See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/49131199

A measurement scale of « aesthetic style » applied to luxury goods stores

Article in International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management · May 2009

DOI: 10.1108/09590550910956250 · Source: OAI

CITATIONS READS

68 1,961

3 authors:

Bruno Godey Joelle Lagier

NEOMA Business School La Rochelle Business School
40 PUBLICATIONS 2,307 CITATIONS 28 PUBLICATIONS 218 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Daniele Pederzoli
NEOMA Business School
40 PUBLICATIONS 2,338 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Joelle Lagier on 03 November 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

A measurement scale of « aesthetic style » applied to luxury goods stores

Bruno Godey
[email protected]

Joëlle Lagier
[email protected]

Daniele Pederzoli
[email protected]

Groupe ESC Rouen

Marketing Department
Boulevard André Siegfried
BP 125 – 76825 Mont Saint Aignan cedex – France
 A measurement scale of « aesthetic style » applied to luxury goods stores

Abstract

Purpose: This article addresses the recent evolution of the luxury goods sector as well as the

distribution strategy of some major companies. The distribution strategy must consider two

different issues: first, the need to control the value chain in order to gain a competitive

advantage in a sector that is becoming concentrated; second, the need to meet a desire for

emotions and for aesthetic experience, as expressed by the customers of luxury goods.

Design/Methodology/approach: For this exploratory phase, we chose to draw our data from

a convenience sample made of undergraduate students from the Rouen School of

Management. They were exposed to slides presenting a varied selection of luxury goods

stores. On the basis of this sample, a principal component factor analysis with Varimax

rotation was performed. This enabled us to find a three factor structure. As a preliminary, tests

were carried out on the suitability of the data sample for factor analysis. We also tested the

internal reliability of this scale.

Findings: The article introduces and validates a scale measuring the aesthetic style of

consumers of luxury goods and an extension of this scale to the outlets selling these articles.

Originality/value: As for the academic aspect, it is the first application of a measurement

scale of aesthetic perception to retail. Concerning the managerial aspect, the three dimensions

of the scale could bring important indications to luxury goods firms as well as to shop

designers concerning the elements which influence consumer perception.

Keywords: Retailing, Luxury, consumer behaviour, aesthetic style, scale, store image.

Paper type: Research paper

2
Introduction

The distribution of luxury goods is by definition synonymous of selectivity if not exclusivity.

The well-known luxury goods brands were the first to perfectly control distribution by

introducing branches in the main European towns at the beginning of the XXth century. The

strategic aim was to control distribution tightly to preserve the image and the reputation of the

brand. This objective remained unchanged until the early 1970s. A second phase began with

the “democratisation” of luxury items and continued until the second half of the 1990s. Where

distribution strategy moved from exclusivity to selectivity with the number of outlets selling

luxury goods multiplied.

However, this tendency has recently been reversed. Distribution has become a strategic

variable once again due to the concentration of companies in very large multi-brand groups.

The manufacturers have taken back control of distribution, developing their own stores

networks and choosing independent distributors very carefully.

One of the main consequences of this strategic change has been the setting up of complex

distribution networks consisting of different formats, namely multi-brand stores, mono-brand

stores, flagship and corners in department stores.

The main objective of this article lies in the understanding of the link which unites luxury

goods and their consumers (Vigneron and Johnson, 2004; Dubois et al., 2001) by means of

stores. Another strategic trend in the luxury good sector consists in diversification in favour of

the most profitable ranges that is to say accessories and perfume. The difficulty faced by

companies then lies in controlling the risk of an offer becoming commonplace. The store

appears to be the ideal place to meet and communicate with the consumer. For this reason,

over the past few years, companies of the sector have taken great care to controlling the

distribution variable in two directions. The balance between being rare or ordinary certainly

3
lies both in having strong control of the retail network and in the aesthetic dimension of the

stores and merchandising.

This article is part of a wider field of research:

 Originally we developed a measurement of aesthetic style in the objet d’art sector.

We defined aesthetic style as “the personal way in which the consumer perceives

the aesthetic dimension of an object and how he reacts when faced with an

aesthetic or cultural stimulus”.

 A conceptual parallel between art and luxury items appeared interesting; we

adapted and transposed our conceptual framework and scale to luxury goods.

