Đề tieng anh thpt 2024 danh cho cac ban hoc sinh
Determining female shopper loyalty towards clothing stores.pdf
1. UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS HO CHI MINH CITY
International School of Business
Nguyen Thi Kim Sa
DETERMINING FEMALE SHOPPER LOYALTY
TOWARDS CLOTHING STORES
ID: 22120068
MASTER OF BUSINESS (Honours)
SUPERVISORS: Prof. Nguyen Dong Phong
Dr. Nguyen Phong Nguyen
Ho Chi Minh City – Year 2014
2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This is our opportunity to express gratitude to those who have helped and supported
us throughout the process.
Firstly, I am especially grateful to my supervisor, Dr. Nguyen Phong Nguyen, for the
patient, dedicated guidance for this thesis over the past few.
Secondly, I would like to thanks to the supervisorial panel’s member who have
thoroughly examine my thesis with valuable comments.
Finally, I would like to direct our gratitude to those tutors that have taught us
something worthwhile to remember during our two years at the Master of Business
program.
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
December, 2014
Nguyen Thi Kim Sa
3. ABSTRACT
Store loyalty is a phenomenon that is currently receiving a great deal of interest from
retail management. What is more, a loyal customer is a source of competitive advantage
through repeat purchase and positive word of mouth. As a matter of fact, lots of enterprises
are facing to the difficulty situation in Vietnam. It is not an exception, in clothing retail
sector, the failure rate of doing that type of business is even higher than others. In hope of
solving this issue, this study aims to study the underlying factors that could impact on
female shopper’s loyalty towards clothing stores. Among the key factors affecting store
loyalty, hedonic shopping motivations (HSM) and store attributes (STA) will be deeply
investigated in relation to store loyalty (LOY) directly and through shopper satisfaction
(SAF) in this study.
To conduct this research, a sample of 226 female shoppers in Ho Chi Minh City,
Vietnam was surveyed to test the proposed model. After that, structural equation modeling
was used to analyze the collected data. It was found that store attributes and hedonic
shopping motivation had positive effects on LOY. However, shopper satisfaction construct
is almost the same with store loyalty in Vietnamese customer’s mind, so that this paper will
provide the implication based on the relationship of 3 main factors Store Attributes,
Hedonic shopping motivation and . As to limitation of this study, a convenience sampling
method was applied in Ho Chi Minh City it is better to use cross-national, random sample.
Also, the study focuses on attitudinal loyalty. Behavioral loyalty should be taken into
account in future research. The findings suggest that the clothing store managers should
show concentrate their positioning strategies not only on the utilitarian dimension but also
on the hedonic motivations to stimulate store loyalty. Also, it is necessary to deeply
understanding customer’s motivation shopping before designing their outlets with store
attributes that would meet the expectations of shoppers, thus motivate them towards store
patronage decisions.
KEYWORDS
Female Shoppers, Consumer behavior, Clothing Stores, Store Loyalty, Vietnam
4. TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1..................................................................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Background...................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Research problem............................................................................................................................ 1
1.3. Research Objectives ........................................................................................................................ 2
1.4. Scope Of This Study ........................................................................................................................ 3
1.5. The Significance of Research.......................................................................................................... 3
1.6. Structure of thesis............................................................................................................................ 4
CHAPTER 2..................................................................................................................................................... 6
LITERATURE REVIEW, HYPOTHESES AND CONCEPTUAL MODEL ........................................... 6
2.1. Theoretical Background.................................................................................................................. 6
2.1.1. Theory of reasoned action............................................................................................................. 7
2.1.2. Expectation – Disconfirmation theory........................................................................................... 8
2.2 Hypotheses Development ...................................................................................................................... 9
2.2.1. Overview on Shopper Loyalty......................................................................................................... 9
2.2.2. Store Attributes ............................................................................................................................... 9
2.2.3. Hedonic Shopping Motivations.................................................................................................... 11
2.2.4 Shopper Satisfaction...................................................................................................................... 13
2.3 Conceptual Model: .............................................................................................................................. 14
CHAPTER 3................................................................................................................................................... 15
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................. 15
3.1. Research process................................................................................................................................. 15
3.2. Sampling.............................................................................................................................................. 19
3.3. Data Collection Methods.................................................................................................................... 20
3.4. Data Analysis Methods....................................................................................................................... 20
Chapter 4:....................................................................................................................................................... 21
DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS............................................................................................................ 21
4.1. Descriptive Statistics .......................................................................................................................... 21
4.2. Refinement of measurement scales ................................................................................................... 22
6. LIST OF ABBREVIATION
HSM Hedonic Shopping Motivation
STA Store Attributes
SAF Shopper Satisfaction
LOY Store loyalty
ADV Adventure shopping
GRA Gratification shopping
ROL Role shopping
SOC Social shopping
IDE Idea shopping
MER Merchandise
AFS After sale services
EMS Employee services
SAT Store Atmosphere
7. LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Descriptive statistics.............................................................................................22
Table 2: Factor loadings, Composite reliability and Average variance extracted ...............29
Table 3: Unstandardized correlation...................................................................................30
Table 4: Unstandardized structural coefficients..................................................................31
Table 5: Results of unidimensionality and reliability test results – refined scales ...............45
Table 6: EFA And Reliability Test Results - Scales Without Modification.........................47
Table 7: Rotated Components ............................................................................................48
8. LIST OF TABLES
Figure 1: Theoretical Model...............................................................................................14
Figure 2: Research Process.................................................................................................16
Figure 3: CFA Result of Store Attributes ...........................................................................26
Figure 4 : The CFA result of Hedonic Shopping Motivation ..............................................27
Figure 5: Modified Model ..................................................................................................31
Figure 6: Saturated Model..................................................................................................51
Figure 7: Final Measurement Model...................................................................................52
Figure 8: Structural Model .................................................................................................53
9. 1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
The clothing retail market is fiercely competitive at the present. Especially, the
women clothing stores have built up everywhere in Vietnam but most of them facing the
risk of shutting down with no profit. In fact, according to National Business Registration
Portal, the number of difficult company that is forced to stop their business in the early
months of the year 2014 is continuously increasing. Until February, 2014, there is 13,124
company have stopped their business. There are 80-100 shops posting on their website for
transferring the ownership of stores. In which, clothing, grocery and coffee shops that have
capital is under 500 million accounts for almost 90 % (Tuan and Son, 2014). It can be seen
that the clothing retailing sector seems to be freeze and owners struggling to remain the
minimal number of customer for covering the rent fee and other fixed costs (My, 2014).
