1. The Influence of Pre-Existing Negative
Affect on Store Purchase Intentions
Presenter ： Radium Cheng
Instructor ： Dr. Teresa Hsu

2. Citation
 Mano, H. (1999). The Influence of Pre-Existing
Negative Affect on Store Purchase Intentions.
Journal of Retailing, 75(2), 149-172.
2

3. Contents
I Introduction
II Literature Review
III Methodology
IV Results
V Discussion
VI Limitation
VII Reflection
3

4. Introduction
 Background
People shop not only because they need to buy but also because they
may enjoy shopping.
Managers have planned their store’s atmospheric impact using
environment and social elements to improve customer’s emotions.
Mood improvements lead to a host of desired behavior, including
higher wiliness to purchase, longer stays, or enhanced satisfaction.
4

5. Introduction
 The Purpose of Study
Negative Affect
Boredom Distress
Purchase
Intention
5

6. Introduction
 Research Questions
1. Do we seek shopping in order to improve our moods?
2. Can pre-existing emotions influence purchase intentions?
3. Can negative pre-existing emotions influence these intentions?
4. Are we more likely to want to shop if we are in a negative
emotional state? (say, bored, sad, or distressed)
6

7. Literature Review
 A consumer entering an environment bored or
upset is likely to respond differently than a relaxed
or elated consumer.
(Gardner & Bitner, 1985; 1992)
7

8. Literature Review
 This study relies on Lazarus’ (1991) model of goal
directed emotion-focused and problem-focused
coping.
Individual
Individual Environment
Environment
Cognitive Coping
Process Process
Psychological Stress
Psychological Stress
8

9. Literature Review
 Hypotheses
 H1: Higher distress will increase purchase intentions.
 H2: More bored subjects will have higher purchase
intentions in favorable environments but lower
purchase intentions in unfavorable environments.
9

10. Literature Review
 Hypotheses
 H3: Boredom will accentuate the effects of involvement
and quality of experience on purchase intentions.
 H4: Contemplating shopping in a good environment will
improve emotions while contemplating shopping in
a bad environment will worsen them.
10

11. Methodology
 Participant
 151 undergraduates
 Procedure
Pre-task affect measurement
An experimentally manipulated
shopping scenario
Elicitation of the dependent variable
Post-task affect measurement
11

12. Methodology
 Statistical Analyses
Hypothesis
1
Hypothesis An Analysis of
Variance Purchase
2 Intention
Hypothesis
3
12

13. Methodology
 Statistical Analyses
Measure
The two Affect scales
13

14. Methodology
 Table 1
Key Multi-item Measure Statistics
Scale First Factor Explained First Factor Lowest Loading Alpha
Variance (%)
Boredom 57 .58 .84
Distress-NA 46 .50 .87
Pleasantness 57 .71 .78
Calmness 54 .68 .81
Elation-PA 46 .64 .86
Purchase Intentions 83 .85 .94
Involvement 68 .74 .89
14

15. Methodology
 Affect
 Participants indicated on 5-point items.
(Based on Mano, 1991)
15

16. Methodology
 Purchase Intentions
 The scale was measured with 5 seven-point items.
(Following Swinyard, 1993)
16

17. Methodology
 Involvement (Manipulation check)
 Involvement with the shopping experience was assessed
with semantic-differential Value scale.
(Mano and Oliver, 1993)
Relevant Important Valuable
Of concern to
Matter to me Significant
me
17

18. Results
 Table 2
Simple Correlation Coefficients between Boredom and Purchase
Intentions for Each of the 4 Experimental Cells
Low Involvement High Involvement Total
Bad Experience -.16 -.29b -.21a
Good Experience .28b .54d .38c
 a
coefficient significant at p < .10; b coefficient significant at p < .05; c coefficient
significant at p < .0005; d coefficient significant at p < .0001
18

19. Results
 Figure 2
Low Involvement High Involvement
Purchase Intentions
Purchase Intentions
Experience Quality Experience Quality
Less Bore More Bored
19

20. Results
 Table 4
Changes in Pleasantness and Calmness from Pre-Task to Post-Task for
the Bad and Good Shopping Experiences
Experience Pre-Task Post-Task
Pleasantness Bad 2.65 2.27b
Good 2.70 2.65
Calmness Bad 3.17 2.83a
Good 3.16 3.06
a difference between pre- and post-task significant at p < .001; b difference between
pre- and post-task significant at p < .0001
20

21. Discussion
Affect Shaping Go shopping
Wiliness Store behavior
21

22. Discussion
 Emotions are complex human responses and the
boarder implications of these findings await further
study.
22

23. Limitation
 Naturally-occurring affect is it may confound
emotional or motivational tendencies or other
personal characteristics that could enhance the
inclination to experience positive or negative
hedonic tone.
23

24. Limitation
 A second criticism is the artificiality of the
scenarios which could potentially induce
demand characteristics.
24

25. Reflection
 It is necessary in the lab and the store to advance
our understanding of the joint consequences of
affect, environment, and individual motivations
and traits on marketplace behaviors.
25

26. 26