 Since luxury goods stores are becoming a vector for communication favoured by

companies in the sector, this measurement must now be applied to the new case for

study.

The first part of our article reviews the recent literature concerning store image and luxury. A

second part presents a conceptual framework for the analysis of the way luxury goods are

perceived. The third part develops a measurement scale of the “aesthetic style” of luxury

goods outlets. Finally, the fourth part presents the first experimentation findings resulting

from the use of this scale.

Retail store image and luxury

The definition and measurement of luxury are highly subjective (Kemp, 1998; Nueno and

Quelch, 1998). As no agreed definition is to be found in literature, the latest research focused

on consumer perceptions. Only a partial consensus has been worked out on the dimensions

building up the perception of luxury brands (Kapferer, 1998; Vigneron and Johnson, 1999;

Dubois et al., 2001). However, Vickers and Renand (2003, p. 465) propose a consumer needs

model for luxury goods based on three dimensions: functional, symbolic interactional and

experiential.

4
This article shares the same trend. It explores the experiential aspect of the consumption of

luxury goods with special attention to sensory pleasure. In this article we especially

emphasize the experiential retail stores issue. The aim of such experiential retail strategies is

to act upon store image to promote customer emotional attachment. (Healy et al., 2007).

Three different trends of research concerning store image can be identified: the first one deals

with the components of the store image; the second and more recent one considers the image

of international retail companies operating in different markets (McGoldrick and Ho, 1992;

McGoldrick, 1998, Burt and Carralero-Encinas, 2000; Burt and Mavrommatis, 2006; Burt et

al., 2007). The third one investigates the personality of retail companies. It is worth noticing

that the interaction between customers and stores is a key component in the building up of the

retail companies’ personality (Martineau, 1958; Aaker, 1997; d’Astous and Lévesque, 2003).

Our research is rooted in the first trend we have just described, namely the components of

store image. Martineau (1958), generally recognized as one of the first researcher to introduce

the concept of store image as a key for differentiation, identified four core attributes: layout

and architecture, symbols and colours, advertising, sale personnel. Lindquist (1974) identifies

in previous literature nine categories: merchandise, service, clientele, physical facilities,

convenience, promotion, store atmosphere, institutional factors, and post-transactional

satisfaction.

McGoldrick (2002) proposes a summary of 18 “general areas” comprising 90 different

elements used in previous image and brand identity studies.

Both Martineau and Lindquist distinguish between functional qualities and psychological

attributes in the construction of a retail image, with a special emphasize on the role of the

customers exposure to a store experience on the psychological attributes.

Kapferer’s identity prism (1986) integrates functional and symbolic elements and stresses the

significant impact of these elements when they are decoded by customers. Similarly,

5
Mazursky and Jacoby (1986), underline the correlation existing between tangible and

intangible elements, as well as the significant role of customers’ individual knowledge and

past experience, in the building of a holistic store image.

Reardon and Miller (1995), propose an applied scale to measure store image that can bridge

the gap between academic research and the needs of retail managers. The scale, built

following the Churchill paradigm, is composed of six dimensions, namely merchandise,

value, atmosphere, service, clientele (meaning kind of people that frequent the store) and

convenience.

A particularly relevant field of research concerns the atmosphere conveyed inside the stores

and its impact on consumers’ attitudes and behaviour. The concept of atmospherics was

coined by Kotler (1973), and other scholars developed and deepened it.

This concept is defined by Greenland and McGoldrick (1994): “atmospherics is the tailoring

of the designed environment to enhance the likelihood of desired effects or outcomes”.

In his seminal work, Bitner (1992) proposes a conceptual framework linking the environment

variables in a store or a service outlet to both the reactions of customers and employees and

their behaviour. In this model, Bitner also introduces various moderating variables

influencing both customers’ attitude and behaviour.

A complete set of research has then been conducted to test the Bitner’s conceptual framework

and to assess the importance and the influence of atmosphere factors stimulating every single

customer’s sense. A very complete and interesting summary of the different researches has

been carried out by Daucé and Rieunier (2002). The authors detail the influence of three

atmospheric variables, namely music, smell, light and colours, on the cognitive, affective and

behavioural areas of response defined by Bitner.

