UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Alternative approaches to the analysis of consumer spatial behavior Taylor, Stuart Martin 1974

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1974_A1 T39.pdf [ 11.48MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0100000.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0100000-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0100000-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0100000-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0100000-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0100000-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0100000-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0100000-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0100000.ris

Full Text

ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO THE ANALYSIS OF CONSUMER SPATIAL BEHAVIOUR  by STUART MARTIN TAYLOR 6.A. M.A.  University of B r i s t o l ,  196,9 -  U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1972  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL.FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY  i n t h e Department of Geography  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as conforming t o the r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA  In  presenting  this  an a d v a n c e d  degree  the  shall  I  Library  further  for  scholarly  by h i s of  agree  this  thesis  in p a r t i a l  fulfilment  of  at  University  of  Columbia,  the  make  it  that permission  p u r p o s e s may  representatives. thesis  freely  for  available  financial  is  gain  of  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h V a n c o u v e r 8, C a n a d a  Date  /6<-  by  the  Columbia  shall  not  requirements  reference copying of  I  agree  and  copying or  be a l l o w e d  for  that  study.  this  thesis  Head o f my D e p a r t m e n t  understood that  written permission.  Department  for  for extensive  be g r a n t e d  It  British  the  or  publication  without  my  ABSTRACT  Recent behaviour the  studies  suggested  perceptions,  seen  as p o t e n t i a l  and measurement  to f u n c t i o n  as c e n t r a l  components  is  placed  the development  of  d i s p o s i t i o n a l scales  This isting model  research  to p r e d i c t  retail  which  data  study  seeks  the i d e n t i which a r e  i n the d e c i s i o n Particular  emphasis  have ap-  study.  makes a f u r t h e r  contribution  the a b i l i t y  choices with  that  to t h e ex-  of a d i s p o s i t i o n a l of t r a d i t i o n a l  on measures o f t h e l o c a t i o n -  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e consumer.  responses  and a f a c t o r  identified five  choices with  through  i t i s hoped m i g h t  b e h a v i o u r models b a s e d  Interview  This  o f a r e l i a b l e and v a l i d s e t  this single  retail  and b i o g r a p h i c a l  naire  to behaviour.  l i t e r a t u r e by c o m p a r i n g  shopping al  beyond  and v a l u e s .  have  including  o f consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s  leading  plicability  variables  approaches  making p r o c e s s upon  attributes  independent  these d i s p a r a t e  consumer s p a t i a l  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  of psychological  beliefs, attitudes  synthesise  fication  to e x p l a i n  i n terms o f the p s y c h o l o g i c a l  consumer. A v a r i e t y  been  to  have s o u g h t  analysis  major d i s p o s i t i o n s  respect  were l a b e l l e d status-orientation,  to c l o t h i n g  of  question-  underlying  purchases.  These  convenience-orientation.  fashion-orientation, A  set  of  sitions  and  The  the  of  information and  to r e t a i l  from  respondent's  s e r i e s of  questionnaire biographical  and  between r e t a i l the  basis  of  patronized results  each of  suggest  that  two-stage  decision  involving  the  shopping  areas  ations;  the  lection  of  areas with ing the store.  the  of  of  subsequently  analyses the  store  The  from data  Location  determined  were p e r f o r m e d  The  and  retail  choices  of  one  stage,  a store within  the  at one  trips may  basis  shopping  the  stage  on  centre  for clothing.  be  the  of  The  outcome of  at  a macro  a l t e r n a t i v e s and  locational  scale  a  scale  choice  the  se-  shopping  fundamental the  consider-  involving  preselected  d i s p o s i t i o n a l factors being  ii  discriminators  more f e a s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e  a micro of  the  g r o u p s were d e f i n e d  first  or  as  t y p e of  shopping  the  on  e f f i c a c y of l o c a t i o n a l ,  four  process:  of  drawn  d i s p o s i t i o n s , shop-  characteristics.  groups.  p r i m a r i l y on  evaluation  questionnaire  households  respondent's  compare  isolation  second  a  address.  patronage type  dispo-  established  municipalities.  f a c i l i t i e s was  to  these  that  comprised  dispositional variables  the  on  adjacent  discriminant  data  to ensure  phase  biographical  relative  to measure  random sample  on  and q u a l i t y - o r i e n t a t i o n .  met.  collection  V a n c o u v e r and  behaviour  A  conducted  s t a n d a r d s were  a stratified  C i t y of  the  developed  a p r e t e s t was  major data  provided ping  orientation  L i k e r t s c a l e s was  psychometric  survey  price  of  in directa  preferred  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  E s p e c i a l thanks a r e due t o my who  has done so much t o e x p e d i t e my  g r a t e f u l t o the o t h e r members o f my  s u p e r v i s o r , Dr. W a l t e r g r a d u a t e programme. committee  Hardwick, I am  also  - Drs. C o l l i n s , Forbes,  H a r r i s and Ley - f o r t h e i r w i l l i n g n e s s t o devote t h e i r time and energy t o r e v i e w i n g t h i s s t u d y . I am a l s o g r a t e f u l t o the group o f geography s t u d e n t s who My  undergraduate  were w i l l i n g t o assume the u n e n v i a b l e r o l e o f i n t e r v i e w e r s .  thanks a l s o go t o the anonymous respondents whose w i l l i n g n e s s t o  complete q u e s t i o n n a i r e s never c e a s e s t o amaze I  me.  thank M i s s Raymonde T h i b e a u l t f o r t y p i n g the m a n u s c r i p t i n  such an exemplary Finally,  manner.  I g r a t e f u l l y acknowledge the f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t I have  r e c e i v e d as a d o c t o r a l f e l l o w from The Canada C o u n c i l over the p a s t two y e a r s .  iii  TABLE OF CONTENTS  Page ABSTRACT  i  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  i i i  TABLE OF CONTENTS  iv  LIST OF FIGURES  viii  LIST OF TABLES  ix  CHAPTER  Page INTRODUCTION  1  1  Major Objectives of the Study The Broader Context o f the Study Outline of Chapters  2 4 6  APPROACHES TO THE ANALYSIS OF CONSUMER SPATIAL BEHAVIOUR  8  A.  INTRODUCTION  8  B.  THE ARRAY OF CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR MODELS  9  (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii)  2  '  Comprehensive Models U t i l i t y Models S o c i a l Class and Life-Cycle Models Image Models Perceptual Preference Models Learning Models Attitude and Value Models  1Q 13 17 20, 27 31 34  C.  SYNTHESIS AND THE CONTEXT OF THE PRESENT STUDY  45  D.  SUMMARY  48  RESEARCH DESIGN  49  A.  INTRODUCTION  49  B.  RESEARCH PURPOSES  49  iv  Page  CHAPTER 2  C.  RESEARCH DESIGN  (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) D. 3  L i k e r t Scales The Assessment o f R e l i a b i l i t y The Assessment o f V a l i d i t y Research Design Components  SUMMARY  5  1  54 56 63 65  THE IDENTIFICATION AND MEASUREMENT OF CONSUMER DISPOSITIONS  67  A.  INTRODUCTION  67  B.  CONSTRUCT IDENTIFICATION  67  C.  THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SET OF LIKERT SCALES  72  (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) D. 4  51  G e n e r a t i o n o f an Item P o o l P r e t e s t i n g and Item A n a l y s i s Construct V a l i d i t i e s Predictive Validities  REVISED SCALES  72 80 8  5  87 90  QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN, SAMPLE DESIGN AND DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES A.  INTRODUCTION  B.  QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN  (i)  The Measurement o f B e h a v i o u r  92  1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.  94 94 95 95 96 96 96 96 96  8.  9. (ii) (iii)  91  Name o f s t o r e p a t r o n i z e d Type o f s t o r e p a t r o n i z e d Store l o c a t i o n Trip origin Location of t r i p o r i g i n Distance estimate T r a v e l mode T r i p purpose P a s t purchases  B i o g r a p h i c a l Measures G e n e r a l Design C o n s i d e r a t i o n s  V  97 97  CHAPTER 4  Page C.  SAMPLE DESIGN  (i) (ii) (iii)  5  9  Population D e f i n i t i o n S t r a t i f i c a t i o n by A r e a Sample S e l e c t i o n  8  ^8 99 ^9  D.  INTERVIEWER TRAINING  1  0  3  E.  DATA RETURNS AND CODING PROCEDURES  1  0  3  F.  SUMMARY  105  DATA ANALYSIS  106  A.  INTRODUCTION  106  B.  SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS, INTERVIEWER BIAS AND SCALE STATISTICS  107  (i) (ii) (iii)  S p a t i a l D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Respondents Biographical Characteristics I n t e r v i e w e r C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and Response B i a s  107 110 110  C.  LIKERT SCALE RELIABILITIES AND VALIDITIES  112  D.  SHOPPING BEHAVIOUR:  (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) E.  S t o r e and Shopping C e n t r e Patronage Trip Origin T r a v e l Mode T r i p Purpose Past Purchases Conclusion  ANALYSIS OF SHOPPING BEHAVIOUR  (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii)  F.  DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS  The A n a l y t i c a l Framework S t a t i s t i c a l Procedures A n a l y s e s o f S t o r e and Shopping C e n t r e l Patronage A n a l y s i s o f Department S t o r e Patronage . A n a l y s i s o f S p e c i f i c Shopping C e n t r e Patronage Regression Analysis o f Distance T r a v e l l e d t o Shop Male-Female D i f f e r e n c e s i n Shopping Behaviour and D i s p o s i t i o n s  CONCLUSION  H  4  114 H II 125 126 129 8  9  129 129 134 ^ 3  177 182 185 190  194  vi  CHAPTER 6  Page SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS  196  Summary Consumer D i s p o s i t i o n s and S p a t i a l B e h a v i o u r I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r Market R e s e a r c h L i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e P r e s e n t Study and P r o p o s a l s f o r F u t u r e Research  BIBLIOGRAPHY  196 199 200 201  204  APPENDIX A:  CONSUMER SHOPPING SURVEY  213  APPENDIX B:  LETTER INTRODUCING THE SURVEY  224  APPENDIX C:  INTERVIEWER'S MANUAL  226  APPENDIX D:  INTERVIEWER'S ASSIGNMENT SHEET  230  vii  LIST OF FIGURES  FIGURE 1.1  A Comprehensive Model o f Consumer B e h a v i o u r  1.2  A Dispositional  2.1  Flow Diagram o f the R e s e a r c h Design  4.1  .  Model o f Consumer S p a t i a l B e h a v i o u r  The S p a t i a l D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Commercial F l o o r s p a c e i n G r e a t e r Vancouver  4.2  T r a v e l Time t o Downtown Vancouver  5.1  Sample and P o p u l a t i o n D i s t r i b u t i o n s District  5.2  S p a t i a l D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Respondents and S e l e c t e d R e t a i l Locations  5.3  Biographical Characteristics  5.4  T r i p D i s t r i b u t i o n by S t o r e  5.5  T r i p D i s t r i b u t i o n by Shopping C e n t r e  5.6  T r i p D i s t r i b u t i o n by  5.7  T r i p D i s t r i b u t i o n by T r a v e l Mode  5.8  T r i p D i s t r i b u t i o n by T r i p Purpose  5.9  T r i p D i s t r i b u t i o n by P a s t P u r c h a s e s  5.10  A Diagramatic Representation o f the A n a l y t i c a l Framework  by E l e c t o r a l  o f the Sample  Type  Origin  viii  LIST OF TABLES  TABLE  Page  1.1  A Suggested C l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f S t o r e Image Components  22  1.2  The H y p o t h e s i s e d S t r u c t u r e o f Shopping C e n t r e Cognitions  24  3.1  Item-Scale C o r r e l a t i o n s  75  3.2  Pretest  Measures  of Scale R e l i a b i l i t i e s  84  3.3  Pretest  Measures  of Scale V a l i d i t i e s  86  3.4  Group Means and F S t a t i s t i c s  88  3.5  Group C l a s s i f i c a t i o n M a t r i x  89  5.1  F i n a l Scale R e l i a b i l i t y  5.2  D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Shopping T r i p s by S t o r e Type and Shopping C e n t r e  117  5.3  D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Shopping T r i p s by T r i p O r i g i n S t o r e Type  and  120  5.4  D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Shopping T r i p s by T r i p O r i g i n Shopping C e n t r e  and  121  5.5  D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Shopping T r i p s by T r a v e l S t o r e Type  Mode and  123  5.6  D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Shopping T r i p s by T r a v e l Shopping C e n t r e  Mode and  124  5.7  D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Shopping T r i p s by T r i p Purpose and S t o r e Type  127  5.8  D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Shopping T r i p s by T r i p Purpose and Shopping C e n t r e  128  5.9  D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Shopping T r i p s b y P a s t P u r c h a s e s and S t o r e Types  130  5.10  D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Shopping T r i p s by P a s t P u r c h a s e s and Shopping C e n t r e  131  5.11  Analysis  140  1:  and V a l i d i t y C o e f f i c i e n t s  Summary o f R e s u l t s  ix  113  TABLE  Page  5.12  A n a l y s i s 2:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  143  5.13  A n a l y s i s 3:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  145  5.14  A n a l y s i s 4:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  147  5.15  A n a l y s i s ' 5:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  149  5.16  A n a l y s i s 6:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  151  5.17  A n a l y s i s 7:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  153  5.18  A n a l y s i s 8:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  155  5.19  A n a l y s i s 9:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  157  5.20  A n a l y s i s 10:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  159  5.21  A n a l y s i s 11:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  162  5.22  A n a l y s i s 12:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  164  5.23  A n a l y s i s 13:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  166  5.24  A n a l y s i s 14:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  168  5.25  A n a l y s i s 15:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  170  5.26  A n a l y s i s 16:  Summary o f R e s u l t s  172  5.27  Average P e r c e n t a g e o f Cases C o r r e c t l y A s s i g n e d S t o r e Patronage Groups  to  175  5.28  Average P e r c e n t a g e o f Cases C o r r e c t l y A s s i g n e d Shopping C e n t r e Patronage Groups  to  176  5.29  A n a l y s i s o f Department S t o r e Patronage: Results  5.30  A n a l y s i s o f Downtown Department S t o r e P a t r o n a g e  181  5.31  A n a l y s i s o f Shopping C e n t r e Patronage  183  5.32  Regression  187  E q u a t i o n s on D i s t a n c e  x  Summary o f  T r a v e l l e d t o Shop  179  Page  TABLE 5.33  D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Shopping T r i p s by Sex and S t o r e Type  192  5.34  D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Shopping T r i p s by Sex and Shopping C e n t r e  192  5.35  Male-Female Group Means on D i s p o s i t i o n a l and F S t a t i s t i c s  xi  Scales  193  INTRODUCTION  The able  a n a l y s i s o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r has  research  time v a r i o u s was  placed  i n t e r e s t w i t h i n b o t h geography and approaches have e v o l v e d .  t i o n has  In geography, i n i t i a l  within  assumed r a t h e r than examined i n d e t a i l . overly  simplistic  i n such models w i t h the r e s u l t t h a t e x p l i c i t  been p a i d t o the  gate l e v e l .  over  emphasis  activity  been a subsequent r e a c t i o n t o the b r o a d and  assumptions i n h e r e n t  consider-  m a r k e t i n g , and  upon s p a t i a l e q u i l i b r i u m models o f r e t a i l  which consumer b e h a v i o u r was There has  attracted  a n a l y s i s o f shopping p a t t e r n s  In t h i s context,  been p r i n c i p a l l y employed:  two  at a  atten-  disaggre-  s e t s o f independent v a r i a b l e s have  namely, measures of the demographic  s o c i o - e c o n o m i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the consumer; and, measures o f the consumer's c o g n i t i o n o f the  retail  and  more r e c e n t l y ,  environment i n terms  o f a range o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l v a r i a b l e s i n c l u d i n g images, b e l i e f s  and  attitudes. The ally  study o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r i n . m a r k e t i n g has  emphasized the development o f h e u r i s t i c d e v i c e s  tradition-  t o meet the  imme-  d i a t e demands o f the b u s i n e s s w o r l d f o r r e l a t i v e l y s i m p l e methods f o r p r e d i c t i n g p o t e n t i a l patronage at given extent,  the g r a v i t y model and  o p e r a t i o n a l procedures. teristic  To  a large basic  In p a r t as a r e a c t i o n to the pragmatism a t t e n t i o n has  been p a i d i n  a s p e c t s of consumer p s y c h o l o g y i n s e e k i n g  the p r o c e s s which antecedes b e h a v i o u r . i n the  location.  i t s d e r i v a t i v e s have been the  of t h i s t r a d i t i o n , increased  years to various  retail  recent  to understand  T h i s development has  resulted  c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a number o f models o f consumer b e h a v i o u r  - 1 -  charac-  ranging  2.  in  complexity  from those which are p u r p o t e d l y  comprehensive t o o t h e r s  which a r e p a r t i a l f o c u s s i n g upon s e l e c t e d components o f the more g e n e r a l models. P r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h t h e r e f o r e demonstrates v a r i o u s approaches t o t h e s e are d e s c r i b e d  the  a n a l y s i s o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r  and  and  c a t e g o r i z e d i n the f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r .  Three major approaches emerge  based upon: a.  the l o c a t i o n o f the consumer r e l a t i v e t o r e t a i l t i e s of varying s i z e  b.  the demographic and the consumer  c.  (or the locational socio-economic  (or the biographical  S i n c e the f i r s t  approach).  characteristics  of  approach).  the consumer's c o g n i t i o n o f the r e t a i l s e q u e n t l y termed the dispositional  facili-  environment  (sub-  approach).  two have been f r e q u e n t l y d i s c u s s e d i n p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s ,  g r e a t e r emphasis i s p l a c e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e r e v i e w upon examining v a r i o u s c o g n i t i v e models o f consumer  behaviour.  Major O b j e c t i v e s o f the Study  In l i g h t o f the e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e , the r e s e a r c h d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s t h e s i s has  two  major o b j e c t i v e s .  The  first  a c o g n i t i v e model o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r . at  the c o n c l u s i o n o f Chapter  a t t i t u d e s and v a l u e s . his  i s to develop  and  test  The model p r e s e n t e d  1 draws upon p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s o f p e r s o n a l  I t i s argued t h a t a consumer's b e h a v i o u r  d i s p o s i t i o n s towards t h e r e t a i l  environment.  reflects  Such d i s p o s i t i o n s  are  seen t o summarize the v a l u e s the consumer seeks t o s a t i s f y by h i s behaviour being linked to s p e c i f i c r e t a i l  a l t e r n a t i v e s through the  formation  3.  of  attitudes. In o r d e r t o o p e r a t i o n a l i z e the model i t was  s a l i e n t consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s and measure them.  The  necessary to i d e n t i f y  to develop a research  instrument  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s was  a s e r i e s of unstructured  interviews.  With r e g a r d  t o the  to  b a s e d upon  development  of  a measuring i n s t r u m e n t , r e l a t e d work i n e n v i r o n m e n t a l p s y c h o l o g y i n d i c a t e s the p o t e n t i a l u s e f u l n e s s a preliminary a s s e s s the  of L i k e r t s c a l i n g .  s e t o f s c a l e s was  reliability  and  d e v e l o p e d and  a p r e t e s t conducted  s e t o f s c a l e s was  component o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e  c o l l e c t i o n phase.  The  a l , biographical behaviour.  To  and  t o compare the  of  locational variables.  e f f i c a c y of l o c a t i o n of  consumer were i n c l u d e d The  a l s o determined t o p e r m i t the  In the  shopping  in  ability  and the  shopping  statisti-  o f the d i f f e r e n t  models to d i s c r i m i n a t e between r e t a i l p a t r o n a g e groups.  trip  measurement  a n a l y s i s phase, m u l t i v a r i a t e  c a l p r o c e d u r e s were employed t o compare the  These  s p a t i a l behaviour.  i n a d d i t i o n t o the L i k e r t s c a l e s .  o r i g i n o f each respondent was  the  assessing  q u e s t i o n s p e r t a i n i n g t o the demographic  s o c i o - e c o n o m i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the f i n a l questionnaire  for  d i s p o s i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s as p r e d i c t o r s  t h i s end,  On  determined.  d a t a o b t a i n e d s e r v e d as the b a s i s  second major o b j e c t i v e was  to  used i n the major d a t a  the r e l a t i o n s h i p between consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s and The  t h i s precedent,  v a l i d i t y o f the p r o p o s e d i n s t r u m e n t .  b a s i s o f the p r e t e s t r e s u l t s a f i n a l s c a l e s formed one  Following  4.  The Broader C o n t e x t o f the  Study  In a b r o a d e r c o n t e x t , the p r e s e n t study r e f l e c t s the c u r r e n t o r i e n t a t i o n t o t h e a n a l y s i s o f human s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r . sometimes termed  This o r i e n t a t i o n ,  ' c o g n i t i v e b e h a v i o u r a l i s m ' , emphasizes the  exploration  and u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s as a n e c e s s a r y and  perhaps  s u f f i c i e n t c o n d i t i o n f o r the e x p l a n a t i o n o f man's movements between d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s i n space.  To t h i s end,  t h e r e i s a b u r g e o n i n g volume o f  c o n c e p t u a l and e m p i r i c a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s from geographers,  psychologists,  p l a n n e r s and o t h e r s . To date however the e f f o r t s o f c o g n i t i v e b e h a v i o u r a l i s t s have tended t o be l o n g on the c o g n i t i v e and s h o r t on the b e h a v i o u r a l component. There are p r o b a b l y two  r e l a t e d reasons f o r t h i s .  l o g i c a l sequence whereby t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n  Firstly,  there i s a  and measurement o f p r o c e s s  v a r i a b l e s precedes the explanation o f c a u s a l l y r e l a t e d behaviour. i s p r o b a b l e t h a t t h i s i n i t i a l phase w i l l  It  c o n t i n u e f o r some time b e f o r e  the c o m p l e x i t i e s o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o g n i t i o n and the n a t u r e o f t h e c o g n i t i o n - b e h a v i o u r l i n k are r e a s o n a b l y w e l l understood.  Secondly, ques-  t i o n s concerning a person's  are  i n themselves  c o g n i t i o n o f h i s environment  and i t can be argued t h a t t h e i r t r e a t m e n t i s an  intriguing important  f a c e t o f man-environment r e s e a r c h i r r e s p e c t i v e o f whether the b e h a v i o u r a l i m p l i c a t i o n s are s p e c i f i e d . I t seems however t h a t the p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r c l a r i f y i n g the b e h a v i o u r l i n k a r e perhaps  greater w i t h respect to c e r t a i n aspects of  human s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r than o t h e r s . shopping b e h a v i o u r i s one  cognition-  F o r v a r i o u s r e a s o n s i t seems t h a t  such a s p e c t .  5.  One r e a s o n f o r t h i s i s t h a t the study o f r e t a i l  s t r u c t u r e and  a s s o c i a t e d consumer movements has been a t o p i c t o which geographers paid considerable attention.  have  A l t h o u g h the e x p l i c i t r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e  p o t e n t i a l s i g n i f i c a n c e o f c o g n i t i v e v a r i a b l e s i n t h i s research area i s of recent o r i g i n ,  the l e g a c y o f p a s t s t u d i e s i s an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f some  i m p o r t a n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r . -Secondly, c o n s i d e r a b l e r e s e a r c h e f f o r t has been expended by b o t h marketers shoppers  and consumer p s y c h o l o g i s t s t o i d e n t i f y the f a c t o r s which l e a d t o s e l e c t one s t o r e o r shopping c e n t r e r a t h e r than  The importance  another.  o f c o g n i t i v e v a r i a b l e s i n t h i s c o n t e x t has been r e c o g n i s e d  f o r some time as the numerous ' s t o r e image' s t u d i e s t e s t i f y .  Nonetheless,  the immediacy o f the demands o f the b u s i n e s s w o r l d have tended t o o v e r shadow the g o a l o f t h e o r y development w i t h t h e r e s u l t t h a t a w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d and e m p i r i c a l l y t e s t e d t h e o r y o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r has n o t been f o r t h c o m i n g a l t h o u g h v a l u a b l e groundwork has been  laid.  The n a t u r e o f t h e b e h a v i o u r i t s e l f i s a t h i r d r e a s o n f o r optimism about a c h i e v i n g a c l a r i f i c a t i o n o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between c o g n i t i o n and shopping b e h a v i o u r .  Most p e o p l e undertake  consumer  shopping  trips  q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y and a r e t h e r e f o r e r e l a t i v e l y f a m i l i a r w i t h the p r o c e s s o f c h o o s i n g between a l t e r n a t i v e r e t a i l o p p o r t u n i t i e s .  These c i r c u m -  s t a n c e s i n c r e a s e t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f a consumer b e i n g a b l e t o a r t i c u l a t e the f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c i n g h i s d e c i s i o n o f where t o shop. since i t i s l i k e l y  T h i s i s important  t o e x p e d i t e the development o f r e l i a b l e and v a l i d  r e s e a r c h i n s t r u m e n t s d e s i g n e d t o measure consumer c o g n i t i o n .  Furthermore,  a consumer's s e l f and e n v i r o n m e n t a l knowledge p e r t a i n i n g t o s h o p p i n g d e c i s i o n s w i l l p r o b a b l y enhance t h e r e l i a b i l i t y  and v a l i d i t y o f t h e  6.  c o g n i t i v e measures subsequently As  obtained.  i n d i c a t e d by the r e s e a r c h o b j e c t i v e s , t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f demon-  s t r a t i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between consumer c o g n i t i o n and s h o p p i n g behav i o u r has been a major m o t i v a t i n g this thesis.  force behind  the research d e t a i l e d i n  Furthermore, an attempt has been made t o r e l a t e t h i s  study  t o p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h i n t h e f i e l d b y comparing t h e e f f i c a c y o f a c o g n i t i v e model w i t h t h a t o f l o c a t i o n a l and b i o g r a p h i c a l models as p r e d i c t o r s o f consumer s p a t i a l  behaviour.  O u t l i n e o f Chapters  The  s t r u c t u r e o f t h e d i s s e r t a t i o n i s perhaps most e a s i l y  compre-  hended from t h e f o l l o w i n g b r i e f o u t l i n e o f c h a p t e r s .  Chapter 1 e s t a b l i s h e s t h e c o n t e x t o f the study i n p r e s e n t i n g a review  o f t h e v a r i o u s approaches adopted i n t h e a n a l y s i s o f consumer  s p a t i a l behaviour,  t h r e e o f which were s u b s e q u e n t l y  the r e s e a r c h d e s i g n . and  Various  consumer b e h a v i o u r  i l l u s t r a t i v e empirical studies are described.  incorporated i n  models a r e d i s c u s s e d Particular  consider-  a t i o n i s g i v e n t o a t t i t u d e and v a l u e models and, f o l l o w i n g from the chapter  concludes  o f consumer s p a t i a l  this,  w i t h t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a d i s p o s i t i o n a l model behaviour.  Chapter 2 o u t l i n e s the r e s e a r c h d e s i g n .  The r e s e a r c h p u r p o s e s a r e  i t e m i z e d and t h e major components o f the d e s i g n a r e summarized  with  e s p e c i a l emphasis b e i n g p l a c e d upon the development o f a r e s e a r c h ment t o measure consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s , and upon t h e c o n t i n g e n t ations o f r e l i a b i l i t y  and v a l i d i t y .  instru-  consider-  7.  Chapter 3 f o c u s s e s on t h e p r e l i m i n a r y s t a g e s o f t h e r e s e a r c h d e s i g n and  d e t a i l s the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f s a l i e n t d i s p o s i t i o n s  development o f a L i k e r t s c a l i n g i n s t r u m e n t . preliminary scales bility  and t h e subsequent  The p r e t e s t i n g  of a set of  i s described together with the c a l c u l a t i o n  and v a l i d i t y i n d i c e e s .  final set of dispositional  On the b a s i s o f t h e p r e t e s t  scales  of relia-  results a  i s determined.  Chapter 4 d e s c r i b e s t h e major d a t a c o l l e c t i o n phase, and, more s p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e d e s i g n o f t h e f i n a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e , t h e sample d e s i g n , the  t r a i n i n g o f t h e i n t e r v i e w e r s , and t h e d a t a c o l l e c t i o n p r o c e d u r e s .  Chapter 5 d e t a i l s t h e d a t a a n a l y s i s . tics  Various descriptive  a r e p r e s e n t e d t o document t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  selected  o f t h e sample and  a s p e c t s o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s ' shopping b e h a v i o u r .  Primary  emphasis i s p l a c e d upon t h e r e s u l t s o f a s e r i e s o f m u l t i v a r i a t e p e r f o r m e d t o compare t h e e f f i c a c y o f l o c a t i o n a l , b i o g r a p h i c a l s i t i o n a l models as p r e d i c t o r s t o shop.  dispositions  dispositions  i n shopping b e h a v i o u r and  The r e l a t i o n s h i p between c o n s u -  and s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r i s r e c o n s i d e r e d i n l i g h t o f t h e  r e s u l t s o f the a n a l y s i s . and  travelled  are described.  Chapter 6 summarizes t h e s t u d y . mer  analyses  and d i s p o -  o f r e t a i l p a t r o n a g e and d i s t a n c e  F i n a l l y , male-female d i f f e r e n c e s  statis-  areas f o r f u r t h e r  The market r e s e a r c h i m p l i c a t i o n s  research a r e proposed.  are discussed  CHAPTER 1  APPROACHES TO THE ANALYSIS OF CONSUMER SPATIAL BEHAVIOUR  A.  INTRODUCTION  The i n c r e a s i n g a t t e n t i o n p a i d by geographers  i n recent years to  the a n a l y s i s o f human s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r has been nowhere more c l e a r than i n r e l a t i o n t o the study o f consumer b e h a v i o u r .  In p a r t t h i s r e -  f l e c t s a t r a d i t i o n a l g e o g r a p h i c a l i n t e r e s t i n t h e a n a l y s i s o f the commercial  structure of c i t i e s .  the assumptions  Indeed,  t h e p e r c e i v e d inadequacy o f  about consumer b e h a v i o u r i n h e r e n t i n models o f t e r t i a r y  a c t i v i t y has been a major f o r c e m o t i v a t i n g t h e development o f d i f f e r e n t approaches.  I n l a r g e measure, t h e d i r e c t i o n o f these developments  has been g u i d e d by r e s e a r c h i n t h e a r e a s o f m a r k e t i n g and consumer psychology.  The purpose o f t h i s c h a p t e r i s t o p r e s e n t a b r i e f  review  o f t h i s r e s e a r c h i n e s t a b l i s h i n g the c o n t e x t o f the p r e s e n t s t u d y . The c h a p t e r b e g i n s w i t h a d e s c r i p t i o n o f a comprehensive sumer b e h a v i o u r .  model o f con-  A t t e n t i o n i s then f o c u s s e d on v a r i o u s p a r t i a l models  which t o date have been a p p l i e d i n t h e a n a l y s i s o f consumer s p a t i a l • behaviour.  The review c u l m i n a t e s i n a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f a t t i t u d e  and v a l u e models, and, f o l l o w i n g from t h i s , a d i s p o s i t i o n a l model o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r i s p r o p o s e d .  -8 -  B.  THE ARRAY OF CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR MODELS  Recent reviews o f consumer b e h a v i o u r models by Sheth Hansen  (1972) have sought t o d e v e l o p model t y p o l o g i e s .  (1967) and  Hansen  identi-  f i e s no l e s s than twenty e i g h t d i f f e r e n t model types each d i s t i n g u i s h e d by a unique combination o f dependent v a r i a b l e s , independent v a r i a b l e s , u n i t o f a n a l y s i s , temporal component, u n d e r l y i n g p r o c e s s , l e v e l o f a g g r e g a t i o n and c o n t e x t o f a p p l i c a t i o n .  Models range i n scope from  those which p u r p o r t t o be f u l l y i n t e g r a t e d and comprehensive (e.g., the d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s models o f N i c o s i a  (1966), Howard and Sheth  (1969)  and E n g e l et al. (1968) t o o t h e r s which a r e p a r t i a l and s e l e c t i v e p e r s o n a l i t y models (Brody and Cunningham,  1968).  To a l a r g e  (e.g.,  extent  the l a t t e r a r e subsumed by t h e former. Seven o f t h e model types i d e n t i f i e d by Hansen appear t o have p a r t i c u l a r r e l e v a n c e t o t h e a n a l y s i s o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r and these are discussed i n the f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n s o f t h i s chapter. are: (i)  Comprehensive models.  (ii)  U t i l i t y Models.  (iii)  S o c i a l c l a s s and l i f e - c y c l e models.  (iv)  Image models.  (v)  P e r c e p t u a l p r e f e r e n c e models.  (vi)  L e a r n i n g models.  (vii)  A t t i t u d e and v a l u e models.  They  10.  (i)  Comprehensive Models  Comprehensive models based l a r g e l y on  s a l i e n t economic and  c h o l o g i c a l t h e o r y commonly assume t h a t b e h a v i o u r i s the sequential  d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s , the  t o i l l u s t r a t e the  o f the  outcome o f  a  conduct o f which r e f l e c t s  i n t e r a c t i o n o f complex s e t s o f s i t u a t i o n a l and A b r i e f description  psy-  model d e v e l o p e d by  dispositional E n g e l et  al.  the  variables.  will  serve  t y p i c a l components o f such d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g frame-  works . As  F i g u r e 1.1  shows, the  o p e r a t i o n o f the model i s determined by.  the  ' c e n t r a l c o n t r o l u n i t ' which f u n c t i o n s  the  input  s t i m u l i and  o f memory and  the p e r s o n a l i t y  m o t i v e s , and  t i o n l e v e l based on p a s t e x p e r i e n c e . f i n d combined e x p r e s s i o n i n the  The  a response t o an e x t e r n a l  s o c i a l environment.  i s t o be  These c o n d i t i o n i n g  individual's attitudes  need may  be  taken t o s o l v e  appears t h a t  con-  informa-  components  and  values. triggered  i n t e r n a l l y generated or  s t i m u l u s emanating from the p h y s i c a l the p e r c e p t i o n  compared t o determine what a c t i o n ,  the problem c r e a t e d  A search f o r a l t e r n a t i v e solutions  Once the  by h i s s t o r e d  The n a t u r e o f the need c o n t r o l s  incoming s t i m u l i which are  'central  individual, in  d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s p r o p o s e d i n the model i s  when a need i s aroused. be  The  thought p r o c e s s e s which are  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the  terms o f h i s b e h a v i o u r a l t r a i t s and  The  i n t e r f a c e between  o u t p u t responses o f the system.  control unit' consists d i t i o n e d by  a t the  a course of a c t i o n  can  by  the  if  may or of any,  need.  t o the p r o b l e m i s begun i f i t  lead to a s a t i s f a c t o r y  a l t e r n a t i v e s have been i s o l a t e d they are  subject  solution. to  evaluation  FIGURE 1.1  11.  A COMPREHENSIVE MODEL OF CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR  [_SEARCHj  SOURCE;  E n g e l , K o l l a t and B l a c k w e l l  C 1 9 6 8 I , p.  5Q.  12.  to  determine  the p r e f e r r e d s o l u t i o n .  I t i s only at t h i s stage,  having  made t h i s sequence o f p r i o r d e c i s i o n s , t h a t the i n d i v i d u a l e n t e r s a purchase  into  s i t u a t i o n , and even then i t i s f a r from c e r t a i n t h a t an  a c t u a l purchase  w i l l be made.  But whatever the u l t i m a t e outcome, the  e x p e r i e n c e d e r i v e d w i l l be added t o the s t o r e d i n f o r m a t i o n t o i n f l u e n c e future behaviour.  Hence the model can be r e g a r d e d  as dynamic.  The b a s i c components o f t h e model w i l l not v a r y w i t h the  nature  of  the p r o d u c t under c o n s i d e r a t i o n , b u t c l e a r l y the r e l a t i v e  of  the v a r i o u s s t a g e s w i t h i n the d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s w i l l be a p p r e c i a b l y  m o d i f i e d by the p o t e n t i a l p u r c h a s e .  importance  F o r example, the s e a r c h o f  alter-  n a t i v e s o l u t i o n s w i l l o b v i o u s l y be more e x t e n s i v e i f the purchase car  i s proposed,  as opposed t o a c a r t o n o f m i l k ; i n the l a t t e r  where the purchase pletely  i s p r o b a b l y based  on h a b i t , t h i s s t e p may  of a  case,  be com-  bypassed.  T e r m i n a t i o n o f the process can o c c u r a t v i r t u a l l y any s t a g e ; i n many i n s t a n c e s t h i s i s l i k e l y  t o take p l a c e p r i o r t o the  e n t e r i n g i n t o an a c t u a l p u r c h a s i n g s i t u a t i o n . comes a t each stage may response ing  individual  In a d d i t i o n , the  out-  be m o d i f i e d by the e f f e c t s o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l  s e t s such as the i n d i v i d u a l p e r c e i v i n g r i s k and doubt i n buy-  situations. The model has not been t e s t e d e m p i r i c a l l y .  This i s hardly  surpri-  s i n g , g i v e n the c o m p l e x i t y o f the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s between model components and the i n e x a c t n e s s w i t h which c e r t a i n o f the components are d e f i n e d . of  L i k e w i s e , the o t h e r two  consumer b e h a v i o u r  s i g n i f i c a n t comprehensive models  - those o f N i c o s i a and Howard and Sheth  e s s e n t i a l l y u n t e s t e d w i t h the e x c e p t i o n o f one  - remain  e m p i r i c a l study which  13.  was  d e s i g n e d t o t e s t the Howard-Sheth model  w i t h somewhat i n c o n c l u s i v e r e s u l t s . al.  (1973) p o i n t out  ( F a r l e y and  1970)  I t i s t r u e however, as Zaltman  i n e v a l u a t i n g the t h r e e models, t h a t each,  p a r t i c u l a r l y the N i c o s i a and  their construction.  et  but  Howard-Sheth models, d e r i v e some s u p p o r t  as w e l l as t h e i r i n s p i r a t i o n from e m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s  conducted p r i o r t o  R e g a r d l e s s o f e m p i r i c a l v e r i f i c a t i o n , t h e s e com-  p r e h e n s i v e models s e r v e s t r u c t s and  Ring,  an i m p o r t a n t f u n c t i o n i n p r o p o s i n g b a s i c  t h e i r i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s and  t h e r e b y a s s i s t i n g the  ment o f p a r t i a l models o f consumer b e h a v i o u r which, b e i n g  con-  develop-  l e s s complex,  are more amenable t o e m p i r i c a l t e s t i n g .  (ii)  Utility  Utility  Models  models draw l a r g e l y on microeconomic t h e o r y  consumer b e h a v i o u r as the outcome o f s e l e c t i n g an i t be  in treating  a l t e r n a t i v e (whether  a b r a n d , p r o d u c t o r s t o r e ) so as t o maximize a u t i l i t y  T h i s approach n e c e s s a r i l y assumes t h a t a consumer has a l l p o s s i b l e choice a l t e r n a t i v e and  a l t e r n a t i v e s and  assign  function.  knowledge o f  i s hence a b l e t o e v a l u a t e  a fixed u t i l i t y  t o each.  Rational  each  economic  b e h a v i o u r i s assumed whereby each i n d i v i d u a l seeks t o maximize h i s overall satisfaction within prevailing prices.  the  l i m i t s o f h i s income i n r e l a t i o n  F u r t h e r m o r e , as H u r s t  (1972, p .  213)  points  i n m i n i m i z i n g the c o s t s of a c q u i r i n g goods, the e c o n o m i c a l l y consumer w i l l  seek t o m i n i m i z e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o s t s and  i z e s the n e a r e s t The  facility  o f f e r i n g the r e q u i r e d  i n the  out,  rational  hence  patron-  commodity.  concept o f u t i l i t y m a x i m i z a t i o n as the b a s i s  behaviour i s i m p l i c i t  to  f o r consumer  c l a s s i c a l c e n t r a l p l a c e model  (Christaller,  14.  1966;  B e r r y and G a r r i s o n , 1958;  B e r r y , 1967)  subsequent r e v i s e d form o f the model and Rushton, 1970)  and  i s e x p l i c a t e d i n the  (Rushton, 1969,  where s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r  1970,  outcome o f a t r a d e - o f f between d i s t a n c e s e p a r a t i o n and the  The u t i l i t y p r i n c i p l e  (i.e.,  i t s place  the work o f Baumol and  t i c model developed  as  the  relative  utility).  i s a l s o e x p l i c i t i n t r a d i n g a r e a models  which have e v o l v e d from the e a r l y m e c h a n i s t i c (1931), through  spatial  These p r e f e r e n c e f u n c t i o n s a r e i n t u r n r e g a r d e d  a t t r a c t i o n o f the o p p o r t u n i t y  Clark  i s seen t o r e s u l t from the  a p p l i c a t i o n o f s u b j e c t i v e preference functions to a set of alternatives.  1971;  by H u f f  (1962).  Ide  formulation of  (1956), t o the  Reilly  probabilis-  In each c a s e , the u t i l i t y  assigned  H u f f ' s s t o c h a s t i c model o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r assumes t h a t consumers c a l c u l a t e a p o s i t i v e measure o f u t i l i t y f o r each shopp i n g c e n t r e w i t h i n a d e f i n e d s e t , and t h a t they d i s t r i b u t e t h e i r r e t a i l patronage o f a l t e r n a t i v e s s p a t i a l l y i n p r o b a b i l i s t i c f a s h i o n . Huff s t a t e s t h a t the p r o b a b i l i t y o f a p e r s o n ' s t r a v e l l i n g t o a g i v e n shopp i n g c e n t r e i s p r o p o r t i o n a l t o the u t i l i t y o f t h a t c e n t r e i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e u t i l i t y o f o t h e r c e n t r e s , where the u t i l i t y o f a c e n t e r i s determined by i t s s i z e ( i n terms o f square f o o t a g e o f s e l l i n g space) and the time n e c e s s a r y t o r e a c h i t e x p r e s s e d a l g e b r a i c a l l y i n the f o l l o w i n g terms: S. J  P.  ii  n  S.  j=l  (T. , ) i:  X  where P^j i s the p r o b a b i l i t y o f a consumer a t i t r a v e l l i n g t o shopping c e n t r e j , S j i s the s i z e o f the shopping c e n t r e j , T ^ j i s t h e t r a v e l time s e p a r a t i n g i and j , and X i s a parameter t h a t v a r i e s w i t h the type o f merchandise under c o n s i d e r a t i o n . T h i s r e f l e c t s t h a t d i f f e r e n t types o f merchandise s u p p o r t d i f f e r e n t amounts o f consumer s e a r c h . The v a l u e o f the exponent was determined e m p i r i c a l l y on the b a s i s o f l i n e a r c o r r e l a t i o n a n a l y s i s t o g i v e a ' b e s t - f i t ' s o l u t i o n , i n a s i m i l a r manner t h a t R e i l l y determined the v a l u e o f the exponent o f the d i s t a n c e term i n h i s model o f r e t a i l g r a v i t a t i o n .  15.  t o each r e t a i l  a l t e r n a t i v e i s seen t o be  a direct  function of i t s a t t r a c -  t i v e n e s s , d e f i n e d i n terms o f a measure o f mass (e.g., the number o f i n - s t o r e items;  o r the commercial f l o o r s p a c e o f a s h o p p i n g c e n t r e )  an i n v e r s e f u n c t i o n o f the  cost incurred i n reaching  ted with p h y s i c a l distance or t r a v e l Utility  accurate  1968).  criticism.  Nevertheless,  Bucklin  major problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h  cost  (distance)  variables The  the  questionable  they have been the  subject three  t r a d i t i o n a l t r a d i n g a r e a models:  i n determining  f a c t o r , and  f o r convenience goods  (1967), f o r example, i d e n t i f i e s  problems i n the measurement o f v a r i a b l e s cost), d i f f i c u l t i e s  and  assumptions, t h e y have p r o v e d t o be p a r t i c u -  i n p r e d i c t i n g consumer t r i p s  Gauthier,  of repeated  time.  despite their simplicity  n a t u r e o f the u n d e r l y i n g  (Bruch and  i t , u s u a l l y equa-  models, such as H u f f ' s , have been f r e q u e n t l y employed i n  t r a d e a r e a s t u d i e s and  larly  and  (both measures o f mass  the v a l u e  issues regarding  and  o f the exponent f o r the the number and  type o f  included. l a s t c r i t i c i s m i s the most f a r - r e a c h i n g and  led Bucklin  to  d e v e l o p a model o f shopping b e h a v i o u r which added shopping p l a n , demographic  and  m o t i v a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s t o the measures o f d i s t a n c e  s i z e o f f a c i l i t i e s t r a d i t i o n a l l y employed. d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with model assumptions has  the  Similarly, within  m o t i v a t e d the a d o p t i o n  In H u f f ' s  Golledge,  geography,  lack of realism c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of u t i l i t y o f more complex approaches  i n v o l v i n g the measurement o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l v a r i a b l e s Harvey, 1969;  and  1970;  (Downs, 1970,  1970a;  W i n k e l , 1970).  d e f e n c e , i t s h o u l d be  t h a t the u t i l i t y o f a shopping c e n t r e  recognized  t h a t he  acknowledged  t o a consumer was  b a s e d upon a  16.  h o s t o f d i f f e r e n t f a c t o r s , but he m a i n t a i n e d t h a t f o r the purpose making r e a s o n a b l y a c c u r a t e i t was bles" do not  p r e d i c t i o n s o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r  s u f f i c i e n t to " d i s c o v e r (Huff, 1962,  p.  17).  and  1967a).  measures patronage  deviate  so f a r from r e a l i t y  as t o  lack  value.  a justification  p r e d i c t i v e models i s n o t  f o r a n e g l e c t o f r e s e a r c h which i s aimed a t  our  knowledge o f the  are  formed.  T h i s argument has  f u t u r e advances i n the  field  " r e l a t e such s t u d i e s t o the  ff.).  the  area research;  are dependent on  they contend  " g e n e r a l i z i n g and  l a r g e body o f r e s e a r c h  that develop-  i n an attempt  on consumer b e h a v i o u r ,  " l e s s emphasis  d a t a as the p r i n c i p a l i n p u t s  to  on  explanatory  models, more emphasis on the s a m p l i n g o f consumer a t t i t u d e s , and  The  extent  researchers  to  s t a t e d the view t h a t s u c h a r e -  effort w i l l necessitate  other published  t i o n to survey research"  and  l o c a t i o n a l a s p e c t s o f the p u r c h a s i n g d e c i s i o n "  Elsewhere, Thompson has  o r i e n t a t i o n of research  preferences  been e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d by Dalrymple  i n g a t h e o r e t i c a l s t r u c t u r e from e x i s t i n g r e s e a r c h "  which l a r g e l y i g n o r e s  increasing  complex p r o c e s s whereby consumer r e t a i l  (1969) i n c r i t i c i z i n g t r a d e  census and  results  s i n c e i n h i s study distance  Success i n the development o f a c c u r a t e  (p. 105  relevant varia-  N o n e t h e l e s s , the problem remains t h a t a sim-  p l i s t i c p r e d i c t i v e model may  Thompson  a few  the most e f f e c t i v e p r e d i c t o r s o f shopping c e n t r e  ( B u c k l i n , 1967,  theoretical  s p e c i f y only  I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t that Bucklin's  contradict t h i s contention  p r o v e d t o be  of  (Thompson, 1966,  t o which t h i s view has  i s o b v i o u s from the  p.  17).  been s h a r e d by o t h e r  consumer  c o n t e n t o f the r e l e v a n t m a r k e t i n g  g e o g r a p h i c l i t e r a t u r e a p p e a r i n g i n the  atten-  l a s t ten years,  and  and  to a large  17.  