment and Leisure 23.105

0.000 Ease of Navigation within 6.612
0.000 Commodity Availability 5.774
0.001 Merchandise Quality 5.351
0.001 Physical Environment Qualities 5.135
0.001 Sales and Comparative gains 4.845
0.003 Atmospheric Stimuli 4.233
0.006 Allowing a longer Stay 3.787
0.009 Sufficient security personnel 3.562
0.011 Personal Assistance 3.449
0.011 Convenience 3.427
0.014 Aesthetic appearance 3.282
0.015 Public Transport / Parking Cost 3.234
0.025 Ease of Reaching and leaving 2.916
0.026 Social Coherence 2.898
0.031 One-Stop vs. Multi-Stop Shopping 2.776
0.037 Sense of Security 2.656
0.038 Social Gathering 2.644
0.042 Number of Stores 2.573
0 0.05 0 10 20 30
Xx Significance Value “p” Xx ANOVA Value “F-Ratio”

Fig. 6. The ANOVA of significant criteria affecting experience in Shopping Malls

5.7 One-way ANOVA Test of the whole sample as a single group.

At last, the one-way ANOVA test was performed on all locations
simultaneously, in order to find out the significant factors that influence shopping
preference in both environments, 20 out of 52 variables were significant. Following
are the significant variables: ‘entertainment and leisure’, F(6, 200) = 17.190, p =
0.000; ‘physical environmental qualities’, F(6, 200) = 9.506, p = 0.000; ‘atmospheric
stimuli’, F(6, 200) = 8.011, p = 0.000; ‘aesthetic appearance’, F(6, 200) = 4.800, p =
0.000; Personal assistance, F(6, 200) = 4.716, p = 0.000; Sense of belonging, F(6, 200)
= 4.251, p = 0.000, ‘sufficient security personnel’, F(6, 200) = 4.228, p = 0.000;
‘allowing a longer stay’, F(6, 200) = 4.088, p = 0.001; ‘ease of navigating’ within the
shopping agglomeration, F(6, 200) = 3.701, p = 0.002; ‘restrooms hygiene’, F(6, 200)
= 3.691, p = 0.002; ‘merchandising policies’, F(6, 200) = 3.593, p = 0.002; ‘quality

34
 INVESTIGATING USERS’ PREFERENCES IN EVOLVING ….

sensitivity’, F(6, 200) = 3.460, p = 0.003; ‘restrooms availability’, F(6, 200) = 2.753, p
= 0.014; ‘sense of security’, F(6, 200) = 2.683, p = 0.016; ‘opening hours’, F(6, 200) =
2.555, p = 0.021; ‘sales and comparative benefits’ F(6, 200) = 2.429, p = 0.027;
‘social coherence’, F(6, 200) = 2.298, p = 0.036 and ‘convenience’, F(6, 200) = 2.295,
p = 0.036. As shown in Fig. 7, the variable with the highest significance is
‘entertainment and leisure’. This fully conforms to the previous findings at all phases
of individual, paired and whole group tests, which all have a consensus on the
significance of ‘entertainment and leisure’.

0.000 Entertainment and Leisure 17.190

0.000 Physical Environmental Qualities 9.506
0.000 Atmospheric stimuli 8.011
0.001 Aesthetics appearance 4.800
0.001 Personal Assistance 4.716
0.001 Sense of Belonging 4.251
0.003 Sufficient Security Personnel 4.228
0.006 Allowing a longer stay 4.088
0.009 Ease of Navigating within 3.701
0.011 Restroom Hygiene 3.691
0.011 Merchandising Policies 3.593
0.014 Merchandising Quality 3.460
0.015 Restrooms Hygiene 3.087
0.025 Sense of Security 2.683
0.026 Opening Hours 2.555
0.031 Sales and Comparative gains 2.429
0.037 Social Coherence 2.298
0.038 Convenience 2.295
0 0.05 0 5 10 15 20
Xx Significance Value “p” Xx ANOVA Value “F-Ratio”

Fig. 7. The ANOVA of significant criteria affecting experience of the whole sample.

6. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The findings of this study may become a useful tool in assisting designers and
planners to build successful and preferable shopping agglomerations in Cairo city and
other Egyptian cities with similar settings. In all cases and locations, two variables
were found to be of significance, these two variables are ‘entertainment and leisure’
and ‘physical environmental qualities’, these variables may be considered as key

35
 M. YASSER ET AL

factors in any shopping agglomeration, thus it may be assumed that by providing good
entertainment quality and facilities and a good design that pays attention to physical
environmental qualities, designers may provide a preferable shopping environment.
The ‘entertainment and leisure’ variable is in harmony with the findings that stated
that the presence of entertainment facilities is essential [16, 17]. It also supports the
viewpoint suggesting that the quality and quantity of entertainment offered in a
shopping place may influence enjoyment and therefore affect the users shopping
experience [9]. The emphasis on ‘physical environmental qualities’ tends to be in line
with the findings mentioning how physical characteristics of place may improve the
patron’s experience [21]. It also complies with a study that mentioned that there is a
relationship between preference and the environmental physical characteristics [3].
Regarding shopping streets, the findings revealed that both shopping locations
had four significant variables in common which are ‘merchandising policies’,
‘entertainment and leisure’, ‘physical environmental qualities’ and ‘allowing a longer
stay’. These four variables may be considered as successful tools in developing a
successful shopping street. Thus by regulating merchandising policies and by allowing
shoppers an appropriate opportunity to linger and spend more time they are more
likely to buy. The ‘merchandising policies’ attribute partially supports findings that the
factor influences patrons’ satisfaction [22]. The significance of ‘allowing a longer
stay’ to shoppers preference and place attachment supports the findings of a studies
that regarded the attribute as a main dimensions that have a direct impact on shopping
preference and behavior. [13, 21].
Other variables that appeared to be important for a preferable shopping street
are for the shoppers to feel a sense of belonging to the shopping area, good
atmospheric stimuli, reasonable prices, social coherence as in absorbing wider
segments of the society, availability and adequacy of waiting areas, good aesthetic
appearance and safety from bad conduct as embodied in casual fights, thievery and
sexual harassments.
In regard to shopping malls, the studied sites had five common significant
variables that are presumably effective treatments in offering a preferable shopping

36
 INVESTIGATING USERS’ PREFERENCES IN EVOLVING ….

mall. These variables are ‘entertainment and leisure’, good ‘physical environmental
qualities’, ‘ease of navigating’ within the shopping place, ‘assortment of merchandise’
and reasonable ‘public transport and parking costs’. The significance of ‘ease of
navigating’ to the attractiveness of shopping places coincides with findings that depict
it as a major requirement towards realizing more convenient accessibility [14, 16]. The
significance of ‘assortment of merchandise’ agrees with the findings of several studies
[16, 18, 24]. Reference to ‘public transport and parking costs’ tends to be similar to
one study’s’ attribution of store preferences to transportation costs and other similar
factors [19]. This factor is also relevant to the factor ‘car convenience’ as mentioned
by another study [26].
Other variables that appeared to be significant in the ‘accessibility’ of shopping
malls are ‘one-stop shopping’ and ‘advertisement and signage’. In terms of store
selection criteria and merchandise related factors, ‘quality’ mattered to mall shoppers,
as did the ‘commodity availability’, ‘sales and comparative gains’ and the ‘number of
stores’. In terms of ‘atmospherics’; ‘aesthetic appearance’ and ‘atmospheric stimuli’
proved to be significant to mall shoppers. For the sake of ‘safety and security’; feeling
a sense of security and the provision of sufficient number of security personnel were
most important to mall shoppers. On another hand, the availability and adequacy of
restrooms together with the provision of personal assistance denoted shoppers’
priorities in terms of services.
The social factors highlighted in the study addressed the role of the mall as a
place for social gathering, the assimilation of wide segments of the community and the
opportunity for shoppers to linger and walk around the mall.
When combining all cases together in order to deduce the most significant
variables that may be considered as a successful tool in achieving a preferable
shopping environment in general there were 20 variables common between shopping
streets and shopping malls combined, which are: entertainment and leisure, physical
environmental qualities, atmospheric stimuli, aesthetic appearance, personal
assistance, sense of belonging, sufficient security personnel, allowing a longer stay,
ease of navigating, restrooms hygiene, merchandising policies, quality sensitivity,