The authors do not analyse studies concerning other atmospheric variables linked with the

stimulation of touch or taste. At the same time they do not present any result concerning the

6
influence of atmospheric variables on employees, because they state that no previous research

exists in this field.

According to the work of Daucé and Rieunier, the Bitner’s model has never been tested

globally; many researches show that atmospheric variables can influence the emotional status

of customers, but very few have looked for the effects of these emotions on real shopping

behaviour. Moreover, when analysis were made trying to measure the effects on behaviour,

they only used quantitative data where more qualitative studies would be necessary to explore

the link between the atmospherics and the affective reactions of customers.

Suggestion for a conceptual framework for the aesthetic perception of luxury items

To develop a measurement of aesthetic style in relation to luxury goods, we followed the

procedure suggested by Churchill (1979). After specifying the working field and detailing the

context of our research, we suggest the following conceptual framework.

Figure 1: A conceptual framework of the perception of luxury goods

Antecedents
Antécédents
Antécédents Aesthetic
Style
Style esthétique
style
esthétique Consequences
Conséquences
Conséquences
 Comparaison de
de l’objet
 Object is compared
Comparaison l’objettoàà des
des
normes,
normes, à des
norms,àtodes références
références
social &
Cognitive
Styles
Styles cognitifs
style
cognitifs historiques
historical
historiques references
et
et sociales
sociales (brand,
(griffe,
(griffe,
Mobilization
Mobilisationofde
Mobilisation de signature,
signature, histoire,
history, renommée…)
awareness…)
signature, histoire, renommée…)
 Différenciation
Cognitive differentiation
Différenciation cognitive
cognitive individual
ressources  Compréhension,
 Object is understood,
Compréhension, interprétation
interprétation
ressources
 Cognitive
Discrimination
discrimination
Discrimination cognitive
cognitive cognitive
cognitives de
de l’objet
l’objet (formes,
interpreted (shape, design,
(formes,design,
design,
cognitives
 Cognitive
Intégration
Intégrationintegration
cognitive
cognitive resources
individuelles couleurs,
couleurs, composition…)
colour, composition…)
composition…)
individuelles
 Tolerance
Tolérance for
à l’ambiguïté
ambiguity
Tolérance à l’ambiguïté Lieu
Placed’exposition
Lieu of display
d’exposition
Price
Prix and
Prix et financial
et valeur
valeur value…
financière…
financière…

 Recherche
Recherche de
de sensations,
Seeking sensations,
sensations,
d’émotions,
emotions, de
de plaisir
feelings,
d’émotions, pleasure
plaisir
Mobilization
Mobilisationof
Mobilisation de
de  Quête
Quest d’évasion,
Quête fort escape,de
d’évasion, détente,
deleisure,
détente,
individual
ressources
ressources
Affective
Intensité
Intensité affective
intensity
affective forgetness
d’oubli
d’oubli
affective
affectives
affectives Demande
 Demande
Seeking dediscovery,
de découverte,
découverte,
resources
individuelles
individuelles adventure
d’aventure
d’aventure
 Attente
Variety seeking…
Attente de
de variété…
variété…

This conceptual framework allows us to highlight the entire conceptual process triggered off

by the consumers when they perceive luxury goods. We decided to construct our

7
measurement scale of the aesthetic style by its antecedents, that is to say items relative to

“cognitive style” (and its different dimensions [1]) and to “affective intensity”.

Development of a measurement scale of aesthetic styles applied to luxury goods stores

At this stage of our research, a sample of 56 items was generated from which we proceed to

the purification of the measurement. Then we adapted and applied this purified scale,

composed of 21 items, to luxury good outlets. All items were scored on a five-point Likert

scale ranging from “always” to “never”.

For this exploratory phase of luxury goods stores, we chose to draw our data from a

convenience sample made up of undergraduate students in business (N = 132).

It would certainly have been interesting to create different segments of consumers of luxury

brands, as in other research (Dubois et al., 2005). However, in this first phase of our work, we

wanted to be able to generate variance about the aesthetic style. Therefore, we worked on a

sample that was as homogeneous as possible.

Respondents were shown slides presenting a varied selection of luxury goods stores and after

were asked to fill a questionnaire. Photographs of outlets were selected so as to represent the

diversity of store formats as much as possible (flagship, corners…).