e x t e n t the  consumer b e h a v i o u r models d e s c r i b e d  t h i s c h a p t e r i l l u s t r a t e the p r o d u c t o f the  i n the  remainder o f  approach advocated  by  Thompson.  (iii)  S o c i a l Class  and  L i f e - C y c l e Models  F r e q u e n t attempts have been made t o account f o r d i f f e r e n c e s consumer b e h a v i o u r i n terms o f v a r i a t i o n s i n s o c i a l c l a s s and the  family  life-cycle.  l o g i s t L l o y d Warner, was  Martineau  first  s h i p between s o c i a l c l a s s membership and work has  stage i n  (1958), i n c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h  amongst the  in  socio-  to demonstrate the r e l a t i o n -  consumption p a t t e r n s ,  been o f p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t t o geographers because he  and  his  paid  s p e c i f i c a t t e n t i o n to s o c i a l c l a s s v a r i a t i o n s i n s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r in for  terms o f s t o r e p a t r o n a g e .  In one  t h a t w h i l e the one  furniture stores.  o f the  market was  Fisk  class hierarchy  I t was  This  segmentation  q u a l i t y ranking  of  furniture  t o everyone.  a q u a l i t y ranking  of s i x Philadelphia  store hierarchy  were d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d i n t h a t the h i g h e s t  s t o r e preferences of s u c c e s s i v e l y  upper  s t o r e p r e f e r e n c e s o f housewives  found t h a t the  p r e f e r r e d by housewives i n the  with decreasing  to s e l l  (1965) r e l a t e d the  drawn from f o u r s o c i a l groups and department s t o r e s .  lower c l a s s e s .  class  demonstrated  found t o o c c u r even though b o t h s t o r e s had  a l l p r i c e ranges and p r o f e s s e d Brown and  Results  s t o r e appealed p r i m a r i l y t o the m i d d l e and  c l a s s e s , the o t h e r a p p e a l e d to the  was  studies,  example, s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were shown i n the s o c i a l  membership o f p a t r o n s o f two  in  of a s e r i e s of Chicago  and  social  quality  store  upper s o c i a l c l a s s group, w h i l e lower s o c i a l c l a s s e s stores.  corresponded  the  18.  Levy  (1966) has made some i n t e r e s t i n g o b s e r v a t i o n s  about the  rela-  t i o n s h i p between s o c i a l s t a t u s and  shopping behaviour, suggesting  that  s o c i a l s t a t u s appears t o a f f e c t how  p e o p l e f e e l about where they  should  shop.  The  r e s u l t i s t h a t the same p r o d u c t s may  be p u r c h a s e d i n d i f f e r -  ent c h a n n e l s o f d i s t r i b u t i o n by members o f d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l c l a s s e s . He  notes t h a t i n the p u r c h a s e o f c o s m e t i c s ,  are more apt who  upper m i d d l e c l a s s women  t o shop i n department s t o r e s than are lower s t a t u s women  are more prone to shop i n v a r i e t y s t o r e s . Drug s t o r e s seem e q u a l l y  a t t r a c t i v e or s u i t a b l e to a l l .  In a d d i t i o n he makes the g e n e r a l  v a t i o n t h a t t h e r e are  sharp d i f f e r e n c e s i n the s t a t u s r e p u t a t i o n  department s t o r e s and  t h a t consumers t e n d  terms o f where i t i s a p p r o p r i a t e  f o r themselves t o shop.  R i c h and  Jain  also  and  The  telephone interviews  s t a g e i n the  d a t a were e x t e n s i v e , i n Cleveland  f a m i l y l i f e - c y c l e was  and  The  New  York.  stage i n  Social class  the  was  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Warner, 1949), i n terms o f f o u r  m a r i t a l s t a t u s , and  cate-  number o f  r e s u l t s r e v e a l e d s i g n i f i c a n t between  group d i f f e r e n c e s on b o t h v a r i a b l e s i n r e l a t i o n t o s u c h c r i t e r i a as s h o p p i n g f r e q u e n c y , downtown s h o p p i n g and Despite  shopping  c o n s i s t i n g o f 4000 p e r s o n a l  defined  g o r i e s u s i n g a composite measure o f age, c h i l d r e n i n the h o u s e h o l d .  pro-  their  (1968) r e p o r t s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the  s t r a t i f i e d u s i n g Warner's Index o f S t a t u s and  and  the  differ.  b e h a v i o u r o f consumers v a r y i n g i n t h e i r s o c i a l c l a s s and family l i f e - c y c l e .  Most e s t a b l i s h -  s o c i a l c l a s s , but  p o r t i o n a l representation of d i f f e r e n t classes w i l l vary, p a t t e r n s may  of  t o s o r t themselves o u t i n  ments w i l l have customers o f more than one  purchasing  obser-  t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s , R i c h and  behavioural  store  preference.  J a i n conclude t h a t t h e i r f i n d i n g s  question  the u s e f u l n e s s  o f l i f e - c y c l e and  s o c i a l c l a s s concepts i n  u n d e r s t a n d i n g consumer b e h a v i o u r i n view o f r e c e n t d i s t r i b u t i o n , education,  l e i s u r e time and  changes i n income  the movement t o  suburbia.  In a r e c e n t l y completed study o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r i n Metropolitan i n the  Vancouver, G a y l e r  shopping p a t t e r n s  f a m i l y s t a t u s groups.  differences  In t h i s c a s e , taxonomic v a r i a b l e s and  s o c i o - e c o n o m i c measures.  I t was  the g r e a t e r the d i s t a n c e  and  consumer  results of a factor analysis of  the s o c i a l c l a s s group, the more f r e q u e n t l y chased and  significant  o f consumers i n d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l c l a s s  groups were d e f i n e d u s i n g the demographic and  (1974) r e p o r t s  various  found t h a t the  higher  shopping goods were p u r -  t r a v e l l e d f o r g r o c e r i e s and  dress.  In terms o f f a m i l y s t a t u s , o l d e r f a m i l i e s w i t h o u t c h i l d r e n o f t e n velled significantly  shorter distances  than o t h e r  a s i g n i f i c a n t p o l a r i z a t i o n of preference department s t o r e s was  by  groups.  tra-  Furthermore,  s o c i a l c l a s s f o r downtown  shown, a l t h o u g h s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n  partment s t o r e patronage between f a m i l y s t a t u s groups were n o t  de-  evi-  dent. Consistent at.  (1968, pp.  w i t h the  r e s u l t s of these various  305-6) p l a c e  c l a s s as a b a s i s  s t r o n g emphasis on  studies, Engel  the u s e f u l n e s s  of  f o r d e l i m i t i n g homogeneous consumer groups.  et social  They  recommend s o c i a l c l a s s as the most s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e f o r p u r p o s e s o f market segmentation on  the b a s i s t h a t s o c i a l c l a s s groups  r e l a t i v e l y homogeneous w i t h r e s p e c t residential location and  are  to income, p s y c h o l o g i c a l v a r i a b l e s ,  ( w i t h i n urban areas) and p a t t e r n s  of  activity,  are f u r t h e r m o r e amenable t o q u a n t i f i c a t i o n on the b a s i s  s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d measures o f demographic and  of  socio-economic a t t r i b u t e s .  20.  A l t h o u g h such c l a i m s t h a t s o c i a l c l a s s and quently  are somewhat e x a g g e r a t e d , i t i s p r o b a b l y  true  l i f e - c y c l e v a r i a b l e s have been the most  fre-  employed i n market segmentation s t u d i e s t o d a t e .  t e x t , Carman  (1965) p r e s e n t s  In t h i s  con-  a d e t a i l e d e x a m i n a t i o n o f the a p p l i c a t i o n  o f s o c i a l c l a s s i n market segmentation. An  inherent  l i m i t a t i o n o f s o c i a l c l a s s and  however i s t h e i r f a i l u r e t o p r o v i d e  explanations  l i f e - c y c l e models o f consumer b e h a v i o u r  i n terms o f the p s y c h o l o g i c a l v a r i a b l e s and p r o c e s s e s which c o n s t i t u t e the  core  Section  components o f the ( i ) above.  comprehensive models r e f e r r e d t o i n  In so f a r as the p o s t u l a t e d  structure of  these  comprehensive models i s v a l i d , i t f o l l o w s t h a t s o c i a l c l a s s and c y c l e measures are o n l y u s e f u l i n a c c o u n t i n g ences t o the e x t e n t  t h a t they are  chological variables.  for behavioural  life-  differ-  congruent w i t h the more b a s i c p s y -  This l i m i t a t i o n  i s an i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r i n  ex-  p l a i n i n g the r e c e n t move away from models o f consumer b e h a v i o u r b a s e d on demographic and  socio-economic v a r i a b l e s i n favour  which the component v a r i a b l e s d i r e c t l y r e f l e c t the p r o c e s s e s assumed t o u n d e r l i e b e h a v i o u r . consideration  (iv)  o f models i n  psychological  A t t e n t i o n now  turns  to a  o f f o u r such models.  Image Models  The  b a s i c p r o p o s i t i o n o f image models i s t h a t consumers  a s e t o f a l t e r n a t i v e s (e.g., p r o d u c t s , the b a s i s o f t h e i r p e r c e i v e d  evaluate  s t o r e s or shopping centres)  a t t r i b u t e s or  'image'.  I t i s further  assumed t h a t the a l t e r n a t i v e w i t h the most p o s i t i v e image w i l l be ted.  A v a r i a t i o n o f t h i s model i s the  on  selec-  image-congruence model w h i c h i s  founded on the p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t the a l t e r n a t i v e chosen i s t h e one most congruent w i t h the consumer's s e l f image. r e g a r d e d as a m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l  I n both cases the image i s  concept.  Of the v a r i o u s p s y c h o l o g i c a l models o f consumer b e h a v i o u r , image models have p r o b a b l y the l o n g e s t h i s t o r y and a r e the type which have been most e x p l i c i t l y  a p p l i e d i n t h e study o f shopping b e h a v i o u r .  a g a i n M a r t i n e a u ' s work was i n i t i a t o r y . t h a t a shopper's c h o i c e o f s t o r e was i n t e r p r e t e d as "the way  He was among the f i r s t  Here  t o argue  r e l a t e d t o s t o r e image which he  i n which t h e s t o r e i s d e f i n e d i n the shopper's  mind, p a r t l y by i t s f u n c t i o n a l q u a l i t i e s and p a r t l y by an aura o f psychological attributes"  ( M a r t i n e a u , 1958a).  V a r i o u s c a t e g o r i z a t i o n s o f t h e components o f s t o r e image have s u b s e q u e n t l y been d e v i s e d Stephenson, 1969).  Hansen  ( F i s k , 1961; Kunkel and B e r r y ,  (1972, p . 362) argues t h a t t h r e e image  dimensions a r e fundamental, namely: and s o c i a l a s p e c t s .  1968;  p r i c e aspects, functional  He r e c o g n i z e s t h a t p r i c e image may d e v i a t e  the a c t u a l p r i c e l e v e l ,  aspects from  r e f l e c t i n g v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e consumer's income  and o t h e r f a c t o r s such as c r e d i t a v a i l a b i l i t y and s a l e s o f f e r s .  The  f u n c t i o n a l image i s seen t o depend upon merchandise and appearance a t t r i b u t e s , w h i l e the s o c i a l image i s based on t h e consumer's p e r c e p t i o n o f who p a t r o n i z e s a p a r t i c u l a r s t o r e and i n t u r n what k i n d o f statement he would be making about h i m s e l f by p a t r o n i z i n g The most d e t a i l e d image c l a s s i f i c a t i o n an'd B e r r y  (1968) who  determinants  list  it.  i s p r o b a b l y t h a t o f Kunkel  twelve major components and f o r t y s i x image  (see T a b l e 1 . 1 ) .  T h i s scheme was t h e r e s u l t o f a c o n t e n t  a n a l y s i s o f u n s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w s w i t h 744 department s t o r e customers  22.  TABLE  1.1  A SUGGESTED CLASSIFICATION OF STORE IMAGE COMPONENTS  01  P r i c e o f Merchandise a. low p r i c e s b. f a i r or competitive p r i c e s c. h i g h o r n o n - c o m p e t i t i v e p r i c e s d. v a l u e s , except w i t h s p e c i f i c r e g a r d t o premiums, such as stamps, o r q u a l i t y o f merchandise  02  Q u a l i t y o f Merchandise 09 a. good o r p o o r q u a l i t y o f merchandise b. good o r p o o r d e p a r t m e n t ( s ) , exc e p t w i t h r e s p e c t t o assortment, fashion, etc. c. s t o c k b r a n d names  03  Assortment o f Merchandise a. b r e a d t h o f merchandise b. depth o f merchandise c. c a r r i e s a brand I l i k e  04  Fashion of  05  Sales Personnel a. a t t i t u d e of sales personnel b. k n o w l e d g e a b i l i t y o f s a l e s personnel c. number o f s a l e s p e r s o n n e l d. good o r poor s e r v i c e  06  L o c a t i o n a l Convenience a. l o c a t i o n from home b. l o c a t i o n from work c. access d. good o r poor l o c a t i o n  07  Other Convenience F a c t o r s a. p a r k i n g b . hours s t o r e i s open c. convenience w i t h r e g a r d t o other stores d. store layout with respect to convenience e. convenience ( i n g e n e r a l ) (SOURCE:  08  (1968), p.  S a l e s Promotions a. special sales, including q u a l i t y o r assortment o f s a l e s merchandise b. stamps and o t h e r promotions c. f a s h i o n shows and o t h e r s p e c i a l events  10  Advertising a. s t y l e and q u a l i t y o f advertising b. media and v e h i c l e s used c. r e l i a b i l i t y of advertising  11  S t o r e Atmosphere a. layout of store without r e s p e c t t o convenience b. e x t e r n a l and i n t e r n a l decor of s t o r e c. merchandise d i s p l a y d. customer type e. c o n g e s t i o n f. good f o r g i f t s , e x c e p t with respect to q u a l i t y , assortment o r f a s h i o n o f merchandise g. "prestige" store  12  R e p u t a t i o n on Adjustments a. r e t u r n s b. exchange c. reputation f o r fairness  Merchandise  Kunkel and B e r r y  Services a. credit b. delivery c. restaurant f a c i l i t i e s d. other services (gift c o n s u l t a n t s , layaway p l a n s , baby s t r o l l e r s , e s c a l a t o r s , etc.)  26.)  23.  which y i e l d e d n e a r l y 4000 statements  describing store perceptions.  Of t h o s e , a p p r o x i m a t e l y 99 p e r c e n t c o u l d be c l a s s i f i e d i n t o t h e twelve c a t e g o r i e s shown i n T a b l e 1.1. S i m i l a r b u t l e s s d e t a i l e d image schemes a r e r e p o r t e d by F i s k and Stephenson dimensions  (1969) f o r food s t o r e s .  (1961)  I t i s t o be expected t h a t image  w i l l v a r y dependent upon the type o f s t o r e under c o n s i d e r a -  t i o n which suggests t h a t i t i s p r o b a b l y n e c e s s a r y t o d e f i n e t h e s a l i e n t image d e t e r m i n a n t s The  i n d e p e n d e n t l y f o r d i f f e r e n t purchase  a d o p t i o n o f image models by geographers  situations.  f o r the purpose o f  a n a l y s i n g human s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r , i n c l u d i n g shopping b e h a v i o u r , i s e v i d e n c e d by t h e work o f Downs (Downs, 1970, 1970a; Downs and S t e a , 1973). In one s p e c i f i c study  (Downs, 1970), he approached  the problem o f  e x p l a i n i n g consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r by a t t e m p t i n g t o measure t h e images shoppers England.  h e l d o f a l t e r n a t i v e shopping  centres i n B r i s t o l ,  An 'image' he d e f i n e d as b e i n g "the p r o d u c t o f t h e p r o c e s s  of c o l l e c t i n g , environment"  c o d i n g and e v a l u a t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n about  the s p a t i a l  (p. 1 5 ) , a view c o n s i s t e n t w i t h a d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s model  of behaviour. Downs h y p o t h e s i s e d t h a t shoppers  h o l d images o f s h o p p i n g  centres  based on t h e i r e v a l u a t i o n s o f them i n terms o f n i n e c o g n i t i v e c a t e g o r i e s . S i n c e t h e n a t u r e o f the images i s seen t o determine  the consumer's  p r e f e r e n c e s , the c e n t r e w i t h the most f a v o u r a b l e image was assumed t o be the most p r e f e r r e d .  This l e d t o the t e s t i n g o f the hypothesis  the image o f t h e a r e a r e g u l a r l y used would be weighted f a v o u r a b l e end o f a s e t o f semantic U n f o r t u n a t e l y , Downs encountered  d i f f e r e n t i a l scales  that  t o t h e more (Table 1.2).  an i n s o l u b l e d a t a c o l l e c t i o n  problem  24.  TABLE THE  1.2  HYPOTHESISED STRUCTURE OF SHOPPING CENTRE COGNITIONS (SOURCE: Downs (1970), p. 22.) Nine H y p o t h e s i z e d C o g n i t i v e C a t e g o r i e s and T h i r t y - S i x Semantic D i f f e r e n t i a l S c a l e s  (1)  Price 1 Competitive 2 Many b a r g a i n s 3 Good v a l u e f o r money 4 Many p r i c e c u t s  (2) S t r u c t u r e and D e s i g n 5 Well designed 6 Simple l a y o u t 7 Designed w i t h shoppers 8 Wide pavements (3) Ease o f 9 Easy 10 Easy 11 Not 12 Easy  uncompetitive few b a r g a i n s poor v a l u e f o r money few p r i c e c u t s  i n mind  I n t e r n a l Movement and P a r k i n g t o c r o s s roads to part congested t o walk around i n  (4) V i s u a l Appearance 13 W e l l k e p t s t o r e s 14 T i d y 15 C l e a n 16 A t t r a c t i v e (5)  Reputation 17 Good r e p u t a t i o n 18 G e n e r a l l y w e l l known 19 G e n e r a l l y p o p u l a r 20 Recommend t o f r i e n d s  badly designed complicated layout n o t d e s i g n e d w i t h shoppers narrow pavements  i n mind  d i f f i c u l t t o c r o s s roads d i f f i c u l t t o park congested d i f f i c u l t t o walk around i n b a d l y kept s t o r e s untidy dirty unattractive bad r e p u t a t i o n g e n e r a l l y l i t t l e known g e n e r a l l y unpopular wouldn't recommend t o f r i e n d s  (6) Range o f Goods 21 Good c h o i c e 22 Wide range 23 W e l l s t o c k e d 24 Can g e t i t  poor choice narrow range badly stocked can't get i t  (7) S e r v i c e 25 H e l p f u l 26 F r i e n d l y s e r v i c e 27 Good s e r v i c e 28 p o l i t e  unhelpful unfriendly service poor s e r v i c e rude  (8.) Shopping Hours 29 L a t e c l o s i n g 30 Convenient opening times 31 Good f o r e v e n i n g s h o p p i n g 32 Always somewhere open  early closing i n c o n v e n i e n t opening times bad f o r e v e n i n g shopping n e v e r anywhere open  (9) Atmosphere 33 Busy 34 Relaxed atmosphere 35 P e r s o n a l  n o t busy t e n s e atmosphere impersonal  25.  s i n c e respondents  were unable  t o d e s c r i b e t h e i r images o f  c e n t r e s o t h e r than i n terms o f i n d i v i d u a l t o assume t h a t respondents shopping  s t o r e s , and  shopping  i t was  impossible  c o n s i d e r e d the same s t o r e s when d e s c r i b i n g  c e n t r e images.  He was  a b l e however to t e s t the h y p o t h e s i s  image o f a major shopping  t h a t the consumer's  c e n t r e and h e r a s s o c i a t e d p r e f e r e n c e s were  o r g a n i z e d i n terms o f n i n e c o g n i t i v e dimensions.  By means o f  factor  a n a l y s i s , he demonstrated the e x i s t e n c e o f e i g h t c o g n i t i v e c a t e g o r i e s : service quality, price,  s t r u c t u r e and d e s i g n , shopping  hours,  internal  p e d e s t r i a n movement, shop range and q u a l i t y , v i s u a l appearance traffic  conditions.  thesis.  T h i s r e s u l t was  and  seen t o a c c o r d w e l l w i t h the hypo-  However, Downs r e c o g n i s e d t h a t t h i s was  r e l a t e d t o a p a r t i c u l a r urban shopping  an i d e o g r a p h i c  study,  c e n t r e , and hence t h e r e was  no  means o f a s s e s s i n g the g e n e r a l i t y o f the c o g n i t i v e s t r u c t u r e p r o d u c e d by  the  analysis.  A f u r t h e r a p p l i c a t i o n o f an image model i n a s i m i l a r c o n t e x t i s reported i n a recent doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n  (Brown, 1974).  In  this  case, image and b e h a v i o u r a l d a t a were o b t a i n e d from a s o c i a l l y homogeneous sample group r e s i d i n g a p p r o x i m a t e l y p i n g c e n t r e s o f s i m i l a r s i z e and thereby  midway between two  composition  i n Edmonton.  It  shopwas  i n t e n d e d to h o l d c o n s t a n t t h r e e o f the. major v a r i a b l e s which  a r e known t o i n f l u e n c e shopping s i z e , and  the socio-economic  d o i n g , i t was  behaviour,  namely:  distance, centre  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the consumer.  In so  hoped t o i s o l a t e the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the consumer's  image and h e r patronage b e h a v i o u r . measured u s i n g a semantic  As i n Down's s t u d y ,  images were  d i f f e r e n t i a l s c a l i n g instrument.  Image  dimensions and s c a l e s c o r e s were d e r i v e d u s i n g f a c t o r a n a l y s i s .  When  these measures were r e l a t e d t o t h e b e h a v i o u r a l d a t a , the r e s e a r c h hypot h e s e s were e s s e n t i a l l y c o n f i r m e d ,  demonstrating  t h a t consumers  t r i b u t e d t h e i r p a t r o n a g e between t h e two c e n t r e s i n accordance f a v o u r a b l y they p e r c e i v e d them.  conclusions, but i n seeking t o c l a r i f y  The  w i t h how  I t s h o u l d be added t h a t t h e u s e f u l n e s s  o f t h i s and s i m i l a r s t u d i e s l i e s n o t i n a r r i v i n g a t such  evaluate a s e t of r e t a i l  dis-  self-evident  t h e p r o c e s s whereby consumers  alternatives.  s t u d i e s o f b o t h Downs and Brown d i f f e r from many p r e v i o u s  s t u d i e s i n f o c u s s i n g on shopping the r e s u l t s w i t h  c e n t r e s r a t h e r than s t o r e s .  o f shopping  Comparing  those d e s c r i b e d i n s t o r e image s t u d i e s s u g g e s t s  s e v e r a l o f t h e dimensions have r e l e v a n c e a t b o t h s c a l e s .  image  that  The v a l i d i t y  c e n t r e image measures must remain i n doubt however i f , as  Downs found,  consumers a r e unable  t o d i s a s s o c i a t e the image o f a shop-  p i n g c e n t r e from t h a t o f p a r t i c u l a r s t o r e s w i t h i n i t . D o r n o f f and Tatham  (1972) r e p o r t an i n t e r e s t i n g a p p l i c a t i o n o f an  image congruence model i n t h e a n a l y s i s o f shopping i n g t h e work on s e l f t h e o r y by Rogers hypothesised  behaviour.  Extend-  (1965), D o r n o f f and Tatham  t h a t i n d i v i d u a l images o f p r e f e r r e d s t o r e s would v a r y  s y s t e m a t i c a l l y w i t h s e l f - i m a g e s , i d e a l s e l f - i m a g e s and images o f b e s t friend.  Data on p e r s o n a l and s t o r e images were o b t a i n e d from 84 r e s -  pondents i n C i n c i n n a t i u s i n g a p r e t e s t e d semantic instrument  c o m p r i s i n g 28 b i p o l a r s c a l e s .  differential  scaling  The r e l a t i o n s h i p s between  the t h r e e types o f p e r s o n a l image - r e a l s e l f , i d e a l s e l f and image o f b e s t f r i e n d - and t h e images o f t h r e e c l a s s e s o f p r e f e r r e d s t o r e - a supermarket, a department s t o r e and a s p e c i a l t y s t o r e - were t e s t e d .  I n g e n e r a l , the r e s u l t s s u p p o r t e d  the h y p o t h e s i s  t h a t an  individual's  p e r s o n a l image i s congruent w i t h h i s s t o r e image w i t h the g r e a t e s t c o n g r u i t y b e i n g between i d e a l s e l f and least being  s t o r e s most p r e f e r r e d and  f o r image o f b e s t f r i e n d and most p r e f e r r e d s t o r e s .  the More-  over, v a r i a t i o n s i n the importance o f the t h r e e t y p e s o f p e r s o n a l image were observed  f o r d i f f e r e n t types o f s t o r e .  o f a department s t o r e , the i d e a l s e l f - i m a g e had  In the  g r e a t e r s a l i e n c e than  b e s t f r i e n d image; whereas, i n s p e c i a l t y s t o r e s e l e c t i o n , of best  f r i e n d had  g r e a t e r i n f l u e n c e than t h e r e a l s e l f ,  the s o c i a l v i s i b i l i t y  o f s p e c i a l t y s t o r e shopping.  market, the d i r e c t i o n o f i n f l u e n c e was  the image reflecting  For the  super-  reversed with greater influence  b e i n g e x e r t e d by r e a l s e l f - i m a g e than by These r e s u l t s ,  selection  image o f b e s t  friend.  though l i m i t e d , are i n d i c a t i v e o f the  potential  u s e f u l n e s s o f image congruence models i n the a n a l y s i s o f consumer decision processes. c a l underpinnings  (v)  F u r t h e r m o r e , they s e r v e t o c l a r i f y  the  theoreti-  o f t r a d i t i o n a l image models.  Perceptual Preference  Models  P e r c e p t u a l p r e f e r e n c e models are s i m i l a r t o image models i n t r e a t i n g behaviour  as the outcome o f the consumer e v a l u a t i n g a l t e r -  n a t i v e s along a set o f p e r c e p t u a l dimensions.  They d i f f e r  models i n t h a t t h e dimensions are n o t p r e d e f i n e d . type r e p r e s e n t one  o f the  f a s t e s t growing areas  a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the development and dimensional Rao,  1972;  s c a l i n g techniques Romney, N e r l o v e  and  from image  Models o f  this  i n consumer r e s e a r c h  a p p l i c a t i o n o f non-metric m u l t i -  (Green and Carmone, 1971; Shepard, 1972).  Green  Their potential  and  a p p l i c a t i o n i n g e o g r a p h i c r e s e a r c h has been reviewed by G o l l e d g e Rushton  (1970).  Non-metric m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l multidimensional  s c a l i n g has t h e advantage o v e r  s c a l i n g procedures  does n o t r e q u i r e i n t e r v a l d a t a .  (e.g.,  as i s t h e case w i t h  Nor i s i t n e c e s s a r y t o determine i n  image models.  s i n c e the i n p u t d a t a  constructs  I t i s termed a 'non-metric' t e c h n i -  a r e o r d i n a l a l t h o u g h they a r e seen t o p o s s e s s  latent interval properties. i n t h i s a r e a by Coombs  other  factor analysis) that i t  advance s a l i e n t a t t r i b u t e s o f o b j e c t s t o f u n c t i o n as s c a l e  que  and  T h i s f o l l o w s from the p i o n e e r  research  (1950) who n o t e d t h a t , where t h e e x i s t e n c e o f  a u n i t o f measurement i s n o t assumed, i t i s s t i l l p o s s i b l e t o o r d e r the magnitude o f t h e i n t e r v a l s between o b j e c t s , and hence t o d e f i n e an  "ordered The  metric" f o r a psychological scale.  d a t a are p r o v i d e d  by respondents making judgements o f t h e  r e l a t i v e s i m i l a r i t y o f t h e o b j e c t s under s t u d y .  T h i s may i n v o l v e  respondents s p e c i f y i n g which two o b j e c t s o f a s e t o f t h r e e they  per-  c e i v e t o be t h e most o r l e a s t s i m i l a r ; a l t e r n a t i v e l y , they may be asked t o i n d i c a t e a most s i m i l a r p a i r among a s e t o f p a i r e d o r t h i r d l y , d a t a may be d e r i v e d from a r a n k - o r d e r i n g  objects;  of k - 1 objects  i n terms o f t h e i r s i m i l a r i t y t o t h e k t h . From t h i s d a t a  i t i s p o s s i b l e t o rank o r d e r each o b j e c t p a i r i n  terms o f ' s u b j e c t i v e ' s i m i l a r i t y .  The rank o r d e r  i s then s u b m i t t e d  t o a computer a l g o r i t h m which d e v e l o p s a s p a t i a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n s e n t i n g the data.  The d i m e n s i o n a l i t y  z e d on t h e b a s i s o f a p r e d e t e r m i n e d The  dimensions r e p r e s e n t  repre-  o f the space p r o d u c e d i s m i n i m i -  'goodness o f f i t c o n s t r a i n t .  the p e r c e i v e d  1  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the  o b j e c t s ; each o b j e c t has o f the respondents  a p o i n t l o c a t i o n i n the space.  on t h e s e dimensions are r e p r e s e n t e d by  p o i n t s d e r i v e d from each respondent's the o b j e c t s . it  The  The p o s i t i o n s 'ideal'  rank o r d e r e d p r e f e r e n c e s f o r  l a t e n t i n t e r v a l p r o p e r t i e s o f the d a t a are such  i s p o s s i b l e t o i n f e r a measure o f s i m i l a r i t y between two  that  objects  from the d i s t a n c e s e p a r a t i n g the two p o i n t s r e p r e s e n t i n g them.  It  f o l l o w s t h a t t h e c l o s e r two p o i n t s a r e t o each o t h e r the more s i m i l a r they are p e r c e i v e d t o be by  the r e s p o n d e n t s ,  and the c l o s e r two  p o i n t s the more s i m i l a r a r e the p r e f e r e n c e s o f the two thus  'ideal'  respondents  represented. To date n o n - m e t r i c  m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l s c a l i n g has been most  q u e n t l y a p p l i e d i n the d e s i g n o f new  products  fre-  f o r e x i s t i n g markets,  but an a p p l i c a t i o n i n the a n a l y s i s o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r r e p o r t e d i n a r e c e n t p a p e r by Doddridge  (1972).  In t h i s study  were o b t a i n e d from two  s m a l l sample groups r e s i d i n g w i t h i n a  o f Sydney, A u s t r a l i a .  Respondents i n the two  ranking nineteen frequency  The  r e s e a r c h t a s k i n v o l v e d each  c e n t r e s i n o r d e r o f p r e f e r e n c e and  p r o p o s e d t h a t respondents  years  and  respondent the  preceding  i n the two  groups  would d i f f e r i n the p e r c e p t u a l dimensions employed t o e v a l u a t e  alter-  n a t i v e shopping  I t was  district  indicating  o f use o f , and money s p e n t a t , each c e n t r e i n the  s i x month p e r i o d .  data  groups d i f f e r e d o n l y i n  t h e i r l e n g t h o f r e s i d e n c e i n the a r e a , group means b e i n g two nine years r e s p e c t i v e l y .  is  c e n t r e s f o r the p u r c h a s e o f c l o t h i n g , hence demonstra-  t i n g d i f f e r e n t s t a t e s o f l e a r n i n g and p e r c e p t i o n . was  s u p p o r t e d by the d a t a :  This p r o p o s i t i o n  whereas l e s s w e l l - i n f o r m e d  e v a l u a t e d a l t e r n a t i v e s on two  dimensions d e f i n e d as  respondents  'likeness to  the  30.  city'  and 'expected  v a l u e f o r money and e f f o r t ' ,  were found t o employ p e r c e p t u a l dimensions unoccupied  p a r k i n g spaces  and e f f o r t ' .  l o n g e r term r e s i d e n t s  l a b e l l e d as 'number o f  c l o s e t o shops' and ' l e a r n t v a l u e f o r money  The dimensions  as d e f i n e d c l e a r l y suggest c o n s i s t e n t  between group d i f f e r e n c e s i n l e a r n i n g s t a t e s , a l t h o u g h i t s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t the d e f i n i t i o n o f p e r c e p t u a l dimensions metric multidimensional s c a l i n g procedures  d e r i v e d u s i n g non-  i s a particularly  difficult  p r o b l e m and i s open t o a good d e a l o f s u b j e c t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .  In  a d d i t i o n , Doddridge found s u p p o r t f o r p r o p o s i t i o n s l i n k i n g t h e p e r c e p t u a l e v a l u a t i o n s o f shopping and p u r c h a s i n g  c e n t r e s and measures o f shopping  travel  behaviour.  Work i n p r o g r e s s a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia  indicates  a f u r t h e r a p p l i c a t i o n o f a p e r c e p t u a l p r e f e r e n c e approach t o t h e a n a l y sis  o f r e t a i l patronage  respondents  (Forbes and W i l e y ,  i n progress).  In t h i s  case,  were r e q u i r e d t o p r o v i d e p a i r e d comparison r a t i n g s o f s i x  Vancouver department s t o r e s p l u s an i d e a l s t o r e u s i n g a t e n p o i n t similarity-dissimilarity  scale.  I t i s hoped u s i n g t h i s d a t a t o demon-  s t r a t e s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s between t h e s e measures and o t h e r p e r c e p t u a l , demographic and b e h a v i o u r a l v a r i a b l e s . I t would be premature a t t h i s p o i n t i n time t o e v a l u a t e t h e cont r i b u t i o n o f p e r c e p t u a l p r e f e r e n c e models t o consumer b e h a v i o u r  research  s i n c e t h e i r p o t e n t i a l i s o n l y now b e i n g e x p l o r e d .  Nonetheless, the  e f f o r t s and p r o g r e s s i n t h i s a r e a t o date s u g g e s t  t h a t t h i s type o f  model may p r o v e  t o be amongst t h e most p r o d u c t i v e y e t employed.  t h e same t i m e , t h e use o f n o n - m e t r i c has a t t e n d a n t problems  multidimensional s c a l i n g  (Day, 1972) and t h e l i m i t a t i o n s which  At  techniques these  impose have y e t t o be  (vi)  fully  identified,  L e a r n i n g Models  The models d e s c r i b e d thus  f a r are e s s e n t i a l l y  i s w i d e l y r e c o g n i s e d t h a t the b e h a v i o u r  s t a t i c , although i t  o f consumers i s a dynamic  p r o c e s s r e f l e c t i n g the o p e r a t i o n o f l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s e s . r e s e a r c h e r s have t h e r e f o r e drawn upon s t i m u l u s - r e s p o n s e  Consumer and c o g n i t i v e  l e a r n i n g t h e o r i e s i n d e v e l o p i n g models o f consumer b e h a v i o u r  (Haines,  1969;  learning  Howard and Sheth,  1969).  The p o t e n t i a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f  models i n the study o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r has s p e c i f i c treatment and Brown, 1967; Golledge temporal  by geographers  Hudson, 1970,  (1967) has  s e a r c h proceeds  range o f f e a s i b l e  identified essentially  phase, which he  two  u n t i l asymptotic  T h i s p r o p o s i t i o n o f c o u r s e assumes s t a b i l i t y of  the pat-  i n the  ' i r r a t i o n a l ' purchases  f o r example.  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f a temporal  i n i t s e l f i n s u f f i c i e n t t o account  that s p a t i a l  the s e a r c h phase  o p p o r t u n i t i e s becomes more s h a r p l y d e f i n e d and  i n the form o f impulse b u y i n g  are p a t r o n i z e d .  phases i n the  and l e a r n i n g about t h e system t a k e s p l a c e , the  s u p p l y environment and the n o n - o c c u r r e n c e  The  Golledge  summarizes as f o l l o w s :  range o f s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r becomes more l i m i t e d terns evolve".  1969;  1971).  development o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r ;  and the h a b i t u a l response "As  ( G o l l e d g e , 1967,  also received  trend i n s p a t i a l behaviour i s  f o r the s p e c i f i c  l o c a t i o n s which  C e r t a i n e x p e c t a t i o n s are r e a s o n a b l e however g i v e n  search i n v o l v e s costs f o r the i n d i v i d u a l  a g a i n s t the b e n e f i t s g a i n e d from the s e a r c h phase.  which he  In t h i s  balances  regard,  32.  C y e r t and March  (1963) have s p e c i f i e d a s e t o f r u l e s t h a t p r o v i d e  i n i t i a l b a s i s f o r a n t i c i p a t i n g the conduct are:  These  (1) s e a r c h i n the neighbourhood o f the problem s i t u a t i o n  mably p r o x i m a t e of  o f search a c t i v i t y .  t o the t r i p o r i g i n ) ;  the c u r r e n t a l t e r n a t i v e ; and  (presu-  (2) s e a r c h i n t h e neighbourhood  (3) i f neighbourhood s e a r c h  procedures  do n o t p r o v i d e a s a t i s f a c t o r y s o l u t i o n , then s u c c e s s i v e l y use d i s t a n t " search  an  "more  procedures.  The p r o d u c t o f the s e a r c h phase i s r e g a r d e d by G o l l e d g e and Brown (1967) as the accumulation  o f i n f o r m a t i o n about the s p a t i a l system i n  w h i c h the i n d i v i d u a l f i n d s h i m s e l f . is  seen t o g i v e way  Initial  trial  and e r r o r  behaviour  w i t h i n c r e a s i n g knowledge and the r e i n f o r c e m e n t  of  s a t i s f y i n g s o l u t i o n s t o an e q u i l i b r i u m s t a t e c o m p r i s i n g the h a b i t u a l response phase.  G o l l e d g e and Brown r e l a t e t h i s p r o c e s s t o t h e  p r o c e s s d e s c r i b e d by H u l l (1955), and  (1962), Spence  (1951) and Bush and M o s t e l l e r  f o l l o w i n g t h e l e a d o f the l a t t e r p r o c e e d  s t o c h a s t i c model o f t h e market d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s . r e p o r t s the r e s u l t s o f a s t u d y based Madison, W i s c o n s i n , which e s s e n t i a l l y R e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d a decrease  learning  t o develop  Golledge  on a sample o f new  a  (1970)  migrants  to  c o n f i r m model e x p e c t a t i o n s .  i n the number o f p l a c e s v i s i t e d f o r  g r o c e r i e s o v e r time; a g r e a t e r d i v e r s i t y i n t r i p b e h a v i o u r  among r e c e n t  i n - m i g r a n t s than among l o n g term r e s i d e n t s ; and a marked d e c r e a s e i n new  s t o r e t r i a l s over  time.  Hudson (1970) on the o t h e r hand, f o l l o w i n g a comprehensive examin a t i o n o f the r e l e v a n c e o f v a r i o u s l e a r n i n g t h e o r i e s t o consumer s p a tial of  choice, concluded t h a t stimulus-response  theories similar to that  H u l l were i n a p p r o p r i a t e and t h a t a more p r o m i s i n g approach t o under-  33.  s t a n d i n g such b e h a v i o u r was  v i a cognitive learning theories.  In t h i s  r e g a r d , he argued t h a t a l e a r n i n g model o f s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r d e r i v e d essentially 1936a, 1951) structs  from the work o f Tolman  (1932, 1952)  and Lewin  (1936,  c o u l d be subsumed under K e l l y ' s Theory o f P e r s o n a l Con-  (Kelly,  1955).  I n a subsequent p a p e r , Hudson  (1971) p r o p o s e d a r e s e a r c h d e s i g n  f o r t e s t i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between consumer p e r s o n a l  constructs  measured a t t h r e e d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s i n time and s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r . o r d e r t o maximize  the e f f e c t s o f l e a r n i n g , he d e c i d e d t o o b t a i n d a t a  from u n i v e r s i t y s t u d e n t s i n B r i s t o l who urban r e s i d e n t i a l moves. liar  In  had made r e c e n t i n t e r o r i n t r a -  C o n s t r u c t s r e l a t i n g t o each o f e l e v e n f a m i -  f o o d s t o r e s and an i d e a l s t o r e were t o be measured on an e l e v e n  point scale.  I t was  hoped u s i n g t h i s d a t a t o demonstrate  increases  i n knowledge o f t h e s h o p p i n g environment o v e r time; g r e a t e r a c c u r a c y in  s t o r e images w i t h i n c r e a s e d p a t r o n a g e f r e q u e n c y ; g r e a t e r c o n f o r m i t y  o v e r time between a s p i r a t i o n s and p e r c e i v e d shopping o p p o r t u n i t i e s ; and c o n s i s t e n c y between c o n s t r u c t and b e h a v i o u r changes.  Furthermore,  he suggested t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f d e v e l o p i n g a p r o b a b i l i s t i c model o f s t o r e p a t r o n a g e based on the d e v i a t i o n o f s t o r e image s c o r e s from the scores f o r the i d e a l  store.  I n a s i m i l a r c o n t e x t , Doddridge  (1972), i n t h e s t u d y p r e v i o u s l y  d e s c r i b e d under the h e a d i n g o f p e r c e p t u a l p r e f e r e n c e models, demonstrated changes i n . consumer p e r c e p t i o n s o f s p a t i a l  has  alternatives  o v e r time which she argued were i n d i c a t i v e o f a c o g n i t i v e  learning  process. There c l e a r l y  remains much more scope f o r the f u r t h e r  investigation  34.  o f the  temporal dynamics o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r , and,  r e g a r d , the  a p p l i c a t i o n of cognitive  suggested by be  Hudson and  i n part  a potentially fruitful  learning  demonstrated by  avenue o f i n q u i r y ,  y i e l d more i n s i g h t than can be p r o v i d e d by (vii)  Attitude The  and  and  s i g n i f i c a n c e i n consumer r e s e a r c h .  p l a c e d on An  i n the  Doddridge appears  and  one  and  v a l u e s as  v a l u e models has  been o f major  b u i l t upon s o c i a l  a basis and  frequently  One  consumer a t t i t u d e  formation  i n d e e d assumes a key  position  s u b f i e l d of Nicosia's  decision  an  model f o c u s s e s  ( N i c o s i a , 1966); Howard and  Sheth  h e n s i o n and to attitudes  as the p r i n c i p a l i n t e r m e d i a r y between b r a n d  b e h a v i o u r a l i n t e n t i o n ; w h i l e E n g e l et and  v a l u e s the  function  s a l i e n t consumer a t t r i b u t e s w i t h i n model o f consumer m o t i v a t i o n and E n g e l et  al.  go  Empirical  studies  (1968)  o f summarizing the  the  behaviour  individual's  ascribe  influence  "map  (see F i g u r e 2.1). attitudes  learn-  compre-  'central control u n i t ' of  so f a r as t o s u g g e s t t h a t  i m p o r t a n t component i n an  al.  (p.  of their  Indeed  comprise the  of h i s world"  on  (1969)  i n t h e i r t h e o r y o f buyer b e h a v i o u r r e c o g n i s e a t t i t u d e as a major and  been  f o r i n t e r p r e t i n g behaviour.  t h r e e major comprehensive models r e f e r r e d t o i n  e a r l i e r section.  ing construct  to  s t i m u l u s - r e s p o n s e models.  T h i s work has  a t t i t u d i n a l component i s i n c l u d e d  i n each o f the  to  which i s l i k e l y  r e s e a r c h i n q h i c h c e n t r a l importance has  attitudes  manner  V a l u e Models  a p p l i c a t i o n of a t t i t u d e  psychological  theories  in this  most  165).  o f consumer b e h a v i o u r i n v o l v i n g a t t i t u d e measure-  ment have been numerous, w h i l e v a r y i n g m e t h o d o l o g i c a l t e c h n i q u e s employed.  markedly i n r i g o u r and  Each o f t h e  in  a c c e p t e d measurement  t e c h n i q u e s have been used i n c l u d i n g T h u r s t o n e , L i k e r t , Guttman semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l s c a l i n g .  The  the  p u b l i s h e d p r o c e e d i n g s o f the  and Attitude  35.  Research  Committee o f the American M a r k e t i n g A s s o c i a t i o n p r o v i d e a  compendium o f the types o f study conducted  i n t h i s area  C r e s p i , 1966,  Haley,  1968;  K i n g and T i g e r t , 1971;  ( A d l e r and  1972).  C o n s i s t e n t w i t h the work i n s o c i a l p s y c h o l o g y ,  consumer b e h a v i o u r  r e s e a r c h e r s have r e c o g n i s e d t h a t the s t r u c t u r e o f an a t t i t u d e i s d i v i s i b l e i n t o t h r e e components: l u a t i o n ) and treatment account  conation  c o g n i t i o n (or b e l i e f ) ,  (or i n t e n t i o n ) .  affect  (or eva-  Consumer s t u d i e s v a r y i n t h e i r  o f t h e s e components b u t most demonstrate an attempt  to  f o r b e h a v i o u r a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n terms o f b e l i e f and/or e v a l u a -  t i o n measures.  A t t i t u d e models range i n c o m p l e x i t y  from t h o s e  based  upon u n i d i m e n s i o n a l measures o f a f f e c t t o those, i n v o l v i n g m u l t i p l e a t t r i b u t e measures o f b o t h c o g n i t i o n and a f f e c t . becoming i n c r e a s i n g l y  The  latter  are  f a v o u r e d o v e r s i m p l e measues o f p r e f e r e n c e  because o f t h e i r g r e a t e r ' d i a g n o s t i c ' v a l u e . (1973) i n d i c a t e i n a r e c e n t review,  As W i l k i e and  the major p u r p o s e o f m u l t i - a t t r i b u t e  a t t i t u d e models i s t o i n c r e a s e u n d e r s t a n d i n g  o f consumer a t t i t u d e  s t r u c t u r e s and hence t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n which has t i o n i n the f o r m u l a t i o n o f m a r k e t i n g  Pessemier  strategy.  Day  direct  applica-  (1972) f u r t h e r  d i s t i n g u i s h e s between u n i d i m e n s i o n a l measures o f a f f e c t and more complex models i n r e g a r d i n g the former  as i l l u s t r a t i v e o f a p u r e l y  p r e d i c t i v e approach w h i l e the l a t t e r demonstrate an e x p l a n a t o r y o r structural  approach.  To the e x t e n t t h a t consumer r e s e a r c h e r s , have a t t e n d e d t o t h e o r y , the work o f Rosenberg 1965,  1967,  Cohen et al.  1967a, 1972) 1972;  (1956, 1960,  1965)  and F i s h b e i n (1963,  has been most f r e q u e n t l y c i t e d  W i l k i e and P e s s e m i e r ,  1973).  attitude  (Day,  1972;  Rosenberg sought t o d e l i n e a t e covary w i t h a t t i t u d e which he t i v e response t o an o b j e c t " v a r i a b l e s t o be the p e r c e i v e d blocking  the  v a r i a b l e s t h a t were assumed t o  defines  as  (1956, p.  "a r e l a t i v e l y  367).  He  r e g a r d e d one  the i n t e n s i t y o f a p e r s o n ' s v a l u e s and  importance o f the  attitude object  attainment of h i s values.  stable  affecof  these  a second t o  i n l e a d i n g to  or  He h y p o t h e s i s e d t h e r e f o r e  a p e r s o n ' s a t t i t u d e toward a g i v e n o b j e c t would be  be  that  "accompanied by  a  c o g n i t i v e s t r u c t u r e made up o f b e l i e f s about the p o t e n t i a l i t i e s o f that object states"  f o r a t t a i n i n g or b l o c k i n g  (1956, p.  367).  I t follows  the r e a l i z a t i o n o f  t h a t the more the o b j e c t  attainment of p o s i t i v e l y valued s t a t e s or blocks negatively  valued  the  leads  attainment  to  of  v a l u e d s t a t e s the more the p e r s o n would have a p o s i t i v e  a t t i t u d e toward the o b j e c t . a l g e b r a i c a l l y as  Rosenberg's h y p o t h e s i s has  been e x p r e s s e d  follows: n  A_ = 0  / I.V. , . l l i=l L  where A„ = a t t i t u d e toward o b j e c t 0 J  0.  I. = p e r c e i v e d i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , the e x t e n t t o which the p e r s o n b e l i e v e s t h a t the o b j e c t 0 w i l l l e a d to o r b l o c k the a t t a i n m e n t of value i . V.  = value importance, value i ' s importance t o the respondent a source of s a t i s f a c t i o n .  n = number o f  Fishbein, writing within  values.  a b e h a v i o u r t h e o r y framework, d e v e l o p e d  an" a t t i t u d e model b a s e d upon p r o c e s s e s o f mediated g e n e r a l i z a t i o n c o n d i t i o n i n g , which he has  as  summarized i n the  following  way:  and  37.  An i n d i v i d u a l h o l d s many b e l i e f s about any g i v e n o b j e c t ; t h a t i s many d i f f e r e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , a t t r i b u t e s , v a l u e s , g o a l s and concepts a r e p o s i t i v e l y o r n e g a t i v e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h any g i v e n o b j e c t ; a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each o f t h e s e ' r e l a t e d o b j e c t s ' i s a m e d i a t i n g e v a l u a t i v e response - an a t t i t u d e ; t h e s e e v a l u a t i v e responses summate; through the m e d i a t i o n p r o c e s s , t h e summated e v a l u a t i v e response i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the a t t i t u d e o b j e c t ; and thus on f u t u r e o c c a s i o n s the a t t i tude o b j e c t ' w i l l e l i c i t t h i s summated e v a l u a t i v e response t h i s a t t i t u d e ... A c c o r d i n g t o the t h e o r y , t h e n , an i n d i v i d u a l ' s a t t i t u d e toward any o b j e c t i s a f u n c t i o n o f (1) t h e s t r e n g t h o f h i s b e l i e f s about the o b j e c t s and (2) t h e eval u a t i v e a s p e c t o f those b e l i e f s . (1965, p . 117). E x p r e s s e d a l g e b r a i c a l l y t h e model takes the f o l l o w i n g form:  A„ = 0  n > B.a. .. l l 1=1 L  where:  A„ = a t t i t u d e toward o b j e c t 0. 0 1  J  B. = t h e s t r e n g t h o f b e l i e f i about the a t t i t u d e o b j e c t 0, t h a t i s , the p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t 0 i s r e l a t e d t o some o t h e r o b j e c t x..  i  a. = t h e e v a l u a t i v e a s p e c t o f B^, t h a t i s t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f x.. l n = number o f b e l i e f s .  Thus d e s p i t e d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e i r t h e o r e t i c a l p r e m i s e s , Rosenberg and  F i s h b e i n have developed remarkably s i m i l a r models, b o t h o f which  regard  an i n d i v i d u a l ' s a t t i t u d e toward any o b j e c t as a f u n c t i o n o f h i s  b e l i e f s about t h e o b j e c t and t h e e v a l u a t i v e a s p e c t s As  a p p l i e d t o consumer a t t i t u d e s , Cohen et al.  o f those b e l i e f s .  (1972) note t h a t ,  given  a s e t o f s a l i e n t o r r e l e v a n t a t t r i b u t e s used by consumers t o choose among a l t e r n a t i v e s , b o t h models r e q u i r e i n f o r m a t i o n the e x t e n t  detailing:  (1)  t o which the consumer b e l i e v e s t h e a l t e r n a t i v e i s r e l a t e d  t o o r p o s s e s s e s each a t t r i b u t e , and (2) h i s e v a l u a t i o n o f o r s a t i s f a c t i o n he would d e r i v e from each a t t r i b u t e .  38.  To date the a p p l i c a t i o n o f these models i n consumer r e s e a r c h been r e s t r i c t e d is  no  to questions  reason why  choices.  they s h o u l d  W i l k i e and  work i n t h i s area and and  o f the number and  and  not be  Pessemier  brand c h o i c e ,  solved.  the  formulations.  