On another hand, the term of store loyalty has become quite popular in developed
countries and people pay much more attention to this outcome when it comes to the retailing
business strategies to make sure their business doing well as well as maintain their
competitive advantages in the market. Conversely, store loyalty is not taken into account
properly in Vietnam while it could be an effective solution for business owner to overcome
the mentioned difficulties.
1.2. Research problem
Facing this situation, the first thing first, they need to figure out the reason why their
business going down by understanding customer insights in order to make the effective
strategies. This may come from the economic downturn or just because they do not invest
the right thing. Instead of retaining the existing customer, they only seek for the new
customers and do not realize that loyalty customers are curial in such a competitive market
like clothing business. It is evident that customer acquisition costs, such as promotions,
10. 2
discounts, advertising, are much higher than customer maintenance costs, such as consistent
quality, service and variety (Reicheld, 1996 cited by Ray, 2009). Additionally, the
understanding of what motivates consumers to purchase from one store rather than another
becomes increasingly important to retail stores design and management (Black et al., 2002).
In this regard, it is also supported that store loyalty is the most important factor for success
and longevity of store (Omar, 1999). Thus, store loyalty is worthwhile to pay much
attention to enhance store performance. To clarify about store loyalty, it is stated that “Store
loyalty means that customers like and habitually visit the same store to purchase a type of
merchandise (Levy & Weitz, 1996, p.61).
However, academic research has found significant difference between women and
men cognitive process and behaviour (Melnyk, 2009; Noble, 2006). Gender difference is
important issue to investigate, because if women and men loyalties differ, both genders
might require different selling approach (Melnyk, 2009). What is more, female clothing
store is much more popular than male clothing store in Vietnam. Therefore, female shopper
behavior is in need of doing a deeply research and find out which are the determinants of
their loyalty decision towards clothing store. In particular, which factors are important to
customer when they consider being loyal to a specific store and from that store managers
could make a right investment on their store to improve business without wasting time, cost
and effort.
1.3. Research Objectives
Apparently, store loyalty is one of the most effective ways to improve their business
at the present. However, how to invest properly and make sure it is not a wasting is a major
concern. Certainly, not all stores could spend money on all factors that could help increase
the level of store loyalty. Therefore, prioritizing their investment in some important factors
is necessary, especially for stores with limited budget. Thus, this study attempts to provide
the knowledge on shopper loyalty, its determinants and the importance of each determinant
in female clothing business in Vietnam by achieving the specific objectives as follows:
11. 3
(1) To identify and test the key factors affecting female shopper loyalty toward
female clothing stores in Vietnam.
(2) To quantify the important level of each independent factor in relationship with
shopper loyalty in female clothing stores in Vietnam
1.4. Scope Of This Study
From previous studies, Fischer and Arnold stated that for a particular gender, it has
differences refer to their responsibilities, roles, and privileges (1994). Cross and Madson
(1997) theorized that gender based information processing differences result from one’s
perception of their self-system. Additionally, the previous study showed that “Modern
marketing has relied on gender to help understand and explain consumers and their
behavior” (Caterall and MacLaran, 2002, p.405). Hence, for the most effective strategy,
owners need to focus on each segment for better application for owners. For that reason,
female customers were chosen for studying. In particular, the target respondents should be
female shoppers from 18 to 30 years old in Ho Chi Minh City.
With respect to this issue, Tripathi and Sinha (2006) stated that consumers evaluate
alternative stores on a set of attributes, and depending on their individual preferences, would
patronize the best store. Moreover, apparel retailers among retailers of other commonalities
that should employ this consumer behavior as apparels are considered hedonic products
(Youn, Sun and Wells, 2001) and therefore shopping for apparel will produce hedonic
values. Thus, we proposed three main factors that affecting store loyalty to deeply
investigate: Store Attributes, Hedonic Shopping Motivation and Shopper Satisfaction. Then
research proposal presents the literature review and hypothesis development and the
methodology sections.
1.5. The Significance of Research
Obviously, that understanding about store loyalty to improve it plays an important
role for owners to overcome that difficult situation and maintain their competitive
advantages in the long term. In particular, loyal customers generate more predictable sales,
a steady cash flow and an improved profit stream (Harris and Goode, 2004; Kumar and
12. 4
Shah, 2004; Rust, Lemon & Zeithaml, 2004). They are also less costly, less price sensitive
and spend more with the retailer (Harris and Goode, 2004; Kumar and Shah, 2004; Rust et
al., 2004). Furthermore, loyal customers are active promoters of the retailer through word of
mouth and can become ambassadors of the business (Butcher, Sparks & O’Callaghan,
2001).
There have been a lot of studies which have looked into various determinants of store
loyalty such as store atmosphere, store images, store satisfaction, service quality, perceived
value, and attitudes toward a store (e.g. Bloemer and Odekerken-Schroder, 2002; Koo,
2003) and utilitarianism (Jin and Kim, 2003) and hedonism (Boedeker, 1995) and
particularly focused on female shopping behavior (Moye and Kincade, 2003; Taylor and
Cosenza 2002). However, those studies are mostly conducted in Korean, Finland and South
Africa, and little research have been done to examine the effects of store attributes and
shopping motivation on shopper loyalty in the clothing business in Vietnam. With well
understand managers’ need, this study will provide the helpful background on customer
loyalty behaviors as well as suggest them the way to improve their business performance.
1.6. Structure of thesis
The paper is organized around four key areas: literature review and hypotheses,
method, results, and discussion and conclusions.
Chapter 1- Introduction: Briefly introduces about research background, research
problem, methodology and design
Chapter 2 – Literature Review: provides an overview of the previous literature on
store attributes and hedonic motivation shopping in order to understand the key drivers of
female shopper’s loyalty and the different impact of each complement on overall loyalty
outcome. This chapter also reviewed various preceding studies about store attributes,
hedonic shopping motivation and store loyalty before releasing the theoretical model and
research hypotheses.