On the basis of this sample, a principal component factor analysis with Varimax rotation was

performed. This enabled us to obtain a three factor structure accounting for 69.9% of the

variance. As a preliminary, tests were carried out on the suitability of the data sample for

factor analysis (KMO = 0.808 and Bartlett test = 0.000). We also tested the internal reliability

of this scale. Cronbach’s alpha (α = 0.809) showed good internal consistency of the scale of

aesthetic style applied to luxury goods stores.

8
 Table 1: Factor structure and reliability of the scale of aesthetic style:
Luxury goods shops
Loadings
Items Communities Dim 1 Dim 2 Dim 3
« When you are in a luxury goods shop »…
S10 You might feel happy and ecstatic 0.658 0.810
S16 You might feel happy and exalted 0.775 0.879
S17 You might feel happy and exuberant 0.744 0.854
You might feel happy and overflowing with
S21 0.786 0.881
energy
S22 You might feel a very strong emotion 0.607 0.777
S35 You might feel happy and full of energy 0.788 0.886
You analyse the components and material
S31 0.607 0.763
used in the architecture of the shop
You look to see if the shop has been designed
S34 0.688 0.828
and built perfectly
You wonder if the conception of the shop is
S37 0.573 0.746
perfect, beyond reproach
You try to understand what is behind the
S47 0.649 0.802
architecture
You try to understand the reason for this
S49 0.745 0.861
display
You might feel uneasy, disturbed by certain
S15 0.745 0.862
elements in the architecture and in the layout
You might feel uneasy about certain imagery,
S23 certain symbols in the layout and in the 0.725 0.843
creation
Eigenvalue 4.355 3.220 1.515
% of
explanatory 33.499 24.770 11.655
variance
Cronbach’s α 0.923 0.860 0.648

This solution presents satisfactory psychometric qualities concerning both the explanatory

variance percentages and the correlation between the items and the factors.

In order to check the factor structure of this solution a confirmatory factor analysis [2] was

performed on the same sample.

9
 Table 2: Confirmatory factor analysis of the scale of aesthetic style:
Luxury goods shops
Loadings T
Items Loadings (with (with
bootstrap) bootstrap)
Dimension 1
S10 0.751 0.736 10.729
S16 0.827 0.813 14.541
S17 0.831 0.825 18.495
S21 0.886 0.889 25.036
S22 0.716 0.706 9.061
S35 0.880 0.880 22.949
Jöreskog’s ρ 0.920
convergent validity (ρvc) 0.658
Dimension 2
S31 0.692 0.691 9.062
S34 0.834 0.832 11.650
S37 0.742 0.750 11.364
S47 0.617 0.613 7.072
S49 0.711 0.703 9.109
Jöreskog’s ρ 0.843
convergent validity (ρvc) 0.520
Dimension 3
S15 0.509 0.673 5.017
S23 0.943 0.742 5.480
Jöreskog’s ρ 0.668
convergent validity (ρvc) 0.502
Chi-square/df (sig.) 1.482 (0.009)
RMSEA/SRMR 0.057 / 0.045
GFI/AGFI 0.907 / 0.862
NFI/TLI/CFI 0.910 / 0.959 / 0.968

The values of the test t > 2.575 indicate significant parameters (p < 0.01). Furthermore, the

model adjustment is satisfactory. The values of the adjustment indicators (GFI/NFI/TLI/CFI)

are all higher than 0.90. In addition, the SRMR is lower than 0.05 while the RMSEA is below

0.08. However, the AGFI (= 0.862) is slightly lower than the generally accepted limit of 0.90.

The estimations of bootstrap and ML are very close which indicates a satisfactory

convergence of the two methods of estimation and thus a good stability of the model.

The internal coherence of the scale is equally satisfactory. In effect, Jöreskog’s p of the three

dimensions are all higher than 0.6 (Bagozzi and Baumgartner, 1964). The convergent validity

10
of the scale is also satisfactory since the ρvc of all the dimensions are above 0.5 (Fornell &

Larcker, 1981)

First results of the measurement applied to stores

The three dimensions of the factor analysis can be interpreted within the conceptual

framework. We effectively find 2 clearly distinct dimensions which measure: affective

intensity (component 1: 6 items) and tolerance for ambiguity (component 3: 2 items).