of  s i g n i f i c a n t i s s u e s which have a r i s e n These i s s u e s i n c l u d e the  determination  type of s a l i e n t a t t r i b u t e s f o r i n c l u s i o n i n the  measurement o f b e l i e f s ;  there  spatial  an e x c e l l e n t review  and measurement o f importance w e i g h t s ; the  ponents; and  although  extended t o the a n a l y s i s o f  (1973) p r o v i d e  i n d i c a t e the  i n p a r t remain t o be  the u t i l i t y  o f p r o d u c t and  has  model;  conceptualisation  the m a t h e m a t i c a l m a n i p u l a t i o n o f model com-  comparison o f t h i s type o f model w i t h a l t e r n a t i v e  I t i s e n c o u r a g i n g t o w i t n e s s the r i g o u r t y p i c a l o f  recent  work employing m u l t i - a t t r i b u t e a t t i t u d e measures, which i s i n marked c o n t r a s t t o the haphazard and  ad  hoa  approaches i n e a r l i e r  consumer  a t t i t u d e s t u d i e s where too o f t e n p s y c h o l o g i c a l t o o l s were borrowed w i t h i n s u f f i c i e n t consideration W i l k i e and  Pessemier  as t o t h e i r  appropriateness.  (1972, p . 438)  a l s o r e p o r t t h a t i n a l l cases  where the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f m u l t i - a t t r i b u t e a t t i t u d e measures been t e s t e d a g a i n s t b e h a v i o u r a l achieved.  has  c r i t e r i a p o s i t i v e r e s u l t s have been  They t h e r e f o r e c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e r e  brand a t t i t u d e s w i l l p r e d i c t brand preferences  i s l i t t l e question or c o n t r o l l e d  that  choice  b e h a v i o u r s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r than chance assignments o f  preference  or choice.  conclusion  can be  I t remains an open q u e s t i o n  reached i n r e l a t i o n t o consumers  seems l i t t l e  1  s p a t i a l choices, but  doubt t h a t the p o s s i b i l i t y i s worthy o f  G i v e n the emphasis p l a c e d research,  whether a s i m i l a r  there  exploration.  upon a t t i t u d e measurement i n m a r k e t i n g  i t i s s u r p r i s i n g t h a t a t t i t u d e models have r e c e i v e d  such  39.  s c a n t a t t e n t i o n i n the a n a l y s i s o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r by  geo-  graphers.  been  T h i s i s perhaps i n d i c a t i v e o f an over-emphasis h a v i n g  p l a c e d on Harvey's p r e c i p i t o u s judgement r e g a r d i n g utility  the p o t e n t i a l  o f a t t i t u d i n a l measures i n the development o f  v i o u r a l theory  (Harvey, 1969).  the a t t i t u d e - b e h a v i o u r cannot be  ignored  A t the same time, the u n c e r t a i n t y  l i n k demonstrated by  (Thomas, 1972).  t h a t the r e l a t i v e n e u t r a l i t y and i n v e s t i g a t e d by geographers  cognitive-beha-  social psychological  There i s r e a s o n t o s u s p e c t  sial  opinions  studies  however  f a m i l i a r i t y o f the b e h a v i o u r commonly  ( i n c l u d i n g consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r )  w i l l suppress the major c o n f o u n d i n g i n f l u e n c e t y p i c a l o f attitude research  of  traditional  i n s o c i a l p s y c h o l o g y , where, f r e q u e n t l y ,  have been sought i n r e l a t i o n t o r e l a t i v e l y  controver-  unfamiliar  behavioural s i t u a t i o n s . The  potential u t i l i t y  b e h a v i o u r has Golledge  o f a t t i t u d e models i n the s t u d y o f  been the s u b j e c t o f g e n e r a l  (1972) and  Golledge  (1970).  spatial  d i s c u s s i o n by Murphy  and  F u r t h e r m o r e , Murphy's d i s s e r t a t i o n  i l l u s t r a t e s a p r e l i m i n a r y e x p l o r a t i o n o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p between t u d i n a l measures and b e h a v i o u r a l patronage  (Murphy, 1970).  more l i k e l y  to p a t r o n i z e  The  criteria  i n c l u d i n g shopping  ment  facilities  towards which, they h e l d a p o s i t i v e  However, the q u e s t i o n a b l e  negatively  adequacy o f the r e s e a r c h  ( a f i v e c o n s t r u c t s e m a n t i c d i f f e r e n t i a l s c a l e ) , the sample  the d a t a cially  centre  r e s u l t s c o n f i r m e d t h a t consumers were  a t t i t u d e than those towards w h i c h they were n e u t r a l o r predisposed.  c o l l e c t i o n procedures p r o h i b i t d e f i n i t i v e  r e s t r i c t i v e i s t h a t , by  atti-  choosing  conclusions.  instruand Espe-  t o employ b i p o l a r a d j e c t i v a l  c o n s t r u c t s as h i s a t t i t u d i n a l measures, Murphy f a i l s  to i d e n t i f y  the  40.  attributes of  o f the  locations  which g e n e r a t e the  alternatives. A more i n s t r u c t i v e  study, r e l a t i n g measures o f the  component o f consumer a t t i t u d e s and  (i.e., beliefs)  membership i n demographic groups, i s t h a t  (1972).  Data were c o l l e c t e d  from 300  d e t a i l i n g responses t o twenty two point scale,  including  The  cognitive  to s p a t i a l behaviour  r e p o r t e d by  Margulis  respondents i n Newark, New  and  the  distances  c r e d i t a v a i l a b i l i t y and  and  the  between s c o r e s on  and  education.  found between b e l i e f s and measures were c o r r e l a t e d twenty two  portion  the  shopping  o f the p u r c h a s e .  income,  were  also  When b e l i e f  w i t h d i s t a n c e s t r a v e l l e d t o shop, twenty  as many o f the  related.  I t i s also interesting  s h i p s was  negative i n d i c a t i n g  statements were not that  that  the  b e l i e f about a p a r t i c u l a r s t o r e the T h i s r e s u l t perhaps suggests t h a t j u s t i f y t o themselves and  indicate  ethnicity,  of  c o e f f i c i e n t s were s i g n i f i c a n t , a s u r p r i s i n g l y h i g h p r o -  especially  more d i s t a n t  Using  c e r t a i n b e l i e f statements  Significant relationships  location  crite-  r a n k s , M a r g u l i s demonstrated  v a r i o u s demographic measures, w h i c h were:  f a m i l y s i z e , age  the  o f v a r i a n c e by  ten-  travelled  convenience, which were assumed t o u n d e r l i e consumer c h o i c e s .  significant relationships  a  b e l i e f statements r e l a t e d t o v a r i o u s  merchandise q u a l i t y ,  Friedman's two-way a n a l y s i s  Jersey,  b e l i e f statements measured on  demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ,  to purchase f u r n i t u r e . ria,  consumer's e v a l u a t i o n  opportunities.  the p o t e n t i a l  each o f the  the  distance  consumers b o l s t e r  shopper's travelled.  their beliefs  others t h e i r unwillingness to search Certainly  utility  the  results  distance  significant relation-  more p o s i t i v e  s h o r t e r the  obviously  are  of follow-up studies.  out  intriguing One  to  and  limitation  41.  s h o u l d be noted however and t h a t i s the t r e a t m e n t o f each b e l i e f ment as an independent  state-  v a r i a b l e r a t h e r than the more common p r o c e d u r e  i n p s y c h o m e t r i c s o f combining  s c o r e s on r e l a t e d s t a t e m e n t s .  Given  v u l n e r a b i l i t y o f s i n g l e statement r e s p o n s e s t o measurement e r r o r , reliability  and v a l i d i t y o f the d a t a i s enhanced by o b t a i n i n g  scale scores.  T h i s o f c o u r s e r e q u i r e s p r i o r d e f i n i t i o n o f the  s c a l e c o n s t r u c t s , which i s another i s s u e u n f o r t u n a t e l y n o t by M a r g u l i s i n r e l a t i o n t o h i s s e l e c t i o n o f b e l i e f  the  summative salient  mentioned  statements.  I t i s commonly r e c o g n i z e d t h a t a consumer's a t t i t u d e s towards cific  spe-  s t i m u l u s o b j e c t s are symptomatic o f u n d e r l y i n g and more g e n e r a l  value o r i e n t a t i o n s . are  the  However, i n many i n s t a n c e s a t t i t u d e s and v a l u e s  n o t o p e r a t i o n a l l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d b u t a r e r a t h e r assumed t o be  tially  essen-  synonymous as i s the case i n E n g e l et al. 's model o f consumer  behaviour  (1968, p. 166).  p r a g m a t i c grounds,  While  t h i s assumption  may  be j u s t i f i e d  on  i t does i g n o r e the d i s t i n c t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f c o n -  sumer v a l u e s which warrant  separate a t t e n t i o n .  Seminal work on the study o f v a l u e systems i s t h a t o f Rokeach (1968, 1969).  He has d e f i n e d a ' v a l u e ' as an " e n d u r i n g b e l i e f t h a t a  p a r t i c u l a r mode o f conduct o r a p a r t i c u l a r e n d - s t a t e o f e x i s t e n c e i s p e r s o n a l l y and s o c i a l l y p r e f e r a b l e t o a l t e r n a t i v e modes o f or  e n d - s t a t e s o f e x i s t e n c e " (1969, p. 550).  themselves are  conduct  V a l u e s a r e then ends i n  i n c o n t r a s t t o a t t i t u d e s towards s p e c i f i c o b j e c t s which  means towards the a t t a i n m e n t o f v a l u e d e n d - s t a t e s .  I t i s therefore  r e a s o n a b l e t o r e g a r d p a r t i c u l a r a t t i t u d e s and b e l i e f s as b e i n g d e r i v e d from v a l u e s  (Bern, 1970,  p. 1 7 ) .  Rosenberg's a t t i t u d e model, c i t e d  p r e v i o u s l y , which i n c o r p o r a t e s v a l u e r e l a t e d measures as  determinants  42.  of a f f e c t , lends f u r t h e r support  f o r t h i s view.  C o n s i s t e n t w i t h h i s d e f i n i t i o n , Rokeach d i s t i n g u i s h e s between 'terminal values' r e l a t e d to end-states  of existence  (e.g., e q u a l i t y ,  s a l v a t i o n , s e l f - f u l f i l l m e n t , and freedom) and ' i n s t r u m e n t a l v a l u e s ' r e l a t e d t o b r o a d modes o f conduct and c h a s t i t y ) .  Rokeach  (e.g., courage, honesty,  (1969) p r e s e n t s t h i r t y s i x such t e r m i n a l and  i n s t r u m e n t a l v a l u e s which have been found different criterion  friendship,  to d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y among  groups.  An a l t e r n a t i v e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  i s suggested  r e c o g n i s e s the f o l l o w i n g f o u r types o f v a l u e s : t a r i a n gains f o r s e l f ;  by J a n i s  (1) a n t i c i p a t e d  (2) a n t i c i p a t e d u t i l i t a r i a n  latter classification  Hansen  utili-  (4) a n t i c i p a t e d  (1972) r e g a r d s  this  scheme as p a r t i c u l a r l y a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e k i n d s  o f v a l u e s s a l i e n t i n consumer c h o i c e p r o c e s s e s y e t no e m p i r i c a l evidence  t o support  this  a l t h o u g h t h e r e i s as  contention.  To date s t u d i e s r e l a t i n g consumer v a l u e s t o b e h a v i o u r  have  upon the use o f m o t i v a t i o n a l and p e r s o n a l i t y r e s e a r c h t e c h n i q u e s loped i n psychology.  who  gains f o r o t h e r s ;  (3) a n t i c i p a t e d a p p r o v a l and d i s a p p r o v a l from s e l f ; a p p r o v a l and d i s a p p r o v a l from o t h e r s .  (1959)  Edwards' P e r s o n a l P r e f e r e n c e Schedule  relied deve-  (Edwards,  1954) i s a p e r s o n a l i t y i n v e n t o r y w h i c h has been f r e q u e n t l y a p p l i e d i n s t u d i e s o f consumer b e h a v i o u r . attempting Koponen  I t was used by Evans  (1958, 1968) i n  t o d i s c r i m i n a t e between F o r d and C h e v r o l e t owners, and by  (1960) and Massy et al.  (1968) i n s e e k i n g t o account  ences on a number o f consumer p u r c h a s e v a r i a b l e s .  Various other studies  i l l u s t r a t e t h e use o f o t h e r p e r s o n a l i t y i n v e n t o r i e s . r e s u l t s a c h i e v e d have n o t been i m p r e s s i v e ; as W e l l s  for differ-  O v e r a l l , the (1966, p. 187)  43.  succinctly states: sistent.  Almost  "The  f i n d i n g s o f t h e s e s t u d i e s have been v e r y  always they have r e s u l t e d i n s t a t i s t i c a l l y  con-  signifi-  c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s t h a t have been too s m a l l t o be o f much p r a c t i c a l v a l u e ". I t would be premature however t o c o n c l u d e on the b a s i s o f t h i s evidence t h a t there i s l i t t l e behaviour  t o be g a i n e d i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g  from the measurement o f consumer v a l u e s .  the apparent  whether t e s t s d e v e l o p e d be e x p e c t e d t o account  i n psychology  advocate  has been adopted  for clinical  can  unrelated area  al.  In t h i s r e g a r d , E n g e l  (1968,  specifically  In the few cases where t h i s  the r e s u l t s have been e n c o u r a g i n g .  f o r example, has demonstrated  attributable  and o t h e r uses  the development o f t e s t i n s t r u m e n t s  d e s i g n e d f o r consumer r e s e a r c h .  that  I t i s questionable  f o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n a seemingly  such as consumer c h o i c e b e h a v i o u r .  White  approach (1966),  c l e a r d i f f e r e n c e s i n product preferences  between groups d i f f e r i n g i n t h e i r s c o r e s on s p e c i f i c a l l y value  w e l l be  lack of success i n previous s t u d i e s i s l a r g e l y  t o t h e r e s e a r c h i n s t r u m e n t s t h a t have been used.  p . 150)  I t may  consumer  designed  dimensions. An e a r l y s t u d y , i n d i c a t i v e o f t h e t y p e s o f v a l u e o r i e n t a t i o n s  s a l i e n t t o consumer s p a t i a l c h o i c e s , i s t h a t o f Stone Chicago  respondents  were asked whether t h e y would p r e f e r t o p a t r o n i z e  l o c a l s t o r e s o r l a r g e c h a i n s t o r e s and why. d i f f e r e n t o r i e n t a t i o n s Stone which were:  the  On  the b a s i s o f t h e i r  r e c o g n i z e d f o u r major c l a s s e s o f  'economic' shopper,  p r i c e , q u a l i t y and assortment shopper who  (1954) i n which  who  was  o f merchandise;  shopper  extremely s e n s i t i v e t o the  'personalising'  formed s t r o n g r e l a t i o n s w i t h s t o r e p e r s o n n e l which were  c r u c i a l i n d e t e r m i n i n g s t o r e c h o i c e ; the  ' e t h i c a l ' shopper who  was  w i l l i n g t o s a c r i f i c e lower p r i c e s and w i d e r s e l e c t i o n i n o r d e r t o s u p p o r t the s m a l l r e t a i l e r i n t h e f a c e o f c o m p e t i t i o n from the c h a i n s t o r e s ; and the  ' a p a t h e t i c ' shopper who  t a s k , and hence l o c a t i o n a l convenience of  found proved  shopping  an onerous  c r u c i a l to her  selection  a s t o r e r a t h e r than p r i c e , q u a l i t y o f goods, r e l a t i o n s w i t h s t o r e  personnel or e t h i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . In  a more r e c e n t study Kenny-Levick  the e x t e n t t o which Stone's  (1969) attempted  t y p o l o g y c o u l d be used t o segment t h e  c e r y t r a d e market i n L i v e r p o o l , England. were asked why store.  t o demonstrate  A sample o f 554  they p r e f e r r e d t o shop a t t h e i r f i r s t  gro-  housewives  choice grocery  Responses were c l a s s i f i e d i n terms o f twelve c a t e g o r i e s w h i c h  were then c o l l a p s e d t o form  f i v e b r o a d e r based  divisions.  L e v i c k i d e n t i f i e d these f i v e c a t e g o r i e s w i t h Stone's types p l u s a miscellaneous category.  He  Kenny-  f o u r shopper  then compared t h e  percentage  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f consumers i n the f o u r c o r r e s p o n d i n g c a t e g o r i e s . found t h a t a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t e d between the two tions.  was  counterparts.  s t r o n g e r i n C h i c a g o , w h i l e the  and the g r e a t e s t importance  s e v e n f o l d t y p o l o g y , the f i r s t  'personalizing'  'economic' f a c t o r was  less factor  of equal  Kenny-Levick  con-  c o u l d b e s t be d e s c r i b e d i n terms o f a four being coincident with  w h i l e t h e r e m a i n i n g t h r e e were d e f i n e d as s e l f - i m a g e ' and  The  t o b o t h sample groups.  c l u d e d t h a t L i v e r p o o l shoppers  of  distribu-  L i v e r p o o l housewives seemed t o be more ' a p a t h e t i c ' and  ' e t h i c a l ' than t h e i r C h i c a g o  He  'pleasure seeking'.  are open t o m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c r i t i c i s m ,  'time-saving',  Stone's, 'enhancement  Although both o f these s t u d i e s the r e s u l t s a r e s u g g e s t i v e as  45.  to the types of value orientations which may be s a l i e n t i n the analysis of consumer s p a t i a l behaviour. There i s c l e a r l y much scope f o r further exploration of the r e l a t i o n ships between consumer values and s p a t i a l behaviour.  The use of values  rather than s p e c i f i c attitudes as independent variables i n consumer research i s p a r t i c u l a r l y appealing because of t h e i r more pervasive character and hence t h e i r p o t e n t i a l l y wider explantory power.  As Levy  (1966) has noted, a l l too often consumer variables most highly related to behaviour have been so close to the behaviour as to be redundant i n explaining i t .  There i s reason to hope that models based upon appro-  p r i a t e measures of consumer values would avoid t h i s f r u s t r a t i n g c i r c u l a r i t y while, at the same time, proving e f f e c t i v e i n accounting for behavioural differences.  C.  SYNTHESIS AND THE CONTEXT OF THE PRESENT STUDY  The purpose of t h i s review of consumer behaviour models has been to i l l u s t r a t e the various approaches open to the student of consumer s p a t i a l behaviour, some of which have been extensively explored already, others p a r t i a l l y so, and others hardly at a l l .  Although each model has  been discussed separately, c l e a r i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s e x i s t between them, and p a r t i c u l a r l y between those which are based upon psychological variables as t h e i r integration within comprehensive models demonstrates. There seems, f o r example, to be a close s i m i l a r i t y between image and attitude models, e s p e c i a l l y where the l a t t e r involve the use of semant i c d i f f e r e n t i a l measures based on the work of Osgood et al. (1957). This s i m i l a r i t y has been noted i n a geographic context by Downs (1970a).  The p r e s e n t study r e l a t e s and c o n t r i b u t e s t o the e x i s t i n g t u r e i n two ways. behaviour  Firstly,  i s developed  and  litera-  a d i s p o s i t i o n a l model o f consumer s p a t i a l tested.  T h i s r e p r e s e n t e s an e x t e n s i o n o f  the r e s e a r c h d e s c r i b e d i n the p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n under the h e a d i n g a t t i t u d e and v a l u e models. the l e a d o f C r a i k  (1969, 1970)  the term i n e n v i r o n m e n t a l dimensions,  The  term dispositions and McKechnie  psychology  of  i s used f o l l o w i n g  (1972) who  have employed  t o d e s c r i b e those p s y c h o l o g i c a l  u n d e r l y i n g s p e c i f i c a t t i t u d e s and b e h a v i o u r , which a r e  used by the i n d i v i d u a l t o d e s c r i b e , comprehend and environmental  objects.  T h i s d e f i n i t i o n was  seen  evaluate a set of  to c o i n c i d e c l o s e l y  w i t h the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the p s y c h o l o g i c a l c o n s t r u c t s i n c l u d e d i n the p r e s e n t  study.  F o l l o w i n g from the p r e v i o u s d i s c u s s i o n o f a t t i t u d e and  value  models, the r o l e o f d i s p o s i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s w i t h i n a model o f consumer s p a t i a l behaviour  i s h y p o t h e s i s e d t o be  as shown i n F i g u r e 1.2.  f l o w diagram i s e s s e n t i a l l y a s i m p l i f i e d  This  and m o d i f i e d v e r s i o n o f  E n g e l et al. ' s model shown i n F i g u r e 1.1.  Purchasing behaviour i s  r e g a r d e d as the outcome o f a s e q u e n t i a l p r o c e s s whereby the consumer i n t e r a c t s w i t h and c o l l e c t s i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g the r e t a i l  environ-  ment l e a d i n g t o the f o r m a t i o n o f d i s p o s i t i o n s , which summarize v a l u e s t h e consumer seeks  t o s a t i s f y through h i s behaviour.  d i s p o s i t i o n s are l i n k e d t o s p e c i f i c r e t a i l or  shopping  c e n t r e s ) through  alternatives  the f o r m a t i o n o f a t t i t u d e s .  the  These  (i.e. , stores I t i s on  b a s i s o f t h e s e a t t i t u d e s t h a t the a l t e r n a t i v e s are e v a l u a t e d and p r e f e r r e d a l t e r n a t i v e d e c i d e d upon.  The  conduct  of s p a t i a l  the  a  behaviour  47.  is  c o n t i n g e n t upon t h i s d e c i s i o n .  gives r i s e t o r e i n f o r c i n g  The degree o f s a t i s f a c t i o n  attained  o r m o d i f y i n g feedback e f f e c t s , b u t , s i n c e  a s t a t i c form o f t h e model was t e s t e d i n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y , dynamic components a r e o m i t t e d . FIGURE 1 . 2 A DISPOSITIONAL MODEL OF CONSUMER SPATIAL BEHAVIOUR  RETAIL ENVIRONMENT (Alternative Stores/Centres)  DISPOSITIONS  XL SPECIFIC ATTITUDES  EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES  DECISION  SPATIAL BEHAVIOUR  these  48.  The r e s e a r c h p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n i n f a c t i s l i m i t e d t o a p a r t i a l t e s t o f t h i s model s i n c e t h e d a t a s e t was r e s t r i c t e d t o d i s p o s i t i o n a l and b e h a v i o u r a l measures.  The i n t e r v e n i n g components and  i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s were t h e r e f o r e i n f e r r e d r a t h e r than demonstrated, t h e i r v e r i f i c a t i o n would c l e a r l y r e q u i r e t h a t a t t i t u d i n a l measures  also  be o b t a i n e d . The second  c o n t r i b u t i o n o f t h i s study t o t h e e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e i s  t o compare t h e e f f i c a c y o f a d i s p o s i t i o n a l model w i t h t h a t o f two o t h e r types o f model as p r e d i c t o r s o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r .  The two  o t h e r models a r e b a s e d on l o c a t i o n a l and b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s and e s s e n t i a l l y r e p r e s e n t the u t i l i t y viously outlined.  and s o c i a l c l a s s c a t e g o r i e s as p r e -  S i n c e t h e e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e i s r e p l e t e w i t h ex-  amples o f t h e l a t t e r two model t y p e s , emphasis i n the f o l l o w i n g two c h a p t e r s i s p l a c e d on t h e development o f a d i s p o s i t i o n a l model.  D.  SUMMARY  The l i t e r a t u r e review p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r has e s t a b l i s h e d the context o f the p r e s e n t study.  V a r i o u s consumer b e h a v i o u r  have been d e s c r i b e d w i t h p a r t i c u l a r emphasis b e i n g p l a c e d on a p p l i c a t i o n t o t h e a n a l y s i s o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r .  models their  The r e s e a r c h  p r e s e n t e d i n subsequent c h a p t e r s b u i l d s on p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s i n d e v e l o p i n g and t e s t i n g a d i s p o s i t i o n a l model o f consumer s p a t i a l and  behaviour  i n comparing t h e p r e d i c t i v e power o f such a model w i t h t h a t o f models  ba'sed on l o c a t i o n a l and b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s .  In the f o l l o w i n g chapter,  a t t e n t i o n s w i t c h e s from a d i s c u s s i o n o f the g e n e r a l c o n t e x t o f the study t o , a d e t a i l e d c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e r e s e a r c h o b j e c t i v e s and t h e r e s e a r c h design.  CHAPTER 2  RESEARCH DESIGN  A.  INTRODUCTION  T h i s c h a p t e r b e g i n s w i t h a statement t h i s study.  o f t h e r e s e a r c h purposes o f  The r e s e a r c h d e s i g n f o r m u l a t e d t o a c h i e v e these  i s then p r e s e n t e d and i t s major components a r e summarized. c o n s t r u c t i o n and development o f a p s y c h o m e t r i c  purposes S i n c e the  s c a l i n g instrument i s  c e n t r a l t o t h e d e s i g n , t h e assessment o f t h e r e l i a b i l i t y  and v a l i d i t y  o f such measurement t o o l s i s c o n s i d e r e d .  B.  RESEARCH PURPOSES  The o b j e c t i v e s o f t h i s s t u d y , which a r e i n p a r t s u b s t a n t i v e and i n p a r t m e t h o d o l o g i c a l , can be i t e m i z e d as f o l l o w s :  1.  To p r o v i d e e m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s and s p a t i a l  2.  behaviour.  To compare models based upon l o c a t i o n a l , b i o g r a p h i c a l and d i s p o s i t i o n a l measures as p r e d i c t o r s o f shopping b e h a v i o u r u s i n g d a t a c o l l e c t e d from a s t r a t i f i e d sample o f households  random  w i t h i n t h e c i t y o f Vancouver and  immediate e n v i r o n s . 3.  To assess* t h e i n c r e m e n t a l v a r i a t i o n i n b e h a v i o u r accounted  f o r by the i n c l u s i o n o f d i s p o s i t i o n a l  b l e s i n the s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s .  - 49 -  varia-  50.  4.  To demonstrate t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n , development and t e s t ing  of a s e t o f L i k e r t scales i n a geographical  Two major c o n s i d e r a t i o n s governed t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t three o b j e c t i v e s .  context.  o f the f i r s t  I n t h e f i r s t p l a c e , a s t r o n g argument has been made  by v a r i o u s r e s e a r c h e r s t h a t t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n  and measurement o f s a l i e n t  c o g n i t i v e v a r i a b l e s would s i g n i f i c a n t l y a i d i n t h e development o f models of and  s p a t i a l behaviour  t h e o r e t i c a l adequacy  W i n k e l , 1971). ing  by combining t h e q u a l i t i e s o f p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y (Downs, 1971; G o l l e d g e ,  I t seemed n e c e s s a r y  1970; Harvey, 1969;  t h e r e f o r e , i n the context o f e x i s t -  c o g n i t i v e - b e h a v i o u r a l r e s e a r c h i n geography, t o supplement t h e  p a u c i t y o f e m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s documenting t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between c o g n i t i v e measures and v a r i a t i o n s i n b e h a v i o u r . of  Hence the e s t a b l i s h m e n t  the f i r s t research o b j e c t i v e . Secondly,  s i n c e a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount o f r e s e a r c h has a l r e a d y been  completed i n t h e s p e c i f i c a r e a o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r , d e s i r a b l e t o formulate  i t was  a r e s e a r c h d e s i g n which would a l l o w comparison o f  a model based upon c o g n i t i v e v a r i a b l e s w i t h models based upon measures commonly employed i n e x i s t i n g s t u d i e s .  T h i s r a t i o n a l e accounts  i n c l u s i o n o f t h e second and t h i r d o b j e c t i v e s l i s t e d  f o r the  above.  Of somewhat l e s s e r importance i s t h e f o u r t h o b j e c t i v e w h i c h i s largely methodological.  E x i s t i n g s t u d i e s have demonstrated t h e a p p l i c a -  t i o n o f various psychometric  s c a l i n g techniques  i n c l u d i n g t h e semantic d i f f e r e n t i a l metric multidimensional p r i s i n g t h a t t o date  scaling  i n geographic  contexts,  (Brown, 1974; Down, 1970), and non-  (Doddridge,  1972).  I t i s somewhat s u r -  t h e r e appears t o have been no r e p o r t e d use o f L i k e r t  51.  s c a l i n g procedures.  This i s p a r t i c u l a r l y  so s i n c e t h e r e i s e v i d e n c e t o  suggest t h a t measurements based upon L i k e r t s c a l e s are more r e l i a b l e  and  more a c c u r a t e l y p r e d i c t b e h a v i o u r than those o b t a i n e d by o t h e r methods ( T i t t l e and H i l l , In  1967).  a d d i t i o n , the e v i d e n c e from g e o g r a p h i c a l s t u d i e s employing  psy-  c h o m e t r i c s c a l i n g p r o c e d u r e s i n d i c a t e s an u n f o r t u n a t e f a i l u r e t o a s s e s s the r e l i a b i l i t y to  and v a l i d i t y o f the r e s e a r c h i n s t r u m e n t s .  suggest t h a t the d a t a o b t a i n e d i s n e c e s s a r i l y  This i s not  suspect, but simply that  r o u t i n e t e s t i n g p r o c e d u r e s have n o t been f o l l o w e d .  An a d d i t i o n a l metho-  d o l o g i c a l o b j e c t i v e o f the p r e s e n t study t h e r e f o r e was  to construct,  develop and t e s t a s c a l i n g i n s t r u m e n t i n accordance w i t h e s t a b l i s h e d psychometric standards.  C.  RESEARCH DESIGN  The r e s e a r c h d e s i g n f o r m u l a t e d t o a c h i e v e the s t a t e d appears  i n the form o f a flow diagram i n F i g u r e 2.1.  objectives  Components 1 t o 9  e x c l u s i v e l y concern the development o f a r e l i a b l e and v a l i d L i k e r t s c a l i n g instrument.  I t i s important, t h e r e f o r e , that b r i e f  consideration  be g i v e n a t the o u t s e t t o L i k e r t s c a l e s and t o the c o n t i n g e n t n o t i o n s of  (i)  reliability  and v a l i d i t y  i n p s y c h o m e t r i c measurement.  L i k e r t Scales  L i k e r t s c a l e s t a k e t h e i r name from the r e s e a r c h e r r e s p o n s i b l e f o r o r i g i n a t i n g t h i s psychometric technique  ( L i k e r t , 1932). They are a  p a r t i c u l a r type o f summative s c a l e s p e c i f i c a l l y d e s i g n e d f o r t h e measurement o f a t t i t u d e s .  In e s s e n c e , a L i k e r t s c a l e c o n s i s t s o f a s e t o f  FIGURE 2.1  FLOW DIAGRAM OF THE RESEARCH DESIGN  53.  a set o f statements which subjects respond to on a five point scale ranging from 'strongly agree' to 'strongly disagree". Each of the statements i s designed to represent a facet of the attitude i n question, and the attitude score for any respondent i s simply a summation of the scores on each of the items (statements) contributing to the scale. As with other s c a l i n g procedures based upon a summative model, L i k e r t scales assume that contributing items are monotonically related to underl y i n g t r a i t s and that a summation of item scores i s approximately l i n e a r l y related to the t r a i t  (Nunnally, 1967, p. 70 f f . ) .  Previous psycholo-  g i c a l research indicates that summative scales have a number of advantages over other s c a l i n g methods:  "they (1) follow from an appealing model;  (2) are rather easy to construct; (3) usually are highly r e l i a b l e ; (4) can be adapted to the measurement of many d i f f e r e n t kinds of a t t i t u d e s ; and (5) have produced meaningful r e s u l t s i n many d i f f e r e n t studies to date" (Nunnally, 1967, p. 531). Further support f o r the s e l e c t i o n of L i k e r t s c a l i n g as a technique for measuring i n d i v i d u a l dispositions i n t h i s study i s derived from i t s use i n a comparable context by environmental psychologists. regard, the work of McKechnie (1970, 1972) i s i n s t r u c t i v e .  In this Faced with  the task of assessing i n d i v i d u a l orientations to both natural and b u i l t environments, McKechnie developed nine L i k e r t scales describing d i f f e r ent a t t i t u d e s , b e l i e f s and preferences with respect to a range of e n v i ronmental settings and experiences.  In a subsequent study, the r e l a t i o n -  ships between environmental d i s p o s i t i o n s , s p e c i f i c environmental attitudes and l e i s u r e a c t i v i t i e s were examined as a basis f o r i d e n t i f y i n g environmental l i f e - s t y l e groups.  54.  (ii)  The Assessment o f R e l i a b i l i t y  In t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f any t e s t o f a t t i t u d e s , a b i l i t i e s ,  aptitudes  o r whatever, i t i s assumed t h a t any s i n g l e respondent has a 'true on t h e a t t r i b u t e i n q u e s t i o n , to provide  and t h a t t h e purpose o f the t e s t items i s  a r e l i a b l e estimate  that departures  of that  from h y p o t h e t i c a l  'true s c o r e ' .  'true s c o r e s ' w i l l  combined e f f e c t o f v a r i o u s e r r o r s o f measurement. these  e r r o r s are minimized i n c r e a s e s r e l i a b i l i t y ,  obtained  score'  I t i s recognized occur  due t o t h e  The e x t e n t  t o which  and hence t h e r e s u l t s  i n any s i n g l e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f a t e s t s h o u l d be r e p e a t a b l e on  subsequent The  occasions.  sources  o f measurement e r r o r a r e e s s e n t i a l l y o f two k i n d s :  those which a r e i n h e r e n t w i t h i n a p a r t i c u l a r s e t o f t e s t i t e m s ; and those which o c c u r between d i f f e r e n t times.  E r r o r s o f the f i r s t type  sampling.  forms o f a t e s t g i v e n a t d i f f e r e n t  l a r g e l y r e f l e c t e r r o r s due t o c o n t e n t  C l e a r l y , t h e s e t o f items s e l e c t e d t o make up a p a r t i c u l a r  t e s t form i s b u t a sample o f the u n i v e r s e o f items which e x i s t s t o meas u r e the a t t r i b u t e i n q u e s t i o n . non-representative the estimated important  sample o f items b e i n g  s c o r e s would d e p a r t  s e l e c t e d with  a p p r e c i a b l y from  the r e s u l t  'true s c o r e s ' .  that It is  t h e r e f o r e t o have a means o f a s s e s s i n g t h e amount o f e r r o r  a r i s i n g from t h i s s o u r c e . 1967,  There i s t h e r e f o r e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a  Ch. 6) p r o v i d e s  The t h e o r y o f measurement e r r o r  a b a s i s f o r such an assessment.  (Nunnally,  I t emerges t h a t  the e r r o r a r i s i n g from t h e sampling o f items i s p r e d i c t a b l e from t h e average c o r r e l a t i o n between items on a p a r t i c u l a r t e s t form, and t h e subsequent c a l c u l a t i o n o f c o e f f i c i e n t a l p h a as t h e i n d e x o f r e l i a b i l i t y .  55.  There a r e o t h e r s o u r c e s o f e r r o r w i t h i n a- s e t o f t e s t items which a r i s e f o r example from respondents  g u e s s i n g answers o r from  subjective  s c o r i n g p r o c e d u r e s , b u t , s i n c e t h e s e a r e n o t s i g n i f i c a n t f o r t h e type of  t e s t developed i n the p r e s e n t s t u d y , they w i l l  r e c e i v e no f u r t h e r  consideration. Three major s o u r c e s o f e r r o r between t e s t s have been (Nunnally, 1967, p . 209 f f . ) . ences  identified  The f i r s t a r i s e s from s y s t e m a t i c d i f f e r -  i n the content o f d i f f e r e n t  forms o f a t e s t such t h a t t h e two  s e t s o f items p l a c e emphasis on d i s t i n c t a s p e c t s o f t h e a t t r i b u t e b e i n g measured.  T h i s problem  tends t o be more c r i t i c a l w i t h r e s p e c t t o t e s t s  of  ability  (e.g., s p e l l i n g t e s t s )  of  s c o r i n g can r e s u l t i n e r r o r between t e s t s b u t a g a i n t h i s i s u s u a l l y  than t o a t t i t u d e s c a l i n g .  n o t c r i t i c a l i n the measurement o f a t t i t u d e s where o b j e c t i v e p r o c e d u r e s a r e n o r m a l l y employed. perhaps  Subjectivity  scoring  The t h i r d major s o u r c e o f e r r o r , and  t h e most d i f f i c u l t t o c o u n t e r , i s t h a t due t o t h e f a c t  p e o p l e change w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e a t t r i b u t e .  that  Measures o f a t t i t u d e a r e  c l e a r l y n o t immune t o such v a r i a t i o n s , s i n c e e x p e r i e n c e s and t h e u n f o l d i n g of  events between t e s t s may s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n f l u e n c e response p a t t e r n s .  In  many i n s t a n c e s , t h e n o n - c o n f o r m i t y  o f a t t i t u d e s and b e h a v i o u r may be  a t t r i b u t a b l e t o such changes i n t e r v e n i n g between t h e measurement o f a t t i tude and t h e m o n i t o r i n g o f c o n t i n g e n t b e h a v i o u r , p a r t i c u l a r l y when t h e attitude relates to issues of current controversy. The s t a n d a r d p r o c e d u r e  f o r a s s e s s i n g v a r i a t i o n s between t e s t s i s t o  a d m i n i s t e r a l t e r n a t i v e forms a t v a r i o u s time i n t e r v a l s .  The c o r r e l a t i o n  between the s c o r e s o b t a i n e d u s i n g the a l t e r n a t i v e forms i s then the b a s i s for  assessing r e l i a b i l i t y .  I d e a l l y , a l t e r n a t i v e forms s h o u l d be a d m i n i s -  56.  t e r e d on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s t o i n v e s t i g a t e s h o r t , mid tions is  and l o n g term  varia-  ( f o r example r e t e s t i n g a f t e r two weeks, s i x weeks and s i x months  desirable).  There are some o b v i o u s p r a c t i c a l o b s t a c l e s t o  retesting  and p r i n c i p a l l y t h a t o f a c c e s s t o the same group o f r e s p o n d e n t s . not s u r p r i s i n g t h e r e f o r e t h a t the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f a l t e r n a t i v e has n o r m a l l y employed a ' c a p t i v e ' s t u d e n t group.  It is forms  U n f o r t u n a t e l y , i n the  p r e s e n t s t u d y , which drew upon a c i t y - w i d e sample from the g e n e r a l popul a t i o n , i t was  (iii)  not p o s s i b l e to perform  The Assessement o f V a l i d i t y  Cronbach and Meehl dictive, fer  retests.  (1955) d i s t i n g u i s h f o u r t y p e s o f v a l i d i t y :  c o n c u r r e n t , c o n t e n t and c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y .  o n l y t o the e x t e n t o f the temporal  The  first  two  predif-  s e p a r a t i o n between the a d m i n i s t r a -  t i o n o f the t e s t i n s t r u m e n t and the measurement o f the r e l e v a n t c r i t e r i o n . F o r the purposes  of t h i s o u t l i n e t h e r e f o r e , i t i s necessary only to  s i d e r p r e d i c t i v e , c o n t e n t and c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y .  con-  Although i t i s  i m p o r t a n t t o a p p r e c i a t e the r e l e v a n c e o f each o f t h e s e , i t i s a l s o n e c e s s a r y t o r e c o g n i s e the i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e  Predictive  validity  concerns  t h a t e x i s t s between them.  the use o f a r e s e a r c h i n s t r u m e n t t o  e s t i m a t e some i m p o r t a n t form o f b e h a v i o u r where the l a t t e r i s r e f e r r e d to  as the  'criterion'.  A normal p r o c e d u r e  then t o o b t a i n an independent  i s to administer a t e s t ,  and  c r i t e r i o n measure on the same s u b j e c t s , and  s u b s e q u e n t l y t o compute the c o r r e l a t i o n o f the two  sets of results.  The  measure o f c o r r e l a t i o n i s then t a k e n t o be a d i r e c t i n d i c a t i o n o f the predictive validity  o f the r e s e a r c h i n s t r u m e n t .  C l e a r l y , both  sound  t h e o r y and common sense need t o be a p p l i e d i n the s e l e c t i o n o f p r e d i c t o r  57.  instruments f o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n  i f the danger o f s p u r i o u s p r e d i c t i o n i s  t o be a v o i d e d . To t e s t t h e p r e d i c t i v e  v a l i d i t y o f a s p e c i f i c research instrument  would seem t o be an immediate and o b v i o u s concern whenever p s y c h o l o g i c a l scaling  i n s t r u m e n t s are used,  and y e t t h e r e a r e few cases i n t h e consumer  s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r l i t e r a t u r e which document such t e s t i n g .  Psychological  t e s t s have been d e v i s e d and a d m i n i s t e r e d which p u r p o r t t o measure b l e s which d i r e c t l y impinge  upon shopping b e h a v i o u r , and y e t t h e r e has  been a f a i l u r e t o demonstrate predict  varia-  t h a t the s c o r e s o b t a i n e d  consistently  r e t a i l choices.  I n some c a s e s , t h i s f a i l u r e can be e x p l a i n e d i n terms o f t h e l i m i t e d aims o f t h e r e s e a r c h i n v e s t i g a t i o n  (Kunkel and B e r r y , 1968), where t h e  c o n c e r n was r a t h e r w i t h c o n s t r u c t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n than w i t h h y p o t h e s i s testing.  I n another case  (Downs, 1970), u n f o r e s e e n  p r e v e n t e d the t e s t i n g o f t h e p r e d i c t i v e ment. diate  d a t a problems  v a l i d i t y o f the research i n s t r u -  With r e s p e c t t o t h i s most s i m p l e form o f v a l i d i t y t e s t i n g , s t u d i e s a r e o b v i o u s l y needed i f t h e p r e d i c t i v e  t e s t i n s t r u m e n t s i s t o be a s s e s s e d .  accuracy o f the  I t i s necessary t o  demonstrate  c o n v i n c i n g l y t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s , who d i f f e r i n terms o f t h e i r of the r e t a i l exhibit  environment  Validation  b a s i c a l l y i n v o l v e s t h e t e s t i n g o f two r e l a t e d  r e t a i l choices.  i n this  hypotheses:  e r s w i t h markedly d i f f e r e n t t e s t s c o r e s e x h i b i t and t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s  cognition  as measured by t h e t e s t i n s t r u m e n t ,  d i f f e r e n t patterns o f behaviour.  imme-  also context  t h a t consum-  d i f f e r e n t r e t a i l choices;  with s i m i l a r t e s t score p r o f i l e s e x h i b i t  similar  58.  Content Validity  has two d i s t i n c t a s p e c t s .  F i r s t l y , confirmation  o f c o n t e n t v a l i d i t y demands t h a t the t e s t items c o n s t i t u t e a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample o f t h e u n i v e r s e o f items which i n that t e s t .  c o u l d p o s s i b l y be i n c l u d e d  I t i s i n t h i s c o n t e x t t h a t a p r i o r n o t i o n o f t h e composi-  t i o n o f t h e u n i v e r s e o f items assumes g r e a t importance.  This i s not a  p r o b l e m i f p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h has e f f e c t i v e l y i s o l a t e d t h e v a r i a b l e s r e l e v a n t t o the area o f i n v e s t i g a t i o n .  An a priori  approach can be more  p r o b l e m a t i c , however, where the n a t u r e o f t h e v a r i a b l e s i s n o t w e l l understood.  The p o s s i b i l i t y  i s then i n c r e a s e d o f the t e s t items  consti-  t u t i n g a n o n - r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample o f t h e u n i v e r s e . S t u d i e s o f s t o r e s e l e c t i o n undertaken under image' r e s e a r c h can be c r i t i c i s e d  the h e a d i n g o f ' s t o r e  from t h e p o i n t o f view t h a t  c i e n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n has been g i v e n t o c o n t e n t v a l i d i t y .  insuffi-  Such s t u d i e s  have l a r g e l y assumed t h a t t h e v a r i a b l e s s a l i e n t t o s t o r e c h o i c e c o i n c i d e w i t h t h e o b j e c t i v e a t t r i b u t e s o f t h e r e t a i l environment,  such as p r i c e  l e v e l , q u a l i t y o f goods, p e r s o n n e l , i n t e r i o r d e s i g n and so on. it  i s o b v i o u s t h a t such a t t r i b u t e s are o f fundamental  While  importance, t h e r e  i s e v i d e n c e t o suggest t h a t more s p e c i f i c a s p e c t s o f t h e s e g e n e r a l i s e d n o t i o n s c o n s t i t u t e the c r i t i c a l v a r i a b l e s  ( T a y l o r , 1972).  I f this i s  t r u e , an attempt must be made i n t h e c o u r s e o f t e s t c o n s t r u c t i o n t o i d e n t i f y these v a r i a b l e s i f t h e requirements o f c o n t e n t v a l i d i t y a r e t o be  satisfied. I t can be argued t h a t t e s t items suggested by a subsample r e p r e s e n -  t a t i v e o f p o t e n t i a l respondents b e t t e r meet t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f c o n t e n t validity  than items imposed  a priori  by the r e s e a r c h e r .  The p r o c e d u r e  f o r e l i c i t i n g t e s t items can be based upon s t r u c t u r e d o r u n s t r u c t u r e d  59.  interview techniques. and M a i r , 1968)  The  illustrates  r e p e r t o r y g r i d t e s t . ( K e l l y , 1955; a method o f p s y c h o m e t r i c  s c a l i n g which  w i t h e l i c i t i n g s c a l e c o n s t r u c t s from the respondent. been suggested Hudson, 1970  and  a p p l i e d i n consumer r e s e a r c h  and 1971,  Bannister  T h i s method  begins has  ( H a r r i s o n and S a r r e ,  1971;  Sampson 1971).  An a l t e r n a t i v e approach i s t o c o n t e n t a n a l y s e u n s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r views i n which respondents  are r e q u e s t e d t o a r t i c u l a t e s a l i e n t  o f t h e i r a t t i t u d e s and b e h a v i o u r .  Again i n the c o n t e x t o f consumer s p a -  t i a l behaviour research there are precedents (Kunkel and B e r r y , 1968). a t t e n d a n t problems and  f o r employing  aspect of content v a l i d i t y  t h e t e s t items a r e p r e s e n t e d .  be o f a  format. 1  1  always-never',  o r whatever o t h e r k i n d .  The way  n o r m a l l y i n d i c a t e which format  f o r test item  has  identifica-  than a w h o l l y a priori,  approach.  r e l a t e s t o the manner i n which  Of p a r t i c u l a r importance  I t i s necessary  'true-false ,  approach  i s c e r t a i n l y not a f o o l p r o o f method o f e n s u r i n g  t i o n can perhaps be more e a s i l y defended  o f response  this  C l e a r l y , the use o f i n t e r v i e w p r o c e d u r e s  c o n t e n t v a l i d i t y ; n o n e t h e l e s s such a p r o c e d u r e  A second  aspects  i s the c h o i c e  t o d e c i d e whether responses  should  'strongly agree-strongly disagree'  i n which the items are e x p r e s s e d  will  c o n s t i t u t e s t h e most s e n s i b l e c h o i c e ; b u t ,  t h i s does not n e c e s s a r i l y r u l e out the need t o a d m i n i s t e r the t e s t u s i n g d i f f e r e n t response  formats  as a check on the c o n s i s t e n c y o f  responses.  These comments are perhaps s u f f i c i e n t t o i n d i c a t e t h a t , a l t h o u g h s t e p s can be taken t o i n c r e a s e c o n f i d e n c e i n c o n t e n t v a l i d i t y , i t s assessment must almost  i n e v i t a b l y p r o c e e d on an i n t u i t i v e b a s i s , w h i c h  i s s u b s t a n t i a t e d by the o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t :  "content v a l i d i t y mainly  upon an a p p e a l t o the p r o p r i e t y o f c o n t e n t and the way  that i t i s  rests  60.  presented"  (Nunnally,  Construct validity research.  1967,  p.  83).  i s the t h i r d a s p e c t  Cronbach and Meehl  (1955, p.  287)  of v a l i d a t i o n i n psychometric state that:  v a l i d a t i o n i s i n v o l v e d whenever a t e s t i s to be  i n t e r p r e t e d as a measure  o f some a t t r i b u t e ( s ) or q u a l i t y ( i e s ) which i s n o t Constructs,  by d e f i n i t i o n ,  "construct  'operationally defined'."  cannot be measured d i r e c t l y , and  yet i t i s  f r e q u e n t l y the case t h a t the measurement o f a p a r t i c u l a r c o n s t r u c t i s b a s i c t o an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f b e h a v i o u r .  I t i s common, f o r example, i n  a n a l y s i n g s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r to i n v o k e a b s t r a c t v a r i a b l e s t o e x p l a i n patterns of behaviour.  S o c i a l c l a s s i s an example o f a c o n s t r u c t common-  l y employed t o which can be gested  as b e h a v i o u r a l  Construct o f observable the o b s e r v a b l e  added the v a r i o u s c o g n i t i v e v a r i a b l e s s u g -  antecedents  ( G a y l e r , 1974;  Downs, 1970).  measurement i s dependent upon the d e f i n i t i o n o f a domain v a r i a b l e s which r e l a t e to t h a t c o n s t r u c t . v a r i a b l e s then serve  Test scores  as a measure o f the c o n s t r u c t .  the case o f s o c i a l c l a s s , income, e d u c a t i o n  and  occupational  on In  status  e i t h e r s e p a r a t e l y o r i n composite have commonly f u n c t i o n e d  as  observable  constructs  variables.  In the measurement o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l  such as a t t i t u d e s then the o b s e r v a b l e  appropriate  v a r i a b l e s o f t e n take the form o f  a s e t o f s t a t e m e n t s which v a r i o u s l y e x p r e s s the c o n s t r u c t domain. The  assessment o f c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y  the o b s e r v a b l e ported  r e s t s upon the e x t e n t  v a r i a b l e s do i n f a c t measure the c o n s t r u c t they are p u r -  t o measure.  T h i s assessment i s l a r g e l y b a s e d upon an  o f the s t r u c t u r e o f the c o r r e l a t i o n s among the o b s e r v a b l e p r e f e r a b l y based upon s e v e r a l s e t s o f sample r e s p o n d e n t s . measures v a r y  t o which  examination  variables, Where the  s y s t e m a t i c a l l y i n r e l a t i o n t o each o t h e r over a number o f  61.  t e s t s i t u a t i o n s , i t i s p o s s i b l e t o a s s e r t t h a t they a r e measuring a s i n gle construct.  