37
 M. YASSER ET AL

restrooms availability, social gathering, commodity availability, sense of security,

opening hours, sales and comparative gains, social coherence and convenience. No
new variables showed significance except for opening hours which may be a result of
chance since it hasn’t proven to be significant in any other case.
In conclusion, putting the general attributes distilled from the literature together
with the findings of the empirical examination applied to different types of shopping
spaces in Cairo, Egypt has yielded to a set of attributes that architects, urban designers
and estate developers need to consider towards realizing a more appealing shopping
experience, a more prosperous economy, and a more sustainable built environment.

REFERENCES

1. Olsen, J., “Shopping Mall Preferences Exploring Consumers’ Preferences for

Shopping Malls Utilizing the Best-Worst Scaling Method”, Aarhus University,
Aarhus, Denmark, 2015.
2. Yang, H., “Shopping Destination Choice Behaviour and Retail Impact
Assessment in Taiwan”, Cardiff University, Wales, United Kingdom, 2005.
3. Woods, J.D., “Environmental Factors that Influence Preference And Price
Perceptions of Commercial Landscapes and Storefronts”, Faculty of the Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA, 1995.
4. Merriam Webster Dictionary (n.d.) retrieved on 12/05/2017 from
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/preference
5. The Economic Times (n.d.), Retrieved on 15/05/2017 from
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/definition/preferences. New Delhi: Bennett,
Coleman & Co. Ltd.
6. Eroğlu, E., “Factors Affecting Consumer Preferences for Retail Industry and
Retailer Selection using Analytic Hierarchy Process”, Journal of Economics and
Administrative Sciences Faculty, Vol. 4, No. 6, pp. 43-58, 2013.
7. Ebrahim, R., “Brand Preferences of Egyptian Consumers”, In Doctoral
Symposium, London: Brunel Business School, pp. 2-8, 2010.
8. Hoeffler, S., & Ariely, D., “Constructing Stable Preferences: A look into
Dimensions of Experience and their Impact on Preference Stability”, Journal of
Consumer Psychology, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 113-139, 1999.
9. Hart, C., Farrell, A., Stachow, G., Reed, G. & Cadogan, J., “Enjoyment of the
Shopping Experience: Impact on Customers' Repatronage Intentions and Gender
Influence”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 27, No. 5, pp. 583-604, 2007.
10. Wakefield, K.L., & Baker, J. ,“Excitement at the Mall: Determinants and Effects
on Shopping Response”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 74, No. 4, pp. 515-539, 1998.

38
 INVESTIGATING USERS’ PREFERENCES IN EVOLVING ….

11. Tai, S., & Fung, A., “Application of an Environmental Psychology Model to In-
store Buying Behaviour”, The International Review of Retail, Distribution and
Consumer Research, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 311-337, 1997.
12. Mano, H., “The Influence of Pre-Existing Negative Affect on Store Purchase
Intentions”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 75, No. 2, pp. 149-172, 1999.
13. Teller, C., & Reutterer, T., “The Evolving Concept of Retail Attractiveness: What
makes Retail Agglomerations Attractive when Customers Shop at them?”,
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 127-143, 2008.
14. Teller, C., “Shopping Streets Versus Shopping Malls - Determinants of
Agglomeration Format Attractiveness from the Consumers' Point of View”, The
International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 18,
No. 4, pp. 381-403, 2008.
15. El-Adly, M.I., “Shopping Malls Attractiveness: A Segmentation Approach”,
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 35, No. 11, pp.
936-950, 2007.
16. Heij, T., “Environmental Influences on Consumer Behaviour, An Empirical
Study into the Contribution of Environmental Characteristics to the Experiential
Value of the Consumer, Differentiated by Age”, Eindhoven University of
Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 2012.
17. Sit, J., Merrilees, B. & Birch, D., “Entertainment‐Seeking Shopping Centre
Patrons: The Missing Segments”, International Journal Of Retail & Distribution
Management, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 80-94, 2003.
18. Borgers, A., & Vosters, C., “Assessing Preferences for Mega Shopping Centres:
A Conjoint Measurement Approach”, Journal of Retailing And Consumer
Services, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 322-332, 2011.
19. Jacobs, S., Van Der Merwe, D., Lombard, E., & Kruger, N., “Exploring
Consumers' Preferences with regard to Department and Specialist Food Stores”,
International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 169-178, 2010.
20. Baltas, G., & Papastathopoulou, P., “Shopper Characteristics, Product and Store
Choice Criteria: A Survey in the Greek Grocery Sector”, International Journal of
Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 31, , No. 10), pp. 498-507, 2003.
21. Paulins, V. & Geistfeld, L., “The Effect of Consumer Perceptions of Store
Attributes on Apparel Store Preference”, Journal Of Fashion Marketing and
Management: An International Journal, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 371-385, 2003.
22. Carpenter, J. & Moore, M., “Consumer Demographics, Store Attributes, and
Retail Format Choice in the US Grocery Market”, International Journal of Retail
& Distribution Management, Vol. 34, No. 6, pp. 434-452, 2006.
23. Waxman, L. (2006). The Coffee Shop: Social and Physical Factors Influencing
Place Attachment. Journal of Interior Design, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 35-53, 2006.
24. Anselmsson, J., “Sources of Customer Satisfaction with Shopping Malls: A
Comparative Study of Different Customer Segments”, The International Review
of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 115-138,
2006.