One dimension is composed of items which fall both in the domain of cognitive

differentiation and cognitive discrimination (component 2: 5 items). These initial results are

promising in so far as they underline the fact that the consumers appear to be very sensitive to

the architecture and the layout of the luxury goods shops. Their sensitivity can be shown by

emotions and sensational experiences which they express through joy, cheerfulness and

energy (the consumers may go as far as to become ecstatic). They may also consider as

important the components and material used in the conception of the shop, or try to

understand the reasons behind the design and layout. But on the other hand, they may be

shocked by certain disturbing elements in the layout of the stores.

The luxury goods consumers’ judgement of stores is based both on sensitivity and analysis.

They attach emotion as well as attention to the surroundings in which luxury goods are

displayed, however affective intensity would appear to be the most determining factor.

Discussion and conclusion

The development of concentration within the luxury goods sector in recent years has made the

distribution variable an essential source of competitive advantage. On the one hand,

companies producing luxury goods are looking to recover complete control of their

distribution networks. On the other hand, since successive diversification has made the limits

of luxury goods less and less clearly defined, specific brands take great care to make their

11
stores a place where offer becomes aesthetic and contribute to reinforce the brand power. To

achieve this goal, luxury firms pay great attention to the architecture and interior layout which

are in turn coherent with the values of the brands.

The strategic stakes are so great for companies that we must take into consideration the

adequation between aesthetic perception of the products and the shops. To this end, we put

together and tested an exploratory measurement scale of aesthetic style which we validated

for luxury goods and then applied to stores. We also conducted a confirmatory analysis of this

scale and obtained results which proved the stability of the scale.

This article may have implications for both academics and managers. As for the academic

aspect, it is the first application, for what we know, of a measurement scale of aesthetic

perception to distribution. To date, stores have only been studied from an image and a

sensorial marketing angle. Aesthetic perception, at least for certain categories of outlets, could

represent an interesting additional contribution. Concerning the managerial aspect, the three

dimensions of the scale could bring important indications to luxury goods firms and to shop

designers concerning those elements which influence consumer perception. It would appear

particularly interesting to notice that certain items correspond to an holistic view of the shop

(all those items concerning affective intensity) whereas certain others are rather more

connected to the physical components of the shop and the “total visual merchandising”

adopted (the items contained in the second and third dimensions).

Limits of our research lie firstly in the use of the same sample in the exploratory and

confirmatory analysis. Moreover, it was a convenience sample not composed of the main

target customer of luxury goods shops. It is however true that the utilisation of students as

survey units is widespread in social science research designed to analyse perception. Peterson

(2001) offers reasons for the validity of the analysis of samples or groups of management

students in research. First, student samples are relatively homogeneous in terms of

12
demographics, socioeconomic background, and education. Second, the students in the sample

may be luxury goods customers from time to time and may in the long term become more

regular consumers as also noted by Kapferer (1998). Finally, it should not be overlooked that

the use of business students has also been evaluated positively by authors about luxury

(Kapferer, 1998; Dubois et al., 2001; Vigneron and Johnson, 1999, 2004). Furthermore, the

means of collecting information was not ideal since the individuals questioned were not in a

real-life situation, inside or just outside a shop. They were however shown slides presenting a

certain number of luxury goods shops before they answered the questionnaire. Perhaps, the

main limit in the use of photographs consists in the fact that they are only two-dimensional.

However, we assume that adding a dimension would only reinforce the perception of

consumers.

The future possible extensions of this research are many. Firstly, it would be preferable to

apply this study to more representative consumers of luxury goods brands either inside or just

outside a shop. Secondly, in order to make the scale more operational we could try to define

more exactly what the components of the luxury store image are, and which one influence

perception on the two more cognitive dimensions of the scale. Finally, we could complete the

work by crossing them with a segmentation based on consumer attitudes towards luxury

(Dubois et al., 2005).

Our scale of “aesthetic style”, as mentioned above, was originally built for the objet d’art

sector and was extended later to luxury goods and luxury stores. We are conscious of the

importance of aesthetic in the entire retail sector, so a possibility for future research could be

the application of a scale of aesthetic style to other types of stores rather than luxury. The

objective of this further research could be to evaluate the importance of the aesthetic

dimension in the sector of shopping goods like for example apparel, perfume and cosmetics,

leather goods…

13
References

Aaker, J.L. (1997) “Dimensions of Brand Personality”, Journal of Marketing Research, vol.