On t h e o t h e r hand, i f t h e v a r i a b l e s tend t o s p l i t up  i n t o c l u s t e r s such t h a t t h e members o f a c l u s t e r c o r r e l a t e h i g h l y w i t h one it  another and c o r r e l a t e much l e s s w i t h t h e members o f o t h e r c l u s t e r s , can be c o n c l u d e d t h a t a number o f d i f f e r e n t c o n s t r u c t s  measured.  I n the case o f t h e r e b e i n g  are b e i n g  a complete absence o f c l u s t e r i n g ,  t h e n t h i s would seem t o i n d i c a t e t h a t each v a r i a b l e i s measuring a d i f f e r ent  construct. The  assessment o f c o n s t r u c t  d i n g t h e course o f r e s e a r c h the  validity  s h o u l d be a s t r o n g  force  gui-  i n v e s t i g a t i o n , and i t s n e g l e c t may l e a d t o  a c c e p t a n c e o f a c o n s t r u c t which i n f a c t s h o u l d be r e p l a c e d by two  o r more new c o n s t r u c t s , o r p e r h a p s , s h o u l d Factor  even be abandoned  altogether.  a n a l y s i s i s c e n t r a l t o t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , measurement and  validation of psychological constructs.  The e s s e n t i a l purpose o f t h i s  technique i s to f i n d c l u s t e r s o f r e l a t e d v a r i a b l e s  (or f a c t o r s )  such  t h a t t h e members o f each c l u s t e r c o r r e l a t e more h i g h l y among themselves than they do w i t h v a r i a b l e s n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h e c l u s t e r . teristic  i s obviously  This  coincident with the conditions o f construct  d a t i o n , and immediately i n d i c a t e s t h e u s e f u l n e s s a t o o l f o r t h e assessment o f c o n s t r u c t  o f f a c t o r a n a l y s i s as  a means o f o b t a i n i n g a  measure f o r each r e s p o n d e n t on each o f a s e t o f c o n s t r u c t s  for  vali-  validity.  A t t h e same t i m e , f a c t o r a n a l y s i s p r o v i d e s  of factor scores.  charac-  These a r e d e r i v e d by o b t a i n i n g  linear  i n t h e form expressions  t h e f a c t o r s i n terms o f t h e o b s e r v e d v a r i a b l e s , and s u b s e q u e n t l y  s u b s t i t u t i n g scores  on those v a r i a b l e s f o r each i n d i v i d u a l .  62.  A f u r t h e r use o f f a c t o r a n a l y s i s i s as a means o f e x p l o r i n g of v a r i a b l e s i n order t o i d e n t i f y the constructs those v a r i a b l e s the  relevant  (Kerlinger,  constructs  construct  presumed t o u n d e r l i e  1964, p. 6 8 0 ) . I n a r e s e a r c h  are e s s e n t i a l l y i l l - d e f i n e d ,  ( i f employed w i t h due c a u t i o n ) can t h e r e f o r e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and c l a r i f i c a t i o n ,  i t has l a r g e l y been a p p l i e d  sets  c o n t e x t where  factor  analysis  p r o v i d e a u s e f u l means o f and i t i s t o t h i s end t h a t  i n t h e a n a l y s i s o f consumer s p a t i a l beha-  viour. However, i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o add a word o f c a u t i o n the  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the r e s u l t s o f f a c t o r a n a l y s i s .  with respect to This w i l l  also  demonstrate the need t o r e c o g n i s e the e s s e n t i a l i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e o f a l l t h r e e t y p e s o f v a l i d i t y when a s s e s s i n g As has o f t e n been p o i n t e d  out,  a p a r t i c u l a r t e s t instrument.  the o u t p u t o f a f a c t o r a n a l y s i s i s  no more and no l e s s than an e x p r e s s i o n o f t h e d a t a c o n t a i n e d i n t h e input variables that  (Armstrong, 1967).  With t h i s i n mind, l e t i t be assumed  f a c t o r analysis i n d i c a t e s the existence  o f a p a r t i c u l a r s e t o f con-  s t r u c t s , and, moreover, t h a t subsequent s t u d i e s constructs  s a t i s f y the s t a n d a r d s o f c o n s t r u c t  s t r u c t i s consistently defined variables.  been s u c c e s s f u l l y i s o l a t e d ?  each con-  that a s e t of abstract  and p r e d i c t i o n o f b e h a v i o u r  Obviously not,  until sufficient  the c o n t e n t v a l i d i t y o f t h e i n p u t  the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f t h e t e s t s c o r e s .  validity,  i n that  these  by a s e t o f i n t e r c o r r e l a t e d o b s e r v a b l e  further the explanation  ance can be g a i n e d r e g a r d i n g and  validity  I s i t r e a s o n a b l e t o conclude t h e r e f o r e  v a r i a b l e s which w i l l has  demonstrate t h a t  assur-  variables  I n o t h e r words,  construct  as c o n f i r m e d by f a c t o r a n a l y s i s , i s a n e c e s s a r y b u t n o t s u f f i -  cient condition  f o r assuming the o v e r a l l v a l i d i t y o f a p a r t i c u l a r t e s t .  63.  The  e x t e n t t o which r e l i a b i l i t y  and v a l i d i t y  assessment c o n s t i t u t e s  an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f the r e s e a r c h d e s i g n  employed i n t h i s study  be  the subsequent  c l e a r from the  (iv)  f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n and  should  chapters.  Research Design Components  The  s e q u e n t i a l s t r u c t u r e o f the  F i g u r e 2.1  research design  and the v a r i o u s components can be  is illustrated in  summarized as  follows:  Components 1 to 3 t o g e t h e r comprise the c o n s t r u c t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n phase o f the r e s e a r c h . c r i t e r i a important c l o t h i n g goods, and  The  purpose o f t h i s phase was  subsequently  t o reduce these  Consistent with  the p r e v i o u s  i d e n t i f i e d using a content  these  c r i t e r i a to a set of a Likert  scaling  d i s c u s s i o n of content  the c r i t e r i a were n o t s e l e c t e d on an a priori  shoppers.  b a s i s but  analysis of unstructured  validity,  r a t h e r were  interviews  with  In o r d e r t o i s o l a t e the c o n s t r u c t s presumed t o u n d e r l i e  c r i t e r i a , a convenience sample r a t e d each o f the c r i t e r i a on  t e n - p o i n t s c a l e o f importance and analysed. construct  the  t o consumers when c h o o s i n g where t o shop f o r major  u n d e r l y i n g c o n s t r u c t s as the b a s i s f o r d e v e l o p i n g instrument.  to i d e n t i f y  a  the r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d were f a c t o r  Thus i l l u s t r a t i n g t h e use  o f f a c t o r a n a l y s i s as a means o f  identification.  Component 4 concerns the g e n e r a t i o n o f an i t e m p o o l t o p r o v i d e statements f o r a p r e l i m i n a r y s e t o f L i k e r t s c a l e s . to represent  the v a r i o u s f a c e t s o f the c o n t e n t  Items were w r i t t e n  domains summarized  each o f the c o n s t r u c t s i d e n t i f i e d i n the p r e v i o u s  phase o f t h e  by  research.  Components 5 and 6 i n v o l v e the p r e t e s t i n g o f the r e s e a r c h i n s t r u ment as a b a s i s f o r a s s e s s i n g the r e l i a b i l i t y  and v a l i d i t y  of  the  64.  preliminary Likert scales. sample groups: students  the f i r s t  To t h i s end, d a t a were c o l l e c t e d from two comprising  and t h e second c o m p r i s i n g  a c l a s s of i n t r o d u c t o r y psychology  shoppers i n t e r v i e w e d  i n two c o n t r a s t -  ing in-store situations.  Components 7 and 8 d e a l w i t h the a n a l y s i s o f t h e p r e t e s t d a t a . Standard procedures f o r a s s e s s i n g the r e l i a b i l i t y  and v a l i d i t y o f t h e  L i k e r t s c a l e s were f o l l o w e d i n c l u d i n g the c a l c u l a t i o n o f i t e m - s c a l e c o r r e l a t i o n s , c o e f f i c i e n t alphas,  and c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y  coefficients.  In a d d i t i o n , i t was p o s s i b l e t o make an i n i t i a l  assessment o f t h e p r e -  d i c t i v e v a l i d i t i e s o f t h e s c a l e s by d e t e r m i n i n g  how a c c u r a t e l y they  dis-  c r i m i n a t e d between shoppers p a t r o n i z i n g t h e two d i f f e r e n t s t o r e s i n which i n t e r v i e w s were conducted.  Component 9 concerns t h e development o f t h e f i n a l s c a l e s . r e s u l t s obtained were n e c e s s a r y and  from the p r e t e s t s e r v e d  The  t o i n d i c a t e what m o d i f i c a t i o n s  t o i n c r e a s e t h e r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y o f t h e s c a l e s ,  the appropriate  r e v i s i o n s were made.  Component 10 i n v o l v e s t h e d e s i g n o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e t o be a d m i n i s t e r e d i n t h e major d a t a c o l l e c t i o n phase.  The r e s e a r c h o b j e c t i v e s d i c -  t a t e d t h a t t h r e e s e t s o f d a t a be c o l l e c t e d  from each respondent i n o r d e r  t o document c o g n i t i o n s , b e h a v i o u r and b i o g r a p h i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . P r i o r phases o f t h e r e s e a r c h d e f i n e d t h e c o g n i t i v e component, b u t d e c i s i o n s as t o t h e d e s i g n o f the o t h e r s e c t i o n s o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e had t o be made a t t h i s  stage.  Component 11 d e a l s w i t h t h e sample d e s i g n .  Various  considerations  l e d t o t h e c h o i c e o f a s t r a t i f i e d random sample o f households w i t h i n the m u n i c i p a l i t i e s o f Vancouver, N o r t h Vancouver and West Vancouver.  65.  Component 12 concerns  t h e t r a i n i n g o f the i n t e r v i e w e r s r e s p o n s i b l e  f o r c o n d u c t i n g the major d a t a c o l l e c t i o n phase.  The i n t e r v i e w e r s , drawn  from s t u d e n t s e n r o l l e d i n a second y e a r geography c l a s s , r e c e i v e d i n c l a s s t r a i n i n g p l u s a w r i t t e n i n s t r u c t i o n manual. Component IS i n v o l v e s the major d a t a c o l l e c t i o n phase. viewers  o b t a i n e d d a t a from 351 respondents  The i n t e r -  d i s t r i b u t e d i n accordance  w i t h the sample d e s i g n . Component 14 d e a l s w i t h the c o d i n g and a n a l y s i s o f the d a t a . i n f o r m a t i o n was coded on the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and was s u b s e q u e n t l y punched.  V a r i o u s a n a l y s e s were performed  The key-  but major emphasis was p l a c e d  upon comparing the a b i l i t y o f c o g n i t i v e , l o c a t i o n a l and b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s t o p o s t d i c t membership i n p r e d e f i n e d c r i t e r i o n groups; t h e c r i t e r i a being  "type o f s t o r e ' and 'type o f shopping  on each o f f o u r shopping was  trips.  area' p a t r o n i z e d  The b a s i c s t a t i s t i c a l t e c h n i q u e  stepwise d i s c r i m i n a n t a n a l y s i s .  Reliability  and v a l i d i t y  were computed f o r each o f the L i k e r t s c a l e s as a recheck  employed  statistics  on the p r e t e s t  results. Component 15 concerns  t h e r e p o r t i n g o f the r e s u l t s  and needs no  further elaboration.  D.  SUMMARY  T h i s c h a p t e r began  w i t h an o u t l i n e o f the r e s e a r c h p u r p o s e s .  t i o n then f o c u s s e d on t h e r e s e a r c h d e s i g n and p a r t i c u l a r l y the ment o f a s c a l i n g i n s t r u m e n t t o measure consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s . bility  o f L i k e r t s c a l i n g as a measurement p r o c e d u r e  the importance  of reliability  and v a l i d i t y  Atten-  developThe s u i t a -  was d i s c u s s e d and  considerations i n scale  66.  c o n s t r u c t i o n was design  stressed.  were b r i e f l y  phases o f the d e s i g n  F i n a l l y , t h e major components  summarized.  o f the  research  In t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r the p r e l i m i n a r y  are d e s c r i b e d  in detail.  CHAPTER 3  THE  A.  IDENTIFICATION AND MEASUREMENT OF CONSUMER DISPOSITIONS  INTRODUCTION  The  development o f a p s y c h o m e t r i c s c a l i n g i n s t r u m e n t  t o measure  consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s i s c e n t r a l t o t h e achievement o f t h e r e s e a r c h o b j e c t i v e s itemized i n the previous  chapter.  This chapter d e t a i l s t h e  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e s a l i e n t d i s p o s i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s and t h e subsequent c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a L i k e r t s c a l i n g instrument  as an a p p r o p r i a t e  measure-  ment d e v i c e . A content the c r i t e r i a tunities.  analysis o f unstructured  interviews served  employed by shoppers t o e v a l u a t e  Each o f t h e c r i t e r i a  alternative retail  was s u b s e q u e n t l y  oppor-  r a t e d by a convenience  sample and t h e d a t a o b t a i n e d were f a c t o r a n a l y s e d constructs.  to identify  to isolate  P r e l i m i n a r y L i k e r t s c a l e s were c o n s t r u c t e d  underlying  to provide a  more r e f i n e d measure o f t h e major c o n s t r u c t s , and t h e s e were p r e t e s t e d using data obtained  from two sample groups.  cedures f o r a s s e s s i n g t h e r e l i a b i l i t y f o l l o w e d and t h e n e c e s s a r y  Standard psychometric  and v a l i d i t y  pro-  o f t h e s c a l e s were  r e v i s i o n s were made t o produce a s e t o f f i n a l  scales.  B.  CONSTRUCT IDENTIFICATION  The  model o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r o u t l i n e d a t t h e c o n c l u s i o n  o f C h a p t e r 1 argues t h a t a d e c i s i o n as t o where t o shop i s t h e outcome o f a shopper e v a l u a t i n g a l t e r n a t i v e r e t a i l  -  67 -  o p p o r t u n i t i e s i n accordance  68.  with a set of predefined d i s p o s i t i o n s . model t h e r e f o r e i t was t i o n s and  necessary  In o r d e r t o o p e r a t i o n a l i s e t h i s  t o i d e n t i f y s a l i e n t consumer d i s p o s i -  t o e s t a b l i s h a means o f measuring them.  The e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e i s s u g g e s t i v e as t o the n a t u r e o f dispositional  c o n s t r u c t s , which have been v a r i o u s l y termed " c o g n i t i v e  categories", "evaluative c r i t e r i a " , determinants"  ( F i s k , 1961;  et ail., 1968;  Stephenson, 1969;  " c o g n i t i v e dimensions"  Becker, 1967;  "image Engel  Downs, 1970). an a p r i o r i  and  empi-  b a s i s l a r g e l y i n the c o n t e x t o f s t o r e image r e s e a r c h and have been  c l a s s i f i e d under such g e n e r a l h e a d i n g s as ment o f merchandise', (Engel et al. , 1968, generated of  and  Kunkel and B e r r y , 1968;  S a l i e n t c o n s t r u c t s have been d e f i n e d on both rical  these  'price', pp.  'location/distance', 'assort-  'advertising',  452-3).  ' p e r s o n n e l ' and  'services'  However, the s p e c i f i c c o n s t r u c t s  by d i f f e r e n t r e s e a r c h e r s have v a r i e d dependent upon t h e  purchase,  and t h e r e i s no evidence  constructs across r e t a i l  functions.  to suggest  type  the g e n e r a l i t y o f  F u r t h e r m o r e , the u t i l i t y  o f the  c o n s t r u c t s remains i n doubt because t h e r e has been a g e n e r a l f a i l u r e v a l i d a t e them a g a i n s t b e h a v i o u r a l  criteria.  I n t h e c o n t e x t o f the p r e s e n t s t u d y t h e r e f o r e i t was  not c l e a r  much c o n f i d e n c e c o u l d be p l a c e d i n t h e c o n s t r u c t s i d e n t i f i e d by chers h i t h e r t o . to  be met  to  As a r e s u l t , c o n t e n t v a l i d i t y  resear-  s t a n d a r d s were more  by i d e n t i f y i n g s a l i e n t d i s p o s i t i o n a l c o n s t r u c t s as a  how  likely  first  s t a g e o f the r e s e a r c h d e s i g n . As a f i r s t conducted  s t e p t o t h i s end  w i t h consumers.  convenience  sample  (N = 27)  a s e r i e s o f u n s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w s were  Though the respondents some e f f o r t was  comprised  a small  made t o maximize demographic  69.  and  socio-economic h e t e r o g e n e i t y .  asked t o d e s c r i b e  the most r e c e n t  to s p e c i f y , where p o s s i b l e , choice.  In each i n t e r v i e w shopping t r i p  d u c i n g a n e e d l e s s ' s o u r c e o f response b i a s .  different criteria.  were m i n i m i z e d t o a v o i d The i n f l u e n t i a l  intro-  criteria  responses revealed  a t o t a l o f 172  Of t h e s e 111 had been mentioned as p o s i t i v e  (e.g., "good q u a l i t y merchandise") and 61 as n e g a t i v e  (e.g., " a g g r e s s i v e s a l e s s t a f f " ) . only  store  by each respondent were r e c o r d e d v e r b a t i m .  A content analysis o f interview  ences  f o r c l o t h i n g goods, and  those f a c t o r s which had i n f l u e n c e d  I n t e r j e c t i o n s by t h e i n t e r v i e w e r  itemized  t h e respondent was  once.  influences  Many o f t h e c r i t e r i a were mentioned  While i t was c l e a r t h a t many o f t h e c r i t e r i a c o u l d be  g o r i z e d under such g e n e r a l h e a d i n g s as ' p r i c e , ' q u a l i t y ' , 1  etc., a subjective  influ-  procedure o f construct  cate-  'location',  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n was  rejected  i n f a v o u r o f an e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e s t r u c t u r e o f c o r r e l a t i o n s amongst the  c r i t e r i a using  factor analysis.  was d e s i g n e d which r e q u i r e d the  importance they a s c r i b e d  t o shop f o r c l o t h i n g goods. e n r o l l e d i n an i n t r o d u c t o r y possible).  To a c h i e v e t h i s , a  questionnaire  respondents t o i n d i c a t e on a 10 p o i n t  scale  t o each o f t h e c r i t e r i a when c h o o s i n g where Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were completed by s t u d e n t s geography c l a s s and t h e i r p a r e n t s  (where  I n f o r m a t i o n was o b t a i n e d from 120 r e s p o n d e n t s .  A f a c t o r a n a l y s i s was p e r f o r m e d on 70 o f the c r i t e r i a , which r e m a i ned  a f t e r the e l i m i n a t i o n  ted c r i t e r i a .  o f l a r g e l y synonomous and h i g h l y i n t e r c o r r e l a -  The a n a l y s i s y i e l d e d t e n f a c t o r s a c c o u n t i n g f o r 56 p e r  c e n t o f the o r i g i n a l v a r i a n c e .  Of t h e s e , t h e f i r s t  f o r 44 p e r c e n t o f t h e t o t a l v a r i a n c e f a c t o r variance  five,  accounting  and 72 p e r c e n t o f t h e common  a f t e r r o t a t i o n , were the most c l e a r l y i n t e r p r e t a b l e .  70.  They were d e s c r i b e d  F a c t o r 1:  as  follows:  'Fashion O r i e n t a t i o n ' - c r i t e r i a r e l a t i n g t o f a s h i o n loaded  h i g h l y on  this  contemporary  f a c t o r , suggesting  that  f a s h i o n o r i e n t a t i o n i s a major consumer d i s p o s i t i o n i n f l u encing  Factor  2:  the  evaluation of alternative clothing stores.  'Price O r i e n t a t i o n " - i n t h i s case, f a c t o r d e f i n i n g were r e l a t e d t o p r i c e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , of previous positional  Factor  3:  confirming  criteria  the r e s u l t s  studies that p r i c e o r i e n t a t i o n i s a basic  dis-  construct.  'Quality O r i e n t a t i o n  1  - c r i t e r i a l o a d i n g h i g h l y on  factor indicated that q u a l i t y considerations  the  third  constitute  an-  o t h e r b a s i c consumer d i s p o s i t i o n when c h o o s i n g where t o shop. N o t i o n s o f q u a l i t y appeared t o extend beyond the i s t i c s o f the merchandise t o i n c l u d e g e n e r a l the r e l i a b i l i t y  Factor  4:  and  trustworthiness  'Convenience O r i e n t a t i o n ' - the t e r i a i s c o n f i r m e d by term  'convenience' was  s i n c e the  Factor  5:  importance o f l o c a t i o n a l c r i -  the emergence o f t h i s  factor.  chosen as the a p p r o p r i a t e  considerations  o f the  and  extended t o t i m e - r e l a t e d  'Status  concerns about  of a store.  f a c t o r d e f i n i n g c r i t e r i a were n o t  s t o r e , but  character-  The  descriptor  restricted  to  r e l a t i v e l o c a t i o n s o f home/workplace  O r i e n t a t i o n ' - the  concerns.  c r i t e r i a defining this  factor  suggested t h a t s t a t u s c o n c e r n s , as e x p r e s s e d i n c h a r a c t e r i s -  71.  t i c s o f the merchandise, c l i e n t e l e and s t o r e l o c a t i o n , form an i m p o r t a n t d i s p o s i t i o n a l c o n s t r u c t  f o r shoppers when  selecting a clothing store.  In g e n e r a l , previous  these major c o n s t r u c t s  studies.  f i e d by B e r r y  The 'convenience' c o n s t r u c t ,  (1968), Downs (1970), F i s k  while the 'quality' construct termed  c o i n c i d e with the r e s u l t s o f  'dependability'  f o r example, was i d e n t i -  (1961) and Stephenson  (1969);  i s i n p a r t c o i n c i d e n t w i t h what Stephenson  and Downs and B e r r y  r e f e r r e d t o as  'reputation'.  ' P r i c e o r i e n t a t i o n ' i n e v i t a b l y emerges i n t h i s and r e l a t e d s t u d i e s  as a  b a s i c consumer d i s p o s i t i o n r e f l e c t i n g v a r i a t i o n s i n b u y i n g power and d i f f e r i n g views on p e r s o n a l  expenditure.  The emergence o f ' f a s h i o n  o r i e n t a t i o n ' as a major d i s p o s i t i o n p r o b a b l y r e f l e c t s the f a c t a t t e n t i o n i n t h i s study was f o c u s s e d c o n s t r u c t may w e l l r e p r e s e n t  on c l o t h i n g p u r c h a s e s .  a psychological  formulation  that  The ' s t a t u s '  o f notions  p r e v i o u s l y embedded i n s o c i a l c l a s s measures. The  factor structure  f u r t h e r s u g g e s t s t h a t s a l i e n t consumer d i s -  p o s i t i o n s transcend  a s i m p l e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n terms o f g e n e r a l and  tangible c r i t e r i a .  Downs (1970) has made a s i m i l a r o b s e r v a t i o n i n  suggesting  t h a t the p r o c e s s by which consumers c o l l e c t , code and e v a -  luate information  concerning  t h e r e t a i l environment may w e l l  reflect  the importance o f i n t a n g i b l e i n f l u e n c e s which may l a c k p h y s i c a l r e f e r ents. To r e c o g n i z e  the c o i n c i d e n c e  o f the constructs  s t u d y w i t h those documented by p r e v i o u s  research  identified  i n this  i s n o t t o admit t o t h e  redundancy o f t h e p r e l i m i n a r y phases o f the r e s e a r c h  design.  Clearly,  72.  the development o f an e f f e c t i v e r e s e a r c h  i n s t r u m e n t demands f a r more  than a l i s t o f s a l i e n t c o n s t r u c t s ; namely, an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the t e n t domain f o r which the It  is in this  regard  construct i t s e l f  t h a t the  i s but  i n i t i a l phase o f the  a useful descriptor. research  p a r t i c u l a r l y p r o f i t a b l e since i t yielded a set of c r i t e r i a with  con-  design  was  associated  each c o n s t r u c t , which, as subsequent s e c t i o n s o f t h i s c h a p t e r  show,  c o u l d f u n c t i o n as the b a s i s f o r c o n s t r u c t i n g a r e f i n e d s c a l i n g i n s t r u ment.  C.  THE  DEVELOPMENT OF A SET  OF LIKERT SCALES  Having i d e n t i f i e d the s a l i e n t d i s p o s i t i o n a l c o n s t r u c t s , the phases o f the  research  design  (components 4 t o 9)  c o n c e r n e d the  next construc-  t i o n o f a s e t o f L i k e r t s c a l e s to f u n c t i o n as d i s p o s i t i o n a l measures. T h i s t a s k i n v o l v e d the g e n e r a t i o n ing  of preliminary  final  (i)  s c a l e s , and  o f a s u i t a b l e i t e m p o o l , the p r e t e s t -  the subsequent f o r m u l a t i o n  scales.  Generation  o f an Item  Pool  Item w r i t i n g i s almost c e r t a i n l y Various one  of a set of  approaches have been s u g g e s t e d b u t the  most f r e q u e n t l y employed and The  as much an a r t as i t i s a  science.  ' r a t i o n a l ' method i s the  most s t r o n g l y s u p p o r t e d  (Jackson,  ' r a t i o n a l ' approach i n v o l v e s w r i t i n g items r e l a t e d t o the  structs i n question  on the b a s i s o f an i n t u i t i v e g r a s p o f the  domain o f each c o n s t r u c t , and  con-  content  s u b s e q u e n t l y d e c i d i n g the d i r e c t i o n i n  which a p a r t i c u l a r i t e m s h o u l d be f o l l o w e d by  1971).  scored.  This s u b j e c t i v e procedure i s  an e m p i r i c a l phase t o e n s u r e , by means o f i t e m a n a l y s i s ,  73.  that a given  item  contributes  t o the o v e r a l l v a r i a n c e  o f the  scale  of  which i t i s supposedly a measure. Item w r i t i n g i s f a r from b e i n g n a t u r e o f the  construct  a capricious exercise  s e l e c t i o n of s e n s i b l e i t e m s .  c a i l l y t r u e i n the p r e s e n t  study where t h e c o n s t r u c t  served  major  the  i s u s u a l l y s u f f i c i e n t l y w e l l understood to pro-  v i d e c l e a r guidance i n the  had  since  t o e s t a b l i s h the  T h i s was  espe-  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n phase  c r i t e r i a a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each o f t h e  five  constructs. The  generation  circumscribed statements  by  of a s u i t a b l e item pool  i n t h i s study was  further  the e s t a b l i s h e d c r i t e r i a f o r e v a l u a t i n g L i k e r t s c a l e  ( L i k e r t , 1932,  p.  44  f f . ) , which are l i s t e d below i n v e r b a t i m  form.  1.  "Each statement s h o u l d  be o f such a n a t u r e t h a t p e r s o n s w i t h  d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s o f view, so f a r as the p a r t i c u l a r a t t i t u d e i s concerned, w i l l respond t o i t d i f f e r e n t i a l l y . " 2.  " I t i s e s s e n t i a l t h a t a l l statements be  behaviour  and n o t  statements o f  l y d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e s may, of 3.  fact.  expressions Two  nevertheless,  of  persons w i t h agree on  desired decided-  questions  fact."  Each p r o p o s i t i o n s h o u l d forward s t a t e m e n t s . "  be  stated i n "clear, concise, s t r a i g h t -  P o t e n t i a l ambiguity a r i s i n g from c o n f u s -  i n g grammatical c o n s t r u c t i o n , d o u b l e - b a r r e l l e d s h o u l d be  eliminated.  statements, e t c .  74.  4.  "In g e n e r a l  i t would seem d e s i r a b l e t o have the q u e s t i o n s  so  worded t h a t the modal r e a c t i o n t o some i s more toward one o f the  a t t i t u d e continuum and  toward the o t h e r 5.  "To  a v o i d any  to others  end  more i n the middle  or  end."  space e r r o r or any  tendency to a  stereotyped  response i t seems d e s i r a b l e t o have the d i f f e r e n t statements so worded t h a t about o n e - h a l f  o f them have one  end  of  the  a t t i t u d e continuum c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o the l e f t o r upper p a r t o f the  reaction alternatives (i.e.,  o t h e r h a l f have the same end p o n d i n g t o the tives  On  (i.e.,  generated.  a t t i t u d e continuum  r i g h t o r lower p a r t o f the  'strongly  the  with c r i t e r i o n ( e i t h e r 7 o r 8)  reaction alterna-  o f 75 statements  statements were e q u a l l y d i s t r i b u t e d between the  p o s i t i o n a l constructs  ( i . e . , 15 statements p e r  5 above, one  scale).  In  in  was  five  dis-  accordance  h a l f o f the statements f o r each s c a l e  e x p r e s s e d a p o s i t i v e d i s p o s i t i o n and  n e g a t i v e l y worded.  Neutral  they tend t o c r e a t e  less variance  statements are l i s t e d  corres-  f a c t o r structure obtained  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n phase, an i t e m p o o l  The  the  disagree')."  the b a s i s of t h e s e c r i t e r i a and  the c o n s t r u c t  The  o f the  ' s t r o n g l y agree') and  and  the  remainder were  extreme statements were a v o i d e d  i n Table  since  than statements t h a t are l e s s extreme. 3.1.  TABLE 3.1  ITEM-SCALE CORRELATIONS  Pretest  Final  I enjoy b u y i n g e x p e n s i v e c l o t h e s .  .5252  .6192  I l i k e t o shop i n e l e g a n t  .5152  .6138  .4848  .5774  Shopping a t e x c l u s i v e s h o r e s i s beyond my means,  .4520  .5749  I f e e l uneasy i n an e x c l u s i v e  .4454  .6474  I'm n o t i n t e r e s t e d i n what happens i n the world of high fashion.  .4269  .5873  I a v o i d s t o r e s which l o o k o r sound e x p e n s i v e .  .4219  .5940  I appreciate  .3806  .4241  I p a t r o n i s e s p e c i a l t y s t o r e s even though I c o u l d p o s s i b l y buy s i m i l a r goods more cheaply elsewhere.  .3792  .4712  Few p e o p l e can a f f o r d t o shop where I do.  .3338  .5020  I l i k e t o shop where t h e s a l e s s t a f f know me and a p p r e c i a t e my needs.  .3230  .2999  I l i k e t o know t h a t what I buy can't be bought f o r l e s s elsewhere.  .3050  .1105  STATUS SCALE  I r e g u l a r l y read high  surroundings.  f a s h i o n magazines.  store.  highly personalised  service.  * I u s u a l l y have ray c l o t h e s custom made.  .2744  I don't a p p r e c i a t e the o p i n i o n s of store personnel.*  .2141  I never c o n s i d e r neighbourhood.*  and a d v i c e  shopping i n a h i g h  income  N = 197 N = 351 Statements e x c l u d e d from t h e f i n a l  scale.  .1606  TABLE 3.1  (cont'd.)  Pretest  Final  I shop as i n f r e q u e n t l y as p o s s i b l e .  .6284  .4043  I r e g a r d shopping as a n e c e s s i t y r a t h e r than a pleasure.  .6256  .5612  I'm w i l l i n g t o spend a l o t o f time and m i l e s t o g e t what I want.  .6230  .6245  I'm q u i t e w i l l i n g t o t r a v e l t o t h e o t h e r o f t h e c i t y t o shop.  .5992  .6359  .5770  .5570  .5338  .5362  I o n l y p a t r o n i s e s t o r e s which a r e e a s i l y a c c e s s i b l e t o my home.  .4880  .5338  The n i c e t i e s o f s t y l e and f a s h i o n a r e n o t i m p o r t a n t t o me.  .4845  .4450  I r a r e l y shop o u t s i d e my home neighbourhood.  .4786  .5150  I enjoy l o o k i n g around s t o r e s even though I may have no i n t e n t i o n o f b u y i n g a n y t h i n g .  .4777  .5152  I spend c o n s i d e r a b l e time s h o p p i n g around b e f o r e making a p u r c h a s e .  .4113  .4830  I would be q u i t e c o n t e n t by phone.  .3962  .4477  CONVENIENCE SCALE  I don't r e g a r d d i s t a n c e as v e r y c h o o s i n g where t o shop.  side  i m p o r t a n t when  Shopping forms one o f my main l e i s u r e  t o do a l l my  activities.  shopping  * I commonly buy t h e f i r s t t h i n g I t r y on.  .3274  I'm n o t p r e p a r e d t o l i m i t my c h o i c e o f s t o r e f o r t h e sake o f c o n v e n i e n c e .  .3264  I l i k e s t o r e s where i t ' s easy t o f i n d what I want.*  .0032  Statements e x c l u d e d from the f i n a l  score.  77.  TABLE 3.1 (cont'd.)  Pretest  Final  L i g h t i n g e f f e c t s and r o c k music c r e a t e a s t o r e atmosphere which a p p e a l s t o me.  .6490  .7283  I l i k e t o dress  .6484  .6307  .5879  .5590  I don't see m y s e l f as one o f t h e younger s e t .  .5849  .5649  I shop a t s t o r e s which a p p e a l m a i n l y t o the younger age group.  .5642  .5959  I a v o i d s t o r e s which make use o f l i g h t i n g and sound e f f e c t s .  .5438  .6185  I p r e f e r s t o r e s which are q u i e t and p e a c e f u l .  .5405  .5591  S t o r e s which c a t e r f o r t h e avant garde a p p e a l t o me.  .5045  .5646  My t a s t e i n c l o t h e s i s c o n s e r v a t i v e  .4880  .6361  I l i k e t o shop i n b r i g h t and c o l o u r f u l surroundings.  .4791  .4407  I would e n j o y s h o p p i n g on Carnaby S t r e e t .  .4657  .5615  I'm a t t r a c t e d t o s t o r e s which make s h o p p i n g exciting.  .4298  .5448  What I buy^ i s n ' t i n f l u e n c e d by the l a t e s t fashions.  .3916  I don't mind m^ c l o t h e s b e i n g old-fashioned.  .3346  FASHION SCALE  i n the l a t e s t  I would n o t c o n s i d e r trendy boutique.  I appreciate and d e c o r . *  fashions.  shopping i n a  considered  t h e use o f i m a g i n a t i v e  displays  Statements e x c l u d e d from t h e f i n a l  scale.  .2184  78. TABLE 3.1  (Cont'd.)  Pretest  Final  I don't p a t r o n i s e s t o r e s which have a r e p u t a t i o n f o r low p r i c e s .  .4835  .6121  I enjoy, b a r g a i n  .4659  .5361  .4649  .6277  I t d o e s n ' t worry me t o know t h a t o t h e r p e o p l e own c l o t h e s i d e n t i c a l t o mine.  .4606  .4045  I'm n o t a t t r a c t e d t o s t o r e s i n income a r e a s .  .4253  .5396  .4228  .5244  PRICE SCALE  hunting.  I buy a t s t o r e s which u n d e r s e l l competitors.  I don't mind shopping i n the p a r t s o f the c i t y .  their  low  poorer  I p r e f e r t o buy s e v e r a l cheaper items than one e x p e n s i v e o n e .  .3875  I l i k e t o f e e l t h a t my appreciated.  .3504  .2351  .3440  .4200  .3421  .3262  .3348  .3780  .2608  .2401  a  patronage i s r e a l l y  I c o n s i d e r i t e s s e n t i a l t h a t the be n e a t l y a r r a n g e d . I f i n d i t hard to r e s i s t s a l e s I t ' s e s s e n t i a l t o me be w e l l - t r a i n e d . I f garments i n the I won't go i n .  merchandise  offers.  t h a t the s a l e s  staff  s t o r e window a r e n ' t  The s t o r e s I p a t r o n i s e a p p e a l m a i n l y the h i g h e r income groups.* I a v o i d crowded s t o r e s .  priced  to  .2591  if  .1807  I l i k e t o see the p r i c e s o f garments c l e a r l y marked. I p r e f e r s t o r e s which base t h e i r a p p e a l low p r i c e s . *  .1726 on  3  Statements e x c l u d e d from the  final  scale.  Statement t r a n s f e r r e d t o the q u a l i t y s c a l e . Statement t r a n s f e r r e d from the q u a l i t y s c a l e .  .6345  TABLE 3.1  (cont'd.)  Pretest  Final  I'm more i n c l i n e d t o buy e x p e n s i v e items i n f r e q u e n t l y than t o make f r e q u e n t cheap purchases.  .5662  .5843  I take c a r e t o ensure t h a t t h e garments I buy a r e well-made.  .4597  .5280  I'm w i l l i n g t o s a c r i f i c e q u a l i t y f o r low p r i c e s .  .4537  .5530  I'm p u t o f f by l o t s o f s i g n s tisements i n a store.  .4345  .3322  .4144  .4146  .4094  .5246  I'm a t t r a c t e d by t a s t e f u l d i s p l a y s and decor.  .4059  .4602  My f i r s t I buy.  .3837  .5341  The s t o r e s I p a t r o n i s e don't base t h e i r r e p u t a t i o n on q u a l i t y .  .3607  .5993  I t doesn't worry clothes.  me t o buy mass-produced  .3457  .4311  I'm n o t d e t e r r e d  by i m p o l i t e p e r s o n n e l .  .3158  .3118  I don't c a r e f u l l y examine the t a i l o r i n g o f t h e goods I buy.  .3104  My c h o i c e o f s t o r e i s n ' t i n f l u e n c e d by a t t r a c t i v e d i s p l a y s and d e c o r . *  .2596  I p r e f e r s t o r e s which base t h e i r a p p e a l on p r i c e .  .2213  The s t o r e s I p a t r o n i s e t e n d t o be i n middle-income neighbourhoods.  .1123  QUALITY SCALE  I'm always  suspicious  I would d e s c r i b e i n g shopper.  and a d v e r -  o f low p r i c e s .  m y s e l f as a d i s c r i m i n a t -  concern i s w i t h t h e q u a l i t y o f what  3  located  I p r e f e r t o buy s e v e r a l cheaper items one expensive one.'  than  3  Statements  e x c l u d e d from t h e f i n a l  scale.  Statement  t r a n s f e r r e d t o the p r i c e s c a l e .  Statement  t r a n s f e r r e d from t h e p r i c e s c a l e .  .5644  80.  (ii)  P r e t e s t i n g and Item  Analysis  As p r e v i o u s l y i n d i c a t e d , i t i s d e s i r a b l e t o p r e t e s t an i n i t i a l s e t of scales t o provide validity.  an e m p i r i c a l base f o r a s s e s s i n g  reliability  and  The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e p r e t e s t respondents s h o u l d  corres-  pond as f a r as p o s s i b l e w i t h the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the sample group t o whom t h e f i n a l  i n s t r u m e n t i s t o be a d m i n i s t e r e d .  Furthermore, Nunnally  s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e s i z e o f t h e p r e t e s t sample s h o u l d times t h e number o f items on each s c a l e The  (Nunnally,  p r e t e s t o b j e c t i v e i n the present  minary s c a l e s .  The p r e t e s t sample  i n t r o d u c t o r y psychology students (N's  firstly,  t o p e r m i t an ade-  and v a l i d i t i e s o f t h e f i v e  preli-  (N = 197) comrpised a c l a s s o f  (N = 144) and two groups o f shoppers  = 51 and 32) who completed q u e s t i o n n a i r e s  situations.  1967, p. 532).  study was t o o b t a i n d a t a from  a s u f f i c i e n t l y l a r g e and d i v e r s e group o f s u b j e c t s quate assessment o f t h e r e l i a b i l i t i e s  be a t l e a s t f i v e  i n contrasting in-store  The i n - s t o r e sampling was conducted f o r two r e a s o n s :  to increase  secondly, to allow  the h e t e r o g e n e i t y  o f the p r e t e s t sample; and,  an i n i t i a l assessement o f t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t i e s  of the s c a l e s . The  respondents were r e q u e s t e d t o p r o v i d e  the 75 statements  (presented  point scale ranging  from  i n a questionnaire  s e l f - r a t i n g s on each o f booklet) using a f i v e  ' s t r o n g l y agree' t o ' s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e ' .  The  o r d e r i n g o f t h e s t a t e m e n t s was randomized t o minimize problems o f r e s ponse b i a s . The item  data obtained  from t h e p r e t e s t sample formed t h e b a s i s  a n a l y s i s , i n v o l v i n g : the c a l c u l a t i o n o f item-scale  f o r an  correlations to  determine how  e f f e c t i v e l y i n d i v i d u a l statements f u n c t i o n e d  o f the s c a l e c o n s t r u c t  as measures  t o which they were i n i t i a l l y a s s i g n e d ; and the  computation o f c o e f f i c i e n t a l p h a s t o e s t a b l i s h s c a l e The c a l c u l a t i o n o f i t e m - s c a l e  reliabilities.  correlations involves  correlating  s c o r e s on an i n d i v i d u a l i t e m w i t h the t o t a l , s c o r e on the s c a l e t o which that item contributes. the  s c o r e s on t h e c o n t r i b u t i n g  negatively for  The t o t a l s c o r e i s o b t a i n e d by s i m p l y  worded s t a t e m e n t s .  items a f t e r f i r s t The i t e m - s c a l e  t h e 75 statements are l i s t e d  i n Table  The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f i t e m - s c a l e  reversing  correlations  summing  s c o r e s on computed  3.1.  c o r r e l a t i o n s i s based on the  r a t i o n a l e t h a t items c o r r e l a t i n g h i g h l y w i t h t o t a l s c o r e s have more variance  r e l a t i n g t o t h e common f a c t o r among the i t e m s , and hence make  a greater It  follows  contribution that,  to s c a l e r e l i a b i l i t y  ( N u n n a l l y , 1967, p. 261).  i n the i n t e r e s t s o f r e l i a b i l i t y ,  h i g h l y w i t h t o t a l s c o r e s s h o u l d be r e t a i n e d ,  items c o r r e l a t i n g  while those e x h i b i t i n g  i n s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s might be u s e f u l l y e l i m i n a t e d . off  The  cut-  p o i n t between u s e f u l and d i s p e n s a b l e items depends upon the  magnitude o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s and t h e number o f items r e q u i r e d comprise t h e f i n a l  scale.  In t h e case o f i t e m - s c a l e items  (Table  to  c o r r e l a t i o n s obtained f o r the p r e t e s t  3.1), c o e f f i c i e n t s above .30 a p p r o x i m a t e l y were found t o  be s i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 l e v e l ,  a f t e r a l l o w a n c e had been made f o r t h e  i n f l a t i o n o f the c o r r e l a t i o n s due t o the c o n t r i b u t i o n  o f t h e s c o r e on  * an " i n d i v i d u a l statement t o the t o t a l s c a l e s c o r e .  The use o f t h e .05  Procedures f o r c o r r e c t i n g t h i s i n f l a t i o n o f c o r r e l a t i o n s are d i s c u s s e d by N u n n a l l y (1967, p . 262 f f . ) and G u i l f o r d (1965, pp. 502-504). An e q u a t i o n s u g g e s t e d f o r c a l c u l a t i n g c o r r e c t e d s c o r e s and t h e one  82.  s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l as the c r i t e r i o n f o r d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between and d i s p e n s a b l e items would appear from the p s y c h o m e t r i c be  useful  l i t e r a t u r e to  a conservative procedure. The  c o r r e l a t i o n s o f an item w i t h t o t a l s c o r e s on the f o u r  t o which i t d i d not c o n t r i b u t e  were a l s o c a l c u l a t e d .  items were found t o c o r r e l a t e more h i g h l y w i t h another t h i s c o r r e l a t i o n exceeded the was  .05  of statements  In a few  cases  scale.  Where  l e v e l s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l , the i t e m  r e g a r d e d as an a c c e p t a b l e measure o f t h a t s c a l e .  f o r w h i c h t h i s was  scales  t r u e are indexed i n T a b l e 3.1.  The  statements  That a l i m i t e d number  were i n c o r r e c t l y a s s i g n e d i s n o t too s u r p r i s i n g i n the  p r e s e n t c o n t e x t where a l l 5 s c a l e s  c o n c e r n d i s p o s i t i o n s toward a  common c r i t e r i o n . The main purpose i n computing i t e m - s c a l e c o r r e l a t i o n s i s t o i d e n tify  statements  which enhance the o v e r a l l r e l i a b i l i t y  of a given scale.  As o u t l i n e d i n the p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r , a s t a n d a r d p r o c e d u r e scale r e l i a b i l i t y the e r r o r due  i s to c a l c u l a t e c o e f f i c i e n t alpha, which  t o c o n t e n t sampling  a t e s t instrument.  for assessing  The  l a r g e l y on the average  indicates  - the major s o u r c e o f v a r i a t i o n  within  c a l c u l a t i o n o f c o e f f i c i e n t a l p h a i s based c o r r e l a t i o n among items u s i n g the  following  formula:  employed i n the p r e s e n t study i s : r r  a  yi y  -  a.  1  where r , = c o r r e l a t i o n o f i t e m 1 w i t h t o t a l s c o r e s y.  a  y  a, r  •- s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n  of t o t a l scores.  = s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n o f i t e m 1. = c o r r e l a t i o n o f i t e m 1 w i t h sum e x c l u s i v e o f i t e m 1.  o f s c o r e s on a l l items  83.  kr. .  hi.  r  kk  1 -  (k - 1) r . . ID  where r  = coefficient  alpha  JCK.  r\_. = average  c o r r e l a t i o n among items  k = number o f  items  C o e f f i c i e n t alpha i s a p a r t i c u l a r l y meaningful r e p r e s e n t s t h e expected  c o r r e l a t i o n o f one  t e s t s drawn from the same domain; and  measure s i n c e i t  k-item with other h y p o t h e t i c a l  f u r t h e r m o r e , the square r o o t o f  c o e f f i c i e n t a l p h a i n d i c a t e s the c o r r e l a t i o n between s c o r e s on a k - i t e m t e s t and h y p o t h e t i c a l 'true s c o r e s ' on the c o n s t r u c t measured by test  (Nunnally, 1967, T a b l e 3.2  pp.  193-4).  shows f o r each s c a l e the average  c o r r e l a t i o n among i t e m s ,  c o e f f i c i e n t a l p h a and the square r o o t o f c o e f f i c i e n t a l p h a from the p r e t e s t d a t a . (Nunnally  (1967, p. 226)  calculated  In terms o f a s a t i s f a c t o r y l e v e l o f suggests  .50 o r above are adequate.  The r e l i a b i l i t i e s  s u r e d up t o t h i s s t a n d a r d , a l t h o u g h t h e r e was ment.  Two  l o g i c a l procedures  e l i m i n a t e statements new  statements  reliability,  t h a t i n the e a r l y s t a g e s o f r e s e a r c h  on p r e d i c t o r t e s t s o r h y p o t h e t i c a l measures o f a c o n s t r u c t , of  the  can be  reliabilities  i n the p r e t e s t mea-  c l e a r l y room f o r improve-  followed to increase  reliability:  h a v i n g low i t e m - s c a l e c o r r e l a t i o n s ; and  introduce  s i m i l a r i n c o n t e n t t o o r i g i n a l items h i g h l y c o r r e l a t e d  with t o t a l scores.  84.  TABLE 3.2 PRETEST MEASURES OF SCALE RELIABILITIES AVG. INTER-ITEM CORRELATION  COEFFICIENT ALPHA  SQUARE ROOT OF COEFF. ALPHA  FASHION  .1924  .7812  .8838  CONVENIENCE  .1616  .7430  .8620  STATUS  .0810  .5693  .7545  QUALITY  .0708  .5333  .7303  PRICE  .0661  .5150  .7176  SCALE  In r e v i s i n g t h e f i v e d i s p o s i t i o n a l s c a l e s t h e former p r o c e d u r e was f o l l o w e d b u t t h e l a t t e r was n o t . each s c a l e e x h i b i t i n g the lowest  E s s e n t i a l l y t h e t h r e e statements f o r i t e m - s c a l e c o r r e l a t i o n s were d i s c a r d e d .  Those items which were e l i m i n a t e d a r e indexed  i n Table  3.1.  The r a -  t i o n a l e f o r n o t i n t r o d u c i n g new statements was t o a v o i d c r e a t i n g an o v e r l y cumbersome r e s e a r c h i n s t r u m e n t . the demands o f p s y c h o m e t r i c t h e o r y research. to has  There i s a c l e a r c o n f l i c t between  and t h e p r a c t i c a l i t i e s  While i t i s d e s i r a b l e from t h e p o i n t o f view o f r e l i a b i l i t y  administer  t e s t s comprising  a l a r g e number o f i t e m s ,  consideration  t o be g i v e n t o t h e i m p o s i t i o n o f such a r e s e a r c h i n s t r u m e n t  v o l u n t e e r respondent. endure l e n g t h y  Whereas a c a p t i v e s t u d e n t  sessions completing  p s y c h o l o g i c a l t e s t s , t h e same w i l l i n g -  f o l l o w s t h a t the d e s i r e i n the p r e s e n t  i n f o r m a t i o n from t h e f i n a l  upon a  group may be w i l l i n g t o  n e s s can h a r d l y be e x p e c t e d from a sample o f t h e g e n e r a l It  o f survey  study  to obtain  population. complete  sample, w h i l e n u j i i m i z i n g n e g a t i v e  d i c t a t e d t h a t t h e l e n g t h o f the r e s e a r c h i n s t r u m e n t  reaction,  be c a r e f u l l y  limited.  85.  (iii)  Construct  In a d d i t i o n Guilford  Validities  t o t h e c a l c u l a t i o n o f c o e f f i c i e n t a l p h a s , which  (1965, p. 399) argues can be i n t e r p r e t e d  s i c v a l i d i t y ' , construct the  five  validity  as a measure o f ' i n t r i n -  c o e f f i c i e n t s were o b t a i n e d f o r each o f  scales.  As n o t e d i n t h e p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r , f a c t o r a n a l y s i s assessment o f c o n s t r u c t  validity.  to perform a f a c t o r a n a l y s i s variables, to extract  i s c e n t r a l t o the  A reasonable procedure t o follow i s  u s i n g raw s c o r e s on s c a l e  as many f a c t o r s  factor scores.  items as i n p u t  as t h e r e a r e o r i g i n a l s c a l e s ,  and  to calculate  The c o n s t r u c t  validity  can  then be e s t i m a t e d by i n t e r c o r r e l a t i n g s c a l e  o f the scales  s c o r e s and f a c t o r  scores.  A f a c t o r a n a l y s i s was p e r f o r m e d u s i n g s c o r e s on t h e 75 p r e t e s t s t a t e m e n t s , and f i v e f a c t o r s were e x t r a c t e d .  Various rotations  were  p e r f o r m e d and a b e s t - f i t s o l u t i o n was o b t a i n e d u s i n g an o b l i q u e  (biquar-  t i m i n ) r o t a t i o n , c o n f i r m i n g a c e r t a i n degree o f i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between the s c a l e  constructs.  The f i v e f a c t o r s t o g e t h e r accounted f o r  60 p e r cent o f t h e common f a c t o r v a r i a n c e . Correlating  summative s c a l e s c o r e s and f a c t o r s c o r e s y i e l d e d t h e  s e t o f c o e f f i c i e n t s shown i n T a b l e 3.3 on  the p r i n c i p a l d i a g o n a l .  that  t h r e e o f the s c a l e s  V a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s appear  Scanning a c r o s s the rows o f t h i s t a b l e  - 'fashion',  'convenience' and ' q u a l i t y ' -  were c l e a r l y v a l i d a t e d by c o r r e s p o n d i n g f a c t o r s c a l e s 'status'  s c a l e was l e s s s t r o n g l y  1, 2 and 3.  v a l i d a t e d by f a c t o r 4, and i n d e e d  l a t e d almost as h i g h l y w i t h f a c t o r 2.  shows  The ' p r i c e ' s c a l e  The corre-  failed to  c o r r e s p o n d w i t h a unique v a l i d a t i n g f a c t o r showing s t r o n g e r  relationships  86.  w i t h f a c t o r s 3 and 4 than w i t h f a c t o r 5 w i t h which i d e a l l y i t s h o u l d have been most h i g h l y  correlated. TABLE 3.3 PRETEST MEASURES OF SCALE VALIDITIES FACTOR 2  FACTOR 3  FACTOR 4  .8944  -.4359  -.0107  -.1171  .2137  -.4330  .8738  -.2116  .0926  .1196  QUALITY  .0867  -.1182  .7674  .0243  -.3390  STATUS  .2868  -.5118  .2127  .5530  -.3165  PRICE  .0205  -.0544  -.6448  -.4113  .2210  FACTOR 1 FASHION CONVENIENCE  The  interdependence o f r e l i a b i l i t y  and v a l i d i t y  FACTOR 5  considerations,  as n o t e d by G u i l f o r d (1965, p . 399), i s c o n f i r m e d by these p r e t e s t r e s u l t s since scales having highest validity  c o e f f i c i e n t alphas a l s o had h i g h e s t  coefficients.  O v e r a l l , the f a c t o r s t r u c t u r e s a t i s f a c t o r i l y v a l i d a t e d four o f the five scales.  