Chapter 3 – Research Methodology: explains the research method used to assess the
research model and test the hypotheses. The study is divided into two phases: qualitative
13. 5
pilot study and main survey. Reliability and Validity Measurement are also conducted to
modify conceptual model and hypotheses. Sampling method, sample size, target
respondents and data analysis method are also covered in this chapter.
Chapter 4 – Data Analysis and Result: represents the main findings the sample
characteristics. This chapter also comprises statistical procedures that were undertaken to
test the hypotheses and reveal the applicable model
Chapter 5 – Conclusions: This chapter includes conclusions, managerial implications,
research limitation and future research.
14. 6
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW, HYPOTHESES AND CONCEPTUAL MODEL
2.1. Theoretical Background
Regarding customer behavior, Koltler, et al (2003) assumed that there are four
determinants affecting consumer behavior, consisting cultural elements, social elements,
personal elements and psychological elements. In term of psychological elements, it
comprised of motivation, perception, learning, belief and attitude. In addition, the work of
Arnold and Reynolds (2003) have indicated that motivation have a great impact on
consumer behavior. Apparently, it is supported that motivation has impact on customer
behavior. In particular, shopping motives drive the behavior that bring customer to the store,
customers’ evaluation of store attributes and subsequent shopping outcomes, such as
shopping satisfaction and shopper loyalty (Groeppel-Klein, Thelen, & Antretter, 1999; Van
Kenhove, De Wulf, & Van Watershcoot, 1999). Thus, we need to consider motivation
factors to predict shopper loyalty.
In addition, the theory of reasoned action (TRA) suggests that the immediate
antecedent of a behavior is the intention to perform the behavior (Fishbein and Ajzen,
1975). The concept of behavior intention denotes that individual’s motivation to engage in a
behavior is specified by the attitudes that affect the behavior (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). In
particular, the attitude toward a store would lead the expected behavior that is loyalty
intention. For that reason, store attributes should take into account in explaining shopper
loyalty
Besides that, consumer satisfaction is one of the important factors that positively
affect consumer loyalty (Oliver, 1980; Patterson, 1997, Bhattacherjee 2001). Oliver (1980)
claims that consumer satisfaction is the main factors that affecting consumer repurchase
behavior through the constructed model of ECT (Expectation-Confirmation
theory).Therefore , the store loyalty should be predicted through customer satisfaction.
Accordingly, we propose 4 variables, in which store attributes and hedonic
motivation shopping is independent variables, shopper satisfaction is mediating variable and
15. 7
finally store loyalty is dependent variables. The following sections would classify each
variable that we propose in the conceptual model.
2.1.1. Theory of reasoned action
Theory of reasoned action (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975) can be used to understand and
predict customer behaviour (Schiffman, 2008). Theory is based on assumptions that human
beings are rational and they systematically use information available to them (Ajzen and
Fishbein, 1975 cited by Randall, 1989). Information available for individual logically and
systematically follows individual‘s behaviour (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1975 cited by Randall,
1989).
Theory suggests that subjective norm influences customer‘s intention to act
(Schiffman 2008). Behavioural intention is a function of attitude toward performing
behaviour and subjective norm regarding to behaviour (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1975 cited by
Randall, 1989). Here attitude toward performing behaviour is individual‘s judgment that
particular behaviour is good or bad and that individual supports or does not supports
specific behaviour (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1975 cited by Randall, 1989). Thus, individual
believes that specific behaviour will lead to certain consequences and individual evaluates
these consequences (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1975 cited by Randall, 1989). Subjective norms
are individual‘s perceptions of whether or not relevant people to individual think that
individual should perform specific behaviour (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1975 cited by Randall,
1989). The subjective norms consist of individuals beliefs whether relevant people think
that individual should perform specific behaviour (approves or disapproves) weighted by
individuals motivation to agree with those relevant people (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1975 cited
by Randall, 1989; Schiffman, 2008). It can be assumed that theory of reasoned action
suggests that behaviour can be predicted by two variables: attitude toward behaviour and
subjective norm (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980 cited by Randall, 1989). These variables are
expected to vary with specific behaviour which is predicted, with conditions under which
specific behaviour will be performed and with specific individual who will perform specific
behaviour (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980 cited by Randall, 1989).
16. 8
Theory of reasoned action posits that loyalty intentions have direct influence on
customer‘s behaviour (willingness to buy) (Vogel 2008). Willingness to buy is attached to
customers desire to search for favourite offers even though it requires considerable effort
(Vogel, 2008). Competitive offerings are not considered as alternatives in customers mind
(Vogel, 2008).
Expansion of the theory of reasoned action (Ajzen, 2001) suggests that customer‘s
previous behaviour can explain their actual behaviour (Vogel, 2008). It means that customer
will prefer to choose the same store they visited in previous purchase occasions, even
though customer perceives that other store provides the same benefits (Vogel, 2008). It can
be explained with psychological commitment to previous choices and customer‘s
willingness to decrease their costs of decision making (Corstjens and Lal, 2000 cited by
Vogel, 2008). This calls inertia effect (Vogel, 2008). It is rational, because it helps customer
to reach satisfaction by saving costs of decision making (Vogel, 2008). Decision takes place
automatically and without conscious thinking (Vogel, 2008).
2.1.2. Expectation – Disconfirmation theory
Expectation - disconfirmation theory is widely used in customer satisfaction and
loyalty studies (Lin, 2009). Expectation – disconfirmation theory alone can be applied in
order to predict customer loyalty through direct influence of satisfaction (Taylor and Baker,
1994 cited by Lin, 2009). Expectation – disconfirmation theory suggests that level of
customer‘s satisfaction is determined by customer‘s initial expectations and disagreement
between performance and customer‘s initial expectations (Vogel, 2008). Expectation
indicates degree of what customers predicts and what customers believe (Coye, 2004 cited
by Lin, 2009). Respectively, what will happen and what should happen (Lin, 2009).