34, august, pp. 347-356.

Bagozzi, R.P., & Baumgartner, H. (1994) “The evaluation of structural equation models and

hypothesis testing”, in R.P. Bagozzi (Ed.), Principles of Marketing Research, Blackwell,

Cambridge, pp. 1-49.

Bitner, M.J. (1992) “Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on customers and

employees”, Journal of Marketing, vol. 56, n°2, pp. 57-71.

Budner, S. (1962) “Intolerance of Ambiguity as a Personality Variable”, Journal of

Personality, vol. 30, pp. 29-50.

Burt, S. & Carralero-Encinas, J. (2000) “The role of store image in retail internationalisation”,

International Marketing Review, vol. 17, n°4-5, pp. 433-453

Burt, S. & Mavrommatis, A. (2006) “The international transfer of store brand image”,

International Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer Research, vol. 16, n°4, pp.395-

413

Burt. S., Johansson U., & Thelander, A. (2007) “Retail Image as Seen through Consumers’

Eyes: Studying International Retail Image through Consumer Photographs of Stores”,

International Review of Retail, Distribution & Consumer Research, vol. 17, n°5, pp. 447-

467.

Churchill, G.A. (1979) “A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures or Marketing

Constructs”, Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 16, n°1, pp. 64-73.

D’Astous, A. & Levesque, M. (2003), “A scale for measuring store personality”, Psychology

& Marketing, vol. 20, n°5, pp. 455-469.

Daucé, B. & Rieunier, S. (2002) “Le marketing sensoriel du point de vente” (Retail store

Sensory marketing), Recherche et Application en Marketing, vol. 17, n°4, pp.45-65.

14
Detweiler, R.A.(1978) “Culture, Category Width and Attributions”, Journal of Cross Cultural

Psychology, vol. 9, pp. 259-285.

Dubois, B., Czellar, S., & Laurent, G. (2005) “Segmentation Based on Ambivalent Attitudes:

The Case of Consumer Attitudes Toward Luxury”, Marketing Letters, April, vol. 16, n°2,

pp. 115-128.

Dubois, D., Laurent, G. & Czellar, S. (2001) “Consumer rapport to luxury: Analyzing

complex and ambivalent attitudes”, Working paper 736, HEC School of Management,

France.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981) “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable

variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 18, pp. 39-50.

Greenland, S.J. & McGoldrick, P.J. (1994) “Atmospherics, attitudes and behaviour:

modelling the impact of designed space”, International Review of Retail Distribution and

Consumer Research, vol. 4, n°1, pp. 1-16.

Harvey, O.J., & Ware, R. (1967) “Personality Differences in Dissonance Resolution”, Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 2, pp. 227-230.

Healy, M.J., Beverland, M.B., Oppewal, H. & Sands, S. (2007) “Understanding retail

experiences – The case of ethnography”, International Journal of Market Research, vol. 49,

n°6, pp. 751-778.

Kapferer, J.N. (1986) “Beyond positioning: retailer’s identity, in Retail Strategies for Profit

and Growth”, Seminar Proceedings (Amsterdam ESOMAR), pp. 167-175.

Kapferer, J.N. (1998) “Why are we seduced by luxury brands?”, Journal of Brand

Management, vol. 6, n°1, pp. 44-49.

Kemp, S. (1998), “Perceiving luxury and necessity”, Journal of Economic Psychology, vol.

19, n°5, October, pp. 591-606.

15
Kotler, P. (1973) “Atmospherics as a marketing tool”, Journal of Retailing, vol. 49, n°4, pp.

48-64.

Kreitler, S., Maguen, T. & Kreitler, H (1975) “The Three Faces of Intolerance of Ambiguity”,

Archiv für Psychologie, vol. 127, pp. 238-250.

Lindquist, J.D. (1974) “Meaning of Image: a survey of empirical and hypothetical evidence”,

Journal of Retailing, vol. 50, n°4, pp. 29-38.