The l a c k o f c l e a r v a l i d a t i o n i n the case o f t h e ' p r i c e '  s c a l e was n o t r e g a r d e d as a s u f f i c i e n t b a s i s final  research  instrument.  f o r i t s e x c l u s i o n from t h e  I t s r e t e n t i o n was based upon i t s s a t i s f a c t o r y ,  i f moderate, l e v e l o f r e l i a b i l i t y  and t h e s u s p i c i o n t h a t a h i g h e r  c o e f f i c i e n t would have emerged had t h e p r e t e s t sample been l e s s in  range.  T h i s s u s p i c i o n was c o n f i r m e d when v a l i d i t y  recomputed u s i n g d a t a o b t a i n e d (see below p . 1 1 3 ) .  from t h e f i n a l  validity  restricted  c o e f f i c i e n t s were  stratified  random sample  87.  (iv)  Predictive Validities  As  i n d i c a t e d above, t h e p r e t e s t sample i n c l u d e d 83 respondents who  completed q u e s t i o n n a i r e s  i n i n - s t o r e s i t u a t i o n s - 51 o f these were i n t e r -  viewed i n what can perhaps b e s t be d e s c r i b e d as a " f a s h i o n a b l e  boutique"  w h i l e t h e r e m a i n i n g 32 were p a t r o n s o f a major department s t o r e . information useable,  obtained  The  from these two groups o f customers p r o v i d e d  though r e s t r i c t e d , d a t a base f o r making a p r e l i m i n a r y  a assess-  ment o f the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t i e s o f the f i v e d i s p o s i t i o n a l s c a l e s . In o r d e r t o make t h i s assessment i t was n e c e s s a r y t o t e s t f o r s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the mean scale, s c o r e s and  o f the two groups  f u r t h e r t o demonstrate how a c c u r a t e l y t h e s c a l e s c o r e s  t e d between t h e groups.  Stepwise d i s c r i m i n a n t a n a l y s i s p r o v i d e d  means o f a c h i e v i n g these two r e l a t e d purposes 1971).  discrimina-  (Cooley  a  and Lohnes,  T h i s t e c h n i q u e d e r i v e s l i n e a r combinations o f o r i g i n a l v a r i a -  b l e s which maximally d i s c r i m i n a t e between p r e d e f i n e d I t s use i s most a p p r o p r i a t e  subject  groups.  i n s i t u a t i o n s where the dependent v a r i a b l e  (or c r i t e r i o n ) i s nominal and t h e independent v a r i a b l e s are i n t e r v a l o r r a t i o s c a l e d .  (or p r e d i c t o r s )  L i n e a r combinations o f o r i g i n a l v a r i a b l e s  (or d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n s ) a r e d e r i v e d i n an i t e r a t i v e  f a s h i o n - the  v a r i a b l e i n c l u d e d i n the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n a t each s t a g e b e i n g t h e one  which maximizes between t o w i t h i n group v a r i a n c e  a s e r i e s o f u n i v a r i a t e analyses not p r e v i o u s l y i n c l u d e d .  of variance  as determined by  on each o f the v a r i a b l e s  The i t e r a t i v e p r o c e d u r e i s t e r m i n a t e d  when  the F p r o b a b i l i t y o f v a r i a b l e s n o t i n c l u d e d i n the d i s c r i m i n a n t t i o n i s i n a l l cases above a p r e d e t e r m i n e d s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l .05).  func-  (usually  The  data obtained  from t h e p r e t e s t subsample was c l e a r l y  appro-  p r i a t e f o r d i s c r i m i n a n t a n a l y s i s p u r p o s e s ; t h e nominal c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e being  'store type  1  and t h e i n t e r v a l p r e d i c t o r s b e i n g  the f i v e  dis-  positional scales. T a b l e 3.4 shows the group means, i n i t i a l F v a l u e s lities  f o r each o f t h e f i v e  and F p r o b a b i -  scales. TABLE 3.4  GROUP MEANS AND F STATISTICS MEAN B  MEAN  D  F  VALUE  F PROB.  FASHION  53.16  43.12  53.93  .0000  PRICE  45.33  42.25  6.75  .0108  QUALITY  51.37  54.25  5.71  .0183  CONVENIENCE  35.88  37.19  0.89  .3496  STATUS  45.31  46.44  0.77  .7698  B o u t i q u e shoppers ** Department s t o r e  It  shoppers  emerged t h a t t h e means f o r t h e two groups were  significantly  d i f f e r e n t f o r t h r e e o f t h e f i v e s c a l e s , namely, ' f a s h i o n ' , and  'quality'.  reference  These s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s can be i n t e r p r e t e d by  t o t h e group means.  The most s t r i k i n g d i f f e r e n c e was i n r e l a -  t i o n t o ' f a s h i o n o r i e n t a t i o n ' where t h e mean s c o r e group was more than t e n p o i n t s h i g h e r s t o r e p a t r o n s - an i n t u i t i v e l y still  'price'  f o r t h e 'boutique'  than t h a t f o r t h e department  reasonable r e s u l t .  Less s t r i k i n g , b u t  s i g n i f i c a n t , were t h e d i f f e r e n c e s w i t h r e s p e c t  t o ' p r i c e ' , the  department s t o r e shoppers p l a c e d  the g r e a t e r emphasis on  ' q u a l i t y ' con-  siderations . Other r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d revealing.  Only one  the d i s c r i m i n a n t and  the o t h e r s  critical  .05  o f the  function.  from the d i s c r i m i n a n t  a n a l y s i s were a l s o  f i v e s c a l e s - ' f a s h i o n ' - was The  degree o f c o v a r i a n c e  included i n  between t h i s  scale  were s u f f i c i e n t t o r a i s e the F p r o b a b i l i t i e s above  l e v e l and  hence p r e v e n t e d the i n c l u s i o n o f any  of  the  the  four remaining s c a l e s . Following  the t e r m i n a t i o n  o f the s t e p w i s e p r o c e d u r e , s c o r e s  discriminant  f u n c t i o n s are c a l c u l a t e d f o r each o f the o r i g i n a l  These s c o r e s  are the b a s i s f o r p r e d i c t i n g membership i n the  groups.  Each s u b j e c t  and  the group c e n t r o i d s  functions. t o the  Subjects  are a s s i g n e d  group c e n t r o i d s .  The  group membership then s e r v e s the v a r i a b l e s i n t r o d u c e d  coincidence  by  as a b a s i s f o r a s s e s s i n g how  actual  accurately  function distinguish  groups.  d i s c r i m i n a n t a n a l y s i s o f the p r e t e s t d a t a y i e l d e d the  f i c a t i o n m a t r i x shown i n T a b l e  a  proximity  between p r e d i c t e d and  i n t o the d i s c r i m i n a n t  subjects.  discriminant  t o groups on the b a s i s o f  between the members o f the d i f f e r e n t The  the  the  criterion  are r e p r e s e n t e d  p o i n t l o c a t i o n i n the g e o m e t r i c space d e f i n e d by  on  classi-  3.5. TABLE  3.5  GROUP CLASSIFICATION MATRIX  DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT BOUTIQUE TOTAL PREDICTED MEMBERSHIP  BOUTIQUE  TOTAL ACTUAL MEMBERSHIP  26  (81%)  6  (19%)  32  9  (18%)  42  (82%)  51  35  48  90.  The  f i g u r e s i n d i c a t e t h a t a h i g h degree o f p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y was  achieved. the  O v e r a l l , a p p r o x i m a t e l y 82% o f t h e s u b j e c t s  c o r r e c t group, a l t h o u g h o n l y  was i n c l u d e d  i n the d i s c r i m i n a n t  were a s s i g n e d t o  one o f t h e f i v e s c a l e s function.  the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f the ' f a s h i o n '  This  - 'fashion'  -  c l e a r l y demonstrates  scale a l b e i t i n a r e s t r i c t e d  situation. In g e n e r a l , varying scales.  t h e r e s u l t s o f -the d i s c r i m i n a n t  degrees, t h e p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y C l e a r l y conclusions  analysis  confirmed, i n  o f a t l e a s t three o f the f i v e  were t e n t a t i v e g i v e n the r e s t r i c t e d range  o f shopping b e h a v i o u r r e p r e s e n t e d w i t h i n  the p r e t e s t  subsample.  t h e l e s s , t h e a b i l i t y t o demonstrate s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s  Never-  i n the d i s -  p o s i t i o n s o f t h e two c r i t e r i o n groups and t o p r e d i c t group membership w i t h such a h i g h degree o f a c c u r a c y s e r v e d as a r e a s s u r i n g to the p r e t e s t  D.  conclusion  analysis.  REVISED SCALES  On t h e b a s i s o f t h e p r e t e s t five scales.  r e s u l t s , i t was d e c i d e d t o r e t a i n a l l  R e v i s i o n s were made l a r g e l y i n accordance w i t h t h e i t e m -  s c a l e c o r r e l a t i o n s shown i n T a b l e 3.1. scale r e l i a b i l i t i e s  I n the i n t e r e s t s o f i n c r e a s i n g  and d e c r e a s i n g t h e l e n g t h o f t h e r e s e a r c h  (and hence t h e time r e q u i r e d  for i t s administration),  ments on each s c a l e h a v i n g lowest i t e m - s c a l e Each o f t h e r e v i s e d s c a l e s t h e r e f o r e  the three  c o r r e l a t i o n s were  An i t e m a n a l y s i s o f t h e r e v i s e d s c a l e s u s i n g  the e f f e c t i v e n e s s  discarded.  instrument.  the data obtained i n the  (see below p.112) s u b s e q u e n t l y  o f t h e s e changes.  state-  comprised twelve s t a t e m e n t s , making  a t o t a l o f 60 statements f o r i n c l u s i o n i n t h e f i n a l r e s e a r c h  major d a t a c o l l e c t i o n phase  instrument  confirmed  CHAPTER 4  QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN, SAMPLE DESIGN AND  A.  DATA COLLECTION  PROCEDURES  INTRODUCTION  The purpose o f t h i s c h a p t e r i s t o d e t a i l the components o f the r e s e a r c h d e s i g n r e l a t e d d i r e c t l y t o t h e major d a t a c o l l e c t i o n phase; namely, q u e s t i o n n a i r e and sample d e s i g n and d a t a c o l l e c t i o n One component o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e comprised s c a l e s d e s c r i b e d i n the p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r . designed  the f i v e  procedures.  dispositional  Two o t h e r components were  t o o b t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e shopping  behaviour  and b i o -  g r a p h i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f consumers. The u t i l i t y  o f the i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d by q u e s t i o n n a i r e  methods stands o r f a l l s  survey  t o a l a r g e e x t e n t on the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f  t h e sample from which i t i s d e r i v e d .  The r a t i o n a l e u n d e r l y i n g the  sample d e s i g n employed i n t h i s study i s p r e s e n t e d mechanics o f sample s e l e c t i o n .  t o g e t h e r w i t h the  Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were a d m i n i s t e r e d by  a team o f t r a i n e d i n t e r v i e w e r s and the procedures  followed f o r ensuring  s y s t e m a t i c and c o n s i s t e n t d a t a c o l l e c t i o n methods a r e o u t l i n e d .  B.  QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN  The q u e s t i o n n a i r e was d e s i g n e d mation:  to obtain three categories o f i n f o r -  measures o f consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s , consumer shopping  and consumer b i o g r a p h i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . measurement i n s t r u m e n t previous chapter.  behaviour  The c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a  f o r the f i r s t o f these was d e s c r i b e d i n the  I n t h i s s e c t i o n , t h e measurement  - 91 -  o f b e h a v i o u r a l and  92.  biographical variables i s considered,  (i)  The Measurement o f B e h a v i o u r  P r e v i o u s q u e s t i o n n a i r e s u r v e y s o f shopping b e h a b i o u r d i f f e r e n t approaches  t o the measurement o f b e h a v i o u r .  demonstrate  I n some c a s e s ,  respondents have been asked about t h e i r most r e c e n t shopping ( B u c k l i n , 1967);  i n o t h e r s , about a s e r i e s o f r e c e n t t r i p s  and i n o t h e r s , about t h e i r  'normal' s h o p p i n g b e h a v i o u r  Each approach has c e r t a i n advantages  trip  (Brown,  (Rich,  1974);  1963).  and d i s a d v a n t a g e s .  A s k i n g consumers t o r e p o r t i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e most r e c e n t shopp i n g t r i p has t h e advantage  that accuracy of r e c a l l i s l i k e l y  t o be  maximized s i n c e the time l a p s e between b e h a v i o u r and r e p o r t i s u s u a l l y short.  I t has t h e d i s a d v a n t a g e t h a t , f o r v a r y i n g r e a s o n s , a s i n g l e  shopping t r i p may be an a t y p i c a l example o f a p a r t i c u l a r  shopper's  behaviour. The main advantage  o f o b t a i n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n about a s e r i e s o f p a s t  shopping t r i p s i s t h a t i t p e r m i t s a check on t h e c o n s i s t e n c y o f r e l a t i o n s h i p s between dependent advantage  and independent v a r i a b l e s .  The main  dis-  i s t h a t a c c u r a c y o f r e c a l l may be s u s p e c t i n cases where  respondents have made r e l a t i v e l y i n f r e q u e n t shopping t r i p s  - this  problem  i s a c c e n t u a t e d f o r middle and h i g h o r d e r goods when t h e time l a p s e between p u r c h a s e s may be q u i t e e x t e n s i v e .  The a l t e r n a t i v e s t r a t e g y o f m o n i t o r i n g  b e h a v i o u r a t r e g u l a r time i n t e r v a l s u s i n g a p a n e l group i n t r o d u c e s t h e problem o f d a t a c o n t a m i n a t i o n .  I t i s very d i f f i c u l t  t o assess the  e x t e n t t o which b e h a v i o u r i s i n f l u e n c e d by the consumer's awareness t h a t shopping d e c i s i o n s have s u b s e q u e n t l y t o be r e p o r t e d .  93.  Asking  respondents t o i n d i c a t e where they- most f r e q u e n t l y shop f o r  a c e r t a i n good has  the advantage t h a t i t s e r v e s  shoppers i n terms o f  t o d e f i n e groups o f  ' t y p i c a l ' b e h a v i o u r - f o r example, the  downtown shopper as opposed t o the p e r s o n who suburban shopping c e n t r e .  I t i s reasonable  normally  regular  patronizes  to s p e c u l a t e  a  t h a t member-  s h i p i n ' t y p i c a l ' c r i t e r i o n groups o f t h i s k i n d i s more c l e a r l y r e l a t e d t o independent p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s than i s group membership d e f i n e d the b a s i s o f a s i n g l e shopping t r i p . f o l l o w i n g chapter  (The  r e s u l t s r e p o r t e d i n the  i n f a c t confirm t h i s speculation.)  advantage o f r e q u e s t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g  main  dis-  shopping  not be  definable.  f o r example p a t r o n i z e a number o f d i f f e r e n t s t o r e s o r  shopping areas w i t h a p p r o x i m a t e l y request  The  'typical'  t r i p s i s t h a t f o r some respondents such a t r i p may A consumer may  on  equal  frequency.  In which case,  to  t h a t a s i n g l e f a c i l i t y be s p e c i f i e d must r e s u l t e i t h e r i n m i s s -  i n g d a t a o r the r e p o r t i n g o f d e c e p t i v e G i v e n t h a t each o f these b e h a v i o u r has the p r e s e n t  attendant  study  information.  t h r e e approaches t o the documentation o f  advantages and  not to r e l y on any  information r e l a t e d to a l l three.  disadvantages,  one  decided  in  o f them, b u t r a t h e r t o o b t a i n  Respondents were t h e r e f o r e asked to  d e s c r i b e t h e i r t h r e e most r e c e n t shopping t r i p s , p o s s i b l e , where they most f r e q u e n t l y shopped. body o f i n f o r m a t i o n would p r o v i d e  i t was  and  I t was  also to report, i f hoped t h a t  a b a s i s f o r a s s e s s i n g the  this  stability  o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between consumer c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and b e h a v i o u r o v e r a sequence o f p u r c h a s e s . Q u e s t i o n s were d e v i s e d t o e l i c i t the f o l l o w i n g i n f o r m a t i o n each o f t h e respondent's t h r e e most r e c e n t shopping  trips:  about  94.  1.  Name o f s t o r e  Studies  patronized.  o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r have tended t o c o n c e n t r a t e  s h o p p i n g c e n t r e r a t h e r than s t o r e p a t r o n a g e Doddridge, 1972; Down, 1970). t i o n t h a t shopping d e c i s i o n s  (Brown, 1974; B u c k l i n , 1967;  I m p l i c i t i n t h i s emphasis i s t h e assumpi n v o l v e two i n t e r d e p e n d e n t l o c a t i o n a l com-  ponents o f d i f f e r i n g s p e c i f i c i t y ; namely, c h o i c e shopping c e n t r e . respect mers.  on  o f store, and c h o i c e o f  The r e l a t i v e importance o f t h e s e components w i t h  t o a s p e c i f i c shopping d e c i s i o n i s l i k e l y t o v a r y between consuU l t i m a t e l y , o f c o u r s e , a l l p u r c h a s e s have t o be made a t s p e c i f i c  r e t a i l establishments  and hence s t o r e c h o i c e  an i n c i d e n t a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n .  can h a r d l y b e r e g a r d e d as  There i s n o t t h e same need however f o r a  consumer t o make a c o n s c i o u s c h o i c e between shopping c e n t r e s ,  and s t u d i e s  o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r which assume t h a t d e c i s i o n s are f o r m u l a t e d a t t h a t aggregate l e v e l may i n p a r t be p r o c e e d i n g on t h e b a s i s o f a misconception.  In t h i s context,  Downs p r o v i d e s  o f shoppers t o d i s a s s o c i a t e e v a l u a t i o n s tions of stores within the  centres  evidence o f the i n a b i l i t y  o f shopping c e n t r e s  (Downs, 1970).  from  evalua-  S u f f i c e i t t o say that  ambiguous r e l a t i o n s h i p between s t o r e c h o i c e  and shopping  centre  patronage i s a p o t e n t i a l source o f confusion  which cannot be i g n o r e d i n  the a n a l y s i s o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r .  F o r t h i s r e a s o n , an attempt  was  made i n t h i s study t o account f o r b e h a v i o u r a l  respect 2.  t o b o t h s t o r e and shopping c e n t r e Type o f s t o r e  differences with  choices.  patronized.  A p r o c e d u r e f o r c l a s s i f y i n g t h e s t o r e s s p e c i f i e d b y t h e respondents was  r e q u i r e d s i n c e i t was i n e v i t a b l e , g i v e n  t h e l a r g e number o f c l o t h i n g  o u t l e t s , t h a t many s t o r e s would be mentioned v e r y  infrequently.  Therefore,  95.  i n o r d e r t o i n c r e a s e t h e a n a l y t i c a l u t i l i t y o f - t h e d a t a , the respondent was  asked t o a s s i g n t h e s t o r e p r e v i o u s l y s p e c i f i e d t o one o f t h e f o l l o w -  ing s i x categories:  high-priced  boutique,  store,  store.  department  specialty,  department  medium-priced  store-budget  specialty,  floor,  budget  priced  T h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme i s s i m i l a r t o t h a t used i n an e a r l i e r  study o f s h o p p i n g b e h a v i o u r ( R i c h , 1963) and has t h e d e s i r e d  advantage  o f b e i n g based e s s e n t i a l l y on d e n o t a t i v e c r i t e r i a . 3.  Store l o c a t i o n.  Respondents  were asked t o s p e c i f y t h e l o c a t i o n s o f t h e s t o r e s they  had p a t r o n i z e d by i n d i c a t i n g , i f a p p l i c a b l e , t h e name o f a shopping c e n t r e or otherwise the i n t e r s e c t i o n nearest t o the store.  F o r purposes o f  a n a l y s i s , i t was n e c e s s a r y t o c l a s s i f y t h e s e l o c a t i o n s .  The r e t a i l  literature  classification  suggests a number o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y e q u i v a l e n t  schemes, employing s i z e o f f a c i l i t y  and c h a r a c t e r o f c o n t r o l  ' c o n t r o l l e d ' v s 'autonomous' c e n t r e s ) as t h e b a s i c taxonomic ( B e r r y , 1963; K e l l y , 1956). c a t e g o r i e s were adopted: Vancouver  Following Bucklin  primary  centres  and Downtown New Westminster;  - a l l r e m a i n i n g commercial  e i t h e r r i b b o n developments 4.  Trip  criteria  (1967), t h r e e l o c a t i o n a l  - r e s t r i c t e d t o Downtown secondary  centres  - restricted  t o p l a n n e d s h o p p i n g c e n t r e s c o n t a i n i n g a major department centres  (i.e.,  d i s t r i c t s which were  store;  tertiary  essentially  o r s m a l l e r planned shopping c e n t r e s .  origin.  A l t h o u g h most shopping t r i p s o r i g i n a t e from t h e home, p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h has demonstrated t h a t o t h e r o r i g i n s - p a r t i c u l a r l y workplace are a l s o i m p o r t a n t ( L e i g h , 1965).  Respondents  were r e q u i r e d t o s t i p u -  l a t e whether t h e t r i p o r i g i n a t e d from t h e home, w o r k p l a c e , o r a n o t h e r  6 ' 9 6 .  l o c a t i o n which was t o be s p e c i f i e d . 5. In the  Location of t r i p  origin.  o r d e r t o p e r m i t the a c c u r a t e measurement o f d i s t a n c e s  separating  consumer's l o c a t i o n and a l t e r n a t i v e r e t a i l o p p o r t u n i t i e s , t h e r e s -  pondent was asked t o s p e c i f y the hundred b l o c k address o f t h e t r i p origin. 6.  Distance estimate.  There i s an i n c r e a s i n g body o f r e s e a r c h e v i d e n c e ( B r i g g s , 1973) t o suggest t h e importance o f c o g n i t i v e d i s t a n c e as a b e h a v i o u r a l d e t e r m i n a n t . A v e r y l i m i t e d attempt t o o b t a i n such a measure was made by a s k i n g r e s pondents and  t o e s t i m a t e the p h y s i c a l d i s t a n c e s e p a r a t i n g t h e i r t r i p  origin  destination. 7.  T r a v e l mode.  Respondents were asked t o s p e c i f y which o f f o u r modal a l t e r n a t i v e s t h e y had employed t o r e a c h t h e i r shopping d e s t i n a t i o n s . 8.  T r i p purpose.  The s e l e c t i o n o f a p a r t i c u l a r r e t a i l the  f a c i l i t y may be i n f l u e n c e d by  consumer combining a p a r t i c u l a r p u r c h a s e w i t h o t h e r purposes  which  may o r may n o t i n v o l v e s h o p p i n g .  In order t o d i s t i n g u i s h s i n g l e pur-  chase and m u l t i p l e purpose t r i p s ,  respondents were asked t o s p e c i f y  t h e i r main purpose 9.  from a s e t o f f i v e  alternatives.  Past purchases.  As a b a s i s f o r a s s e s s i n g t h e degree o f commitment t o a s p e c i f i e d s t o r e , respondents were asked t o r e c o r d t h e number o f p u r c h a s e s made t h e r e i n the p r e v i o u s two y e a r s .  These n i n e q u e s t i o n s c l o t h i n g purchases. mine the s t o r e and  (ii)  were r e p e a t e d  f o r each o f the t h r e e most r e c e n t  Q u e s t i o n s 1, 2 and  3 were r e p e a t e d  again t o  deter-  shopping a r e a p a t r o n i z e d most o f t e n .  B i o g r a p h i c a l Measures  The b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s commonly employed i n p a s t r e s e a r c h were the ones i n c l u d e d i n the p r e s e n t  status,  number of children  study;  namely:  age,  sex,  marital  at home, before taxes annual household income, *  education  and occupation  of head of household.  k i n d are so commonly employed i n s u r v e y  S i n c e measures o f  research, there i s l i t t l e  this need  f o r f u r t h e r e l a b o r a t i o n here. (iii)  General  The  Design  Considerations  f i n a l questionnaire  comprised t h r e e main s e c t i o n s :  Section  1  ** c o n s i s t i n g o f the 60 L i k e r t statements  , Section 2 comprising  questions  r e l a t e d t o p a s t c l o t h i n g p u r c h a s e s ; and S e c t i o n 3 d e a l i n g w i t h b i o g r a p h i c a l information.  The  o r d e r i n g o f these  t h r e e s e c t i o n s was  by  no  means a r b i t r a r y . There i s always a danger o f d a t a c o n t a m i n a t i o n such as t h i s where r e l a t e d measures are j u x t a p o s e d vey  instrument.  I t i s necessary  T h i s was r e c o r d e d a n a l y t i c a l purposes was  g o r i e s : professional, unskilled.  in  circumstances  within a single sur-  therefore to design  the  questionnaire  i n the form o f a j o b d e s c r i p t i o n , which f o r a s s i g n e d t o one o f the f o l l o w i n g o r d i n a l c a t e -  managerial, white collar,  skilled,  semi-skilled,  ** The statements were s e r i a l l y o r d e r e d such t h a t statement 1 was a measure o f s c a l e 1, statement 2 o f s c a l e 2, and so on t o statement 6 which was a g a i n a measure o f s c a l e 1 b e g i n n i n g the second f i v e statement sequence. T h i s o r d e r i n g s e r v e s to m i n i m i z e p o s s i b l e response b i a s  98.  so as t o minimize c o n t a m i n a t i o n  effects.  g r e a t e s t danger o f c o n t a m i n a t i o n  In the p r e s e n t case  appeared t o be between the  t i o n a l measures and the b e h a v i o u r a l d a t a .  I t was  t o complete the d i s p o s i t i o n a l  past behaviour. statements  The  disposi-  decided that t h i s  p o t e n t i a l problem c o u l d be c o n t r o l l e d most e f f e c t i v e l y by respondents  the  scales before  r a t i o n a l e f o r t h i s o r d e r i n g was  requiring  recording their  t h a t response  can be d i s t o r t e d e i t h e r d e l i b e r a t e l y o r s u b c o n s c i o u s l y  to to  match p r e v i o u s l y r e c o r d e d b e h a v i o u r w i t h r e l a t i v e ease; whereas t o d i s t o r t i n f o r m a t i o n about b e h a v i o u r  so as t o c o r r e s p o n d w i t h p r e v i o u s l y  s t a t e d d i s p o s i t i o n s r e q u i r e s t h a t a respondent contingency  deliberately l i e - a  which most survey r e s e a r c h e r s would p r e f e r n o t t o contem-  plate. The b i o g r a p h i c a l q u e s t i o n s were p o s i t i o n e d on the l a s t page o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s i n c e they r e q u e s t i n f o r m a t i o n p r o p e r t y r e g a r d e d c o n f i d e n t i a l and tion.  are t h e r e f o r e the most l i k e l y  t o arouse  t h e r e f o r e to leave these questions u n t i l  The q u e s t i o n n a i r e was  presented  last.  t o the respondent  i n the form o f  a t e n page b o o k l e t , a copy o f w h i c h appears as Appendix  (i)  non-coopera-  I n the i n t e r e s t s o f o b t a i n i n g complete i n f o r m a t i o n i t seemed  prudent  C.  as  A.  SAMPLE DESIGN  Population D e f i n i t i o n  The p o p u l a t i o n was  d e f i n e d as a l l h o u s e h o l d s w i t h i n the c i t y  of  Vancouver and the f e d e r a l e l e c t o r a l d i s t r i c t o f C a p i l a n o , w h i c h encomp a s s e s West Vancouver D i s t r i c t , N o r t h Vancouver C i t y and r e s u l t i n g from a s u c c e s s i o n o f statements  the western  r e l a t e d t o the same s c a l e .  A t the same time, the o r d e r i n g i s s u f f i c i e n t l y s y s t e m a t i c t o the c o d i n g and  a n a l y s i s o f the  data.  expedite  half  99.  o f N o r t h Vancouver D i s t r i c t .  These g e o g r a p h i c a l  the d e s i r e t h a t sample respondents be  l i m i t s were based  aware o f and have a c c e s s  range o f a l t e r n a t i v e r e t a i l o p p o r t u n i t i e s .  On  the b a s i s o f the  d i s t r i b u t i o n o f commercial f l o o r s p a c e i n G r e a t e r Vancouver 4.1),  (see  to a spatial Figure  i t seemed f a i r t o assume t h a t h o u s e h o l d s w i t h i n the d e f i n e d geo-  g r a p h i c a l a r e a had  reasonable  Downtown Vancouver and  access  t o the major commercial c e n t r e i n  t o p l a n n e d s h o p p i n g c e n t r e s and  d i s t r i c t s d i s t r i b u t e d throughout the a r e a . assumption d e r i v e d from the  Vancouver  (see F i g u r e 4.2)  from o t h e r r e t a i l  (ii)  other  shopping  A d d i t i o n a l support  f a c t t h a t a l l households w i t h i n the  a r e a were w i t h i n a p p r o x i m a t e l y  for this sample  30 minutes d r i v i n g time o f Downtown  and were c o n s i d e r a b l y s h o r t e r time d i s t a n c e s  facilities.  S t r a t i f i c a t i o n by  Area  I n the i n t e r e s t s o f drawing a sample o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n which p r o p o r t i o n a l l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f a l l p a r t s o f the urban r e g i o n above, i t was I t was  decided  to s t r a t i f y  defined  would h e l p  and b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a n c e g i v e n the known d i s -  t r i b u t i o n s o f commercial f a c i l i t i e s groups w i t h i n the sample a r e a  (see F i g u r e 4.1)  (Patterson,  and  socio-economic  forthcoming).  Sample S e l e c t i o n  The 1971  was  on a census enumeration a r e a b a s e .  f u r t h e r hoped t h a t s t r a t i f y i n g the sample i n t h i s way  t o maximize b e h a v i o u r a l  (iii)  on  number o f households i n the sample a r e a as determined by  census was  189,124 r e p r e s e n t i n g 967  (E.A.s) o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y  census enumeration  e q u a l p o p u l a t i o n size-.  I t was  the  areas  decided  that a  FIGURE 4.1  100.  THE SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF COMMERCIAL IN GREATER VANCOUVER  FLOORSPACE  iii. -i  COMMERCIAL  •/  1  FLOORSPACE  FLOOR AREA SQUARE F E E T  NOTES:  #  A "  CENTRE WITH LESS THAN 15,000 SO. FT. FLOOR AREA.  O  CENTRE WITH UNKNOWN FLOOR AREA (LESS THAN 15,000 SO. FT. BUT NOT INCLUDED IN TABULATIONS).  BASED ON MUNICIPAL ASSESSMENT DATA AND L.MR.PB. ESTIMATES. DATA VARIES IN YEAR AND DEFINITION ANO THUS ONLY APPROXIMATES ACTUAL FLOOR SPACE. SEE TABLES FOR COMMENTS. NUMBERS AND L E T T E R S REFER TO TABLES.  GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT PLANNING DEPARTMENT  FEBRUARY, 1978  SCALE IN MILES 0 I 2  •  £ek \ "  ia  •  FIGURE 4.2 TRAVEL TIME TO DOWNTOWN VANCOUVER*  * Map shows 5 minute i s o c h r o n e s from i n t e r s e c t i o n o f G r a n v i l l e and G e o r g i a i n Downtown Vancouver a t 4:30 p.m. by f a s t e s t r o u t e (data c o l l e c t e d i n summer o f 1968 by G.V.R.D. P l a n n i n g Department).  101.  s u f f i c i e n t l y l a r g e sample p o o l ( a p p r o x i m a t e l y 483) would be o b t a i n e d by a random s e l e c t i o n o f households  from alternate  l i s t e d i n t h e Canada Census S t r e e t D i r e c t o r y  enumeration  f o r Greater  areas as  Vancouver.  T h i s d i r e c t o r y l i s t s the b l o c k - f a c e a d d r e s s e s o c c u r r i n g w i t h i n enumeration Two  each  area.  b l o c k f a c e s were randomly  s e l e c t e d from a l t e r n a t e E.A.s.  This  p r o c e d u r e d e f i n e d a range o f h o u s e h o l d a d d r e s s e s from which a s i n g l e household was  subsequently s e l e c t e d .  L e t t e r s were d e l i v e r e d t o the  f i r s t t e n households w i t h i n the s p e c i f i e d range o f a d d r e s s e s .  This  l e t t e r s e r v e d t o i n t r o d u c e the s t u d y and t o s t a t e i t s g e n e r a l o b j e c t i v e s - a copy o f the l e t t e r appears as Appendix t h i s p r i o r c o n t a c t would enhance the response  B.  hoped t h a t  rate.  A f t e r about two days a t r a i n e d i n t e r v i e w e r a randomly  I t was  (see below} r e t u r n e d t o  s e l e c t e d h o u s e h o l d w i t h i n the t e n which had r e c e i v e d a  l e t t e r i n the hope o f f i n d i n g a s u i t a b l e and w i l l i n g r e s p o n d e n t . c r i t e r i a f o r d e t e r m i n i n g s u i t a b i l i t y were those o f age and sex.  The Inter-  v i e w e r s were i n s t r u c t e d t h a t respondents must be seventeen o r above, and t h e sex o f the respondent r e q u i r e d from e a c h E.A. (In t h i s way, by  the sample was  was  also  stipulated.  e f f e c t i v e l y s t r a t i f i e d by sex as w e l l  as  area). I f a s u i t a b l e and w i l l i n g respondent was  s e l e c t e d h o u s e h o l d , t h e i n t e r v i e w e r was next household delivered.  randomly  i n s t r u c t e d t o proceed to the  ( i n o r d e r o f a s c e n d i n g address) where a l e t t e r had been  T h i s p r o c e d u r e was  respondent was  not found a t the  found.  repeated u n t i l  a s u i t a b l e and  willing  D.  INTERVIEWER TRAINING  Data c o l l e c t i o n was u n d e r t a k e n by a team o f t r a i n e d i n t e r v i e w e r s . The  i n t e r v i e w e r s were drawn from a second y e a r  geography c l a s s and the  r e s e a r c h t a s k formed an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f t h e i r course  requirements.  Each i n t e r v i e w e r r e c e i v e d two hour l o n g p e r i o d s o f i n s t r u c t i o n . The  first  took the form o f a c l a s s l e c t u r e i n which t h e p u r p o s e s and  p r o c e d u r e s o f the r e s e a r c h d e s i g n were o u t l i n e d i n the c o n t e x t pertinent research l i t e r a t u r e . t i o n s concerning  o f the  I n the second s e s s i o n , d e t a i l e d i n s t r u c -  the methods o f d a t a  c o l l e c t i o n were g i v e n .  In a d d i -  t i o n , each i n t e r v i e w e r r e c e i v e d an i n s t r u c t i o n manual (see Appendix C) which summarized the p r o c e d u r e s t o be The  r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f each i n t e r v i e w e r was t o d e l i v e r l e t t e r s t o  ten designated sheet  followed.  a d d r e s s e s i n each o f f o u r E.A.s l i s t e d on an assignment  (see Appendix D) and s u b s e q u e n t l y  t o complete f o u r  interviews  - one i n each E.A.  E.  DATA RETURNS AND  CODING PROCEDURES  Data c o l l e c t i o n was completed i n the second h a l f o f November 1973. A t o t a l o f 351 completed q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were r e t u r n e d . represents  a 73% response r a t e - the r e m a i n i n g  t e d f o r by a p a r t i a l o r t o t a l t h e i r assigned  This figure  27% were l a r g e l y  accoun-  f a i l u r e of c e r t a i n interviewers to f u l f i l l  responsibilities.  The g e o g r a p h i c a l  d i s t r i b u t i o n and  b i o g r a p h i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the 351 r e s p o n d e n t s - d e s c r i b e d i n the f o l l o w i n g chapter  - were s u c h t h a t the sample was riot s e r i o u s l y compro-  mised, and, as a r e s u l t , no e f f o r t was made t o supplement the r e t u r n s .  104.  The c o u l d be simply  questionnaire  (see Appendix A) was  completed on the b o o k l e t i t s e l f .  designed  such t h a t t h e  In l a r g e measure, t h i s  coding task  i n v o l v e d t h e t r a n s c r i p t i o n o f d a t a codes; the c o d i n g o f d i s t a n c e  measures was  somewhat more i n v o l v e d however.  Preparatory  to d a t a a n a l y s i s , i t was  necessary  t o o b t a i n measures  o f t h e d i s t a n c e s s e p a r a t i n g respondents from v a r i o u s r e t a i l namely:  the  facilities;  s t o r e p a t r o n i z e d , Downtown Vancouver, the n e a r e s t p l a n n e d  shopping c e n t r e ; and the n e a r e s t o t h e r shopping d i s t r i c t  containing a  * clothing store.  These d i s t a n c e s were determined by p l o t t i n g  respondent's t r i p  o r i g i n on a l a r g e s c a l e map  a r e a and the  subsequently  measuring the main a r t e r i a l  four f a c i l i t i e s using a plenimeter.  Vancouver was  o f the G r e a t e r  the Vancouver  d i s t a n c e s t o each o f  Time d i s t a n c e t o Downtown  a l s o coded on the b a s i s o f a r e l a t i v e l y r e c e n t  survey  (G.V.R.D., 1970). A l s o coded were the s i z e s  ( i n square f e e t ) o f t h e s h o p p i n g  p a t r o n i z e d , the n e a r e s t p l a n n e d shopping c e n t r e and shopping d i s t r i c t . mercial floorspace  These f i g u r e s were o b t a i n e d (G.V.R.D., 1970a) which was  the n e a r e s t  from a survey  area other  o f com-  updated t o i n c l u d e  r e c e n t changes i n the r e t a i l s t r u c t u r e . F o l l o w i n g t h e completion f e r e d t o cards  i n preparation  o f t h e c o d i n g phase the d a t a were t r a n s f o r computer a n a l y s i s .  * F i e l d survey  served to d e f i n e these  commercial f a c i l i t i e s .  F.  SUMMARY  T h i s c h a p t e r has d e s c r i b e d q u e s t i o n n a i r e d e s i g n , sample d e s i g n data c o l l e c t i o n procedures.  In each c a s e , an e f f o r t was  mize sources o f b i a s and hence s t r e n g t h e n the d a t a .  and  made t o m i n i -  A f t e r coding  and  key-punching, t h e d a t a were a n a l y s e d and the r e s u l t s are p r e s e n t e d i n the f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r .  CHAPTER 5  DATA ANALYSIS  A.  INTRODUCTION '  The  d a t a from the q u e s t i o n n a i r e  completed by t h e 351 respondents  were a n a l y s e d and t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s e s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s chapter.  The c h a p t e r i s d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e main s e c t i o n s .  includes  The f i r s t  a d e s c r i p t i o n o f the s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n and b i o g r a p h i c a l  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e respondents as a check on t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e ness o f t h e sample. also considered.  The p o s s i b l e b i a s i n t r o d u c e d  Measures o f the r e l i a b i l i t y  by t h e i n t e r v i e w e r i s  and v a l i d i t y o f the f i n a l  L i k e r t s c a l e s a r e then p r e s e n t e d and compared w i t h the c o r r e s p o n d i n g r e s u l t s i n the pretest. The  second s e c t i o n i s devoted t o a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f the  shopping b e h a v i o u r o f the r e s p o n d e n t s .  A series o f tables i s presented  t o show t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s h o p p i n g t r i p s i n terms o f b o t h s t o r e and shopping c e n t r e p a t r o n a g e .  The r e l a t i o n s h i p s between s e l e c t e d b e h a v i o u r -  a l v a r i a b l e s and r e t a i l patronage a r e demonstrated. I n the t h i r d s e c t i o n a t t e n t i o n i s f o c u s s e d  on t h e major  objective  o f t h e a n a l y s i s which was t o demonstrate how e f f e c t i v e l y measures o f t h e  locational,  biographical  pondents, b o t h s e p a r a t e l y defined  and  dispositional  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the r e s -  and i n composite, d i s c r i m i n a t e d  c r i t e r i o n groups; where t h e c r i t e r i a  were  between p r e -  type of store and  type of shopping centre p a t r o n i z e d on each o f f o u r shopping t r i p s .  - 106 -  The  107.  sample  s i z e was  also s u f f i c i e n t to permit a r e s t r i c t e d  a n a l y s i s o f the  e f f i c a c y o f t h e s e same measures as d i s c r i m i n a t o r s between p a t r o n s o f s p e c i f i c department s t o r e s and i n d i v i d u a l s h o p p i n g c e n t r e s .  The p r e d i c -  t i v e power o f the t h r e e s e t s o f measures i s f u r t h e r compared by means o f a r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s i n which distance  travelled  to  shop was  the  dependent v a r i a b l e and t h e i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s were a g a i n v a r i o u s t i o n a l , b i o g r a p h i c a l and d i s p o s i t i o n a l measures.  Specific  loca-  consideration  i s a l s o g i v e n t o male-female d i f f e r e n c e s i n shopping b e h a v i o u r and  dis-  positions.  B.  (i)  SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS, INTERVIEWER BIAS AND  SCALE STATISTICS  S p a t i a l D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Respondents.  The purpose o f s t r a t i f y i n g on an enumeration base was  t o ensure  t h a t t h e sample be p r o p o r t i o n a l l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f subareas w i t h i n t h e t o t a l sampling a r e a .  I n o r d e r t o determine how  w e l l t h i s aim  was  * a c h i e v e d the sample  and p o p u l a t i o n d i s t r i b u t i o n s  were compared f o r each  o f the s i x e l e c t o r a l d i s t r i c t s which t o g e t h e r make up the s a m p l i n g a r e a . The r e s u l t i n g f r e q u e n c y d i s t r i b u t i o n s a r e shown i n h i s t o g r a m form i n Figure  5.1.  F o r each e l e c t o r a l d i s t r i c t , b a r A r e p r e s e n t s the p e r c e n t a g e o f the sample, b a r B the p e r c e n t a g e o f census enumeration areas and b a r C the percentage o f households.  S i n c e the sample was  drawn on an enumeration  a r e a base, b a r s A and B s h o u l d be a p p r o x i m a t e l y c o i n c i d e n t .  In no case  does the d i s p a r i t y exceed two p e r c e n t a g e p o i n t s , e f f e c t i v e l y  demonstrat-  *  P o p u l a t i o n d i s t r i b u t i o n f i g u r e s based on 1971 Canada Census  results.  108.  FIGURE 5.1 SAMPLE AND POPULATION  DISTRIBUTIONS BY  ELECTORAL DISTRICT  CAPILANO  VAN.  CENTRE  VAN. EAST  VAN. KNGSWY  VAN. QUADRA  VAN. SOUTH  ing  A  16.8  B  18.2  C  17.4  A  19.9  B  21.3  C  24.4  A  18.2  B  16.3  C  15.4  A  14.0  B  13.4  A = % sample  C  13.5  B = % population (E.A.s)  A  16.0  B  14.5  C  13.6  A  14.8  B  15.9  C  15.5  at this relatively  representation.  coarse l e v e l  C = % population (hhlds)  t h e achievement o f t h e d e s i r e d a r e a l  Mapping r e s p o n d e n t l o c a t i o n s (see F i g u r e 5.2) f u r t h e r  s e r v e d t o c o n f i r m t h e approximate c o i n c i d e n c e between the sample b u t i o n and t h e p o p u l a t i o n d e n s i t y s u r f a c e .  distri-  FIGURE  5.2  SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS AND SELECTED RETAIL LOCATIONS  Department S t o r e s B E S W  The Bay Eatons Sears Woodwards  Shopping C e n t r e s * +  Park R o y a l Oakridge  110.  (ii)  Biographical C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .  A further concern was  that the sample be representative of the popu-  l a t i o n i n terms of s a l i e n t demographic and socio-economic v a r i a b l e s . Histograms, showing the frequency and percentage d i s t r i b u t i o n of respondents on each of the biographical measures obtained, appear i n Figure  5.3.  At the time of w r i t i n g , the 1971 Canada census s t a t i s t i c s for the population on each of these variables were not a v a i l a b l e .  Nevertheless,  i n l i g h t of past s t a t i s t i c s , i t would seem that the sample c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , described by the histograms, show no major departures lation distributions.  There i s perhaps a disproportionate  from popurepresenta-  t i o n of younger respondents without children and also of highly educated people engaged i n professional occupations.  But these biases are merely  speculative and are u n l i k e l y to i n v a l i d a t e the r e s u l t s of the  analyses  which follow. (iii)  Interviewer C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and Response Bias.  An attested source of response bias i n survey research stems from such c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the interviewer as sex, age and education and Cannel, 1957).  (Kahn  Since the interviewers used i n the data c o l l e c t i o n  phase i n t h i s study were a l l drawn from the same undergraduate c l a s s , homogeneity with respect to age and educational background was As a r e s u l t attention was i n f e r v i e w e r s sex. 1  assumed.  r e s t r i c t e d to assessing the e f f e c t s of the  Of the 351 questionnaires, 234 were administered  male interviewers and 117 by females.  by  FIGURE 5.3 BIOGRAPHICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE  CM  o J  • O CT\ CN C\ ON ON O fi N W ^ ^ LT\ MD t- CD N  C  CD  O R  ^ r l  s™a  I^V)  40  y  20  T • t~ PC A  u  eg  O fe O CK W • £ t/i o to K  E  ^ W  M K  n X  r B.  HU  EDUCATION  T  6  CO (\l W C\J O ro  -  INCOME (I'OOO)  # CHILDREN vo  p  C E N  H  CO W vfi H H W N W  m S j n MARITAL STATUS  SEX  ACE  E R  . Fran  r cc CM vo  o H cy <o v ir»eo  O  jx jj jj jij aj t,1 Sri M o o K D  W iri O n » a  £ £  OCCUPATION  a  itn  p  E  E  J  E  s  E< Z 3  a  I —  ti, w  E< W | j to fa «  EMPLOYMENT STATUS  112.  A s e r i e s of u n i v a r i a t e analyses of variance f o r s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the interviewers.  for subjects The  interviewed  C.  by  .05  male and  female  respondent's o c c u p a t i o n was  the  F  l e v e l r e f l e c t i n g the o v e r a l l tendency  males t o r e c o r d h i g h e r s t a t u s  occupations.  e x t e n t t o which t h i s d i s p a r i t y r e f l e c t s a response b i a s i s a m a t t e r  for conjecture. is  responses e l i c i t e d by  Only i n the case o f the  s t a t i s t i c s i g n i f i c a n t a t the  were p e r f o r m e d t o t e s t  The  f a c t t h a t no o t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s  emerged  reassuring.  LIKERT SCALE RELIABILITIES AND  VALIDITIES  R e l e v a n t s t a t i s t i c s were c a l c u l a t e d t o check the v a l i d i t i e s o f the described  f i n a l Likert scales.  i n the p r e t e s t a n a l y s i s  The  reliabilities  and  same p r o c e d u r e s as were  ( i n C h a p t e r 3) were employed.  The  r e a d e r i s r e f e r r e d to t h a t c h a p t e r f o r a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e s e . s t a t i s t i c s and  the b a s i s The  3.1, all  pp.  for their  use.  f i n a l item-scale  c o r r e l a t i o n s are  i n Chapter 3  (Table  75-79 ) t o ease comparison w i t h the p r e t e s t r e s u l t s .  cases t h e  r e f l e c t s the  correlations increased. r e s u l t of reducing  In p a r t t h i s i n c r e a s e  the number o f c o n t r i b u t i n g  f o r each s c a l e from f i f t e e n t o t w e l v e . e f f e c t o f i n c r e a s i n g the p r o p o r t i o n i n d i v i d u a l item The  listed  This  reduction  of scale variance  has  In  almost  merely  statements the  inevitable  accounted f o r by  variance.  c a l c u l a t i o n o f c o e f f i c i e n t a l p h a s s e r v e d t o demonstrate  t h i s apparent improvement i n the merely an a r t i f a c t .  T a b l e 5.1  c o r r e l a t i o n , c o e f f i c i e n t alpha,  i t e m and  lists the  s c a l e r e l i a b i l i t i e s was  that not  f o r each s c a l e the mean i n t e r - i t e m square r o o t o f c o e f f i c i e n t a l p h a  and  113.  TABLE 5.1 FINAL SCALE RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY COEFFICIENTS AVG. INTER-ITEM CORRELATION  SCALE  COEFFICIENT ALPHA  SQ. RT. OF COEFF. ALPHA  CONSTRUCT VALIDITY  FASHION  .2820 (.1924)  .8249 (.7812)  .9182 (.8838)  .9699 (.8944)  CONVENIENCE  .2013 (.1616)  .7573 (.7430)  .8703 (.8620  .8325 (.8738)  STATUS  .1845 (.0810)  .7310 (.5693)  .8550 (.7545)  .8181 (.5530)  QUALITY  .1681 (.0708)  .7079 (.5333)  .8413 (.7303)  .6376 (.7674)  PRICE  .1381 (.0661)  .6406 (.5150)  .8004 (.7176)  .7652 (.2210)  * construct v a l i d i t y 351 r e s p o n d e n t s . the p r e t e s t  coefficient  b a s e d on t h e s c o r e s o b t a i n e d from t h e  To ease comparison, the c o r r e s p o n d i n g s t a t i s t i c s  from  (see T a b l e s 3.2 and 3.3) a r e shown i n p a r e n t h e s e s .  In g e n e r a l t h e r e i s a marked improvement i n t h e f i n a l s c a l e t i c s o v e r the p r e t e s t l e v e l s .  T h i s improvement i s p a r t l y  statis-  attributable  t o t h e m o d i f i c a t i o n o f the s c a l e s i n l i g h t o f t h e p r e t e s t r e s u l t s , and partly  t o t h e use o f a l e s s c o n s t r a i n e d sample group i n t h e major d a t a  c o l l e c t i o n phase, which i n c r e a s e s i t e m and s c a l e v a r i a n c e s and t e n d s t o sharpen c o n s t r u c t d i f f e r e n c e s .  This r e s u l t s  from t h e f a c t t h a t t h e  r e s p o n s e s o f a heterogeneous s e t o f s u b j e c t s a r e more l i k e l y  to represent  a complete range o f d i s p o s i t i o n s .  * The p r i n c i p a l d i a g o n a l v a l u e s o f t h e m a t r i x o b t a i n e d from t i n g summative s c a l e and f a c t o r s c a l e s c o r e s .  correla-  D.  (i)  SHOPPING BEHAVIOUR:  DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS  S t o r e and Shopping C e n t r e  Patronage.  The 351 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s p r o v i d e d p o t e n t i a l (351 x 4) shopping t r i p s .  F i g u r e s 5.4 and 5.5 i l l u s t r a t e the d i s t r i b u -  t i o n o f these t r i p s by store  type  and shopping  t h e r e .was some m i s s i n g d a t a which l a r g e l y certain  i n f o r m a t i o n on 1404  respondents t o r e c a l l l e s s  centre.  reflects  In both cases,  the i n a b i l i t y of  r e c e n t shopping t r i p s o r t o s t i p u l a t e  a "most f r e q u e n t " t r i p .  FIGURE 5.4 TRIP DISTRIBUTION BY STORE TYPE  78  MISSING DATA HIGH PRICE SPECIALTY  80  MEDIUM PRICE SPECIALTY  21Q 99  BOUTIQUE  245  DEPARTMENT DEPT./BUDGET 118  BUDGET 0 j  10 i  20 I  30 t  40  50  1  I  60 1  Percentage o f T r i p s  * In  t h e case o f t r i p d i s t r i b u t i o n  most s t r i k i n g  by s t o r e type  ( F i g u r e 5.4), t h e  f e a t u r e i s t h e predominance o f department s t o r e  shopping,  The s i x c a t e g o r i e s r e p r e s e n t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 200 d i f f e r e n t s t o r e s mentioned by t h e respondents. The r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme was a t t e s t e d by the minimal d i s c r e p a n c y between respondents i n c l a s s i f y i n g t h e same s t o r e .  115.  which accounted  f o r 57 p e r cent o f the o b s e r v a t i o n s .  