According to expectation – disconfirmation theory, satisfaction was originally
defined as positive emotional state which results from evolution of someone‘s job (Locke,
1976 cited by Lin, 2009). Anic (2006) defines customer satisfaction as post consumption
experience outcome in terms of rewards and costs, which indicates degree to which store
meets or exceeds customer expectations (Anic, 2006). A positive customer perception of
17. 9
store attributes increases satisfaction, which in turn leads to positive loyalty intentions
(Anic, 2006). Concept of satisfaction includes paradigm of disconfirmation, which holds
that satisfaction is related to disconfirmations experiences size and direction, where
disconfirmation is related to individual‘s initial expectations (Anic, 2006). If product
performs as customer expected, individual‘s expectations are confirmed; if product performs
poorly than expected, then individual‘s expectations are negatively disconfirmed; if product
performs better than expected, then individual‘s expectations are positively disconfirmed
(Churchill and Suprenant 1982 cited by Anic, 2006). Satisfaction occurs when individual‘s
expectations are met or exceeded, whereas dissatisfaction occurs when individual‘s
expectations are negatively disconfirmed (Levy and Weitz, 2004 cited by Anic, 2006).
2.2 Hypotheses Development
2.2.1. Overview on Shopper Loyalty
It has been widely accepted that loyalty is an ‘‘essential asset’’ in service industries
(e.g. Keaveney, 1995; Bloemer and Ruyter, 1998). Gounaris and Stathakopoulos (2004)
believe that there are primarily three different perspectives of loyalty: attitudinal,
behavioral, and reasoned action. The attitudinal approach posits that loyalty is based on
psychological commitment, purchase intention, and word-of-mouth recommendations. It is
expected that an increase in attitudinal loyalty should lead to an increase in behavioral
loyalty (Gounaris and Stathakopoulous, 2004). The behavioral approach conceptualizes
loyalty in terms of repeated purchases (e.g. Huddleston et al., 2004). Finally, the reasoned
action approach, derived from Fishbein’s (1980) theory of reasoned action, views that one
may have a favorable attitude towards a brand but does not necessarily purchase it.
Therefore, loyalty is based merely on brand belief, not on brand experience (Oliver, 1999).
Although such an individual never purchases the brand, s/he promotes it publicy and
recommends it to others (Gounaris and Stathakopoulos, 2004). In this study, LOY refers to
the willingness of shoppers to repeat their shopping trips in the same clothing store and
recommend it to others (e.g. Baker et al., 2002; Sirohi et al., 1998; Zeithaml et al., 1996).
2.2.2. Store Attributes
18. 10
Store attributes are viewed as part of the overall image of a store (Bloemer and de
Ruyter, 1998). Store attributes can be defined as the ‘‘summation of all attributes of a store
as perceived by the shoppers through their experience of that store’’ (Omar, 1999, p. 103).
Current literature has presented various and varying conceptualizations of store attributes.
For example, Lindquist (1974-1975) suggests nine key attributes: merchandise (MER);
services; clientele; physical facilities; convenience; promotion; store ambience; institutional
factors; post-transaction satisfaction. Ghosh (1990) introduces eight elements: locations;
MER; store atmosphere; customer services; price; advertising; personal selling; sales
incentive programs. Koo (2003) proposes seven components: store atmosphere; location;
convenient facilities; value; employee services (EMS); after sale services (AFS);
merchandising (MER).
Based on these studies, we propose four components of Store Attributes: Store
Atmosphere (SAT); EMS; AFS; MER. Store atmosphere, created by the layout and
environment. EMS refers to the quality of services provided by a store’s employees (Koo,
2003; Lindquist, 1974-1975). AFS involve good exchange and refund policies, and MER
refers to product and brand variety and availability (Koo, 2003).
As for specialty store shoppers judged employee service as a more important
determinant of patronage than the department store or discount store shopper (Lumpkin and
McConkey, 1984). Quality service contact makes for closer customer/retailer relationships
(Berry and Parasuraman, 1991), which engenders positive word-of-mouth, greater sales and
customer loyalty retention (Beatty et al., 1996). Particularly, store atmosphere is important
in the fashion sector of retail (Birtwistle and Shearer, 2001). Also, the post-transaction,
consequently, creates credibility and can generate loyalty patronage behavior in future
(Osman, 1993)
In short, much research also showed that certain retail store attributes influence store
choice and patronage behavior (Baker et al., 2002; Hu and Jasper, 2006; Pan and Zinkham,
2006; Sherman, Mathur & Smith, 1997; Sirgy, Grewal, & Mangleburg, 2000). Existing
evidence from research showed the importance that retail store attributes have on
19. 11
consumers' shopping behavior. Some studies showed that retail store attributes played a
major role in creating positive responses (Areni and Kim, 1993; Hui, Dube & Chebat,
1997; Spangenberg, Crowley & Henderson, 1996).
H1: Store Attributes have a positive effect on Shopper Loyalty
Moreover, store image has an indirect impact on store loyalty or repeat behavior
mediated by store satisfaction (Bloemer and de Ruyter, 1998; Sirgy and Samli; 1985; Thang
& Tan, 2003).
Bloemer & Ruyter (1998) stated that store image acts as a mediator of satisfaction
and pointed out that high customer satisfaction will reflect positively on the store’s image.
The authors concluded that customer loyalty is directly related to satisfaction, and that
satisfaction comes from the various attributes of the store’s image. This conclusion leads to
two points about store image. The first is that store image indirectly influences loyalty,
through satisfaction. The second is that a store’s image directly influences its customers’
satisfaction level
H2: Store Attributes have a positive effect on Shopper Satisfaction
2.2.3. Hedonic Shopping Motivations
Several studies have attempted to identify shoppers’ underlying motives and the
relationship between these motives and shoppers’ behavior (e.g. Jin and Kim, 2003; Tauber,
1972; Westbrook and Black, 1985). Shopping motivations can be defined as ‘‘the drivers of
behavior that bring consumers to the marketplace to satisfy their internal needs’’ (Jin and
Kim, 2003, p. 399). Based on the premise that people go shopping motivated by a variety of
psychological needs, Tauber (1972) develops a number of shopping motivations. These
motivations can be categorized into personal (i.e. role playing, diversion, self-gratification,
learning about new trends, physical activity, and sensory stimulation), and social (i.e. social
experiences outside the home, communication with others having similar interest, peer
group attractions, status and authority, and pleasure of bargaining). Westbrook and Black
(1985) note that shopping behavior evolves from three reasons: to acquire a product; to
acquire both a desired product and satisfaction with non-product-related needs; to primarily
20. 12
attain goals not related to product acquisition. They propose seven dimensions of shopping
motivations: anticipated utility; role enactment; negotiation; choice optimization; affiliation;
power/authority; stimulation.