Martineau, P. (1958) “The personality of the retail store”, Harvard Business Review, vol. 36,

january-february, pp. 47-55.

Mazursky, D. & Jacoby, J. (1986) “Exploring the development of store images”, Journal of

Retailing, vol. 62, n°2, pp.145-165.

McGoldrick P.J. & Ho, S.L. (1992) “International positioning: Japanese department stores in

Hong Kong”, European Journal of Marketing, vol.26, n°8-9, pp. 65-73

McGoldrick P.J. (2002) Retail marketing, 2nd ed., McGraw Hill, London.

McGoldrick P.J., (1998) “Spatial and temporal shifts in international retail images”, Journal

of Business Research, vol. 42, n°2, pp. 189-196

Norton, R.W. (1975) “Measurement of Ambiguity Tolerance”, Journal of Personality

Assessment, vol. 39, pp. 607-619.

Nueno, J.L. & Quelch, J.A. (1998) “The mass marketing of luxury”, Business Horizons, vol.

41, n°6, November-december, pp. 61-68.

Peterson, R. (2001) “On the use of college students in social science research: Insights from a

second-order meta-analysis”, Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 28, December, pp.450-

461.

Pettigrew, T.F. (1958) “The Measurement and Correlates of Category-Width as a Cognitive

Variable”, Journal of Personality, vol. 26, pp. 532-544.

16
Pettigrew, T.F. (1982) “Cognitive Style and Social Behavior: A Review of Category-Width”,

in L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of Personality and Social Psychology, Beverly Hills: California,

Vage, pp. 199-219.

Pinson, C. (1975) “A Consumer Cognitive Differentiation Test”, Research Paper INSEAD,

Fontainebleau.

Pinson, C. (1978) “Consumer Cognitive Styles: Review and Implications for Marketers“, in

E. Topritzhofer (Ed.), Marketing: Neue Ergebnisse aus Forschung und Praxis, Düsseldorf:

Westdeutscher Verlag.

Pinson, C., Jain, A.K. & Malhotra, N.K. (1988) “Les Styles Cognitifs des Consommateurs

(Cognitive Styles of Consumers)”, Recherche et Applications en Marketing, vol. 3, n°1, pp.

53-73. (in French)

Reardon, J. & Miller, C.E. (1995) “Applied scale development: Measurement of store image”,

Journal of Applied Business Research, vol.11, n°4, pp. 85-94.

Schroder, H.M., Driver, M.J. & Streufert, S. (1967), Human Information Processing, New

York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Streufert, S. & Streufert, S.C. (1978), Behavior in the Complex Environment, New York:

Wiley.

Vickers, J.S. & Renand, F. (2003) “The marketing of luxury goods: An exploratory study –

Three conceptual dimensions”, The Marketing Review, vol. 3, pp. 459-478.

Vigneron, F. & Johnson, L.W. (1999) “A review and a conceptual framework of prestige-

seeking consumer behavior”, Academy of Marketing Science Review, vol. 3, n°1.

Vigneron, F. & Johnson, L.W. (2004) “Measuring perceptions of brand luxury”, Journal of

Brand Management, vol. 11, n°6, pp. 484-506.

17
 Endnotes

[1] Cognitive style includes two dimensions: complexity and cognitive accommodation.

Cognitive complexity presents three distinct components: cognitive differentiation,

discrimination and integration (Pinson, 1978; Pinson, Jain & Malhotra, 1988). Cognitive

differentiation corresponds to the number of attributes used by an individual to deal with

information received (Pinson, 1975). Cognitive discrimination (Shroder,Driver &Streufert,

1967 ; Pettigrew, 1958; Detweiler, 1978) measures the degree of finesse in the distinctions

made by an individual about one object or between objects. The concept of cognitive

integration (Harvey & Ware, 1967; Streufert & Struefert, 1978) measures the degree of

complexity of individual rules used in relation to objects. Cognitive accommodation

characterises the tendency to review the method of information processing in use. The

concept of “tolerance for ambiguity” (Kreitler, Maguen & Kreitler, 1975; Budner, 1962;

Norton, 1975) plays an important role in this analysis. It describes the tendency for the

individual to seek or discard information conflicting with his own system of values.

[2] The confirmatory analysis was performed using Lisrel 8.30 software.

18

View publication stats