are s m a l l by comparison, the s m a l l e s t b e i n g floor store  The  other categories  department s t o r e - budget  which f o r purposes o f f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s was  added t o the budget  category. FIGURE  5.5  TRIP DISTRIBUTION BY  SHOPPING CENTRE  122  MISSING DATA  699  DOWNTOWN SECONDARY CENTRE  433  TERTIARY CENTRE  150 0  The  20  10 I  30  Percentage  d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t r i p s by  shopping  the dominance o f downtown shopping.  i  40 of T r i p s centre  50 __i  60  —i  ( F i g u r e 5.5)  T h i s r e f l e c t s two  indicates  factors:  the  con-  c e n t r a t i o n o f c l o t h i n g s t o r e s i n Downtown Vancouver; and the f a c t t h a t the sample was  drawn l a r g e l y from w i t h i n the t r a d e a r e a o f t h e  business d i s t r i c t . larly  secondary  c e n t r e s , accounted  trip destinations. percentage  N e v e r t h e l e s s , the o t h e r two  f o r s i g n i f i c a n t percentages  d i s t r i b u t i o n of t r i p s to centres of varying s i z e : - 17 p e r c e n t , t e r t i a r y  s e t s o f r e s u l t s are not s t r i c t l y respondents  they had  c a t e g o r i e s , and  particuo f the  In a r e l a t e d study B u c k l i n (1967) found the f o l l o w i n g  50 p e r c e n t , secondary  study  central  - 33 p e r c e n t .  The  two  comparable however s i n c e i n B u c k l i n ' s  ( i n Oakland, C a l i f o r n i a ) were asked  l a s t made any  primary  t o s p e c i f y where  s i n g l e i t e m p u r c h a s e o v e r $5.00 i n v a l u e .  -  116.  The  u n i v a r i a t e d i s t r i b u t i o n s shown i n F i g u r e s 5.4 and 5.5 a r e com-  * bined i n the f o l l o w i n g b i v a r i a t e t a b l e  (Table 5.2) which p r o v i d e s  addi-  t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e s h o p p i n g p a t t e r n s o f the sample group. t a b l e shows both  frequency  l a t t e r appearing  i n parentheses.  The  and h o r i z o n t a l p e r c e n t a g e f i g u r e s w i t h t h e  In p e r c e n t a g e terms, department s t o r e s l o c a t e d downtown and i n secondary c e n t r e s accounted f o r a p p r o x i m a t e l y r e s p e c t i v e l y o f a l l shopping t r i p s .  35 p e r c e n t and 26 p e r c e n t  The n e x t  largest bivariate  category  - downtown budget s t o r e s - accounted f o r a c o n s i d e r a b l y s m a l l e r p e r c e n t a g e of trips  (6.5%).  F o r each s t o r e t y p e , o t h e r than department s t o r e s , the l a r g e s t centage o f t r i p s was t o downtown l o c a t i o n s f o l l o w e d by t e r t i a r y and  t h i r d l y secondary c e n t r e s .  o v e r a l l trend. boutique  per-  centres  There a r e however v a r i a t i o n s w i t h i n  this  Whereas, f o r example, o v e r 60 p e r c e n t o f t r i p s t o  and budget s t o r e s i n v o l v e d downtown l o c a t i o n s , t h e same  was t r u e f o r o n l y 40 p e r c e n t a p p r o x i m a t e l y medium p r i c e d s p e c i a l t y o u t l e t s .  I n these  o f t r i p s to l a t t e r cases  high  and  an almost  e q u a l p e r c e n t a g e o f t r i p s as t o s t o r e s l o c a t e d i n t e r t i a r y  centres.  T h i s f i n d i n g i s somewhat c o n t r a r y t o t r a d i t i o n a l c e n t r a l p l a c e n o t i o n s whereby s p e c i a l t y s t o r e s a r e expected i n o r d e r t o maximize t h e i r market a r e a . Leigh's  t o seek downtown l o c a t i o n s  I t i s s u p p o r t i v e however o f  c o n c l u s i o n t h a t s p e c i a l t y s t o r e s i n Vancouver show a tendency  t o l o c a t e i n suburban c e n t r e s p r o x i m a t e t o t h e r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s i n which t h e i r c l i e n t e l e  are concentrated  ( L e i g h , 1965).  * Tabulations tables.  e x c l u d e m i s s i n g d a t a f o r t h i s and subsequent b i v a r i a t e  TABLE 5.2  DISTRIBUTION OF SHOPPING TRIPS BY STORE TYPE AND SHOPPING CENTRE  SECONDARY CENTRE  r . ™ ™ , ^ ™  DOWNTOWN  TERTIARY ^^„ r>r, CENTRE m  „« TOTAL m 1 1 T  High P r i c e S p e c i a l t y  31 (41%)  19 (25%)  26 (34%)  76  Medium P r i c e S p e c i a l t y  77 (39%)  47 (24%)  .72 (37%)  196  Boutique  55 (61%)  17 (19%)  18 (20%)  90  452 (58%)  332 (42%)  0 ( 0%)  784  84 (63%)  17 (13%)  33 (25%)  134  699 (55%)  432 (34%)  149 (12%)  1280  Department Budget  Total  Chi-Square = 318.02 Degrees o f Freedom = 8 S i g n i f i c a n t a t .001 l e v e l  118.  The b i v a r i a t e d i s t r i b u t i o n of shopping t r i p s (.Table 5.2) shows a strong r e l a t i o n s h i p between store and shopping centre choices. square value confirms a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p .  The c h i -  This value i s however  a r t i f i c a l l y i n f l a t e d because of the absence, by d e f i n i t i o n of the shopping centre c l a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme (see p. 95 ), o f department stores i n t e r t i a r y centres.  (ii)  Trip Origin. Figure 5.6 i l l u s t r a t e s the d i s t r i b u t i o n of shopping t r i p s by o r i g i n .  The breakdown by category i s as expected with the largest percentage o f t r i p s o r i g i n a t i n g from the home (75%), followed by the workplace (14%) and t h i r d l y other locations  (5%) which i n many cases were the homes of  r e l a t i v e s or friends. FIGURE 5.6 TRIP DISTRIBUTION BY ORIGIN  66  MISSING DATA HOME WORK  145 53  OTHER  i i i i i i i  0"  10  20  30  40  50  60  Percentage of Trips  70. i  i  80  Smaller N r e s u l t s from the f a c t that ' t r i p o r i g i n ' was not recorded f o r "most frequent" t r i p ; the same applies to 'travel mode', ' t r i p purpose' and 'past purchases'.  119.  T r i p o r i g i n was a l s o c r o s s - t a b u l a t e d w i t h centre  ' s t o r e type  and  shopping  and t h e r e s u l t s a r e shown i n T a b l e s 5.3 and 5.4.  The p e r c e n t a g e  f i g u r e s i n T a b l e 5.3 r e v e a l c e r t a i n aggregate  ences i n t h e types o f s t o r e p a t r o n i z e d by shoppers origins.  Most marked i s t h e h i g h e r p e r c e n t a g e  differ-  having d i f f e r e n t  of trips  to  trip  medium p r i c e d  specialty  s t o r e s amongst those whose t r i p s o r i g i n a t e d from a w o r k p l a c e  or  l o c a t i o n s and t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y s m a l l e r p e r c e n t a g e  other  t o departments s t o r e s .  The c h i - s q u a r e s t a t i s t i c i s a g a i n  of trips  significant  i n d i c a t i n g a s y s t e m a t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p between t r i p o r i g i n and s t o r e t y p e . T a b l e 5.4 shows t h a t a s t i l l  stronger relationship exists within  the d a t a between t r i p o r i g i n and shopping  centre patronage.  In t h i s  t h e r e i s a c o n t r a s t between t r i p s o r i g i n a t i n g from a w o r k p l a c e ,  o f which  71 p e r cent were t o a downtown d e s t i n a t i o n , and those o r i g i n a t i n g other  from  l o c a t i o n s which were more e v e n l y d i s t r i b u t e d between d i f f e r e n t  c e n t r e s w i t h t e r t i a r y c e n t r e s b e i n g t h e modal c a t e g o r y . was  case,  Where t h e home  t h e o r i g i n , downtown l o c a t i o n s were a g a i n t h e most f r e q u e n t f o l l o w e d  by secondary  and t e r t i a r y  centres i n that order.  The marked  tendency  f o r t r i p s b e g i n n i n g a t a workplace t o end a t a downtown s t o r e i s l a r g e l y e x p l a i n e d by t h e f a c t t h a t such t r i p s were i n most cases undertaken by p e o p l e working i n t h e c e n t r a l b u s i n e s s  (iii)  T r a v e l Mode.  The 5.7.  district.  d i s t r i b u t i o n o f shopping  t r i p s by t r a v e l mode i s shown i n F i g u r e  These f i g u r e s c o n f i r m t h e importance  means o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n t o shopping  o f t h e automobile  as t h e major  d e s t i n a t i o n s (see C l a u s and Hardwick  (1972) f o r a d e t a i l e d c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f automobile  oriented retailing).  TABLE 5.3 1  DISTRIBUTION OF SHOPPING TRIPS BY TRIP ORIGIN AND STORE TYPE  HIGH PRICE SPECIALTY  MEDIUM PRICE SPECIALTY  Home  51 ( 6%)  118 (15%)  Work  9 ( 6%)  37 (25%)  Other  3 ( 5%)  20 (38%)  TOTAL  63 ( 6%)  175  (18%)  BOUTIQUE * 61 ( 8%)  DEPARTMENT 465  BUDGET  TOTAL  (59%)  93  (12%)  788  14 (10%)  72 (50%)  13  ( 9%)  145  5 ( 9%)  18 (34%)  7 (13%)  53  80 ( 8%)  555 (56%)  113 (11%)  986  C h i Square = 28.88 Degrees o f Freedom = 8 S i g n i f i c a n t a t .001 l e v e l  ro o  TABLE 5.4  DISTRIBUTION OF SHOPPING TRIPS BY TRIP ORIGIN AND SHOPPING CENTRE  DOWNTOWN  ~  Home  397 (51%)  286 (37%)  88 (11%)  771  Work  100 (71%)  22 (16%)  19 (13%)  141  Other  12 (32%)  11 (29%)  15 (39%)  38  Total  509 (54%)  319 (34%)  122 (13%)  950  CENTRE  CENTRE  Chi-Square = 50.88 Degrees o f Freedom = 4 S i g n i f i c a n t a t .001 l e v e l  TOTAL  122.  The  frequency o f p e d e s t r i a n t r i p s  (13 p e r cent) perhaps  t i o n and i n l a r g e measure r e f l e c t s t h e tendency  exceeds  expecta-  o f p e o p l e who work down-  town t o walk t o s t o r e s i n t h e immediate v i c i n i t y o f t h e i r  workplace.  FIGURE 5.7 TRIP DISTRIBUTION BY TRAVEL MODE  49  MISSING DATA CAR BUS  232  WALK  134 36  OTHER 0 I  10  20  30  40  50  60  1  1  I  I  i  l  Percentage o f T r i p s  S i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s emerge i n t h e s t o r e and s h o p p i n g c e n t r e c h o i c e s o f consumers u s i n g d i f f e r e n t modes o f t r a v e l  (Tables 5.5 and 5.6).  Most s t r i k i n g i s t h e a s s o c i a t i o n o f p e d e s t r i a n t r i p s and s p e c i a l t y patronage proportion  (Table 5.5).  Compared w i t h t h e o t h e r t r a v e l modes, a g r e a t e r  (39 p e r cent) o f such t r i p s were t o one o r o t h e r o f t h e spe-  c i a l t y store categories. department  store  Whereas t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e s e same t r i p s t o  s t o r e s was c o m p a r a t i v e l y l e s s  seems t o u n d e r l i n e t h e tendency i n commercial  (38 p e r c e n t ) .  This f i n d i n g  noted above f o r s p e c i a l t y s t o r e s t o l o c a t e  d i s t r i c t s proximate  t o t h e homes o r workplaces  of their  clientele. C l e a r d i f f e r e n c e s can be seen i n t h e t r a v e l modes employed t o r e a c h d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f shopping c e n t r e s (Table 5.6) .  There i s an a p p r o x i m a t e l y  TABLE 5.5 '  DISTRIBUTION OF SHOPPING TRIPS BY TRAVEL MODE AND STORE TYPE  HIGH PRICE n^n r i M ^ SPECIALTY Car  48  ( 8%)  MEDIUM PRICE " " ^ SPECIALTY o  u  i  u  102  BOUTIQUE y  DEPARTMENT  BUDGET  TOTAL  (17%)  49 ( 8%)  348 (58%)  54 (9%)  601  143  (62%)  34 (15%)  231  Bus  4(2%)  30 (13%)  20 ( 9%)  Walk  9 ( 7%)  43 (32%)  10 ( 7%)  51 (38%)  21 (16%)  134  Other  3(8%)  4 (11%)  1(3%)  23 (64%)  5 (14%)  36  80 ( 8%)  565 (56%)  114 (11%)  1002  TOTAL  64  ( 6%)  179  (18%)  C h i Square  = 48.84  Degrees o f Freedom = 12 S i g n i f i c a n t a t .001 l e v e l  to  OJ  TABLE 5.6  DISTRIBUTION OF SHOPPING TRIPS BY TRAVEL MODE AND SHOPPING CENTRE  „„„^„  DOWNTOWN  CENTRE  „ ™ ,  r , r ,  CENTRE  82  m  Car  235 (40%)  268 (46%)  Bus  195 (85%)  26 (11%)  9 ( 4%)  230  Walk  84 (65%)  16 (12%)  29 (22%)  129  Other  10 (40%)  11 (44%)  4 (16%)  25  Total  524 (54%)  321 (33%)  124  (14%)  TOTAL  (13%)  Chi-Square = 168.46 Degrees o f Freedom = 6 S i g n i f i c a n t a t .001 l e v e l  585  969  125.  even s p l i t o f automobile  t r i p s t o downtown  t r a n s i t i s predominantly  used t o r e a c h downtown  the downtown  downtown  locations,  centres i s largely r e s t r i c t e d  (84 p e r c e n t o f t r i p s t o secondary  centage  centres.  Bus  reflecting  f o c u s o f most p u b l i c t r a n s i t r o u t e s i n G r e a t e r Vancouver,  w h i l e access t o secondary cars  and secondary  t o those  c e n t r e s were by c a r ) .  with  The p e r -  d i s t r i b u t i o n o f p e d e s t r i a n t r i p s c o n f i r m s the a s s o c i a t i o n l o c a t i o n s noted  above.  with  I t a l s o emerges t h a t t r i p s t o t e r t i a r y  c e n t r e s a r e f r e q u e n t l y made on f o o t , which i s some c o n f i r m a t i o n o f cent r a l p l a c e e x p e c t a t i o n s t h a t t h e s e s m a l l e r c e n t r e s have c o m p a r a t i v e l y l o c a l i s e d trade areas.  (iv)  T r i p Purpose.  Approximately need t o purchase  62 p e r c e n t o f t r i p s were m o t i v a t e d by the s p e c i f i c  clothing  c l o t h i n g purchases  ( F i g u r e 5.8).  In a f u r t h e r 23 p e r c e n t o f c a s e s ,  were made i n the course o f a t r i p where the s t a t e d  p u r p o s e was t o f u l f i l l c a t e g o r i e s accounted  o t h e r shopping needs.  The o t h e r t r i p purpose  f o r comparatively small percentages.  Of t h e s e the  l a r g e s t was t h e r e c r e a t i o n a l c a t e g o r y s u g g e s t i n g t h a t shopping f o r c l o t h e s i s r e g a r d e d by some as a l e i s u r e  FIGURE  activity.  5.8  TRIP DISTRIBUTION BY TRIP PURPOSE 46  MISSING DATA CLOTHES  245  OTHER SHOPPING 35  BUSINESS  26  SOCIAL  52  RECREATIONAL 0  •  10  i  20  i  30  i  40  i  50  i  60  •  70  •  126.  I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e b i v a r i a t e t a b l e r e l a t i n g t r i p purpose and s t o r e type tries  (Table 5.7) i s r e s t r i c t e d by t h e number o f low f r e q u e n c y en-  (which accounts f o r t h e i n f l a t e d c h i - s q u a r e v a l u e ) .  One o b v i o u s  o b s e r v a t i o n can be made however i n terms o f t h e c o i n c i d e n c e o f t r i p s to  s p e c i a l t y and b o u t i q u e s t o r e s , which by d e f i n i t i o n market  goods e x c l u s i v e l y , and t h e s t a t e d t r i p purpose  clothing  o f purchasing clothing.  No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e t r i p purposes o f shoppers ing  d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f shopping c e n t r e were found  (Table 5.8).  s u p p o r t f o r t h e c o n t e n t i o n t h a t m u l t i - p u r p o s e shopping t r i p s a l l y t o suburban  shopping c e n t r e s (Claus and Hardwick,  selectSome  are t y p i c -  1972, p. 76)  d e r i v e s from t h e f a c t t h a t t r i p s t o secondary c e n t r e s were p r o p o r t i o n a l l y h i g h e r (38 p e r cent) where a m u l t i - p u r p o s e shopping t r i p was indicated.  (v)  Past Purchases.  Most p u r c h a s e s were made a t s t o r e s from which t h e r e s p o n d e n t s had o b t a i n e d o t h e r c l o t h i n g goods i n t h e p r e v i o u s two y e a r p e r i o d 5.9).  (Figure  T h i s r e f l e c t s t h e w i d e l y r e c o g n i s e d importance o f p a s t purhcase FIGURE 5.9 TRIP DISTRIBUTION BY PAST PURCHASES  ONE  198  2 TO 5  455  6 TO 10  156  OVER 10  153 0  10  20  «  1  1  30  40  50  1  i  i  Percentage o f T r i p s  TABLE 5.7 DISTRIBUTION  OF SHOPPING TRIPS BY TRIP PURPOSE AND STORE TYPE  HIGH PRICE „„„_,,.„,.„„, SPECIALTY C l o t h i n g purchase Other  shopping  51  MEDIUM PRICE ,„ ^ , „ SPECIALTY r  T 1  T  T m  „ „ BOUTIQUE * m  m  T  m  r ^ r , . ™ , . . ™ ™  DEPARTMENT  r , r r r ^ m  BUDGET  ^  m  ,  TOTAL  T  ( 8%)  135 (21%)  62 (10%)  344 (53%)  56 ( 9%)  648  8 ( 3%)  27 (11%)  7 ( 3%)  160 (65%)  43 (18%)  245  Business  2(6%)  6 (18%)  4 (12%)  18 (53%)  4 (12%)  34  Social  2(8%)  0(0%)  2 ( 8%)  18 (69%)  4 (15%)  26  Recreational  2 ( 4%)  11 (21%)  5 (10%)  26 (50%)  8 (15%)  52  65 ( 6%)  179 (18%)  566 (56%)  115 (11%)  1005  TOTAL  80 ( 8%)  C h i Square = 51.45 Degrees o f Freedom = 16 S i g n i f i c a n t a t .001 l e v e l  to  TABLE 5.8  DISTRIBUTION OF SHOPPING TRIPS BY TRIP PURPOSE AND SHOPPING CENTRE  C l o t h i n g Purchase  338 (53%)  206 (33%)  88 (14%)  632  Other Shopping  125 (51%)  92 (38%)  26 (11%)  243  Business  22 (67%)  5 (15%)  6 (18%)  33  Social  13 (65%)  5 (25%)  2 (10%)  20  Recreational  27 (64%)  13 (31%)  2 ( 5%)  42  525 (54%)  321 (33%)  Total  124 (13%)  Chi-Square = 12.41 Degrees o f Freedom = 8 Not  significant  970  129.  e x p e r i e n c e and  s t o r e l o y a l t y as  Repeat p u r c h a s i n g p a t t e r n s  f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c i n g shopping  decisions.  v a r y s i g n i f i c a n t l y between type o f  store,  however, b e i n g most pronounced amongst department s t o r e p a t r o n s and common amongst s p e c i a l t y s t o r e  shoppers  (Table  5.9).  This pattern  gests that  f o r most consumers shopping a t s p e c i a l t y s t o r e s  infrequent  p r a c t i c e , p r o b a b l y l i m i t e d to the  is a  least sug-  relatively  rare  s p e c i a l occasion pur-  a g a i n emerged i n the  case o f the r e l a t i o n -  chase. Significant differences  s h i p between r e p e a t p u r c h a s i n g and Downtown and  shopping c e n t r e p a t r o n a g e  major department s t o r e  the  locations.  p r e c e d i n g r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s between  shopping t r i p v a r i a b l e s  and  r e t a i l patronage and  findings of previous studies instructive in providing b e h a v i o u r o f the  consideration  (e.g., B u c k l i n ,  1967).  This  s e r v e s as a b a s i s  i n which a t t e n t i o n  the  These r e s u l t s  are  shopping  for proceeding  t u r n s from d a t a d e s c r i p t i o n t o  o f the main a n a l y t i c a l o b j e c t i v e s  ANALYSIS OF  l a r g e l y confirm  a comprehensive d e s c r i p t i o n o f the  respondents.  t o the n e x t s e c t i o n  (i)-  influence of  Conclusion.  The  E.  5.10).  secondary c e n t r e shoppers were the more i n c l i n e d t o make  f r e q u e n t r e p e a t p u r c h a s e s , which l a r g e l y r e f l e c t s the  (vi)  (Table  a  o f t h i s study.  SHOPPING BEHAVIOUR  The  A n a l y t i c a l Framework.  The  central objective  of t h i s research  i s to a s s e s s the  t h r e e d i f f e r e n t s e t s o f measures, b o t h s i n g l y and  efficacy of  i n composite,  as  TABLE 5.9 DISTRIBUTION OF SHOPPING TRIPS BY PAST PURCHASES AND STORE TYPES  HIGH PRICE SPECIALTY  MEDIUM PRICE SPECIALTY  BOUTIQUE  DEPARTMENT  BUDGET  TOTAL  One  16 ( 8%)  58 (29%)  21 (11%)  71 (36%)  31 (16%)  197  2 to 5  37 ( 7%)  99 (20%)  43 ( 9%)  259 (52%)  57 (12%)  495  6 t o 10  10 ( 6%)  19 (12%)  4 ( 3%)  110 (70%)  13 ( 8%)  156  Over 10  2 ( 1%)  3 ( 2%)  11 ( 7%)  123 (80%)  14 ( 9%)  153  179 (18%)  79 ( 8%)  563 (56%) •  115 (11%)  1001  TOTAL  65  ( 6%)  C h i Square = 98.71 Degrees o f Freedom = 12 S i g n i f i c a n t a t .001 l e v e l  CO  o  TABLE 5.10  DISTRIBUTION OF SHOPPING TRIPS BY PAST PURCHASES AND SHOPPING CENTRE  DOWNTOWN  TOTAL  CENTRE  CENTRE  95 (53%)  51 (29%)  32 (18%)  178  262 (54%)  147 (30%)  73 (15%)  482  6 t o 10  78 (51%)  59 (38%)  17 (11%)  154  Over 10  88 (58%)  62 (41%)  1 ( 1%)  151  523 (54%)  319 (33%)  One 2 to 5  Total  123 (13%)  Chi-Square = 30.71 Degrees o f Freedom = 6 S i g n i f i c a n t a t .001 l e v e l  965  132.  d i s c r i m i n a t o r s between r e t a i l patronage p r e d i c t i v e measures comprised  groups.  the l o c a t i o n a l , b i o g r a p h i c a l and  t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the consumer. shopping b e h a v i o u r  To r e c a p i t u l a t e ,  The  the  disposi-  criterion variable  was  c a t e g o r i z e d e s s e n t i a l l y i n terms o f the type o f s t o r e  and type o f shopping  c e n t r e p a t r o n i z e d on a g i v e n shopping  l i m i t e d e x t e n t i t was  trip.  To  a  p o s s i b l e t o c a t e g o r i z e the c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e a t  a d i s a g g r e g a t e l e v e l r e f l e c t i n g the s p e c i f i c department s t o r e s and shopping  c e n t r e s s e l e c t e d by the consumer.  The q u e s t i o n n a i r e d a t a  p r o v i d e d a b a s i s f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g the s t a b i l i t y o f r e l a t i o n s h i p s o v e r a sequence o f p u r c h a s e s ,  criterion-predictor  which i t was  felt  t e d a s t r o n g e r b a s i s f o r i n f e r e n c e than i f the a n a l y s i s was t o a s i n g l e shopping  constitu-  restricted  decision.  I t i s u s e f u l t o c o n c e i v e o f t h e a n a l y s i s phase i n c u b i c form i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i g u r e 5.10.  The  p r e d i c t o r s and p u r c h a s i n g t r i p s t h e dimensions  has  separate c e l l s  o f the cube are the  f o r which d a t a were a v a i l a b l e .  criteria, Each o f  f o u r l a b e l l e d segments c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o the c a t e g o r i e s  of behavioural c r i t e r i a , of past purchases.  dimensions  as  The  the s e t s o f p r e d i c t i v e measures and the sequence cube i s t h e r e f o r e d i v i s i b l e i n t o 64  ( 4 x 4 x 4 )  c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o 64 p o s s i b l e c r i t e r i o n - p r e d i c t o r  analyses  o f which 16 are l a b e l l e d i n the diagram. No  attempt  i s made i n t h i s c h a p t e r t o p r o v i d e an e x h a u s t i v e d e s c r i p -  t i o n o f the r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d from each o f t h e s e 64 a n a l y t i c a l Rather,  examples o f the a n a l y s i s o f each c r i t e r i o n - p r e d i c t o r  combinations. combination  w i l l be p r e s e n t e d f o l l o w e d by a summary o f the o v e r a l l r e s u l t s which w i l l r e f l e c t analyses not o u t l i n e d i n d e t a i l .  I t i s hoped i n t h i s  t o produce a r e p o r t which i s b o t h comprehensive i n i t s coverage  and  way  133.  FIGURE 5.10 A DIAGRAMATIC  REPRESENTATION OF THE ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK  C R I T E R I A  Criteria C . = store st C C  = centre s  C^  Predictors type  P^ = l o c a t i o n a l  type  variables  = biographical  = specific  stores  P  = specific  centres  P  = dispositional  d  = combined  c  Purchases T^ = p u r c h a s e t r i p 1 T^ = p u r c h a s e t r i p 2 T^ = p u r c h a s e t r i p 3 T  n  =  purchase  trip  (norm)  variables variables  variables  134.  concise  (ii)  i n i t s detail.  Statistical  Procedures.  Previous reference  has been made t o t h e a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s o f d i s c r i -  minant a n a l y s i s t o s i t u a t i o n s where a c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e i s n o m i n a l and the p r e d i c t o r s  a r e i n t e r v a l o r r a t i o - s c a l e d (see C h a p t e r 3 ) .  These con-  d i t i o n s h e l d i n t h e p r e t e s t , where one o b j e c t i v e was t o a s s e s s the p r e dictive validity equally  of the preliminary  to the c r i t e r i o n  d i s p o s i t i o n a l s c a l e s , and they a p p l y  and p r e d i c t o r measures o b t a i n e d i n t h e major  d a t a c o l l e c t i o n phase. The  f o l l o w i n g purposes o f d i s c r i m i n a n t  pond w i t h t h e r e s e a r c h differences  objectives:  t o determine whether o r n o t t h e  i n p r e d i c t o r score p r o f i l e s  are s t a t i s t i c a l l y  a n a l y s i s were seen t o c o r r e s -  f o r two o r more c r i t e r i o n  groups  s i g n i f i c a n t ; t o maximize the d i s c r i m i n a t i o n among  groups by d e r i v i n g l i n e a r combinations o f p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s ; t o a s s i g n o r i g i n a l subjects  t o groups based on d e r i v e d  scores  a c c u r a c y o f d i s c r i m i n a t i o n by comparing p r e d i c t e d  and t o a s s e s s t h e  and a c t u a l group  membership. In g e o m e t r i c a l of subjects  b e i n g r e p r e s e n t e d by a p o i n t  upon a k - v a r i a b l e bership  terms, i t i s p o s s i b l e  score p r o f i l e .  o f each s u b j e c t  s h i p can be p r e d i c t e d existence the  i s known.  t o c o n c e i v e o f each o f a s e t l o c a t i o n i n a k-space b a s e d  In addition, the c r i t e r i o n  group mem-  The a c c u r a c y w i t h w h i c h group member-  from s c o r e p r o f i l e s i s then dependent upon the  of d i s t i n c t clusters within  same c r i t e r i o n group.  t h e k-space c o m p r i s i n g members o f  Where "same group" members a r e t i g h t l y  t e r e d and c l e a r l y s e p a r a t e d from o t h e r group c l u s t e r s , h i g h l y  clus-  accurate  135.  p r e d i c t i o n s are p o s s i b l e . On dom  distribution of  the o t h e r hand, where t h e r e i s a near  'same group' members and hence e x t e n s i v e  l a p , low p r e d i c t a b i l i t y  group o v e r -  results.  I n o r d e r to maximize d i s c r i m i n a t i o n between groups, weighted nations  o f p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s are d e f i n e d which n o r m a l l y  following linear  Y = a,X, XI  combi-  assume the  form:  + a„X„ + 2 2  ... a X n n  where:  Y  = discriminant  X X_...X = raw 1 2 n W  a  The  ran-  l' 2"** n a  a  =  var  scores.  scores.  ^ ^-'-'a  e  weights.  same s e t o f weights i s a p p l i e d t o the s c o r e s o f each p e r s o n i n each  group, r e s u l t i n g i n a new information  score  f o r each p e r s o n  from X.,X„...X regarding 1 2 n  o p t i m i z a t i o n r u l e f o r determining m a x i m i z a t i o n o f between t o  d i s c r i m i n a t i o n o f the  the  groups.  The  the v a r i a b l e weights i s based upon  within-group variances  Where t h e r e are more than two than one  (Y) which combines  the  ( F i s h e r , 1936) .  groups, i t i s p o s s i b l e t o d e r i v e more  d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n , the number b e i n g  o f v a r i a b l e s o r the number o f groups minus one,  determined by  the number  whichever i s l e s s .  The  f i r s t d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n i s t h a t l i n e a r combination o f the v a r i a b l e s which maximizes the r a t i o o f between t o -.within-group v a r i a n c e . orthogonal proportions ned  f u n c t i o n s are d e r i v e d w h i c h s u c c e s s i v e l y account f o r o f the v a r i a n c e ,  beyond the  and  second o r t h i r d  normally  very  little  variance  Additional smaller is explai-  discriminants.  There are obvious s i m i l a r i t i e s between d i s c r i m i n a n t a n a l y s i s f a c t o r a n a l y s i s and,  as N u n n a l l y  (1967, p.  394)  notes,  and  the major computa-  t i o n a l step i n d e r i v i n g m u l t i p l e d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n s i s to perform a  136.  principal-axes factor analysis.  But, i n c o n t r a s t t o f a c t o r a n a l y s i s ,  computations a r e n o t based upon the c o r r e l a t i o n s among the v a r i a b l e s , but  upon the sums o f squared d e v i a t i o n s  about t h e means w i t h i n  I n t h e s t e p - w i s e form o f m u l t i p l e d i s c r i m i n a n t  groups.  a n a l y s i s , employed i n  t h i s s t u d y , the v a r i a b l e s f o r i n c l u s i o n i n the d i s c r i m i n a n t  function are  determined i n an i t e r a t i v e manner such t h a t a t each s t e p t h e v a r i a b l e i n c l u d e d i s t h a t f o r which group means d i f f e r most s i g n i f i c a n t l y as a s s e s s e d by u n i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e .  Where t h e r e  i s covariation  amongst p r e d i c t o r s t h e i n c l u s i o n o f a l l v a r i a b l e s i n t h e d i s c r i m i n a n t function i s often precluded. (usually  A predefined  .05) s e r v e s as t h e b a s i s  be added t o (or d e l e t e d b l e s w i t h F r a t i o s below linear discriminant  F p r o b a b i l i t y tolerance  f o r d e c i d i n g whether  from) t h e d i s c r i m i n a n t the t o l e r a n c e  functions  level  a variable i s to  f u n c t i o n . Once a l l v a r i a -  l e v e l have been e n t e r e d , t h e  f o r the various  groups a r e c a l c u l a t e d ,  and F r a t i o s between p a i r s o f groups a r e computed b a s e d on d i s c r i m i n a n t scores guish  t o determine how e f f e c t i v e l y  the d i s c r i m i n a n t  functions  distin-  the groups. An a d d i t i o n a l b a s i s  f o r assessing  i s by t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f s u b j e c t s separating  subjects  discriminant  t h e a c c u r a c y o f group  separation  t o groups based upon t h e d i s t a n c e s  and group c e n t r o i d s i n t h e space d e f i n e d by the  functions.  The p o s t e r i o r p r o b a b i l i t y o f membership i n each  o f the groups i s a l s o c a l c u l a t e d .  The degree o f c o i n c i d e n c e  between  p r e d i c t e d and a c t u a l group membership i s a f u r t h e r i n d i c a t i o n o f t h e e f f i c a c y o f the o r i g i n a l p r e d i c t o r s as d i s c r i m i n a t o r s between the c r i terion  groups.  For a d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n o f d i s c r i m i n a n t a n a l y s i s , the reader i s  137.  r e f e r r e d t o such m u l t i v a r i a t e s t a t i s t i c s (19 71) and O v e r a l l and K l e t t  (iii)  Analyses  t e x t s as C o o l e y  and Lohnes  (1973).  o f S t o r e and Shopping C e n t r e  The r e s u l t s o f s i x t e e n o f the s i x t y  Patronage.  f o u r p o s s i b l e a n a l y s e s shown  i n F i g u r e 5.10 a r e r e p o r t e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n .  Attention at this point  i s r e s t r i c t e d t o two o f t h e f o u r c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e s p r e v i o u s l y men-  t i o n e d - type of store f o u r shopping  and type of shopping  t r i p s - the most recent  centre  - and t o two o f the  and most frequent.  In large  measure, t h e r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d u s i n g d a t a r e l a t i n g t o t h e two l e s s recent t r i p s c o i n c i d e d with the r e s u l t s presented,  and, f u r t h e r m o r e ,  they a r e r e p r e s e n t e d i n the a n a l y s i s summary which appears i n a l a t e r section of this  chapter.  T h i s s i x t e e n a n a l y s e s r e p r e s e n t d i f f e r e n t combinations v a r i a b l e , shopping  of criterion  t r i p and p r e d i c t i v e model, and a r e p r e s e n t e d  i n the  following order:  ANALYSIS  CRITERION  TRIP  PREDICTIVE MODEL  1  S t o r e Type  Most Recent  Locational  2  S t o r e Type  Most Recent  Biographical  3  S t o r e Type  Most Recent  Dispositional  4  S t o r e Type  Most Recent  Composite  5  S t o r e Type  Most  Frequent  Locational  6  S t o r e Type  Most  Frequent  Biographical  7  S t o r e Type  Most  Frequent  Dispositional  8  S t o r e Type  Most  Frequent  Composite  138.  PREDICTIVE MODEL  TRIP  CRITERION  ANALYSIS 9  Shopping C e n t r e  Most Recent  Locational  10  Shopping C e n t r e  Most Recent  Biographical  11  Shopping C e n t r e  Most Recent  Dispositional  12  Shopping C e n t r e  Most Recent  Composite  13  Shopping C e n t r e  Most F r e q u e n t  Locational  14  Shopping C e n t r e  Most F r e q u e n t  Biographical  15  Shopping C e n t r e  Most F r e q u e n t  Dispositional  16 •  Shopping C e n t r e  Most F r e q u e n t  Composite  Accompanying  each a n a l y s i s i s a t a b l e summarizing  the r e s u l t s using a  s t a n d a r d format t o ease t h e comparison o f d i f f e r e n t s e t s o f r e s u l t s . Included i n the tables are: dictor  t h e mean s c o r e s f o r each group on t h e p r e -  v a r i a b l e s , the discriminant c o e f f i c i e n t s  f o r each group, t h e  f i n a l between group s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l s and t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f cases s s i f i e d i n t o each group on t h e b a s i s o f d i s c r i m i n a n t s c o r e s .  cla-  The i n t e r -  p r e t a t i o n o f these sets o f f i g u r e s i s explained i n r e p o r t i n g the r e s u l t s o f A n a l y s i s 1.  ANALYSIS 1. CRITERION:  S t o r e Type  PURCHASE TRIP:  (5 groups)  Most Recent  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Locational Variables -  estimated distance (origin-destination) actual distance (origin-destination) d i s t a n c e t o Downtown Vancouver d i s t a n c e t o t h e n e a r e s t secondary c e n t r e distance to the nearest t e r t i a r y centre time d i s t a n c e t o Downtown Vancouver s i z e o f shopping a r e a p a t r o n i z e d s i z e o f t h e n e a r e s t secondary c e n t r e s i z e o f the nearest t e r t i a r y centre  139.  The  mean s c o r e s  f o r each o f the  f i v e s t o r e p a t r o n a g e groups on  o f the n i n e l o c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s i n c l u d e d the  f i r s t s e c t i o n o f T a b l e 5.11.  lities  i n the  initial F  probabi-  i n d i c a t i n g the s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the d i f f e r e n c e s i n group means.  one  v a r i a b l e - size  therefore  t h i s was  nearest  secondary  of  the nearest  function.  centre  Two  and size  s u b s e q u e n t l y i n c l u d e d however.  s i g n i f i c a n c e o f these two  The  f e l l below the  other  l e v e l i n the centre.  raw  had  control value  scores  mine t h e i r d i s c r i m i n a n t the weights are variance.  for inclusion to  area patronized  - were  the e f f e c t o f i n c r e a s i n g  of  together  three v a r i a b l e s i s  w i t h the  discriminant  These l a t t e r f i g u r e s r e p r e s e n t  the  o f members i n the r e s p e c t i v e groups t o  scores.  Consistent  w i t h the  statistical  T h e i r magnitude r e f l e c t s the s c a l e p r o p e r t i e s o f the  Scanning across t i o n i n the  hence the  f i g u r e s are t o be  weights determodel,  group res-  i n t e r p r e t e d row-wise.  the rows i n the t a b l e r e v e a l s t h a t the p a t t e r n  group c o e f f i c i e n t s commonly, a l t h o u g h n o t  ponds t o the p a t t e r n  the  .05.  c a l c u l a t e d so as t o maximize between t o w i t h i n  p e c t i v e v a r i a b l e s and  the  a d d i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s such t h a t t h e i r F p r o b a -  f o r each group.  a p p l i e d t o the  of  Initially  v a r i a b l e s - distance  F p r o b a b i l i t i e s f o r e n t r y o f each o f the  coefficients  case  T h i s demonstrates t h a t c o n t r o l l i n g f o r  shown i n the second p a r t o f T a b l e 5.11  The  tertiary  of shopping  the v a r i a b l e ( s ) p r e v i o u s l y e n t e r e d  bilities  .05  the o n l y v a r i a b l e t o s a t i s f y c o n d i t i o n s  i n the d i s c r i m i n a n t  the  a n a l y s i s are shown i n  A l s o l i s t e d are the  Between group d i f f e r e n c e s were s i g n i f i c a n t a t only  each  of v a r i a -  invariably, corres-  o f group means.  v a r i a t i o n s i n group means and  f o l l o w i n g major group d i f f e r e n c e s :  discriminant high-price  c o e f f i c i e n t s show specialty store  shoppers  TABLE 5.11 ANALYSIS 1:  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  i HIGH PRICE SPECIALTY  MEDIUM PRICE SPECIALTY  BOUTIQUE  DEPARTMENT  BUDGET  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  GROUP MEANS Estimated d i s t a n c e Actual distance' D i s t a n c e downtown D i s t a n c e t o secondary c e n t r e D i s t a n c e t o t e r t i a r y centre' Time d i s t a n c e downtown S i z e o f shopping a r e a ^ S i z e o f secondary c e n t r e Size o f t e r t i a r y c e n t r e 3  3  3  0  e  3.2 103.9 143.5 86.4 29.6 15.6 3.4 493.1 222.1  4.3 126.1 158.8 113.9 30.2 16.7 3.2 495.6 217.5  3.4 105.1 149.4 113.6 28.3 16.1 3.5 483.6 256.9  3.0 97.2 143.7 124.9 25.8 15.6 3.4 457.7 282.4  3.9 127.4 156.6 105.5 29.9 16.7 3.5 466.8 292.2  .418 .326 .867 .085 .931 .879 .056 .272 .046  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS D i s t a n c e t o secondary c e n t r e S i z e o f shopping a r e a Size of t e r t i a r y centre  .016 6.226 .010  .028 5.654 .011  .026 6.324 .012  .024 6.363 .013  .127 .000 .095  .730 .718  .286  20 44 16 16 34  20 16 23 13 14  16 9 29 23 14  .031 6.151 .013  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Medium p r i c e Boutique Department Budget  specialty  .055 .202 .061 .023  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIEDi INTO EACH GROUP High p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Medium p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Boutique Department Budget  Figures i n miles d  44 22 19 27 21  ^ F i g u r e s i n map m i l l i m e t e r s  Thousands o f square f e e t  Clog transformed)  e  c . Figures  0 9 13 22 17  m minutes  Thousands o f square  feet  .044 .024 .046  141.  were d i s t i n g u i s h e d  by  t h e i r p r o x i m i t y t o secondary c e n t r e s ;  s p e c i a l t y s t o r e p a t r o n s by  t h e i r tendency t o shop a t s m a l l e r  c e n t r e s and  t h e i r p r o x i m i t y to small  shoppers by  t h e i r i n e v i t a b l e a t t r a c t i o n to l a r g e r centres;  s t o r e p a t r o n s by  t h e i r distance  mity to l a r g e r t e r t i a r y The  t e r t i a r y centres;  T a b l e 5.11.  the  from secondary c e n t r e s and  s e t o f F p r o b a b i l i t i e s i n the .05  demonstrate a l e s s than 5 p e r  are  variables  t o account f o r d i f f e r e n c e s The  high-price  s p e c i a l t y and  s p e c i a l t y and  only  mentioned  m i n a t o r y power o f the  they  o f the  ten  locational type  those between  between medium-price  shoppers.  (p. 136),  discriminant  accuracy of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  of  respondent's c h o i c e o f  shoppers and  a further step i n  i s t o c l a s s i f y membership i n the  shows the  Only two  l i m i t e d power o f the  i n the  budget s t o r e  department s t o r e  previously  discriminant  third section  s i g n i f i c a n t d i s t i n c t i o n s t o emerge are  proximity of a subject's  5.11  their proxi-  c e n t p r o b a b i l i t y o f o b s e r v e d group d i f f e r -  s i g n i f i c a n t s u g g e s t i n g the  of store.  budget  considered s i g n i f i c a n t since  ences b e i n g a t t r i b u t a b l e t o chance v a r i a t i o n s .  analysis  and  store  centres.  E n t r i e s below  e n t r i e s are  shopping  department  s i g n i f i c a n c e o f between group d i f f e r e n c e s based on  s c o r e s i s shown by  As  medium p r i c e  s e r v e s as  discriminant  o r i g i n a l groups based on  s c o r e t o the  group c e n t r o i d s .  an a d d i t i o n a l i n d e x o f the  selected variables.  The  the  f i n a l section of  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n matrix obtained i n Analysis  1.  The  discriTable  The  prin-  c i p a l d i a g o n a l e n t r i e s o f the m a t r i x show the p e r c e n t a g e o f cases  cor-  r e c t l y c l a s s i f i e d i n each group, and  percent-  age  of m i s c l a s s i f i e d cases.  cation  In the  the o f f - d i a g o n a l  e n t r i e s the  case o f p e r f e c t l y a c c u r a t e  a l l the d i a g o n a l v a l u e s would be  100  per  c e n t and  classifi-  a l l the  off-  142.  diagonal  values  zero.  The  A n a l y s i s 1 c o n f i r m s the guish  large percentage of m i s c l a s s i f i e d cases i n  f a i l u r e o f the  a c c u r a t e l y between the v a r i o u s  o f the h i g h - p r i c e  l o c a t i o n a l measures t o  criterion  groups.  Only i n the  s p e c i a l t y and medium-price s p e c i a l t y groups d i d  p e r c e n t a g e o f c o r r e c t assignments exceed 40 p e r  ANALYSIS  distincases  the  cent.  2.  CRITERION: TRIP:  Store  Type  Most Recent  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Biographical -  Variables  age  - sex - marital status - number o f c h i l d r e n a t home - education - o c c u p a t i o n o f head o f h o u s e h o l d  T a b l e 5.12 for  f i v e o f the  shows t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n group means seven b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s , the e x c e p t i o n s  sex of the respondent  and the number of children  living  f i v e v a r i a b l e s , f o u r were i n c l u d e d i n the d i s c r i m i n a n t cation,  though i n i t i a l l y  s i g n i f i c a n t , was  tion with variables previously entered  v a r i a b l e s had  respondent,  included.  the r e v e r s e  f o r entry  entered  not  Of the  functions.  Edu-  due  and  to i t s c o v a r i a -  of  satis-  equations. high-price  o l d e r , female, m a r r i e d , more a f f l u -  t o come from h o u s e h o l d s where the head t y p i c a l l y had  or p r o f e s s i o n a l occupation;  the  s i g n i f i c a n t , subsequently  Main d i s t i n c t i o n s i n group p r o f i l e s were as f o l l o w s :  ent,  the  Controlling for previously  i n the d i s c r i m i n a n t  s p e c i a l t y s t o r e shoppers tended t o be  being  at home.  e f f e c t i n the case o f sex  which, though i n i t i a l l y  f i e d conditions  not  occurred  a managerial  b o u t i q u e shoppers were commonly younger  and  TABLE 5.12 ANALYSIS 2:  HIGH PRICE SPECIALTY  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  MEDIUM PRICE SPECIALTY  BOUTIQUE  DEPARTMENT  BUDGET  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  GROUP MEANS Age Sex Marital status Number o f c h i l d r e n Income Education Occupation  40.8 1.7 1 1 239 4 5  36.2 1.5 1.4 0.7 115.6 3.8 4.0  23.4 1.6 1.3 0.6 129.7 3.4 3.8  36.3 1.5 1.6 0.9 109.8 3.3 3.4  37.7 1.4 1.6 1.0 102.5 3.2 3.5  .000 .121 .000 .453 .000 .002 .000  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Age Sex Marital status Income Occupation  .102 7.200 6.158 .018 2.646  .044 6.791 4.410 .006 2.144  .094 5.984 5.331 .001 2.016  .001 .010 .331  .000 .001  .968  16 23_ 13 14 21  4 28 52 23 21  4 12 19 23 31  .100 6.178 4.739 .0006 2.415  .101 5.785 5.296 - .0005 2.093  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Medium p r i c e Boutique Department Budget  specialty  .000 .000 .000 .000  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP High p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Medium p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Boutique Department Budget  72 16 16 11 14  4 20 0 29 14  .000 .038 .033 ,000 ,001  144.  s i n g l e ; department s t o r e p a t r o n s had  the  budget s t o r e p a t r o n s were more l i k e l y  l o w e s t mean job s t a t u s ;  t o be male and  Between group d i f f e r e n c e s i n d i s c r i m i n a n t c a l v a r i a b l e s were s i g n i f i c a n t i n e i g h t out s p e c i a l t y group was group l e a s t so. 72 p e r  least affluent.  based on  o f ten c a s e s . and  biographi-  The  high-price  the budget  store  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n matrix confirms t h i s conclusion,  cent of high-price  same was  scores  the most c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d  The  the  and  true of only  whereas  s p e c i a l t y shoppers were c o r r e c t l y a s s i g n e d ,  14 p e r  l e v e l o f p r e d i c t i v e accuracy  cent o f the budget s t o r e group. (51 per  cent) was  A  the  reasonable  a l s o a c h i e v e d i n the  case  o f the b o u t i q u e group.  ANALYSIS  3.  CRITERION: TRIP:  S t o r e Type  Most Recent  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Dispositional Variables - status  scale  - convenience s c a l e - fashion scale - quality scale  Mean s c o r e s  on  a l l f i v e o f the  f i c a n t l y between groups amongst the  s c a l e s was  minant f u n c t i o n : The follows:  (Table  d i s p o s i t i o n a l scales d i f f e r e d s i g n i -  5.13), but  such t h a t o n l y  status,  fashion  high-price  c o n s c i o u s and  the  p a t r o n s showed the  covariation  t h r e e were i n c l u d e d  and  p r i n c i p a l d i s t i n c t i o n s i n the  the degree o f  i n the  quality. s t o r e group p r o f i l e s were as  s p e c i a l t y shoppers were the most s t a t u s  l e a s t fashion greatest  conscious;  not  t h e i r low  scores  and  quality  s u r p r i s i n g l y , boutique  f a s h i o n o r i e n t a t i o n ; w h i l e budget  shoppers were d i s t i n g u i s h e d by  discri-  on  the  status  store and  quality  TABLE 5.13 ANALYSIS  HIGH PRICE SPECIALTY  3:  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  MEDIUM PRICE SPECIALTY  BOUTIQUE  DEPARTMENT  BUDGET  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  GROUP MEANS 42.4 32.2 33.0 28.1 49.2  Status Convenience Fashion Price Quality  36.0 34.1 36.2 31.4 44.7  37.0 31.0 42.8 33.8 42.8  33.2 34.5 34.6 33.8 42.4  29.8 37.7 31.9 37.0 39.1  .000 .002 .000 .000 .000  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS .661 .469 1.678  Status Fashion Quality  .429 .599 1.581  .424 .733 1.506  .367 .584 1.515  .000 .001 .000  .000 .000  .001  4 19 16 14 10  8 27 58_ 23 7  8 12 6 22 17  .306 .548 1.407  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Medium p r i c e Boutique Department Budget  specialty  .000 .000 .000 .000  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP High p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Medium p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Boutique Department Budget  80 23 10 9 3  0 19 10 33 62  ,000 .000 .000  146.  scales.  Medium-price s p e c i a l t y and department s t o r e shoppers f a i l e d t o  demonstrate extreme s c o r e s discriminant The  on any o f the t h r e e  scales included i n the  function.  t a b l e o f f i n a l between group F p r o b a b i l i t i e s shows t h a t a l l  e n t r i e s a r e h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t , d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f the d i s p o s i t i o n a l measures as d i s c r i m i n a t i n g v a r i a b l e s .  The c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  matrix- r e v e a l s t h a t t h e improvement i n p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y o v e r analyses  previous  was s m a l l however, m a i n l y because t h e two l a r g e s t groups,  comprising  medium-price s p e c i a l t y and department s t o r e s h o p p e r s , e x h i b i -  ted the greatest within-group heterogeneity. p r o f i l e s o f the high-price  The d i s t i n c t d i s p o s i t i o n a l  s p e c i a l t y , b o u t i q u e and budget s t o r e groups  i s borne o u t by t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f c o r r e c t assignments: 58 p e r cent  80 p e r c e n t ,  and 62 p e r c e n t r e s p e c t i v e l y .  ANALYSIS 4. CRITERION: TRIP:  Store  Type  Most Recent  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Combined v a r i a b l e s -  l o c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s (see A n a l y s i s 1) b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s (see A n a l y s i s 2) d i s p o s i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s (see A n a l y s i s 3) number o f p a s t p u r c h a s e s  T h i s a n a l y s i s was performed t o determine t h e i n c r e a s e  i n discrimina-  t o r y power a c h i e v e d  by combining t h e s e t s o f measures t r e a t e d s i n g l y i n  previous  An a d d i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e was i n c l u d e d i n the form o f  analyses.  the number of past  purchases  made a t a s p e c i f i e d s t o r e .  The group means  f o r t h e l o c a t i o n a l , b i o g r a p h i c a l and d i s p o s i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s were o f course i d e n t i c a l t o those p r e v i o u s l y  reported  and so a r e n o t t a b u l a t e d  TABLE ANALYSIS  HIGH PRICE SPECIALTY  4:  5.14  SUMMARY OF  MEDIUM PRICE SPECIALTY  RESULTS  BOUTIQUE  DEPARTMENT  BUDGET  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  1.822 6.584 .012 - .019 1.340 .230 .465 1.457  .000 .023 .012 .000 .048 .000 .000 .002  DICSRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Past purchases S i z e o f shopping Size of t e r t i a r y Income Occupation Status Fashion Quality  area centre  1.242 6.501 .009 - .006 1.743 .560 .395 1.684  1.143 5.942 .010 - .021 1.538 .385 .522 1.621  432 435 012 017 295 357 656 550  2. 337 6. 655 013 021 204 279 497 575  .000 .000 .000  .000 .000  .005  24 34 19 11 24  8 23 55 17 0  0 0 6 43 24  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Medium p r i c e Boutique Department Budget  specialty  .000 .000 .000 .000  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP High p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Medium p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Boutique Department Budget  68 16 10 4 3  0 20 10 25 48  148.  again. T a b l e 5.14 were e n t e r e d  shows t h a t e i g h t o f the o r i g i n a l twenty two  i n t o the d i s c r i m i n a n t  functions.  Most n o t a b l e  t h a t t h r e e d i s p o s i t i o n a l s c a l e s - status,  fashion  amongst the  u n d e r l i n i n g the  first  f i v e v a r i a b l e s entered,  variables i s the  and quality  fact  - were  comparative  power o f t h e s e measures as d i s c r i m i n a t o r s between s t o r e p a t r o n a g e groups. A l s o noteworthy i s the the  discriminant  s i g n i f i c a n c e o f p a s t p u r c h a s e s ; the magnitude o f  c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r t h i s v a r i a b l e shows t h a t whereas d e p a r t -  ment s t o r e p a t r o n s were l i k e l y t o e x h i b i t f r e q u e n t c o n v e r s e h e l d i n the s h i p c o n f i r m s the Highly the  case o f b o t h s p e c i a l t y s t o r e groups.  a s s o c i a t i o n noted p r e v i o u s l y  (see T a b l e  purchases, This 5.9).  the group c l a s s i f i c a t i o n m a t r i x r e v e a l s ,  e x p e c t e d , t h a t the o v e r a l l p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y was o f the t h r e e p r e v i o u s  analyses.  