Generally, shopping motivations have been categorized into two key aspects:
utilitarian and hedonic. The utilitarian shopping behavior is characterized by task related,
product-oriented, rational, and extrinsic motivations (Babin et al., 1994). The hedonic
shopping behavior refers to recreational, pleasurable, intrinsic, and stimulation-oriented
motivations. This study focuses on the hedonic aspect of shopping motives by examining
various hedonic reasons that people go shopping. HSM can be conceptualized to have six
dimensions: adventure; social; gratification; idea; role; value (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003).
Adventure shopping (ADV), grounded in stimulation, and expressive theories of
human motivation, refers to ‘‘shopping for stimulation, adventure, and the feeling of being
in another world’’ (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003, p. 80). The adventure aspect of shopping
can provide hedonic value for shoppers (Babin et al., 1994). Social shopping (SOC),
grounded in affiliation theories of human motivation, reflects socializing aims of shoppers
while shopping (Reynolds and Beatty, 1999). Gratification shopping (GRA), grounded in
tension-reduction theories of human motivation, involves shopping for relieving stress (Lee,
Moschis & Mathur, 2001). Idea shopping (IDE), grounded in categorization theories, and
objectification theories, refers to shopping with the purpose of learning about new trends
and fashion, styling or innovations (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Tauber, 1972). Role
shopping (ROL), grounded from identification theories of human motivations, reflects the
enjoyment that shoppers derive from shopping for others (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003).
Finally, value shopping (VAL), grounded in assertion theories of human motivation, reflects
the enjoyment of shoppers in bargaining, looking for sales, and finding discounts (Arnold
and Reynolds, 2003). These components of HSM are conceptually related but are distinct
concepts (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Westbrook and Black, 1985).
Research has suggested that HSM attract shoppers to the store and have direct links
with outcomes such as shopper satisfaction (e.g. Babin et al., 1994). Shoppers who are
21. 13
strongly motivated by hedonic aspects are more likely to be satisfied with a store that is able
to provide them with the hedonic value of their shopping trips (Dawson, Bloch and
Ridgway, 1990). Indeed, Carpenter and Fairhurst (2005) showed that hedonic shopping
benefits had a positive impact on satisfaction.
H3: Hedonic Shopping Motivation has a positive effect on Shopper Satisfaction
Again, hedonic shopping motives have been widely accepted as a theoretical
foundation to understand consumer outcomes including shopper loyalty (Babin et al., 1994).
Hedonic consumption has a greater effect on the emotional loyalty of consumers when
compared to utilitarian shopping motivations since it dominates the heart and feelings of
consumers (Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982; Roy and Ng, 2012). Added to that, Stephenson
and Willett (1969) suggested that recreational shoppers could tend to restrict
their shopping to fewer store, whilst Van Trijp et al. (1996) highlighted the difficulty of
finding a shopping atmosphere well suited to hedonic feelings, so that consumers with
hedonic shopping motivation are likely to be loyal to a specific store.
H4: Hedonic Shopping Motivation has a positive effect on Shopper Loyalty
2.2.4 Shopper Satisfaction
Gerpott, Rams, and Schindler (2001) proposed that satisfaction is based on a
customer’s estimated experience of the extent to which a store fulfills his or her
expectations. Giese and Cote's (2000) multi-method study elicited the following definition:
customer satisfaction is identified by a response (cognitive or affective) that pertains to a
particular focus (i.e. a purchase experience and/or the associated product) and occurs at a
certain time (i.e. post-purchase, post-consumption). Given this definition, a customer's
satisfaction with his/her shopping experience may be an outcome of the value provided by
the shopping experience.
Satisfaction is also a much desired target for businesses, since a satisfied customer is
likely to buy more, return to the store and spread positive word-of-mouth opinions to other
customers (Anderson, Fornell & Lehmann, 1994). Customer satisfaction leads to greater
customer loyalty (Bolton & Drew, 1994).
22. 14
H5: Shopper Satisfaction has a positive effect on Shopper Loyalty
2.3 Conceptual Model:
Store Attributes
Hedonic shopping
motivation
Shopper Loyalty
Shopper Satisfaction
H3 (+)
H1 (+)
H4 (+)
H2 (+)
H5 (+)
Figure 1: Theoretical Model
23. 15
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1. Research process
The research process was initiated with literature review. Based on that, the model
and research hypotheses were built. After that, qualitative study was conducted to obtain the
corrected items in Vietnam consumer context. The findings from qualitative result
supplemented previous studies and generated the final items scales for the quantitative pilot
study. The pilot study was conducted to test the reliability of measured scales by Cronbach
Alpha measurement and to identify the modification of theoretical model and hypotheses
when necessary. After finalizing the modified model and hypotheses, the main survey was
implemented. Again, reliability was assessed in a larger sample size by alpha score. Then
the main survey results revealed the findings and hypotheses testing process. Finally,
conclusion and managerial implications were delivered based on the results of main survey.