39
 M. YASSER ET AL

25. Carrasco, N., “Deciding Where to Shop: Disaggregate Random Utility

Destination Choice Modeling of Grocery Shopping in Canton Zurich. IVT, ETH
Zurich, Zurich, 2008.
26. Thomas, K.C., “Attitude Assessment, Maidenhead”, TRC- Rediguides, 1987.
27. Reimers, V., & Clulow, V., “Retail Centres: It's Time to make them
Convenient”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol.
37, No. 7, pp. 541-562, 2009.
28. Maitland, B., “Shopping Malls, Planning and Design”, London: Construction
Press, 1985.
29. Maitland, B., “The New Architecture of the Retail Mall”, London: Construction
Press, 1990.
30. Gilbert, D., “Retail Marketing Management”, Harlow: Financial Times Prentice
Hall, 2003.
31. Levy, M. & Weitz, B. A., “Retailing Management”, Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2006.
32. Heiman, G., “Basic Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences”, Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2011.

APPENDIX

Table 1. Mean values and Standard Deviations of significant a ttributes in Road 9.

Standard
Mean
Deviation
Merchandising Policies 3.09 1.326
Prices range and sensitivity 4.91 1.491
Entertainment and Leisure 4.95 1.539
Physical Environmental Qualities 4.27 1.484
Allowing a longer stay 1.30 0.462
Atmospheric Stimuli 4.68 1.611

Table 2. Mean values and Standard Deviations of significant attributes in Abbas Al-Akkad St.
Standard
Mean
Deviation
Waiting areas 2.20 0.848
Physical Environmental Qualities 4.15 1.638
Entertainment and Leisure 4.38 1.569
Allowing a longer stay 1.51 0.505
Social Coherence 2.38 1.367
Merchandising Policies 2.84 1.118

40
 INVESTIGATING USERS’ PREFERENCES IN EVOLVING ….

Table 3. Mean values and Standard Deviations of significant attributes in Citystars mall.
Standard
Mean
Deviation
Entertainment and Leisure 5.63 1.405
Sales and Comparative gains 3.00 1.166
Ease of Reaching and Leaving 1.65 0.935
Restrooms Availability 1.11 0.317
Allowing a longer stay 1.28 0.452
Aesthetic appearance 5.63 1.458
Merchandise Quality 5.93 1.385
Commodity Availability 1.65 0.677
Public Transport / Parking Cost 2.61 1.280
Assortment of Merchandise 1.91 0.937
One-stop vs. Multi-stop Shopping 2.87 0.825
Physical Environmental Qualities 5.31 1.515
Ease of Navigating within 1.89 0.793
Atmospheric Stimuli 5.31 1.301