This  higher  than i n  (43 p e r  discriminant  as any  cent  c o r r e c t l y a s s i g n e d ) which i n t u r n i s l a r g e l y accounted f o r by l o c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s and  using  i s m a i n l y a t t r i b u t a b l e t o the more  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f department s t o r e shoppers  s i o n o f two  the  relation-  s i g n i f i c a n t between group F p r o b a b i l i t i e s were o b t a i n e d  combined measures and  accurate  repeat  the  the p a s t p u r c h a s e measure i n  incluthe  functions.  * ANALYSIS  5.  CRITERION: TRIP:  Store  Type  Most F r e q u e n t  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Locational  Variables  (as f o r A n a l y s i s  distance  1 excluding  estimated  travelled)  * R e s u l t s o f the a n a l y s e s o f s t o r e patronage based on 'most f r e q u e n t t r i p i n f o r m a t i o n (Analyses 5 t h r o u g h 8) do n o t i n c l u d e t a b u l a t i o n s o f group means and i n i t i a l F p r o b a b i l i t i e s s i n c e t h e s e f i g u r e s v a r i e d l i t t l e from the c o r r e s p o n d i n g s t a t i s t i c s r e p o r t e d i n A n a l y s e s 1-4. 1  TABLE 5.15 ANALYSIS  HIGH PRICE SPECIALTY  5:  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  MEDIUM PRICE SPECIALTY  BOUTIQUE  6.266  7.402  7.075  .006 .003 .057  .335 ,306  ,709  0 16 0 .5 0  27 29 74 56 59  DEPARTMENT  BUDGET  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS S i z e o f shopping a r e a  6.148  6.968  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Medium p r i c e Boutique Department Budget  specialty  .781 .010 .014 .069  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP High p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Medium p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Boutique Department Budget  73 55 26 41 37  0 0 0 2_ 0  0 0 0 0 4  .0040  150.  In t h i s case o n l y ized  - met  the  one  conditions  v a r i a b l e - the size, of for entry  the  shopping  i n t o the d i s c r i m i n a n t  discriminant  c o e f f i c i e n t s (Table  5.15)  to patronize  l a r g e r shopping a r e a s , whereas the r e v e r s e  area  patron-  function.  The  show t h a t b o u t i q u e shoppers tended was  t r u e f o r spe-  c i a l t y s t o r e p a t r o n s and p a r t i c u l a r l y h i g h - p r i c e s p e c i a l t y shoppers. Not t o be  s u r p r i s i n g l y , the s i n g l e v a r i a b l e d i s c r i m i n a n t  a v e r y weak d i s c r i m i n a t o r .  r a t i o s were s i g n i f i c a n t , and between p r e d i c t e d and the c o n c l u s i o n s o f the  there  i s a correspondingly  a c t u a l group membership.  drawn from A n a l y s i s  low  coincidence  These r e s u l t s  1 i n terms o f the v e r y  confirm  l i m i t e d power  6.  CRITERION: TRIP:  Store  Type  Most F r e q u e n t  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Consistent  w i t h the  of  household  bles.  Only f o u r o f the ten between group F  l o c a t i o n a l measures t o d i s c r i m i n a t e between s t o r e p a t r o n a g e groups.  ANALYSIS  tion  f u n c t i o n proved  head of The  discriminant  Biographical Variables  (as f o r A n a l y s i s  r e s u l t s o f A n a l y s i s 2, income, again  age  and  2)  occupa-  emerged as the main d i s c r i m i n a t i n g v a r i a -  c o e f f i c i e n t s (Table  5.16)  confirm  the d i s t i n c t i o n s  i n the group b i o g r a p h i c a l p r o f i l e s n o t e d p r e v i o u s l y w i t h the a d d i t i o n a l i n d i c a t i o n t h a t department s t o r e shoppers were the most l i k e l y c h i l d r e n l i v i n g at home w h i l e t h i s was  least likely  t o have  i n the case o f  high-  p r i c e s p e c i a l t y shoppers. " the  Nine o f the .05  groups.  ten between group F r a t i o s p r o v e d t o be  l e v e l , the e x c e p t i o n A r e l a t i v e l y high  b e i n g between the budget and  significant department  l e v e l o f p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y was  achieved  at store in  TABLE 5.16 ANALYSIS  HIGH PRICE SPECIALTY  6:  SUMMARY OF  MEDIUM PRICE SPECIALTY  RESULTS  BOUTIQUE  DEPARTMENT  BUDGET  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  .168 .165 - .001 1.900  .000 .011 .000 .001  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Age Number o f c h i l d r e n Income Occupation  .196 - .328 .031 2.257  .181 .225 .005 2.580  .091 - .137 .008 2.322  .153 .353 .004 1.931  .000 .000 .000  .000 .000  .088  20 45 0 13 4  7 13 74 21 22  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Medium p r i c e Boutique Department Budget  specialty  .000 .000 .000 .000  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP High p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Medium p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Boutique Department Budget  67 13 10 6 4  0 6 5 31. 19  7 23 11 30 52  152.  c l a s s i f y i n g group membership on t h e b a s i s o f d i s c r i m i n a n t all  f i v e groups t h e modal c a t e g o r y appears on t h e p r i n c i p a l d i a g o n a l and,  as i n A n a l y s i s ty  scores; f o r  2, m i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n was lowest f o r the h i g h - p r i c e s p e c i a l -  and b o u t i q u e groups.  ANALYSIS 7. CRITERION: TRIP:  Store  Most F r e q u e n t  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  The ing  Type  status,  D i s p o s i t i o n a l Scales  fashion  and quality  s c a l e s emerged as t h e d i s t i n g u i s h -  v a r i a b l e s as they d i d i n A n a l y s i s  r e f l e c t e d i n the discriminant s i s t e n t w i t h the p r e v i o u s were s i g n i f i c a n t ,  (as f o r A n a l y s i s 3)  3, and t h e group p r o f i l e  differences  c o e f f i c i e n t s (Table 5.17) were a l s o con-  results.  A l l t e n o f t h e between group F r a t i o s  and the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n m a t r i x r e f l e c t s t h e s e  t i o n s i n the r e l a t i v e l y accurate  distinc-  p r e d i c t i o n o f membership i n t h e h i g h -  p r i c e s p e c i a l t y , b o u t i q u e and budget s t o r e groups.  I t i s t o be n o t e d  however t h a t t h e o v e r a l l p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y was i n t h i s case below achieved  that  on t h e b a s i s o f t h e b i o g r a p h i c a l measures, d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h e  a b i l i t y o f t h e s e l a t t e r v a r i a b l e s t o d i s t i n g u i s h medium-price s p e c i a l t y and  department s t o r e shoppers more p r e c i s e l y .  ANALYSIS 8. CRITERION: TRIP:  Store  Type  Most F r e q u e n t  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Combined  Variables  (as f o r A n a l y s i s 4 e x c l u d i n g estimated  travelled  and past  purchases)  distance  TABLE ANALYSIS  HIGH PRICE SPECIALTY  7:  5.17  SUMMARY OF  MEDIUM PRICE SPECIALTY  RESULTS  BOUTIQUE  DEPARTMENT  BUDGET  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Status Fashion Quality  .524 .351 1.615  .388 .525 1.508  .299 .752 1.466  .269 .571 1.437  .000 .000 ,000  .000 .000  .000  33 29_ 11 12 0  0 16 63 23 7  7 16 16 24 19  .208 .529 1.326  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Medium p r i c e s p e t i a l t y Boutique Department Budget  .000 .000 .000 .000  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP High p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Medium p r i c e s p e t i a l t y Boutique Department Budget  60 19 11 10 7  0 19 0 31 67  .000 .000 .001  154.  Of t h e seven v a r i a b l e s e n t e r e d  i n t o the d i s c r i m i n a n t  5.18), f i v e were t h e same as t h o s e i n c l u d e d c a s e s , income,  status  mary d i s c r i m i n a t o r s . for entry,  orientation Price  and fashion  orientation  4, and, i n b o t h  orientation  were the p r i -  a l s o s a t i s f i e d the c o n d i t i o n s  group on t h i s s c a l e .  The i n c l u s i o n o f o n l y  size  patronized  area  (Table  i n Analysis  r e f l e c t i n g the d i s t i n c t l y higher, s c o r e s  of shopping  function  o f the budget  store  one l o c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e -  - reemphasises t h e l i m i t e d power o f t h e  l o c a t i o n a l measures t o d i s c r i m i n a t e between t h e f i v e s t o r e p a t r o n a g e groups. The  t a b l e o f F p r o b a b i l i t i e s and t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n m a t r i x demon-  s t r a t e again achieved  t h a t the most e f f e c t i v e between group d i s c r i m i n a t i o n was  when the v a r i o u s  s e t s o f measures were combined.  differences i n discriminant per  scores  Between group  a r e a l l h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t and 46  c e n t o f t h e c a s e s were c o r r e c t l y c l a s s i f i e d .  Membership i n t h e h i g h  p r i c e s p e c i a l t y , b o u t i q u e and budget groups was a g a i n  the: most  accurately  predicted. An  o v e r a l l comparison o f t h e r e s u l t s o f A n a l y s e s 1 t o 4 w i t h t h o s e  obtained  i n A n a l y s e s 5 t o 8 demonstrates c o n s i s t e n c y  i n the d i s c r i m i n a t o r y  powers o f t h e p r e d i c t i v e models and i n t h e major d i s c r i m i n a t i n g v a r i a b l e s . I t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e b i o g r a p h i c a l and d i s p o s i t i o n a l measures a r e f a r s u p e r i o r t o t h e l o c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s which i s as might be a n t i c i p a t e d a t t h e d i s a g g r e g a t e l e v e l o f c h o i c e between t y p e s o f s t o r e . appears t o be an e q u i v a l e n c e  i n the p r e d i c t i v e accuracy achieved  b a s i s o f t h e b i o g r a p h i c a l and d i s p o s i t i o n a l models. an  improvement i n p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y f o r a n a l y s e s  frequent'  There  t r i p data confirming  on t h e  There i s i n g e n e r a l based on t h e 'most  t h e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t s t o r e group p r o f i l e s  TABLE ANALYSIS  HIGH PRICE SPECIALTY  8:  5.18  SUMMARY OF  RESULTS  MEDIUM PRICE SPECIALTY  BOUTIQUE  DEPARTMENT  5.955 .539 .003 2.479 1.837 .187 2.310  6.891 .271 .007 2.218 1.737 .405 2.330  6.821 .722 .005 1.883 1.726 .232 2.370  .000 ,000 ,000  .000 .000  .000  27 42 11 14 7  0 10 6_3 16 7  7 16 5 41 7  BUDGET  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS S i z e o f shopping a r e a Number o f c h i l d r e n Income Occupation Status Fashion Price  5.871 - .132 .028 2.160 1.968 .0005 2.363  6.725 .462 .002 1.872 1.728 .174 2.534  FIANL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Medium p r i c e Boutique Department Budget  specialty  .000 .000 .000 .000  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP High p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Medium p r i c e s p e c i a l t y Boutique Department Budget  60_ 19 10 3 4  7 13 11 24 74  .023 .007 .000 .002 .000 .000 .006  156.  a r e l i k e l y t o be more d i s t i n c t when d e f i n e d by t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f a 'regular'  clientele.  ANALYSIS 9. CRITERION: TRIP:  Shopping C e n t r e Patronage  Most Recent  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Locational  Variables  * ( e x c l u d i n g size  of shopping  area  patronized)  The i n c r e a s e d importance assumed by l o c a t i o n a l measures i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e a n a l y s i s o f shopping c e n t r e p a t r o n a g e i s immediately a p p a r e n t from T a b l e 5.19) sixth  F i v e o f t h e e i g h t v a r i a b l e s have s i g n i f i c a n t F r a t i o s and a  {distance  to the nearest  the .05 s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l .  tertiary  centre)  i s only s l i g h t l y  above  These F r a t i o s s i g n i f y d i f f e r e n c e s i n group  means which i n p a r t a r e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h e x p e c t a t i o n s based upon the t r a d i t i o n a l n o r m a t i v e assumptions  r e g a r d i n g consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r .  There was, f o r example, a g e n e r a l tendency f o r respondents t o p a t r o n i z e the types o f f a c i l i t y n e a r e s t t o t h e i r t r i p o r i g i n s .  Furthermore, the  group means c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o t h e a c t u a l d i s t a n c e s t r a v e l l e d t o shop, although not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t , suggest a d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e s i z e o f shopping c e n t r e and t h e t e r r i t o r i a l e x t e n t o f t h e t r a d e area. E x p e c t a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s between s i z e s o f n e a r e s t facilities  and r e t a i l p a t r o n a g e do n o t appear t o be u p h e l d however.  Group  * T h i s v a r i a b l e was e x c l u d e d from t h e a n a l y s i s o f s h o p p i n g a r e a p a tronage s i n c e by d e f i n i t i o n i t c o r r e s p o n d s c l o s e l y w i t h t h e c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e and i s e s s e n t i a l l y a c o n s t a n t f o r t h e Downtown group.  TABLE 5.19 ANALYSIS 9:  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  DOWNTOWN  SECONDARY CENTRE  3..9 123..5 123.,3 122..0 27.,2 13.8 487.9 248.7  3.8 122.5 188.0 86.0 33..6 19.,4 456.,2 310..0  TERTIARY CENTRE  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  GROUP MEANS Estimated distance Actual distance D i s t a n c e downtown D i s t a n c e t o secondary c e n t r e Distance to t e r t i a r y centre Time d i s t a n c e downtown S i z e o f secondary c e n t r e Size o f t e r t i a r y centre  3.4 111.8 177.8 117.8 26..5 18..5 486.,1 225.3  .736 .776 .000 .000 .069 .000 .036 .005  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Estimated distance D i s t a n c e t o secondary c e n t r e Time d i s t a n c e downtown Size o f t e r t i a r y centre  -.076 .067 .478 .011  .188 .060 .611 .012  -.228 .071 .622 .010  FIANL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Secondary c e n t r e T e r t i a r y Centre  .000 .000  .004  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP Downtown Secondary c e n t r e T e r t i a r y centre  55_ 23 31  29 60 36  16 17 33  .002 .000 .000 .043  means f o r size  of nearest  secondary  centre  and size  of nearest  tertiary  centre  are somewhat s u r p r i s i n g l y l o w e s t f o r t h e secondary and t e r t i a r y  centre  groups r e s p e c t i v e l y , s u g g e s t i n g  as a measure o f c e n t r e t e d by t h e s e d a t a ;  attractiveness  t h a t the c o n v e n t i o n a l  (Huff, 1962) i s n o t w h o l l y  However, i t s h o u l d  measures r e f e r t o the n e a r e s t  use o f s i z e  be r e c o g n i z e d  secondary and t e r t i a r y  o f course were n o t n e c e s s a r i l y the ones p a t r o n i z e d  suppor-  t h a t these s i z e facilities  which  by the r e s p e c t i v e  groups. T a b l e 5.19 shows t h a t f o u r o f the o r i g i n a l e i g h t v a r i a b l e s were entered  i n t o the d i s c r i m i n a n t  estimated  distance  travelled  functions  and i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t the  t o shop was amongst them, r e f l e c t i n g a  s i g n i f i c a n t d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p between d i s t a n c e shopping c e n t r e p a t r o n i z e d All  when o t h e r  entered  e s t i m a t e s and s i z e o f  v a r i a b l e s were c o n t r o l l e d .  t h r e e o f the between group F r a t i o s based on d i s c r i m i n a n t  scores  p r o v e d t o be s i g n i f i c a n t and some 54 p e r c e n t o f cases were c o r r e c t l y classified.  The d i s c r i m i n a n t  f y i n g secondary c e n t r e assigned  shoppers o f w h i c h 60 p e r cent were c o r r e c t l y  and l e a s t e f f e c t i v e i n c l a s s i f y i n g t e r t i a r y  which o n l y  ANALYSIS  centre patrons o f  33 p e r cent were c o r r e c t l y p r e d i c t e d .  10.  CRITERION: TRIP:  Shopping C e n t r e Patronage  Most Recent  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Biographical Variables  Group means on t h r e e  status,  f u n c t i o n s were most e f f e c t i v e i n c l a s s i -  number of children  (as f o r A n a l y s i s  o f the e i g h t b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s -  living  at home and occupation  2)  marital  - differed  TABLE 5.20 ANALYSIS  10:  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  DOWNTOWN  SECONDARY CENTRE  TERTIARY CENTRE  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  35..6 1..6 1.,6 0.8 133.2 3,.8 4..2  .420 .110 .000 .036 .201 .082 .010  GROUP MEANS Age Sex Marital status Number o f c h i l d r e n Income Education Occupation  34.4 1.5 1.4 0.7 113.7 3.4 3.5  36.8 1.5 1 .6 1 .1 129.0 3.4 3.8  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS 641 786  6.527 1.917  .000 .005  ,154  Marital status Occupation  6.172 2.143  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Secondary c e n t r e T e r t i a r y centre  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP Downtown Secondary c e n t r e T e r t i a r y centre  47 29 40  34 45 21  19 26 38  .010 .016  160.  significantly  (Table 5.20).  were as f o l l o w s :  The d i s t i n g u i s h i n g group  downtown shoppers were commonly s i n g l e ;  c e n t r e p a t r o n s were more l i k e l y  t o be m a r r i e d  a t home; w h i l e t e r t i a r y c e n t r e shoppers were job s t a t u s o f household Only occupation  characteristics secondary  and t o have c h i l d r e n  living  d i s t i n g u i s h e d by t h e h i g h e r  heads.  two o f t h e t h r e e s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s - marital  status  and  - were e n t e r e d i n t o t h e d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n i n d i c a t i n g the  e x t e n t o f the c o v a r i a t i o n between m a r i t a l s t a t u s and t h e number o f c h i l d r e n l i v i n g a t home.  The between group F p r o b a b i l i t i e s  demonstrate  t h a t t h e downtown group was t h e most c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d and t h e t e r t i a r y c e n t r e group l e a s t s o .  This p a t t e r n i s r e f l e c t e d i n the p r e -  d i c t i o n o f group membership whereas 47 p e r c e n t o f downtown shoppers were a c c u r a t e l y a s s i g n e d t h e f i g u r e dropped t o 38 p e r c e n t f o r t h e t e r t i a r y c e n t r e group. These r e s u l t s a r e n o t t o t a l l y c o n s i s t e n t w i t h those o b t a i n e d i n a s i m i l a r study by B u c k l i n  (1967) based on d a t a c o l l e c t e d from r e s i d e n t s  o f t h e Oakland a r e a o f C a l i f o r n i a .  He n o t e d ,  f o r example a tendency f o r  f a m i l i e s w i t h i n the h i g h e r income and s o c i a l groups t o shop downtown, whereas secondary  c e n t r e s appealed  groups, and t e r t i a r y  t o middle  t o lower  income and s o c i a l  c e n t r e s t o shoppers w i t h " b e t t e r incomes" b u t  " l e s s e r s o c i a l s t a t u s " (p. 8 5 ) . I n c o n t r a s t , t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s a n a l y s i s show t h a t t h e income and s o c i a l s t a t u s o f downtown shoppers (based on measures o f e d u c a t i o n and o c c u p a t i o n ) below t h a t o f the o t h e r two groups.  was c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y  The i n c o n s i s t e n c y i s perhaps  b u t a b l e t o t h e s t r o n g i n f l u e n c e o f an e t h n i c f a c t o r i n B u c k l i n ' s  attristudy.  161.  ANALYSIS 11. CRITERION: TRIP:  Shopping C e n t r e  Patronage  Most Recent  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  D i s p o s i t i o n a l V a r i a b l e s (as f o r A n a l y s i s 3)  Two o f the f i v e d i s p o s i t i o n a l s c a l e s nificant i n i t i a l F-ratios  (Table 5.21).  fashion  and  price  - show s i g -  The group mean s c a l e s c o r e s  f o r t h e s e v a r i a b l e s i n d i c a t e t h a t f a s h i o n o r i e n t a t i o n was h i g h e s t f o r the downtown group, f o l l o w e d by the t e r t i a r y  c e n t r e and secondary  centre  groups; w h i l e , i n t h e case o f p r i c e o r i e n t a t i o n , t h e h i g h e s t s c o r e was f o r secondary  c e n t r e shoppers,  f o l l o w e d by downtown and t h i r d l y  tertiary  centre patrons. Only  the f a s h i o n s c a l e s a t i s f i e d t h e c o n d i t i o n s f o r e n t r y i n t o t h e  discriminant function.  There was s u f f i c i e n t c o v a r i a t i o n between the  f a s h i o n and p r i c e s c a l e s t o r a i s e the F p r o b a b i l i t y o f t h e l a t t e r l y above t h e c r i t i c a l  .05 l e v e l .  slight-  A s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the d i s c r i -  minant s c o r e s o f t h e downtown and secondary  c e n t r e groups a g a i n emerges,  whereas t h e t e r t i a r y c e n t r e group was n o t c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d a t a l l . The  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n matrix  the t e r t i a r y  confirms  t h i s r e s u l t w i t h o n l y 12 p e r c e n t o f  c e n t r e shoppers b e i n g c o r r e c t l y a s s i g n e d i n c o n t r a s t t o  the f i g u r e s o f 50 p e r c e n t and 57 p e r c e n t f o r the o t h e r two groups. In o r d e r t o t e s t whether t h e i n c l u s i o n o f the p r i c e s c a l e would improve p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y , t h e F p r o b a b i l i t y t o l e r a n c e l e v e l was r e l a x e d t o .10.  The r e s u l t was a c o n s i d e r a b l e i n c r e a s e i n t h e a c c u r a c y  o f assignment f o r t h e t e r t i a r y  c e n t r e group  (from 12 p e r c e n t t o 48 p e r  c e n t c o r r e c t ) , b u t a t t h e expense o f d e c r e a s e d two  groups:  the p e r c e n t a g e  accuracy  f o r the o t h e r  o f c o r r e c t assignments dropped from 50 t o  TABLE 5.21 ANALYSIS  11:  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  DOWNTOWN  SECONDARY CENTRE  TERTIARY CENTRE  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  36.1 34.1 36.0 31.3 44.8  .087 .254 .038 .045 .083  GROUP MEANS Status Convenience Fashion Price Quality  34.6 33.6 36.2 33.3 42.7  33.7 35.0 34.0 33.8 43.0  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Fashion  .655  .615  .651  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Secondary c e n t r e Tertiary centre  .013 .847  .133  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP Downtown Secondary c e n t r e T e r t i a r y centre  50 36 36  41 57 52  9 7 12  .038  163.  33 f o r t h e downtown group and from 56 t o 44 f o r t h e secondary group, r e s u l t i n g o v e r a l l i n a r e d u c t i o n assignments  (from 48 t o 3 9 ) .  centre  i n the percentage o f c o r r e c t  T h i s r e s u l t appears t o c o n f i r m  the v a l i d i t y  of the e s t a b l i s h e d p r a c t i c e o f s e t t i n g the F p r o b a b i l i t y tolerance for entry o f a v a r i a b l e into the discriminant  level  f u n c t i o n a t .05.  ANALYSIS 12. CRITERION: TRIP:  Shopping C e n t r e Patronage  Most Recent  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Combined  Variables  (as f o r A n a l y s i s  area  When t h e t h r e e  4 excluding  size  shopping  s e t s o f measures were combined, seven o f t h e twenty  one o r i g i n a l v a r i a b l e s were i n c l u d e d i n t h e d i s c r i m i n a n t 5.22).  of  patronized)  As i n A n a l y s i s  4, t h e number of past  f i c a n t , d i s t i n g u i s h i n g secondary c e n t r e  purchases  functions  (Table  p r o v e d t o be s i g n i -  shoppers, amongst whom  frequent  r e p e a t p u r c h a s i n g was most common, from t e r t i a r y c e n t r e p a t r o n s o f whom i t was l e a s t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c .  In contrast to Analysis  4, t h e l o c a -  t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s emerged as t h e most e f f e c t i v e d i s c r i m i n a t o r s between the  shopping c e n t r e patronage groups:  f o u r o f t h e seven e n t e r e d  varia-  b l e s were l o c a t i o n a l measures and o n l y one v a r i a b l e from each o f t h e other  two models was i n c l u d e d :  namely, marital  status  and price  orien-  tation. The between group F r a t i o s were a l l h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t and t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f s u b j e c t s based on d i s c r i m i n a n t than t h a t a c h i e v e d  i n any o f the a n a l y s e s  s c o r e s was more  described  i s n o t i c e a b l e t h a t p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y was h i g h e s t  accurate  to this point. f o r the t e r t i a r y  It  TABLE 5.22 ANALYSIS 12:  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  DOWNTOWN  SECONDARY CENTRE  TERTIARY CENTRE  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  .064 3.231 .065 .404 .012 6.101 1.092  - .053 3.276 .058 .535 .014 6.945 1.107  - .104 2.764 .069 .551 .012 6.687 1.010  ,002 .033 .000 .000 .031 .010 .017  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Estimated distance Past purchases D i s t a n c e t o secondary c e n t r e Time d i s t a n c e downtown Size o f t e r t i a r y centre Marital status Price  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Secondary c e n t r e T e r t i a r y centre  .000 .000  .000  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP Downtown Secondary c e n t r e T e r t i a r y centre  52_ 20 24  26 58_ 14  22 22 62  165.  c e n t r e group lowest  (62 p e r cent c o r r e c t ) a l t h o u g h ,  f o r t h a t group i n the t h r e e p r e v i o u s  must i n p a r t be s i m p l y d i f f e r e n t models, but  without  e x c e p t i o n , i t was  s i n g l e model a n a l y s e s .  a t t r i b u t a b l e to the e f f e c t o f combining a l s o important  was  This  the  the i n c l u s i o n o f t h e p a s t p u r -  chase v a r i a b l e which so c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d the t e r t i a r y  centre  group.  * ANALYSIS  13.  CRITERION: TRIP:  Most  Shopping Centre  Patronage  Frequent  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Locational Variables (as f o r A n a l y s i s 1 e x c l u d i n g size  area patronized travelled)  and estimated  of  shopping  distance  Three o f the seven l o c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s i n c l u d e d i n the a n a l y s i s were e n t e r e d  measures: from  the  i n t o the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n , and  actual nearest  i n T a b l e 5.23  distance secondary  t r a v e l l e d , distance centre.  The  a l l t h r e e were d i s t a n c e  from downtown and  discriminant coefficients  c o n f i r m the between group d i f f e r e n c e s n o t e d  distance shown  i n Analysis  9.  C o n s i s t e n t w i t h t r a d e a r e a e x p e c t a t i o n s , the d i s t a n c e t r a v e l l e d t o shop was  h i g h e s t f o r the downtown group and  group.  f o r the t e r t i a r y  centre  E q u a l l y c o n s i s t e n t i s the f a c t t h a t d i s t a n c e from downtown showed  the lowest nearest  lowest  c o e f f i c i e n t f o r the downtown group, w h i l e d i s t a n c e from  secondary c e n t r e was  lowest  the  f o r t h e secondary c e n t r e group.  I n A n a l y s e s 13-16 group means and i n i t i a l s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l s are e x c l u d e d from the t a b u l a t i o n s due to t h e i r c l o s e correspondence t o the f i g u r e s reported i n Analyses 9-12.  TABLE 5.23 ANALYSIS  13:  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  DOWNTOWN  SECONDARY CENTRE  -.002 .038 .068  -.019 .060 .058  TERTIARY CENTRE  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Actual distance D i s t a n c e downtown D i s t a n c e t o secondary  centre  -.027 .065 .071  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Secondary C e n t r e T e r t i a r y Centre  .000 .000  .011  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP Downtown Secondary C e n t r e T e r t i a r y Centre  88 23 19  11 5_3_ 27  1 24 54  .000 .000 .002  167.  The  t a b l e o f between group F p r o b a b i l i t i e s i n d i c a t e s h i g h l y s i g n i -  f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e d i s c r i m i n a n t s c o r e s o f t h e downtown d i f f e r e n c e s between the secondary what l e s s s h a r p .  and t e r t i a r y  A high percentage  group;  c e n t r e groups were some-  o f c a s e s were c o r r e c t l y  classified  - 72 p e r cent o v e r a l l - r e f l e c t i n g t h e e x c e p t i o n a l l y a c c u r a t e p r e d i c t i o n o f membership i n the l a r g e s t group such t h a t 88 p e r c e n t o f downtown shoppers  were c o r r e c t l y a s s i g n e d .  c o r r e s p o n d i n g a n a l y s i s based  Comparing these r e s u l t s w i t h the  on t h e 'most r e c e n t ' t r i p d a t a  (Analysis 9),  r e v e a l s an e s s e n t i a l s i m i l a r i t y , a l t h o u g h i t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e between group d i f f e r e n c e s were more s h a r p l y d e f i n e d i n t h e p r e s e n t  case.  ANALYSIS 14. CRITERION: TRIP.:  Shopping C e n t r e  Patronage  Most F r e q u e n t  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  B i o g r a p h i c a l V a r i a b l e s (as f o r A n a l y s i s 2)  The d i s c r i m i n a n t c o e f f i c i e n t s  (Table 5.24) c o n f i r m the between group  b i o g r a p h i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s noted i n A n a l y s i s 10.  Downtown shoppers  d i s t i n g u i s h e d by b e i n g c o m p a r a t i v e l y young and h a v i n g a lower secondary  were  job s t a t u s :  c e n t r e p a t r o n s were t h e most l i k e l y t o be male and have c h i l d -  ren; while t e r t i a r y  c e n t r e shoppers  were c h a r a c t e r i z e d by b e i n g o l d e r ,  female, h a v i n g few i f any c h i l d r e n , and the h i g h e s t j o b s t a t u s . The between group s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l s show t h a t t h e t e r t i a r y shoppers  were the most c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d , and t h i s  centre  i s reflected i n  T a b l e 5.24 w i t h 81 p e r c e n t o f t h a t group b e i n g c o r r e c t l y a s s i g n e d comp a r e d w i t h 56 p e r c e n t and 40 p e r c e n t f o r t h e downtown c e n t r e groups r e s p e c t i v e l y .  and  secondary  A g a i n t h e r e s u l t s show a more a c c u r a t e  TABLE 5.24 ANALYSIS 14:  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  DOWNTOWN  SECONDARY CENTRE  TERTIARY CENTRE  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Age Sex Number o f c h i l d r e n Occupation  .136 6.226 .106 2.028  .141 6.117 .481 2.195  .175 7.320 .009 2.880  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Secondary C e n t r e T e r t i a r y Centre  .001 .000  .000  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP Downtown Secondary C e n t r e T e r t i a r y Centre  56_ 37 4  20 40 15  24 22 81  .024 .032 .000 .000  between group d i s c r i m i n a t i o n than was t r i p analysis  ( A n a l y s i s 10),  prediction of t e r t i a r y cent  correct).  achieved  i n the  corresponding  the most marked improvement b e i n g  c e n t r e membership  (from 31 p e r  cent  t o 81  TRIP:  functions.  Shopping C e n t r e Patronage  Most F r e q u e n t  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Dispositional Variables  Group d i f f e r e n c e s w i t h r e s p e c t  (as f o r A n a l y s i s  to the status  and  were s u f f i c i e n t l y s i g n i f i c a n t t o r e s u l t i n t h e s e two i n t o the d i s c r i m i n a n t  f o r the most r e c e n t  functions  t r i p data  e x c e e d i n g the  f o r the o t h e r  secondary c e n t r e  tertiary  scales being case  fashion s c a l e scores  were  a r e v e r s a l i n the mean  groups w i t h the  f o r the  As was  3)  the  secondary c e n t r e mean  t e r t i a r y c e n t r e mean i n t h i s a n a l y s i s .  s c a l e were h i g h e s t  downtown and  two  t h e r e was  fashion variables  (Table 5.25).  ( A n a l y s i s 11),  f o r the downtown group but  fashion scores  status  the  15.  CRITERION:  highest  per  a n a l y s i s and  subsequent i n c l u s i o n o f more v a r i a b l e s i n the d i s c r i m i n a n t  entered  the  T h i s improvement i s a t t r i b u t a b l e t o the more h i g h l y  s i g n i f i c a n t s i n g l e v a r i a b l e d i f f e r e n c e s i n the p r e s e n t  ANALYSIS  in  singl  centre  S c o r e s on  the  group f o l l o w e d by  groups r e s p e c t i v e l y , which i s p r o b a b l y  the a  f u r t h e r i n d i c a t i o n of. the p r e v i o u s l y n o t e d tendency o f s p e c i a l t y s t o r e shoppers to p a t r o n i z e The  tertiary  (see T a b l e  5.2).  t a b l e o f between group F p r o b a b i l i t i e s shows s i g n i f i c a n t  enees between t e r t i a r y c e n t r e t y p e s o f c e n t r e , but  the  between the d i s c r i m i n a n t groups.  centres  shoppers and p a t r o n s o f the o t h e r  differ two  figures reveal a non-significant difference scores  o f the downtown and  I t f o l l o w s t h a t group membership was  secondary  p r e d i c t e d most  centre accurately  TABLE 5.25  «  ANALYSIS  15:  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  DOWNTOWN  SECONDARY CENTRE  TERTIARY CENTRE  SIGNIFICANCE • LEVEL  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Status Fashion  .648 .447  .635 .428  .725 .343  .050 .013  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Secondary C e n t r e T e r t i a r y Centre  .291 .002  .008  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP Downtown Secondary C e n t r e T e r t i a r y Centre  47_ 34 15  20 36_ 35  34 30 50_  o  171.  i n the case o f t e r t i a r y  c e n t r e shoppers  l e a s t so f o r t h e secondary ing  (50 per c e n t c o r r e c t ) ,  c e n t r e group  and  (36 p e r c e n t c o r r e c t ) .  these r e s u l t s w i t h the c o r r e s p o n d i n g  f i g u r e s i n Table  marked improvement i n the p r e d i c t i o n o f t e r t i a r y  5.21  Comparshows a  c e n t r e membership  (from  12 t o 54 p e r c e n t c o r r e c t ) , b u t an a p p r e c i a b l e r e d u c t i o n i n the  accurate  assignment o f secondary  correct).  c e n t r e shoppers  (from 57 t o 36 p e r c e n t  These changes r e f l e c t the d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t o f the i n c l u s i o n o f the s t a t u s s c a l e i n the d i s c r i m i n a n t e q u a t i o n s . When the r e s u l t s o f t h i s a n a l y s i s are compared w i t h those  obtained  u s i n g the l o c a t i o n a l and b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s as p r e d i c t o r s , i t i s c l e a r t h a t the d i s p o s i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s p r o v e d c r i m i n a t o r s between the t h r e e groups. of  cases  c l a s s i f i e d was  the l e a s t e f f e c t i v e  Whereas the o v e r a l l  dis-  percentage  72 p e r c e n t f o r the l o c a t i o n a l model and  53  c e n t f o r the b i o g r a p h i c a l model, the f i g u r e dropped t o 43 p e r c e n t the b a s i s o f the d i s p o s i t i o n a l  ANALYSIS  on  scales.  16.  CRITERION: TRIP:  Most  Shopping C e n t r e  Patronage  Frequent  PREDICTIVE MODEL:  Combined V a r i a b l e s (as f o r A n a l y s i s 4 e x c l u d i n g estimated  t r a v e l l e d , size of shopping and past purchases)  The  per  comparative  area  distance  patronized  e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f the t h r e e s e t s o f measures i s f u r -  t h e r e v i d e n c e d by the r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d when the v a r i a b l e s were combined, of  the 19 p r e d i c t o r s , 7 s a t i s f i e d the c o n d i t i o n s f o r e n t r y i n t o  d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n s (Table 5.26); o f t h e s e , t h r e e were  the  locational  TABLE 5.26 ANALYSIS 16:  SUMMARY OF RESULTS  DOWNTOWN  SECONDARY CENTRE  TERTIARY CENTRE  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  - .0006 .038 .061 4.695 .532 1.650 .574  - .017 .060 .051 4.760 .917 1.789 .563  - .024 .064 .062 6.229 .413 2.475 .467  .000 .000 .002 .006 .003 .000 .024  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Actual distance D i s t a n c e downtown D i s t a n c e t o secondary Sex Number o f c h i l d r e n Occupation Fashion  centre  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Secondary C e n t r e T e r t i a r y Centre  .000 .000  .000  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP Downtown Secondary C e n t r e T e r t i a r y Centre  80 21 19  14 63 8  5 15 73  to  173.  measures - actual  distance  travelled  distance  nearest  secondary  from  the  measures - occupation, was  number of  centre,  children  wed  by  two  and  the t h i r d  centre-,  the  from downtown and  l o c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e - distance the fashion  s c a l e and  sex,  l o c a t i o n a l model and  and  This conclusion  two  were l o c a -  travelled,  from  the  the sex  of  ( A n a l y s i s 12)  the  follo-  secondary  the  the  respond-  primary  comparative weakness o f  'most r e c e n t '  the  children,  nearest  i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the  i n the c o r r e s p o n d i n g a n a l y s i s based on  one  first  d i s p o s i t i o n a l s c a l e s as d i s c r i m i n a t o r s between the s h o p p i n g p a t r o n a g e groups.  only  i n which  and number of  finally  the  and  order  type and o r d e r i n g o f t h e s e v a r i a b l e s u n d e r l i n e s  importance o f the  downtown  The  distance  b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s - occupation  s i x t h was  The  home and  scale.  i s also instructive:  t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s - distance  from  t h r e e were b i o g r a p h i c a l at  a d i s p o s i t i o n a l measure - the fashion  v a r i a b l e s were e n t e r e d  ent.  to shop, distance  the  centre  results trip  obtained  data  a l t h o u g h , i n t h a t c a s e , the b i o g r a p h i c a l measures assumed  l e s s importance than i s seen h e r e . The  between group s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l s and  show t h a t the  composite model was  the  classification  t h e most e f f e c t i v e o f the  d i s c r i m i n a t i n g between the t h r e e groups, a l t h o u g h the d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y over t h a t a c h i e v e d was  noticeably  all  increased  was  i n f a c t more a c c u r a t e l y p r e d i c t e d by  cent  smalli  using  c o r r e c t compared w i t h 80 p e r  combined.  two  four i n  improvement i n p r e -  l o c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s alone  the p e r c e n t a g e o f cases c o r r e c t l y a s s i g n e d  from 72.44 t o 73.72.  s h i p i n the o t h e r  the  groups was  matrix  over-  Membership i n the downtown group the l o c a t i o n a l model  cent), but  (88  per  the p r e d i c t i o n o f member-  improved when the d i f f e r e n t models were  174.  It  i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t i c e the c l o s e correspondence between  r e s u l t s o f t h i s p a r t i c u l a r a n a l y s i s and  those  of  shopping c e n t r e patronage c i t e d e a r l i e r  He  too was  o r i g i n a l p r e d i c t o r s , comprising  ditions  ( B u c k l i n , 1967,  p. 78  t e r t i a r y centre f a c i l i t i e s .  ff.). patron-  Of some 55  i n t o the d i s c r i m i n a n t  equations  f o u r o f those would n o t have s a t i s f i e d the more s t r i n g e n t con-  f o r e n t r y adopted i n t h i s a n a l y s i s ) .  Consistent with  r e s u l t s r e p o r t e d above, the most h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t o f those were t h r e e d i s t a n c e measures, two  c e n t r e used  the seventeen  o f which were e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e mea-  s u r e s o f d i s t a n c e from downtown and  d i s t a n c e from the n e a r e s t  secondary  here.  The p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y p e r c e n t o f cases  i n the case o f the Oakland study  c o r r e c t l y assigned)  with  overall.  (or a t l e a s t f a i l e d t o r e p o r t )  the comparative e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f the d i f f e r e n t s e t s o f measures employed as d i s c r i m i n a t o r s between the t h r e e c r i t e r i o n t h e F r a t i o s l i s t e d f o r each e n t e r e d v a r i a b l e (p. 84)  groups, suggest  he although  that his  d a t a too would have demonstrated o n l y a s m a l l i n c r e a s e i n p r e d i c t i v e accuracy  u s i n g a combination  b a s i s o f d i s t a n c e measures  o f v a r i a b l e s o v e r t h a t a c h i e v e d on alone.  the  classification  73.72 p e r c e n t o f cases were c o r r e c t l y c l a s s i f i e d  U n f o r t u n a t e l y , B u c k l i n d i d not a n a l y s e  (72.6  a l s o c l o s e l y corresponds  r e s u l t s o f A n a l y s i s 16, where, as i n d i c a t e d i n the matrix,  study  demographic, shopping p l a n , m o t i v a t i o n a l  d i s t a n c e v a r i a b l e s , 17 were e n t e r e d  (although  reported i n Bucklin's  concerned t o p r e d i c t shopping p a t t e r n s i n terms o f the  age o f downtown, secondary and  and  the  the  175.  SUMMARY  In o r d e r t o p r o v i d e a c o n c i s e summary o f t h e r e s u l t s p r e s e n t e d i n the previous  s i x t e e n a n a l y s e s , and, a t the same time,  to r e f l e c t the  r s u l t s o f other analyses not reported i n d e t a i l , Tables are i n c l u d e d .  The e n t r i e s i n these  5.27 and 5.28  t a b l e s r e p r e s e n t , f o r t h e s t o r e and  shopping c e n t r e patronage groups r e s p e c t i v e l y , t h e c o r r e c t p r e d i c t i o n s ( i n p e r c e n t a g e s ) a c h i e v e d by the t h r e e d i f f e r e n t models p l u s t h e comb i n e d model averaged o v e r t h e f o u r shopping t r i p s  f o r which d a t a were  available. TABLE 5.27 AVERAGE PERCENTAGE OF CASES CORRECTLY ASSIGNED TO STORE PATRONAGE GROUPS G R O U P HIGH PRICE SPECIALTY  MODEL  MEDIUM PRICE SPECIALTY  BOUTIQUE  DEPARTMENT  BUDGET  LOCATIONAL  52  32  35  20  20  BIOGRAPHICAL  66  30  55  24  39  DISPOSITIONAL  65  19  57  20  58  COMPOSITE  62  36  53  41  56  In t h e case o f s t o r e p a t r o n a g e  (Table 5.27), t h e l o c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s  f a i l e d t o d i s t i n g u i s h a c c u r a t e l y between shoppers s e l e c t i n g  different  t y p e s o f s t o r e , w i t h the p o s s i b l e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e h i g h - p r i c e s p e c i a l t y grQup where size  of the shopping  discriminating variable. occupation,  area  patronized  was t h e most e f f e c t i v e  The b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y age,  sex and income,  performed somewhat b e t t e r e s p e c i a l l y as  176.  predictors of high-price specialty  and b o u t i q u e s t o r e shoppers.  d i s p o s i t i o n a l s c a l e s , e s p e c i a l l y status,  fashion  and quality,  the most e f f e c t i v e o f the t h r e e s e p a r a t e models, y i e l d i n g  The  comprised  moderately  a c c u r a t e p r e d i c t i o n s o f membership i n the h i g h - p r i c e s p e c i a l t y , b o u t i q u e and budget s t o r e groups.  O v e r a l l , t h e composite model a c h i e v e d the most  a c c u r a t e r e s u l t s , b u t , even s o , t h e p e r c e n t a g e a c c u r a c y was r e l a t i v e l y low w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e medium-price s p e c i a l t y and department groups, d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h e heterogeneous  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the shoppers  p a t r o n i z i n g these two c l a s s e s o f s t o r e . unexpected  i n t h e case o f department  departments, The  store  T h i s h e t e r o g e n e i t y was n o t  s t o r e s which,  through t h e i r v a r i o u s  can, and do, a p p e a l t o a b r o a d c r o s s - s e c t i o n o f consumers.  f a i l u r e t o p r e d i c t medium-price s p e c i a l t y s t o r e patronage w i t h  g r e a t e r a c c u r a c y was more s u r p r i s i n g however and perhaps question the v a l i d i t y  calls  into  o f d i v i d i n g s p e c i a l t y s t o r e s i n t o two c l a s s e s .  TABLE  5.28  AVERAGE PERCENTAGES OF CASES CORRECTLY ASSIGNED TO SHOPPING CENTRE PATRONAGE GROUPS G R O U P DOWNTOWN  SECONDARY CENTRE  TERTIARY CENTRE  LOCATIONAL  70  54  52  BIOGRAPHICAL  46  47  53  DISPOSITIONAL  51  50  22  COMPOSITE  64  57  66  MODEL  In g e n e r a l , p r e d i c t i o n s w i t h r e s p e c t t o shopping c e n t r e p a t r o n a g e  177.  (Table  5.28)  were more a c c u r a t e ,  s m a l l e r number o f groups and v a r i a b l e s , e s p e c i a l l y the gin  and  facilities  which, i n p a r t , may  the more even group s i z e s .  distances  separating  than t h a t o f the  consumer's t r i p  ori-  l o c a t i o n a l model was  composite model.  centre.  only  This evidence  slightly  clearly  importance p l a c e d upon d i s t a n c e measures i n e x i s t i n g models  o f shopping b e h a v i o u r . o f the  the  Locational  three d i f f e r e n t classes of  Indeed, the o v e r a l l performance o f the  s u p p o r t s the  the  reflect  o f v a r y i n g s i z e , were p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e i n d i s -  t i n g u i s h i n g between p a t r o n s o f the  l e s s accurate  simply  F u r t h e r m o r e , i t demonstrates t h a t the l o c a t i o n  consumer r e l a t i v e t o r e t a i l  facilities  remains a s t r o n g  influence  upon s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r even under c o n d i t i o n s where a medium t o h i g h good  (such as c l o t h i n g ) i s sought i n an urban c o n t e x t  of r e t a i l  opportunities within  which a c o n f o u n d i n g o f d i s t a n c e  a relatively  a situation in  e f f e c t s might have been a n t i c i p a t e d . d i s p o s i t i o n a l models  s i m i l a r except t h a t the p a t r o n s o f t e r t i a r y c e n t r e s were f a r more  accurately  (iv)  o f f e r i n g a range  small area;  The p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y o f the b i o g r a p h i c a l and was  order  d i s t i n g u i s h e d by  their biographical characteristics.  A n a l y s i s o f Department S t o r e The  analyses shoppers.  Patronage.  p o o r p r e d i c t i o n o f department s t o r e p a t r o n a g e i n the  previous  i n d i c a t e s a wide range i n the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f department To  i n v e s t i g a t e these v a r i a t i o n s , a d i s c r i m i n a n t  analysis  p e r f o r m e d where the c r i t e r i o n groups comprised p a t r o n s o f s p e c i f i c ment s t o r e s .  F o u r groups were d e f i n e d  c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o the  store was  depart-  f o u r major  * Both Massy (1965) and B u c k l i n (1967) have n o t e d the e f f e c t which uneven group s i z e s can have upon the r e s u l t s o f d i s c r i m i n a n t a n a l y s i s .  department s t o r e c h a i n s Woodwards, Eatons subjects  and Sears.  i n c l u d e d i n the  a n a l y s i s was set  having o u t l e t s i n Greater The  The  store locations patronized  a n a l y s i s are  p e r f o r m e d on the  Vancouver:  by  the  A single  shown i n F i g u r e 5.2.  'most f r e q u e n t '  Bay,  t r i p data using  a combined  of predictor variables. The  r e s u l t s o f the  analysis confirm  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between  shoppers at d i f f e r e n t department s t o r e s .  The  f o u r groups d i f f e r e d s i g -  n i f i c a n t l y on s i x o f the v a r i a b l e s w i t h b i o g r a p h i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s the most marked  (Table  t h e i r tendency t o be  5.29).  s i n g l e and  r e n ; Woodwards' shoppers had o l d e r and  more l i k e l y  younger and  The  Bay  p a t r o n s were d i s t i n g u i s h e d  c o n s e q u e n t l y t o have few,  i f any,  educational  and  occupational  ( a t t r i b u t a b l e t o the p e r i p h e r a l l o c a t i o n o f t h e  l a r g e r f a m i l i e s and  the lowest e d u c a t i o n a l  and  and age.  four v a r i a b l e s entered  Covariation  b e i n g number of  amongst the p r e d i c t o r s was  none o f the d i s p o s i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s had the  .05  l e v e l , b o t h the status  t i o n s f o r entry entered followed  initial  and quality  Bay  status.  functions. by  children,  such t h a t ,  although  s c a l e s s a t i s f i e d the  Sears,  and Sears' The  Bay,  at  condi-  Controlling for  Woodwards', Eatons'  whereas, on the q u a l i t y s c a l e the o r d e r i n g was  three occupation  shoppers emerged as the most s t a t u s  i n d e s c e n d i n g o r d e r by  The  F ratios significant  i n t o the d i s c r i m i n a n t e q u a t i o n s .  