24. 16
Figure 2: Research Proccess
Literature
Review
Theoretical Model &
Hypotheses
Qualitative Pilot
Study (n=6)
Main Survey
(n=236)
Reliability Measurement
Testing Hypotheses
Conclusions &
Implications
Model & Hypotheses
Modification
25. 17
3.1. Measurement Scales
The measurement of each of following item was developed by adopting scales from
previous studies. Most of items were measured on 7-point Likert-type scales excepting
Shopper Satisfaction concept that was measured on 9- point Likert-type scales. In particular:
Store attributes. Store Attribute comprised four components: SAT; EMS; AFS;
MER. The items used to measure the Store Attribute components were based on Koo
(2003)- seven-point Likert scale, anchored by 1: strongly disagree and 7: strongly agree
Store Atmosphere (SAT)
The layout makes it easy to get around
Easy to find what I’m looking for in the store
The shelf is not too high to pick up merchandise with hands
The merchandise display at the store is very good
Employee services (EMS)
Employees at the store are helpful and friendly and courteous
Employees are always willing to respond to my request promptly
Appropriateness of salesperson’s explanation
I can trust employees at the store
Employees at the store are very kind in respond to my questions and inquires
After sale services (AFS)
The store has appropriate return policy and easy to return harmer products
The store’s refund policy is appropriate
The store offers excellent and easy exchange services for goods I purchased
Merchandise (MER)
The store sells a lot of name brands
This store sells a variety of products from many different manufacturers
The store carries many store brands
26. 18
The store carries various assortments
Hedonic shopping motivations (HSM). HSM comprised six components; ADV;
GRA; ROL; VAL; SOC; IDE. The items measuring the HSM components were based on
Arnold and Reynolds (2003)
Adventure shopping (ADV)
To me, shopping is an adventure
I find shopping stimulating
Shopping is a thrill to me
Shopping makes me feel I am in my own universe
Gratification shopping (GRA)
When I am in a down mood, I go shopping to make me feel better
To me, shopping is a way to relieve stress
I go shopping when I want to treat myself to something special
Role shopping (ROL)
I like shopping for others because when they feel good I feel good
I feel good when I buy things for the special people in my life
I enjoy shopping for my friends and family
I enjoy shopping around to find the perfect gift for someone
Value shopping (VAL)
For the most part, I go shopping when there are sales
I enjoy looking for discounts when I shop
I enjoy hunting for bargains when I shop
I go shopping to take advantage of sales
Social shopping (SOC)
I go shopping with my friends or family to socialize
27. 19
I enjoy socializing with others when I shop
To me, shopping with friends or family is a social occasion
Shopping with others is a bonding experience
Idea shopping (IDE)
I go shopping to keep up with the trends
I go shopping to keep up with the new fashions
I go shopping to see what new products are available
I go shopping to experience new things
Shopper satisfaction (SAF). For measuring customer satisfaction, a three-item scale
was adapted from previous research (Brady et al., 2001) which was also measured on nine
point semantic differential scale
I am satisfied with my decision to purchase products at this store
My choice to purchase at this store was a wise one
I think that I did the right thing when I purchase at this store
Shopper loyalty (LOY). The scale used to measure LOY was adapted from previous
research (Nguyen, Nguyen & Barret, 2007), seven-point Likert scale, anchored by 1:
strongly disagree and 7: strongly agree
I consider myself to be loyal to this store
I am going to do my shopping in this store in the next few weeks
Shopping in this store is my first choice
I will go shopping in this store in future
I will promote this store to my relatives and friends
3.2. Sampling
The convenience sampling was chosen to collect data. The target respondents were
female officers, students from 18 to 30 in Ho Chi Minh City. Respondents were only
qualified to the survey if they used to purchase at clothing stores. A total of 250 responses
28. 20
were collected. However, after deleting incomplete responses, 226 responses were finally
utilized in data analysis.
3.3. Data Collection Methods
The self-administrated questionnaires were distributed and collected directly or
indirectly from some universities, offices and factories. The rest of questionnaires were
collected by emailing the online survey link.
3.4. Data Analysis Methods
Two phases of study were undertaken in this research: a pilot study and a main
survey. The pilot phase involved a focus group and a quantitative pilot study. Its purpose
was to modify and refine the measures. The main survey was used to test the measurement
and structural models.
Structural equation modeling is a multivariate statistical methodology, which takes a
confirmatory approach to the analysis of a structural theory. SEM provides researchers with
the ability to accommodate multiple interrelated dependence relationships in a single model.
Its closest analogy is multiple regression analysis, which can estimate a single relationship.
But SEM can estimate many equations at once, and they can be interrelated, meaning that
the dependent variable in one equation can be an independent variable in other equations.
This allows the researcher to model complex relationships that are not possible with other
multivariate techniques (Hair et al. 1998).
Advantages of SEM compared to multiple regression include more flexible
assumptions (particularly allowing interpretation even in the face of multi-collinearity), use
of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to reduce measurement error by having multiple
indicators per latent variable, graphical modeling interface, the desirability of testing models
overall rather than coefficients individually, the ability to test models with multiple
dependents, the ability to model mediating variables, the ability to model error terms, and
the ability to handle difficult data (time series with auto-correlated error, non-normal data,
incomplete data). AMOS 16.0, a leading SEM package, was used in this study.
29. 21
Chapter 4:
DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
4.1. Descriptive Statistics
A sample of female customers in Ho Chi Minh City was collected using convenience
sampling method. Respondents were students, officers, workers and other occupations. The
original questionnaire was in English, and was translated into Vietnamese for respondents
who are unlikely to understand the content in English. Back-translation was used to ensure
equivalence of meanings. Self-administered surveys, in which questionnaires were mailed to
the target respondents and collected by interviewers, were chosen for this study.
Spontaneously, others questionnaires were distributed to some offices and universities.
In order to obtain a sample size of about 200, 250 questionnaires were distributed to
respondents in the chosen sample. About 236 completed questionnaires were collected: a
response rate of 94 per cent. Among these, 10 were found to be invalid due to the
respondents not buying clothing in store but the market and that is nonsense for this study.
The remaining 226 valid completed questionnaires were the source of the data for analysis.
The sample comprised 118(52.2 per cent) officers, 61(27 per cent) students, 12 (5.3 percent)
workers and 35 other occupation. In terms of age, there is 110 (48.9 per cent) respondents in
the age between 18 and 25, 89(39.4%) respondents in the age between 26 and 35 and 27
(11.9 per cent) in the age above 35). Finally, 104 respondents (46 per cent) earn between 5
millions and 10 millions Vietnam dongs each month, 88( 38.9 per cent) respondents have
income below 5 millions, 18 ( 8 per cent) respondents have income between 10 millions
to15 millions and 16 (7.1 percent) respondents have income above 15 millions
30. 22
Table 1: Descriptive statistics
Age Group Income group
18-25 26-35 > 35
Less
than 5M
From
5M to
10M
From
10M to
15M
More
than
15M
Count Count Count Count Count Count Count
Occupation Student 56 2 3 54 7 0 0
Officer 42 64 12 22 72 13 11
Worker 1 7 4 4 7 1 0
Other 11 16 8 8 18 4 5
4.2. Refinement of measurement scales
A focus group was undertaken with six female customers to refine the content of
questionnaire. Although most of the scales have been used widely in the past, this step is
important because of the difference in the research setting: female clothing store in
developing country-Vietnam. A quantitative pilot survey followed to refine the
measures.The scales were assessed via Cronbach’s alpha and exploratory factor analysis
(principal components with varimax rotation).