Table 4. Mean values and Standard Deviations of significant attributes in Mall of Arabia.
Standard
Mean
Deviation
Entertainment and Leisure 5.33 1.229
Physical Environmental Qualities 5.54 1.077
Social Gathering 2.37 1.138
Ease of navigating within 2.46 1.023
Gender 1.63 0.487
Architectural Layout 1.17 0.376
Advertisement and Signage 2.52 1.225
Public Transport / Parking Cost 2.67 1.637
Assortment of Merchandise 1.83 0.841

Table 5. Mean values and Standard Deviations of significant attributes ‎of Shopping Streets.
Standard
Mean
Deviation
Physical Environmental Qualities 4.20 1.565
Merchandising Policies 2.95 1.215
Atmospheric Stimuli 4.45 1.554
Sense of Belonging 1.31 0.466
Safety from Bad Conduct 1.53 0.502
Aesthetic appearance 5.20 1.400

41
 M. YASSER ET AL

Table 6. Mean values and Standard Deviations of significant attributes ‎of Shopping Malls.
Standard
Mean
Deviation
Entertainment and Leisure 5.08 1.505
Physical Environmental Qualities 4.84 1.561
Atmospheric Stimuli 4.89 1.494
Aesthetic appearance 5.33 1.458
Personal Assistance 1.43 0.496
Sense of Belonging 1.30 0.459
Sufficient security personnel 1.52 0.501
Allowing a longer stay 1.36 0.482
Ease navigating within 2.31 1.125
Restrooms Hygiene 1.65 0.884
Merchandising Policies 2.88 1.291
Merchandise Quality 5.56 1.477
Restrooms Availability 1.70 0.885
Sense of Security 1.21 0.410
Opening Hours 1.09 0.289
Sales and Comparative gains 3.00 1.199
Social Coherence 2.59 1.300
Convenience 4.03 1.585

Table 7. Mean values and Standard Deviations of significant attributes of the whole sample.
Standard
Mean
Deviation
Entertainment and Leisure 5.48 1.322
Ease of navigating within 2.18 0.955
Commodity Availability 1.75 0.725
Merchandise Quality 5.76 1.497
Physical Environmental Qualities 5.43 1.313
Sales and Comparative gains 2.93 1.213
Atmospheric Stimuli 5.30 1.320
Allowing a longer stay 1.31 0.467
Sufficient security personnel 1.38 0.488
Personal Assistance 1.26 0.440
Convenience 4.31 1.579
Aesthetic appearance 5.45 1.506
Public Transport/ Parking Cost 2.64 1.463
Ease of Reaching and Leaving 1.52 0.891
Social Coherence 2.60 1.245
One-stop vs. Multi-stop Shopping 2.81 0.725
Sense of Security 1.16 0.366
Social Gathering 2.34 1.129

42
 INVESTIGATING USERS’ PREFERENCES IN EVOLVING ….

GLOSSARY

 SPSS: is one of the leading statistical computer software programs and is the abbreviation
for “Statistical Program for Social Sciences” [32].
 Linear Regression: is the procedure for describing the best-fitting straight line that
summarizes a linear relationship [32].
 Coefficient of determination: denoted as “r2” and is the proportion of variance accounted
for by a relationship; computed by squaring the correlation coefficient, which is the
percentage of the response variable variation that is explained by a linear model [32].
 Analysis of Variance: abbreviated ANOVA and is the parametric procedure for
determining whether significant differences exist in an experiment containing two or more
sample means [32].
 One-way ANOVA: The analysis of variance performed when an experiment has only one
independent variable [32].
 F-ratio: In ANOVA, it is the ratio of the mean square between groups to the mean square
within groups [32].
 Significance / Probability: symbolized by “ ” which is a mathematical statement
indicating the likelihood that an event will occur; when a particular population is randomly
sampled. It also describes results that are too unlikely to accept as resulting from chance
sampling error when the predicted relationship does not exist; it indicates rejection of the
null hypothesis [32].
 Two-tailed test: The test used to evaluate a statistical hypothesis that predicts a relationship,
but not whether scores will increase or decrease [32].
 Mean: The score located at the mathematical center of a distribution [32].
 Standard Deviation: is a measure of variability that indicates how much the scores are
spread out around the mean [32].

43