4.2.1. Reliability assessment
Cronbach Alpha Results:
The scales were assessed via Cronbach alpha .Reliability assessment resulted in the
deletion of one item measuring merchandising (MER4) and one item measuring value
shopping motivation (VAL3) , due to its low item-total correlation of 0.30 (Nunnally and
Bernstein, 1994).
EFA Results for Individual Scales:
For further assessment, exploratory factor analysis for each scale was used. The
criteria used to delete an item were (1) whether the items was of a scale with low –total
variance extracted of less than 50%, and (2) whether the item had either item-total
correlation or factor loadings of below 0.35.This is because of the sample size of this study
31. 23
was 226, which is close to 250, so the factor loadings of above 0.35 were considered
significant for interpretative purposes (Hair et al, 2010)
The results indicate that, of 12 scales, 4 scales were immediately acceptable and 8
scales needed some refinement. The scales that had no modification are shown in Appendix
1 They were after services (3 items), social shopping motivation (4 items), idea shopping
motivation 4 items) and satisfaction (3 items).Based on the criterion of an eigenvalue of
more than 1, the results showed that only one factor was extracted for each of these scales.
The variance is explained by the extracted factor ranged from 65.49% to 73.33% and the
factor loadings were all above the threshold of 0.50. These results indicated that all of the
four scales listed above were, at the preliminary stage, unidimensional.
The remaining eight scales that needed some refinement are shown in Appendix 2.
Before refinement, all the scales had the total variance extracted higher than 50%, from
52.22% to 64.85%. However, some items had the low factor loading and low item-total
correction. Therefore, 2 items was further deleted based on the criterion above. In particular,
it including the items measuring store atmosphere (SAT3), employee services (EMS4), and
adventure shopping motivation (ADV1). The loadings for other items (43 items) were
acceptable, and they were used for the common factor analysis.
EFA Results for all Scales:
For initial EFA analysis for 43 items, 11 factors were extracted that together
explained 68.77% of the total variance. However, seven items, ROL4, LOY5, SAF1, SAF3,
SAT3, GRA1, and EMS1, loaded highly on more than one factor or has low factor loading.
Thus, they were eliminated one by one, and the remaining items were reanalyzed by the
EFA procedure.
The EFA results for the remaining 36 items revealed that they were loaded on 10
factors with total variance explained of 69.72%. To overcome the issue of appropriateness,
Barlett’s test of sphericity and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measures were examined. These
measures showed that the degree of inter-correlations among the items were suitable for the
EFA (KMO= 0.822, p= 0.000). Moreover, no item loaded highly on more than one factor.
All items had factor loading above the threshold of 0.5. However, there are some items
32. 24
loaded highly on a factor other than their designate factors representing their latent
constructs. By running EFA, there are totally 10 factors extracted compared to 12 construct
at the beginning coupled with some items was eliminated. Thus it is needed to rename the
constructs as follows:
1. Store Atmosphere: SAT1,SAT2, SAT4, EMS2
2. Store Loyalty: LOY1, LOY 2, LOY 3, LOY4, SAF3
3. Idea Shopping Motivation: IDE 1, IDE2, IDE3, IDE4
4. Gratification shopping motivation: ADV2, ADV3, ADV4, GRA2, GRA3
5. Social shopping motivation: SOC1, SOC2, SOC3, SO3
6. After Services: AFS1, AFS2, AFS3
7. Value Shopping Motivation: VAL1,VAL2, VAL4
8. Merchandising: MER1, MER2, MER3
9. Role Shopping Motivation: ROL1, ROL2, ROL3
10.Employee Services: EMS3, EMS5
All those factors were further assessed in the next stage – Conformation Factor
Analysis (CFA) to validating the measurement.
A two-step approach in structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed to
analyze the data (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was
used to validate the measures and SEM was used to test the theoretical model.
The scales were assessed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), before structural
equation modeling was used to test the theoretical model and hypotheses. The screening
process shows that the data exhibited slight deviations from normality.
Nonetheless, all univariate kurtoses were non-significant and all skewness values
were within the range of (-1, 1). Therefore, maximum likelihood estimation was used
(Muthen and Kaplan, 1985).
4.2.2. Measurement Validation (CFA)
33. 25
The first-order constructs in the model were store loyalty. The second-order
constructs were store attributes and hedonic shopping motivation. Store attributes consisted
of three components: store atmosphere, employee services, after services and
merchandising. Hedonic shopping motivation had five components: gratification shopping
motivation, value shopping motivation, role shopping motivation, social shopping
motivation and idea shopping motivation. Those two second –order construct were
assessment through CFA technique separately.
Store Attributes Scales
CFA results indicate that two second-order constructs were a good fit to the data
(χ2
(47) =2.248 (p= 0.000); IFI = 0.943; CFI = 0.942; GFI=0.801; RMSEA=0.074. Most of the
component achieved unidimensionality excluding the SAT due to it had correlation between
standard errors. In addition, the correlations between the components of each construct,
together with their standard errors, indicate that they were significantly less than unity.
These findings support within-construct discriminant validity (Steenkamp and van Trijp,
1991).
On the other hand, all the factor loadings were above 0.6 and achieved the significant
level (p=0.000).Thus, it can be concluded that the components of store attributes achieved
convergent validity.
Hedonic shopping motivation scales
CFA results indicate that two second-order constructs were a good fit to the data
(χ2
(140) =2.066 (p= 0.000); IFI = 0.872; CFI = 0.919; GFI=0.883; RMSEA=0.069. Most of
the component achieved unidimensionality excluding the IDE and SOC due to they had
correlation between standard errors. In addition, the correlations between the components of
each construct, together with their standard errors, indicate that they were significantly less
than unity. These findings support within-construct discriminant validity (Steenkamp and
van Trijp, 1991).On the other hand, all the factor loadings were above 0.6 and achieved the
significant level (p<0.05).Thus, it can be concluded that the components of store attributes
achieved convergent validity
35. 27
Figure 4 : The CFA result of Hedonic Shopping Motivation
36. 28
Store Loyalty Scale
Store loyalty categorized as an unidimensional scales so that it were assessed through
saturated model to give conclusion on its convergent validity
The saturated model
The saturated model (the model in which LOY and the components of STA and HSM were
freely correlated with each other) received a good fit to the data: χ2
(479) =1.967 (p= 0.000);
IFI = 0.872; CFI = 0.869; GFI=0.801; RMSEA=0.043. It is also noted that two items in the
LOY scale were deleted due to their low factor loadings (<0.60). The remaining items scales
were acceptable with factor loading higher than 0.60.Thus, the data supporting that LOY
scale achieve the convergent validity.
Table 2 presents the standardized factor loadings, composite reliability, and average
variance extracted of the scale items (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
The final measurement model
The final measurement model also achieved a good fit to the data. (χ2
(515) =2.134 (p=
0.000); IFI = 0.853; CFI = 0.851; GFI=0.774; RMSEA=0.068). The factor loadings of all
items were significant and substantial (>0.5; p=0.000), and most of average variances
extracted were high (>0.50), excluding that of ROL and GRA. However, they are near to 0.5
(0.465 & 0.468). In addition, the composite reliability of all scales was acceptable (>0.63).
These findings indicate that all scales measuring the first-order constructs and the
components of the second-order constructs were unidimensional (Fornell and Larcker,
1981) and within-method convergent validity was achieved (Steenkamp and van Trijp,
1991). Finally, the correlations between constructs, together with their standard errors,
indicate that they were significantly less than unity. Again, these findings confirmed the
within-construct discriminant validity.
Tải bản FULL (69 trang): https://bit.ly/3r7rhDA
Dự phòng: fb.com/TaiHo123doc.net
37. 29
Table 2: Factor loadings, Composite reliability and Average variance extracted
Scale items Standardized loadings
Store Attributes (STA)
Store Atmospheres (SAT): composite reliability c)= 0.803; average
variance extracted vc) = 0.506
The layout makes it easy to get around (SAT1) 0.704
Easy to find what I’m looking for in the store (SAT2) 0.728
The merchandise display at the store is very good (SAT4) 0.631
Employees are always willing to respond to my request promptly (EMS2) 0.775
After Services (AFS): c )= 0.817; vc) = 0.600
The store has appropriate return policy and easy to return harmer products
(AFS1)
0.858
The store’s refund policy is appropriate (AFS2) 0.746
The store offers excellent and easy exchange services for goods I purchased
(AFS3)
0.713
Employee Services (EMS): c)= 0.627; vc) = 0.458
Employees are always willing to respond to my request promptly (EMS3) 0.621
I can trust employees at the store (EMS5) 0.728
Merchandising (MER): c)= 0.781; vc) = 0.547
The store sells a lot of name brands (MER1) 0.861
This store sells a variety of products from many different manufacturers
(MER2)
0.724
The store carries many store brands (MER3) 0.614
Hedonic shopping motivation (HSM)
Idea shopping (IDE): c)= 0.873; vc) = 0.635
I go shopping to keep up with the trends (IDE1) 0.851
I go shopping to keep up with the new fashions (IDE2) 0.85
I go shopping to see what new products are available 0.802
I go shopping to experience new things (IDE3)
0.67
Gratification shopping (GRA): c)= 0.812; vc) = 0.468
I find shopping stimulating (ADV2) 0.829
Shopping is a thrill to me (ADV3) 0.735
Shopping makes me feel I am in my own universe (ADV4) 0.609
To me, shopping is a way to relieve stress (GRA2) 0.612
I go shopping when I want to treat myself to something special (GRA3) 0.604
Social shopping (IDE): c)= 0.838; vc) = 0.565
I go shopping with my friends or family to socialize (SOC1) 0.782
I enjoy socializing with others when I shop (SOC2) 0.79
To me, shopping with friends or family is a social occasion (SOC3) 0.743
Tải bản FULL (69 trang): https://bit.ly/3r7rhDA
Dự phòng: fb.com/TaiHo123doc.net
38. 30
Table 3: Correlations among HSM, SAT and LOY
Correlation Estimate S.E. C.R. P
STORE ATTRIBUTES <->
HEDONIC
MOTIVATION
0.355 0.073 4.833 ***
STORE LOYALTY <-> STORE ATTRIBUTES 0.423 0.089 4.752 ***
STORE LOYALTY <->
HEDONIC
MOTIVATION
0.442 0.088 5.018 ***
4.3. Model and Hypotheses Modification
The results of the scales assessment, EFA and CFA, showed that, Store Loyalty and
Satisfaction are theoretically discriminant constructs, but they are practically a
unidimensional constructs. Based on it, the model was adjusted with the following
hypotheses:
Shopping with others is a bonding experience (SOC4) 0.686
Value shopping (VAL): c)= 0.805; vc) = 0.581
For the most part, I go shopping when there are sales (VAL1) 0.777
I enjoy looking for discounts when I shop (VAL2) 0.844
I go shopping to take advantage of sales (VAL4) 0.654
Role shopping (ROL): c)= 0.723; vc) = 0.465
I like shopping for others because when they feel good I feel good (ROL1) 0.642
I feel good when I buy things for the special people in my life (ROL2) 0.704
I enjoy shopping for my friends and family (ROL3) 0.699
Store Loyalty (LOY): (c)= 0.783; (vc) = 0.546
My choice to purchase at this store was a wise one (SAF2) 0.853
I consider myself to be loyal to this store (LOY1) 0.602
I am going to do my shopping in this store in the next few weeks (LOY2) 0.654
Shopping in this store is my first choice (LOY3) Deleted item
I will go shopping in this store in future (LOY4) Deleted item
6673719