v a r i a b l e s , The  distances  s t o r e ) , having  p r i m a r y importance o f b i o g r a p h i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s i s u n d e r l i n e d first  be  status; while  occupational  Seven v a r i a b l e s were i n c l u d e d i n the d i s c r i m i n a n t  o f the  child-  t o be m a r r i e d ; Eatons ' customers tended t o  t o have h i g h e r  by  g e n e r a l l y t r a v e l l e d s h o r t e r d i s t a n c e s , were  Sears ' p a t r o n s were c h a r a c t e r i z e d by h a v i n g t r a v e l l e d l o n g e r t o shop  being  other  oriented patrons; Eatons  TABLE 5.29 ANALYSIS OF DEPARTMENT STORE PATRONAGE: BAY  WOODWARDS  SUMMARY OF RESULTS EATONS  SEARS  GROUP MEANS Actual distance D i s t a n c e downtown D i s t a n c e t o secondary c e n t r e Distance to t e r t i a r y centre Time d i s t a n c e downtown S i z e o f secondary c e n t r e Size o f t e r t i a r y centre Age Sex Marital status Number o f c h i l d r e n Income Education Occupation Status Convenience Fashion Price Quality  129.5 134.1 120.1 30.1 14.8 496.0 291.3 33.8 1.6 1.4 0. 105. 3, 3. 35. 33. 36. 32. 43.  112.2 159.8 102.6 28.6 17.3 467.9 271.0 39.3 1.5 1.6 1.3 120.0 3.3 3.6 32.7 35.5 34.3 34.5 41.4  113.3 151.1 104.3 29.2 16..1 466. .1 267.0 30.3 1.5 1.5 0.7 112.2 3..6 3,.7 33..0 33..9 35.8 33.7 42.9  163.9 177.8 91.0 25.5 18.5 436.6 266.0 32.6 1.6 1.6 1.7 104 2 2 32 33 36.2 33.5 43.2  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL .041 .117 .089 .913 .105 .187 .897 .005 .762 .038 .000 .611 .027 .009 .070 .167 .232 .204 .094  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Actual distance Time d i s t a n c e downtown Age Number o f c h i l d r e n Occupation Status Quality  -  .013 .175 .119 .162 .184 .825 1.278  .005 .266 .138 .635 .190 .736 1.213  .000 .019 .002  .009 .000  .004  19 48 23 11  16 22 36 11  .007 .239 .097 .386 .154 .730 1.275  .016 .224 .095 .966 .479 .715 1.354  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Woodwards Eatons Sears  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP Bay Woodwards Eatons Sears  46 14 21 21  19 16 19 58  .033 .048 .015 .000 .009 .009 .050  180.  and Woodwards.  Two  d i s t a n c e measures were a l s o e n t e r e d i n d i c a t i n g  signi-  f i c a n t between group d i f f e r e n c e s i n d i s t a n c e s t r a v e l l e d t o shop and i n time d i s t a n c e s from downtown Vancouver. s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the between The and Eatons. was  Bay  l e v e l w i t h the c l e a r e s t d i s t i n c t i o n  and Woodwards and  The  the g r e a t e s t o v e r l a p between The  most a c c u r a t e l y p r e d i c t e d i n the case o f Sears  Bay  being Bay  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n m a t r i x i n d i c a t e s t h a t group membership  f o l l o w e d i n descending The  .05  A l l between group F r a t i o s were  (58 p e r c e n t  o r d e r o f a c c u r a c y by Woodwards  (46 p e r cent) and Eatons  a c c u r a c y i s r e l a t i v e l y low,  (36 p e r c e n t ) .  correct),  (48 p e r c e n t ) ,  Although  the l e v e l  of  the modal c a t e g o r y f o r each s t o r e o c c u r s  the p r i n c i p a l d i a g o n a l o f the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n m a t r i x r e f l e c t i n g the  on  sig-  n i f i c a n t between group d i f f e r e n c e s . A s e p a r a t e a n a l y s i s was  performed  to investigate p r o f i l e  differences  between the p a t r o n s o f the t h r e e department s t o r e s l o c a t e d i n Downtown Vancouver - The  Bay,  Eatons  and Woodwards - a g a i n u s i n g the  quent' t r i p d a t a and a combined s e t o f p r e d i c t o r s .  'most f r e -  In t h i s case, o n l y  two o f the n i n e t e e n v a r i a b l e s were e n t e r e d i n t o the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c tions:  namely, number of children  shoppers  and the status  scale.  The  Bay  a g a i n emerged as h a v i n g fewer c h i l d r e n and the s t r o n g e s t s t a t u s  o r i e n t a t i o n , w h i l e the r e v e r s e h e l d f o r Woodwards' p a t r o n s .  Between  group F p r o b a b i l i t i e s and the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f s u b j e c t s on t h e b a s i s o f discriminant scores p a t r o n s o f The  Bay  (Table 5.30)  showed a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between  and Woodwards, b u t t h e Eatons'  f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from e i t h e r o f the o t h e r two. tially  c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h a t r e p o r t e d by G a y l e r  group was  not  signi-  This r e s u l t i s essen(1974, pp.  143-4) i n an  a n a l y s i s o f the s o c i a l c l a s s d i f f e r e n c e s o f Downtown Vancouver department  I  TABLE 5.30 ANALYSIS OF DOWNTOWN DEPARTMENT STORE PATRONAGE  BAY  WOODWARDS  EATONS  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS Woodwards Eatons  .000 .337  .110  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP Bay Woodwards Eatons  6_1 27 52  23 56_ 45  14 17 _3  CO  i—•  182.  store patrons.  He  too found, i n the case o f c l o t h i n g p u r c h a s e s ,  that  the most pronounced d i f f e r e n c e s i n c l i e n t e l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were between shoppers a t The the middle and higher  Bay  and  Woodwards w i t h the  former a p p e a l i n g  upper s o c i a l c l a s s e s ; a r e s u l t perhaps r e f l e c t e d i n  status scale scores  f o r The  Bay  p a t r o n s i n the p r e s e n t  i s noteworthy, however, t h a t between group d i f f e r e n c e s on education  and  occupation  s o c i a l c l a s s were not The  f a r more t o  existence  v a r i a b l e s employed by  Gayler  the  o f the p r e v i o u s  o f s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the  income,  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of of  within-  f o r the department s t o r e group apparent from the r e s u l t s analyses  o f s t o r e patronage t h a t the  (Analyses  1 to 8).  I t would  achievement o f more p r e c i s e between  group d i s c r i m i n a t i o n depends upon a d i s a g g r e g a t i o n  (v)  It  significant i n this analysis.  seem t o f o l l o w t h e r e f o r e  store  case.  as measures o f  s p e c i f i c department s t o r e p a t r o n s accounts f o r the p r o p o r t i o n group v a r i a n c e  the  o f the  department  category.  A n a l y s i s o f S p e c i f i c Shopping C e n t r e Patronage A further discriminant  d i f f e r e n c e s , i f any, ping centres: Both c e n t r e s  a n a l y s i s was  performed t o determine what  e x i s t e d between the p a t r o n s o f two  Oakridge  i n Vancouver and Park  are l o c a t e d w i t h i n the  Royal  sampling area  specific  shop-  i n West Vancouver. (see F i g u r e  5.2)  and  b o t h are p l a n n e d developments o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y e q u a l s i z e i n terms o f commercial f l o o r s p a c e Since  appropriate  c o n t a i n i n g a s i m i l a r range o f r e t a i l  l o c a t i o n a l measures were not  the d i s t a n c e s s e p a r a t i n g p r e d i c t o r s was  respondents from the  available -  two  centres  establishments. specifically,  - the  set  of  l i m i t e d t o the seven b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s and  the  five  TABLE ANALYSIS  5.31  OF SHOPPING CENTRE PATRONAGE  OAKRIDGE  PARK ROYAL  SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL  GROUP MEANS Age Sex Marital status Number o f c h i l d r e n Income Education Occupation Status Convenience Fashion Price Quality  41.1 1.5 1.7 1 133 3 3 33 34 34 34.0 42.1  34.1 1.5 1.5 1.2 150.0 3 6 4 3 33 7 34.8 35 :o 33.6 44.1  .028 .936 .100 .376 .395 .046 .111 .797 .823 .608 .711 .083  DISCRIMINANT COEFFICIENTS Age  .196  ,162  .028  FINAL BETWEEN GROUP SIGNIFICANCE LEVEL Park R o y a l  .028  PERCENTAGE OF CASES CLASSIFIED INTO EACH GROUP Oakridge Park R o y a l  64 44  36 56  oo CjJ  184.  dispositional scales.  The  d a t a base, as  i n the p r e v i o u s  department s t o r e p a t r o n a g e , comprised the The two  initial  F probabilities listed  whereas Park cation.  Royal  i n T a b l e 5.31  groups.  p e r s e x h i b i t i n g the was  discriminant  show t h a t f o r o n l y  education  P a t r o n s o f Oakridge  responses.  - were the  tended t o be higher  centre  older,  l e v e l s o f edu-  Only i n the .05  case o f the q u a l i t y s c a l e , d i d  s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l w i t h Park  Royal  shop-  greater q u a l i t y o r i e n t a t i o n .  the o n l y  v a r i a b l e to s a t i s f y  e q u a t i o n and  i n T a b l e 5.31.  trip  of  a s t r i k i n g s i m i l a r i t y i n the d i s p o s i t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r -  the F r a t i o come near the  Age  and  shoppers c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y had  There was  i s t i c s o f the two  S i n c e no  group F p r o b a b i l i t y was The  'most f r e q u e n t '  o f the twelve o r i g i n a l v a r i a b l e s - age  means s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t .  analysis  the  associated  conditions centre  f o r entry i n t o  c o e f f i c i e n t s are  o t h e r v a r i a b l e s were e n t e r e d , the  same as t h a t f o r the  age  the  the  shown  f i n a l between  variable  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f s u b j e c t s b a s e d on the s i n g l e v a r i a b l e  (.0285).  discriminant  e q u a t i o n shows t h a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 61 p e r  cent o f cases were c o r r e c t l y  assigned  group b e i n g  w i t h membership i n the Oakridge  p r e d i c t e d than was  t r u e f o r Park  accurately  Royal.  I t i s c l e a r t h e r e f o r e t h a t the b i o g r a p h i c a l and r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the p a t r o n s o f t h e s e two distinguished except.in  more  the case o f age.  centres The  d i s p o s i t i o n a l cha-  c o u l d n o t be  absence o f  clearly  significant  d i f f e r e n c e s i n respondent c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s suggests t h a t a shopper's s e l e c t i o n o f one  or other  o f the c e n t r e s  was  based mainly upon  considerations.  However t h i s must remain a s p e c u l a t i v e  s i n c e the n e c e s s a r y l o c a t i o n a l measures were n o t  distance  conclusion  available.  I t i s also  u n f o r t u n a t e t h a t group s i z e s were too s m a l l t o p e r m i t the i n c l u s i o n o f  a l a r g e r number o f shopping c e n t r e s , which may between group  (vi)  have s e r v e d t o a c c e n t u a t e  differences.  R e g r e s s i o n A n a l y s i s o f D i s t a n c e T r a v e l l e d t o Shop The  a n a l y s e s r e p o r t e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r have c e n t r e d on the problem  o f a c c o u n t i n g f o r v a r i a t i o n s i n retail  patronage.  Attention i n this  s e c t i o n s h i f t s t o a d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r , namely the distance  travelled  to shop.  The r e s u l t s o f a r e g r e s s i o n  a n a l y s i s are r e p o r t e d i n which d i s t a n c e t r a v e l l e d t o shop was  the depen-  dent v a r i a b l e and the independent v a r i a b l e s comprised measures o f the l o c a t i o n a l , b i o g r a p h i c a l and d i s p o s i t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the  consu-  mer. V a r i o u s s t u d i e s have sought t o account f o r v a r i a t i o n s i n d i s t a n c e s t r a v e l l e d t o shop i n terms o f d i f f e r e n c e s i n consumer c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . As e a r l y as 1948,  Converse,  i n a study o f b u y i n g h a b i t s i n s o u t h e r n  I l l i n o i s , n o t e d the w i l l i n g n e s s o f h i g h e r income consumers t o t r a v e l l o n g e r d i s t a n c e s t o s a t i s f y t h e i r shopping needs Rich  (Converse,  1948).  (1963) found a g r e a t e r p r o p e n s i t y among women i n the upper  groups t o t r a v e l f u r t h e r t o p a t r o n i z e downtown s t o r e s i n New C l e v e l a n d , and s i m i l a r r e s u l t s were o b t a i n e d by Jonassen (1965) and Hess pectively.  York  and  (1955), P a h l  (1966) i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s , B r i t a i n and Denmark r e s -  Murdie  (1965) has demonstrated  ences on t r a v e l b e h a v i o u r i n comparing Order Mennonites  income  and  'modern' Canadians  south-western O n t a r i o .  Perhaps  the e f f e c t o f c u l t u r a l  differ-  the shopping p a t t e r n s o f O l d f o r c l o t h i n g and footwear i n  o f most r e l e v a n c e i n the p r e s e n t con-  t e x t a r e the r e s u l t s o f G a y l e r ' s s t u d y o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r i n G r e a t e r Vancouver  i n which s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were shown i n the  186.  distances  t r a v e l l e d to purchase v a r i o u s  s o c i a l c l a s s and  f a m i l y s t a t u s groups  goods by  (Gayler,  consumers i n d i f f e r e n t  1974).  Upper and. m i d d l e  c l a s s consumers were found t o t r a v e l s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r f o r g r o c e r i e s and  dress  i t e m s , w h i l e consumers h a v i n g a low  status t r a v e l l e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y and  distances  shorter distances  family  for groceries,  furniture. In t h i s s t u d y , f o u r s t e p - w i s e r e g r e s s i o n  t o determine the r e l a t i o n s h i p between d i s t a n c e set of p r e d i c t o r s comprising variables.  The  analyses  were performed  t r a v e l l e d t o shop and  dependent v a r i a b l e s were the o r i g i n - d e s t i n a t i o n d i s t a n c e s  Step-wise r e g r e s s i o n  f o r which d a t a were a v a i l a b l e .  i s a form o f m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n  those p o t e n t i a l independent v a r i a b l e s t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t l y  i n which  contribute  e x p l a i n i n g v a r i a t i o n i n the dependent v a r i a b l e are i n c l u d e d regression equation.  The  most s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o the  a t each stage i s the one  explanation  a n a l y s i s i s t e r m i n a t e d when no  which  the  contributes  regression  equation.  f u r t h e r p o t e n t i a l independent v a r i a -  b l e s make a c o n t r i b u t i o n s i g n i f i c a n t beyond a p r e d e t e r m i n e d  level,  .05.  T a b l e 5.32 The  shows the r e g r e s s i o n regression  e q u a t i o n s d e r i v e d i n the  the  are the  included  s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the c o n t r i b u t i o n o f  each o f t h e s e v a r i a b l e s i s shown i n p a r e n t h e s e s by tabulated  four  c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r independent v a r i a b l e s  i n "each e q u a t i o n are l i s t e d and  Also  to  o f the dependent v a r i a b l e , c o n t r o l -  l i n g f o r the v a r i a b l e s p r e v i o u s l y i n c l u d e d i n the  analyses.  in  only  a n a l y s i s p r o c e e d s i n a s t e p - w i s e manner such  t h a t the v a r i a b l e i n t r o d u c e d  usually  a  l o c a t i o n a l , b i o g r a p h i c a l and d i s p o s i t i o n a l  f o r each o f the f o u r shopping t r i p s  The  dress  intercept values,  the F p r o b a b i l i t y .  coefficients of  determination  TABLE 5.32 REGRESSION  EQUATIONS ON DISTANCE TRAVELLED TO SHOP  POTENTIAL INDEPENDENT VARIABLES  DISTANCE TRAVELLED (TRIP 1)  DISTANCE TRAVELLED (TRIP 2)  DISTANCE TRAVELLED (TRIP 3)  DISTANCE TRAVELLED (TRIP 4)  DISTANCE DOWNTOWN .  .5856 (.0000)  .6423 (.0000)  .7500 (.0000)  .7265 (.0000)  DISTANCE SEC. CENTRE  .3122 (.0005)  .2526 (.0021)  .3364 (.0000)  27.9884 (.0000)  32.2024 (.0000)  DISTANCE TER. CENTRE  * SIZE OF SHOPPING AREA  20.2996 (.0024)  33.0470 (.0000)  -.1231 (.0003).  SIZE OF SEC. CENTRE SIZE OF TER. CENTRE AGE SEX  -23.4159 (.0052)  +  MARITAL  STATUS  NUMBER OF  CHILDREN  INCOME EDUCATION -5.3096 (.0124)  OCCUPATION STATUS -1.3912 (.0197)  CONVENIENCE  -1.1089 (.0162)  FASHION PRICE 2.2046 (.0024)  QUALITY INTERCEPT R  2  STAND. ERR.  (Y)  * Log. T r a n s f o r m +  Binary  Variable  -71.5814  -184.1477  -25.8311  -24.5571  .2369  .3848  .3954  .5233  84.5709  70.7870  71.5566  56.8276  188.  (R ) and The  standard  e r r o r s o f the e s t i m a t e  most s t r i k i n g  f o r each  equation.  f e a t u r e o f the r e s u l t s i s the s m a l l number o f  p o t e n t i a l independent v a r i a b l e s s a t i s f y i n g the c o n d i t i o n s f o r i n c l u s i o n in  the r e g r e s s i o n e q u a t i o n s ,  absence o f b i o g r a p h i c a l and  and,  dispositional predictors.  cant p r e d i c t o r s were distance shopping tions.  area The  patronized,  more p a r t i c u l a r l y , the  from Damtown  Vancouver  comparative  The  most  signifi-  and the size  of  both o f which were i n c l u d e d i n a l l f o u r equa-  s t r o n g p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between d i s t a n c e t r a v e l l e d  and  d i s t a n c e from Downtown Vancouver r e f l e c t s t h e dominance o f Downtown Vancouver as a c e n t r e  f o r c l o t h i n g p u r c h a s e s , shown p r e v i o u s l y i n the  h i g h p e r c e n t a g e o f shopping t r i p s t o downtown l o c a t i o n s (see  Figure  5.5) . The  importance p l a c e d upon s i z e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s as a s u r r o g a t e mea-  sure o f centre u t i l i t y  i n t r a d i t i o n a l t r a d e a r e a models i s  supported  h e r e by the s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between d i s t a n c e and to  s i z e o f shopping a r e a p a t r o n i z e d .  t h i r d most s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r was  the form o f distance  from  the nearest  i n c l u d e d i n t h r e e o f the f o u r e q u a t i o n s to  C l e a r l y respondents were  prepared  t r a v e l f u r t h e r t o shop a t l a r g e r c e n t r e s . The  in  travelled  d i s t a n c e t r a v e l l e d t o shop.  The  again  secondary and was  a l o c a t i o n a l measure centre,  which  was  also positively related  i n c l u s i o n of t h i s v a r i a b l e r e f l e c t s  the importance o f secondary c e n t r e s as the major t r i p  destinations  after  Downtown Vancouver. " was  The size  o n l y o t h e r l o c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e t o appear i n any of  the  nearest  secondary  centre  p r e d i c t o r o f d i s t a n c e t r a v e l l e d t o the  o f the  equations  which emerged as a s i g n i f i c a n t 'most f r e q u e n t '  destination.  The  negative nearest  r e l a t i o n s h i p i n t h i s case i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e s m a l l e r t h e secondary c e n t r e  t h e f u r t h e r t h e respondent tended t o t r a v e l .  T h i s i m p l i e s t h a t respondents were p r e p a r e d t o f o r e g o o f shopping a t nearby, b u t c o m p a r a t i v e l y the  regarding  regression  two i n s t a n c e s  equations.  the respondent  at a greater distance; a  c o n s i s t e n t with trade  t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between c e n t r e  In only  of  s m a l l , secondary c e n t r e s f o r  sake o f b e t t e r shopping o p p o r t u n i t i e s  r e s u l t which i s again  the convenience  a r e a model assumptions  s i z e and a t t r a c t i v e n e s s .  were b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s e n t e r e d  I n t h e case o f t h e t h i r d most r e c e n t  emerged as a n e g a t i v e  i n the  t r i p , sex  p r e d i c t o r of distance t r a v e l l e d ,  i n d i c a t i n g a tendency f o r men t o t r a v e l f u r t h e r than women.  This  i sa  somewhat s u r p r i s i n g outcome i n l i g h t o f t h e p r e v i o u s l y n o t e d  convenience-  o r i e n t a t i o n o f t h e male r e s p o n d e n t s , b u t i t i s p r o b a b l y a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e i r preference  f o r department s t o r e s , hence n e c e s s i t a t i n g t r i p s e i t h e r  t o Downtown Vancouver o r a secondary c e n t r e . variable to contribute  significantly  t r a v e l l e d was occupational trip,  and again  status  status  jobs  biographical  t o the p r e d i c t i o n o f d i s t a n c e  i n t h e case o f t h e 'most  t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p was n e g a t i v e  pondents w i t h h i g h e r  The o t h e r  frequent'  demonstrating that  to t r a v e l shorter distances.  c o n s i s t e n t with the r e s u l t s o f the e a r l i e r d i s c r i m i n a n t  This i s  analyses  showed t h a t p a t r o n s o f t h e more immediately a c c e s s i b l e t e r t i a r y were most c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d by t h e i r h i g h e r ever i n c o n s i s t e n t with Gayler's s o c i a l status distances  (assessed  conclusion  job status.  res-  which centres  I t i s how-  t h a t consumers o f h i g h e r  p a r t l y i n terms o f o c c u p a t i o n ) t r a v e l l e d l o n g e r  t o purchase c l o t h i n g goods  (Gayler,  1974, p . 123 f f . ) .  i n c o n s i s t e n c y may i n p a r t be a t t r i b u t a b l e t o changes i n t h e r e t a i l  This  190.  structure i n Greater  Vancouver subsequent to G a y l e r ' s  to d i f f e r e n c e s i n the s p a t i a l e x t e n t Only two equations:  o f the  sampling  orientation  and quality  i n c l u d e d as a n e g a t i v e  in part  area.  f i v e d i s p o s i t i o n a l s c a l e s appeared i n the  convenience  n i e n c e s c a l e was  o f the  s t u d y , and  orientation.  p r e d i c t o r i n two  regression The  conve-  instances,  con-  f i r m i n g the e x p e c t e d i n v e r s e  r e l a t i o n s h i p between convenience o r i e n t a t i o n  and  q u a l i t y s c a l e on  distance  travelled.  a single instance trip,  suggesting  The  the o t h e r hand emerged i n  as p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o the l e n g t h o f the t h a t respondents who  p a r t i c u l a r l y valued  shopping  q u a l i t y were  p r e p a r e d t o t r a v e l somewhat f u r t h e r t o s a t i s f y t h a t d i s p o s i t i o n . The  c o e f f i c i e n t s of determination  a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each e q u a t i o n  show t h a t the p e r c e n t a g e o f v a r i a t i o n i n d i s t a n c e by  the v a r i o u s  o f the  for  the  s e t s o f p r e d i c t o r s ranged from a low  'most f r e q u e n t '  discriminant  analyses  trip.  This pattern  o f t h e s e v a r i a b l e s was Had  respondent may  r e s t r i c t e d by  i n the  i n d i c a t e d i n C h a p t e r 4,  shows t h a t i n f a c t 166  case  r e s u l t s of again  the highest  contribution  spatial limitations of  the  sample been drawn,  the  But  i n the  absence o f such a  remains l a r g e l y s p e c u l a t i v e .  i n Shopping B e h a v i o u r and the sample was  an a p p r o x i m a t e l y e q u a l number o f male and 5.3  'explained'  d i s p o s i t i o n a l characteristics of  have been i n c r e a s e d .  Male-Female D i f f e r e n c e s As  the  a more s p a t i a l l y e x t e n s i v e  d a t a base t h i s c o n j e c t u r e  (vii)  c o n f i r m s the  I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t the  s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the b i o g r a p h i c a l and the  o f 24  i n t h a t the l e v e l o f p r e d i c t i v i t y was  ' t y p i c a l ' shopping t r i p .  sampling area.  travelled  d e s i g n e d so as t o  female r e s p o n d e n t s .  r e s p o n d e n t s were male and  p r i m a r y reason f o r c o n t r o l l i n g the  Dispositions  sample i n t h i s way  185 was  provide  Figure  female. to obtain  The a  191.  d a t a base  f o r comparing male and female shopping p a t t e r n s .  Studies of  s h o p p i n g b e h a v i o u r have commonly d e a l t e x c l u s i v e l y w i t h female and y e t t h i s emphasis  consumers,  i s becoming i n c r e a s i n g l y q u e s t i o n a b l e i n the con-  temporary North American  c i t y where the m a r k e t i n g o f men's goods i s  r a p i d l y a c h i e v i n g e q u a l prominence.  T h i s t r e n d i s perhaps most  explicit  i n the r e t a i l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f c l o t h i n g , t h e p u r c h a s i n g o f which  formed  the focus of a t t e n t i o n i n t h i s study. Two  c o n t i n g e n c y t e s t s were performed t o determine the r e l a t i o n s h i p  between the respondent's Responses  sex and store  and shopping  centre  were a g g r e g a t e d over t h e f o u r s h o p p i n g t r i p s  were o b t a i n e d , and hence the u n i t o f a n a l y s i s was r a t h e r than a respondent.  a  f o r which d a t a  'respondent  trip'  T h i s p r o c e d u r e has the e f f e c t o f i n c r e a s i n g  the c e l l s i z e s i n the t a b u l a t i o n s which i s advantageous chi-square s t a t i s t i c s  patronage.  ( B l a l o c k , 1960, p. 214  t h a t t h i s b e n e f i t i s g a i n e d a t the expense  ff.),  i n computing  but i t i s r e c o g n i s e d  o f compromising  the assump-  t i o n o f independent random sampling. The most s t r i k i n g d i f f e r e n c e s between male and female shoppers emerge i n the patronage h i g h - p r i c e s p e c i a l t y , b o u t i q u e and department (Table 5.33) .  whereas female shoppers were the more l i k e l y  stores  to patronize  h i g h - p r i c e s p e c i a l t y and b o u t i q u e s t o r e s , male shoppers were the more likely  t o s e l e c t department  stores.  While o n l y 5 p e r c e n t o f male t r i p s  were t o b o u t i q u e s t o r e s the c o r r e s p o n d i n g f i g u r e  (9.62 p e r cent)  almost double f o r female t r i p s , and the d i f f e r e n c e was i n the case o f h i g h - p r i c e s p e c i a l t y s t o r e p a t r o n a g e . department  s t o r e s h o p p i n g was  t h a n f o r women (56 p e r c e n t ) .  almost as g r e a t On the o t h e r hand,  some 9 p e r c e n t h i g h e r f o r men These male-female  was  (65 p e r cent)  d i f f e r e n c e s were  c i e n t t o produce a h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t c h i - s q u a r e v a l u e showing  suffi-  t h a t the  TABLE 5.33 DISTRIBUTION OF SHOPPING TRIPS BY SEX AND STORE TYPE  HIGH PRICE ^ o ^ r m , , SPECIALTY  MEDIUM PRICE „„„„„„,.„,„ SPECIALTY  BOUTIQUE  DEPARTMENT  BUDGET  TOTAL  Male  27 ( 4%)  94  (15%)  31 ( 5%)  401  (65%)  66 (11%)  619  Female  53 ( 7%)  116  (16%)  68 (10%)  394 (56%)  76 (11%)  707  TOTAL  80 ( 6%)  210 (16%)  99 ( 7%)  795  (60%)  142  (11%)  C h i Square = 19.6 Degrees o f Freedom = 4 S i g n i f i c a n t a t .001 l e v e l  TABLE 5.34 DISTRIBUTION OF SHOPPING TRIPS BY SEX AND SHOPPING CENTRE  DOWNTOWN  SECONDARY CENTRE  Male  326  (55%)  220  (37%)  52  Female  373 (55%)  213  (31%)  98 (14%)  TOTAL  699  433 (34%)  (55%)  C h i Square = 11.66 Degrees o f Freedom = 2  TERTIARY CENTRE  150  ( 9%)  (12%)  „™,» TOTAL T  598 684  1282  1326  193.  v a r i a t i o n s i n s t o r e patronage were g r e a t e r than c o u l d be a s c r i b e d t o change a l o n e . I n t h e case o f shopping  centre patronage,  a virtually  identical  p r o p o r t i o n o f male and female t r i p s were t o downtown l o c a t i o n s (Table 5.34).  Secondary c e n t r e d e s t i n a t i o n s accounted  percentage  f o r a somewhat h i g h e r  o f male t r i p s , whereas a g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n o f female  were t o t e r t i a r y c e n t r e s .  Indeed, n e a r l y t w o - t h i r d s o f t r i p s t o t e r t i a r y  c e n t r e s were made by females,  although  i t must be n o t e d t h a t t h i s  t i o n i s somewhat i n f l a t e d by t h e l a r g e r t o t a l number o f female This r e s u l t probably  trips  r e f l e c t s the greater i n c l i n a t i o n  frac-  trips.  among women t o  p a t r o n i z e s p e c i a l t y s t o r e s which p r e v i o u s f i g u r e s have shown t o be a s s o c i a t e d with t r i p s to t e r t i a r y centres square  (see T a b l e 5.2).  The c h i -  v a l u e i s a g a i n s i g n i f i c a n t showing t h a t t h e male-female  ences i n shopping  differ-  c e n t r e p a t r o n a g e exceeded chance v a r i a t i o n s .  I n a d d i t i o n t o these contingency  t e s t s , u n i v a r i a t e analyses o f  v a r i a n c e were p e r f o r m e d t o e s t a b l i s h how male and female  respondents  d i f f e r e d i n t h e i r s c o r e s on t h e f i v e d i s p o s i t i o n a l s c a l e s . o b t a i n e d a r e shown i n T a b l e 5.35 which l i s t s  The r e s u l t s  f o r each s c a l e :  group  means, F r a t i o s and F p r o b a b i l i t i e s . TABLE 5.35 MALE-FEMALE  GROUP MEANS ON DISPOSITIONAL SCALES AND F STATISTICS  MALE  FEMALE  F RATIO  F PROB.  33 .1  35 .4  12. 06  .0007  35 .9  32 .8  18. 81  .0000  FASHION  33 .9  36 .4  9. 85  .0020  PRICE  33 .4  33 .0  0. 63  .4323  QUALITY  42 .2  43 .7  6. 39  .0115  STATUS CONVENIENCE  .  194.  Male-female d i f f e r e n c e s were s i g n i f i c a n t beyond t h e .05 l e v e l f o r four o f the f i v e scales. corresponds  In general, the d i r e c t i o n o f the differences  with i n t u i t i v e expectations.  Between group v a r i a t i o n s were  most s i g n i f i c a n t w i t h r e s p e c t t o convenience  orientation.  Not s u r p r i s i n g l y  s c o r e s were h i g h e r f o r t h e male group s u g g e s t i n g a s t r o n g e r d e s i r e on the p a r t o f men t o complete t h e shopping t a s k as e x p e d i e n t l y as p o s s i b l e . It  f o l l o w s t h a t women were more l i k e l y  t o r e g a r d s h o p p i n g as a l e i s u r e  a c t i v i t y and hence be w i l l i n g t o expend time and e f f o r t i n shopping around p r i o r t o making a p u r c h a s e .  Scores  on t h e status  s c a l e were  s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r f o r women, a g a i n , i n l i g h t o f p r e v i o u s  results,  r e f l e c t i n g t h e i r g r e a t e r i n c l i n a t i o n toward s p e c i a l t y s t o r e shopping. S i m i l a r l y , t h e demonstrated p r e f e r e n c e o f women f o r b o u t i q u e  stores i s  r e f l e c t e d i n t h e s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r s c o r e s f o r t h e female group on the fashion quality men  scale.  Finally,  s c a l e suggests  the h i g h e r mean s c o r e f o r women on t h e  t h a t they tended t o p l a c e g r e a t e r emphasis  than  on c o n s i d e r a t i o n s o f q u a l i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y when c h o o s i n g where t o  shop.  F.  CONCLUSION The  ral  r e s u l t s o f the a n a l y s e s p r e s e n t e d  i n t h i s chapter  c o n c l u s i o n s about t h e shopping b e h a v i o u r  l e a d t o seve-  o f t h e sample group.  In  the f i r s t p l a c e i s was shown t h a t a d e c i s i o n t o p a t r o n i z e a p a r t i c u l a r type o f s t o r e o r shopping c e n t r e was r e l a t e d t o o t h e r a s p e c t s shopping t r i p ;  i n p a r t i c u l a r , the o r i g i n o f the t r i p ,  and t h e main purpose o f t h e t r i p .  o f the  t h e mode o f t r a v e l ,  I n a d d i t i o n , a r e l a t i o n s h i p between  the p a t t e r n o f p a s t p u r c h a s e s and r e t a i l p a t r o n a g e was demonstrated.  195.  The  r o l e o f such v a r i a b l e s  i n the  however e s s e n t i a l l y d e s c r i p t i v e In s e e k i n g t o e x p l a i n  analysis  o f shopping b e h a v i o u r i s  r a t h e r than e x p l a n a t o r y .  variation  i n the  shopping b e h a v i o u r o f  sample group, t h r e e approaches were compared. a l and  biographical,  variables  Two  o f t h e s e , the  to those i n c l u d e d here.  The  The  t h i r d , the  ability  o f the  dispositional  criterion.  In the  b l e s comprised the  accurate predictions general, the by  the  shoppers.  The  largest  f i v e groups. i models was  n  limited  group c o m p r i s i n g department  within-group v a r i a t i o n s  varia-  three m o d e l s , . y i e l d i n g moderately  power o f the p r e d i c t i v e  h e t e r o g e n e i t y o f the  accurately  dispositional  o f membership i n t h r e e o f the  discriminatory  approach,  found t o v a r y dependent upon  case o f s t o r e p a t r o n a g e , the  most e f f e c t i v e o f the  similar  previous  d i f f e r e n t models to d i s t i n g u i s h  between the p r e d e f i n e d p a t r o n a g e groups was the  location-  have been employed i n p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s u s i n g  i s e s s e n t i a l l y the p r o d u c t o f t h i s study as d e s c r i b e d i n the chapters.  the  store  i n t h i s case were demonstrated  i n a separate a n a l y s i s .  With r e s p e c t t o s h o p p i n g c e n t r e p a t r o n a g e ,  the  the  l o c a t i o n a l model was  p a t r o n s o f the  three classes  p l a c e d upon measures o f the  most e f f e c t i v e i n d i s c r i m i n a t i n g o f c e n t r e , s u p p o r t i n g the consumers' l o c a t i o n  importance  r e l a t i v e to  o f v a r y i n g s i z e i n e x i s t i n g models o f s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r . regression analysis  also  s i g n i f i c a n t contribution v e l l e d to  showed l o c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s t o the  facilities  Results of  as making the  explanation of variance i n distance  a  most tra-  shop.  S e p a r a t e c o n s i d e r a t i o n was s h o p p i n g b e h a v i o u r and area of i n q u i r y the  between  dispositions  hitherto.  r e t a i l c h o i c e s and  g i v e n t o male-female d i f f e r e n c e s  which seems to have been a n e g l e c t e d  Significant differences  dispositional  in  emerged i n b o t h  characteristics  o f the  two  the  sexes.  CHAPTER 6  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS  Summary  A major o b j e c t i v e o f t h i s study has been t o compare t h r e e to  t h e a n a l y s i s o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r .  approaches  These approaches  were  based upon measures o f the l o c a t i o n a l , b i o g r a p h i c a l and d i s p o s i t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e consumer.  The e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e p r o v i d e s many  examples o f the a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e f i r s t  two approaches  and t h e emphasis  i n much o f t h i s study has t h e r e f o r e been p l a c e d upon t h e development o f a d i s p o s i t i o n a l model o f consumer s p a t i a l The  behaviour.  review o f consumer b e h a v i o u r models i n Chapter 1  the importance  demonstrated  o f an i n d i v i d u a l ' s a t t i t u d e s and v a l u e s as m e d i a t i n g  varia-  b l e s i n the s e q u e n t i a l d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s l e a d i n g t o p u r c h a s i n g behaviour.  F o l l o w i n g from t h a t review, a model o f consumer s p a t i a l  b e h a v i o u r was proposed wherein  a decision to patronize a specific  store  on shopping c e n t r e was seen t o r e l a t e back t o t h e consumer's d i s p o s i t i o n s . These were d e f i n e d as p s y c h o l o g i c a l dimensions, u n d e r l y i n g s p e c i f i c  atti-  tudes and b e h a v i o u r , used by t h e i n d i v i d u a l t o d e s c r i b e , comprehend and evaluate a s e t o f environmental In  objects.  the f o l l o w i n g two c h a p t e r s , t h e methodology employed t o i d e n t i f y  and measure consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s w i t h r e s p e c t t o c l o t h i n g p u r c h a s e s was described.  F i v e major d i s p o s i t i o n s , were i d e n t i f i e d on t h e b a s i s o f  i n t e r v i e w r e s p o n s e s and a f a c t o r a n a l y s i s o f q u e s t i o n n a i r e d a t a .  - 196 -  These  197.  status-orientation,  were l a b e l l e d :  orientation,  convenience-orientation,  price-orientation,  and  quality  orientation.  fashionThe  measure-  ment o f consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s r e q u i r e d the development o f a p s y c h o l o g i c a l s c a l i n g instrument.  F o l l o w i n g the l e a d o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l p s y c h o l o g i s t s ,  the L i k e r t s c a l i n g t e c h n i q u e device. ted  was  s e l e c t e d as an a p p r o p r i a t e  A p r e l i m i n a r y s e t o f s c a l e s was  to assess  t h e i r r e l i a b i l i t y and  shed p s y c h o m e t r i c methods.  On  validity  a p r e t e s t conduc-  i n accordance w i t h  set of scales.  major d a t a c o l l e c t i o n phase comprised a q u e s t i o n n a i r e  of a s t r a t i f i e d Vancouver and  establi-  the b a s i s o f the r e s u l t s minor m o d i f i c a -  t i o n s were made t o produce the f i n a l The  d e v e l o p e d and  measuring  survey  random sample o f households drawn from the C i t y  of  the a d j a c e n t m u n i c i p a l i t i e s o f N o r t h and West Vancouver.  The  q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were a d m i n i s t e r e d  351  completed r e t u r n s were o b t a i n e d .  by t r a i n e d s t u d e n t The  data provided  interviewers information  and on  the respondent's d i s p o s i t i o n s , s h o p p i n g b e h a v i o u r and b i o g r a p h i c a l characteristics. was  Location r e l a t i v e to r e t a i l  f a c i l i t i e s of varying  d e t e r m i n e d from the address o f each respondent. V a r i o u s t y p e s o f a n a l y s i s were p e r f o r m e d u s i n g the  data but  the major emphasis was  analyses.  questionnaire  p l a c e d upon a s e r i e s o f d i s c r i m i n a n t  Respondents were grouped based on the type o f s t o r e and  o f shopping c e n t r e p a t r o n i z e d on each o f f o u r shopping t r i p s The  size  ability  o f l o c a t i o n a l , b i o g r a p h i c a l and  d i s c r i m i n a t e between these case o f  type  for clothing.  d i s p o s i t i o n a l measures t o  r e t a i l p a t r o n a g e groups was  compared.  In  the  store patronage, t h e r e s u l t s showed t h a t the: most s i g n i f i c a n t  between group d i f f e r e n c e s and membership were a c h i e v e d  the most a c c u r a t e p r e d i c t i o n s o f group  u s i n g the d i s p o s i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s .  The  status,  198.  fashion tors.  and quality The  s c a l e s emerged as p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e d i s c r i m i n a -  r e s u l t s from combining the t h r e e d i f f e r e n t s e t s o f p r e d i c t o r s  c o n f i r m e d the s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the d i s p o s i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s and  the  impro-  vement i n p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c y a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e i r i n c l u s i o n . The  r e s u l t s o f the  marked c o n t r a s t .  The  analyses  o f shopping  type o f c e n t r e  centre  s e l e c t e d by  patronage  were i n  the respondents  was  c l e a r l y b e s t p r e d i c t e d by measures o f t h e i r l o c a t i o n r e l a t i v e t o t i e s of varying  size.  In g e n e r a l ,  t i o n o f the importance p l a c e d models o f shopping b e h a v i o u r . v a l i d i t y of regarding tiveness, while,  the  r e s u l t s provided  upon l o c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s i n e x i s t i n g More s p e c i f i c a l l y ,  s i z e of centre  larger centres.  The  e i t h e r type e n t e r e d  measure o f a t t r a c -  explanation  the  equations. travelled  I n t h i s c a s e , i t was  i n e v i t a b l e t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s would emerge between l o c a t i o n r e l a t i v e to r e t a i l  facilities,  since, of  consumers l o c a t e d f u r t h e r from major r e t a i l o p p o r t u n i t i e s f u r t h e r t o shop.  More s u r p r i s i n g however, was  to  almost distance necessity,  have t o t r a v e l  the n e g l i g i b l e c o n t r i b u -  t i o n made t o the r e g r e s s i o n  e q u a t i o n s by  sitional variables.  s u g g e s t e d t h a t the r e l a t i v e l y  I t was  of  strong influence of l o c a t i o n a l  v a r i a b l e s i n consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r .  t r a v e l l e d and  vari-  inaccurate  s m a l l number o f v a r i a b l e s  i n t o the d i s c r i m i n a n t  f u r t h e r e v i d e n c e o f the  of c r i t e r i o n  the r e l a t i v e l y  r e s u l t s o f the r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s on distance  shop p r o v i d e d  the  c o n t r i b u t i o n o f the d i s p o s i -  comparison as e v i d e n c e d by  p r e d i c t i o n s o f group membership and  The  they c o n f i r m e d  as a s u r r o g a t e  t i o n a l and b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s t o the s m a l l by  confirma-  d e m o n s t r a t i n g the w i l l i n g n e s s o f consumers t o t r a v e l  further to patronise  ance was  strong  facili-  e i t h e r b i o g r a p h i c a l or  dispo-  confined  199.  sampling a r e a may have been a c o n t r i b u t o r y significance of non-locational  Consumer D i s p o s i t i o n s  f a c t o r i n s u p p r e s s i n g the  variables.  and S p a t i a l  Behaviour  The r e s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s e s p r o v i d e p a r t i a l s u p p o r t f o r t h e d i s p o s i t i o n a l model o f consumer s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r p r e s e n t e d i n C h a p t e r 1, V e r i f i c a t i o n o f the model was dependent upon d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h a t mers d i f f e r i n g s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n t h e i r d i s p o s i t i o n s t i a l behaviour.  This  consu-  e x h i b i t d i f f e r e n t spa-  r e l a t i o n s h i p was v e r y c l e a r l y shown t o h o l d  case o f s t o r e p a t r o n a g e .  Highly s i g n i f i c a n t differences  i n the  were found i n the  d i s p o s i t i o n a l p r o f i l e s o f consumers s e l e c t i n g d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f c l o t h i n g store. and  P r o f i l e differences  quality scales.  were most pronounced on the s t a t u s ,  fashion  The r e l a t i o n s h i p between consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s  and  s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r was n o t c l e a r l y demonstrated i n the case o f shopping centre patronage.  The d i s p o s i t i o n a l p r o f i l e s o f downtown, secondary  and . t e r t i a r y c e n t r e shoppers were, i n many c a s e s , n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t , and t h e p r e d i c t i o n  o f group membership was  correspondingly  poor. The r e s u l t s s u g g e s t t h a t tions  the r e l a t i o n s h i p between consumer d i s p o s i -  and r e t a i l patronage may be s c a l e dependent.  A t the macro  scale,  where the consumer i s c h o o s i n g between d i f f e r e n t shopping c e n t r e s the influence  of dispositional variables  o f t h e consumer r e l a t i v e t o r e t a i l p r i m a r y importance. stores, and  i s n o t pronounced.  The l o c a t i o n  f a c i l i t i e s of varying  s i z e assumes  A t the m i c r o s c a l e , when c h o o s i n g between d i f f e r e n t  t h e consumer's d i s p o s i t i o n s assume f a r g r e a t e r  i n f a c t emerge as the most a c c u r a t e p r e d i c t o r s  significance  of retail  patronage.  200.  The  varying  significance of d i f f e r e n t variables  s u g g e s t s t h a t a p a t r o n a g e d e c i s i o n may s e a r c h and  evaluation  i n v o l v i n g the  process:  i s o l a t i o n o f one  areas p r i m a r i l y  on  the b a s i s  the  store.  stage scale  o r more f e a s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e  shopping the  second  s e l e c t i o n of a store within  evaluation  of alternatives  and  one  being the  choice  C l e a r l y , an e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h i s p r o c e s s and  r e l a t i o n s h i p between s t o r e  ant  area f o r future  In an  s t a g e , a t a macro  of l o c a t i o n a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s ;  the  Implications  scales  r e s u l t o f a two  shopping areas w i t h d i s p o s i t i o n a l f a c t o r s  fundamental i n d i r e c t i n g the of a p r e f e r r e d  the  first  s t a g e , a t a micro s c a l e i n v o l v i n g the o f the p r e s e l e c t e d  be  at d i f f e r e n t  and  shopping c e n t r e c h o i c e s i s an  of  import-  research.  f o r Market R e s e a r c h  applied  c o n t e x t , the  f o r market r e s e a r c h .  r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y have  In c h a p t e r 1  (p. 43),  i t was  v i o u s attempts t o p r e d i c t consumer b e h a v i o u r on  implications  suggested t h a t  the b a s i s  of  pre-  consumer  v a l u e s have been u n p r o d u c t i v e because o f a n a i v e a p p l i c a t i o n o f  stand-  ard p e r s o n a l i t y  through  the  tests.  A more f r u i t f u l approach was  seen t o be  development o f t e s t i n s t r u m e n t s s p e c i f i c a l l y d e s i g n e d f o r consumer  research. scales  This  approach was  f o l l o w e d i n t h i s study i n d e v e l o p i n g  t o measure consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s .  the u s e f u l n e s s o f t h e s e v a r i a b l e s The  The  q u e s t i o n then a r i s e s  five of  i n market r e s e a r c h .  r e s u l t s r a i s e some doubt as t o the u t i l i t y o f d i s p o s i t i o n a l  measures f o r d e f i n i n g criminate accurately with respect  r e t a i l segments. between the  t o the p r e d i c t i o n  The  five scales  f a i l e d to d i s -  s h o p p i n g c e n t r e p a t r o n a g e groups,  and,  o f s t o r e p a t r o n a g e , t h e i r performance  was  201.  only  s l i g h t l y s u p e r i o r t o that achieved  When c o n s i d e r a t i o n  i s given  using biographical variables.  t o the r e l a t i v e l y complex t a s k o f d e v e l o p -  i n g r e l i a b l e and v a l i d d i s p o s i t i o n a l measures, t h e a p p e a l o f t h e more e a s i l y obtainable  l o c a t i o n a l and b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s i s a c c e n t u a t e d .  I t i s not s u r p r i s i n g therefore  t h a t market r e s e a r c h e r s ,  f a c e d w i t h the  need t o employ t h e most e x p e d i e n t method f o r d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between consumer groups, have commonly r e l i e d upon l o c a t i o n a l and b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s i n developing  trade  a r e a and market-segmentation models.  G i v e n these s t r o n g r e s e r v a t i o n s ,  t h e f a c t remains t h a t d i s p o s i t i o n a l  measures c o n s t i t u t e a p o t e n t i a l l y r i c h s o u r c e o f i n f o r m a t i o n retailer.  They a r e d i s t i n c t  i n providing information  from l o c a t i o n a l and b i o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a b l e s  which has d i r e c t a p p l i c a t i o n i n t h e f o r m u l a -  t i o n o f a p r e c i s e marketing s t r a t e g y .  The c r u c i a l i s s u e i s whether  the b e n e f i t g a i n e d from t h i s type o f i n f o r m a t i o n high costs o f data a c q u i s i t i o n .  placed  s u g g e s t s t h a t i n many cases  accepted.  L i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e P r e s e n t Study and P r o p o s a l s  I t i s important t o recognize i n seeking  more than o f f s e t s t h e  The i n c r e a s i n g emphasis b e i n g  upon " p s y c h o g r a p h i c s " i n m a r k e t i n g r e s e a r c h the c o s t s a r e b e i n g  f o r the  f o r Future Research  the l i m i t a t i o n s o f the present  t o g e n e r a l i s e on t h e b a s i s o f the r e s u l t s .  One p o s s i b l e  l i m i t a t i o n a r i s e s from t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f the c r i t e r i o n i n t h e main a n a l y s e s .  variables  The need t o a c h i e v e adequate group s i z e s  t h a t t h e a n a l y s i s be based upon c l a s s e s o f s t o r e and shopping r a t h e r than i n d i v i d u a l s t o r e s and c e n t r e s .  study  required  centre  I t follows that the v a l i d i t y  o f t h e r e s u l t s depends upon t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n  schemes  202.  employed. ain.  How  f a r t h i s represents a serious  l i m i t i n g factor i s uncert-  I t would c e r t a i n l y seem n e c e s s a r y i n subsequent s t u d i e s  aggregate the  a n a l y s i s and  of s p e c i f i c stores  and  to d i s -  examine group c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a t the  level  c e n t r e s i n more d e t a i l then the p r e s e n t d a t a  permitted. I n t h i s study, the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between consumer c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and  s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r were examined w i t h r e s p e c t  chase, namely c l o t h i n g . g e n e r a l i t y o f the t h a t the  Further research  findings with respect  type o f p u r -  i s needed t o e s t a b l i s h  t o o t h e r goods.  adopted w i t h the  A s y s t e m a t i c approach t o s c a l e  s p e c i f i c aim  function  i n consumer r e s e a r c h  existing psychological  the  analogous t o the  inventories  r o l e performed  in personality  be  set of s p a t i a l a l t e r n a t i v e s .  made t o e x p l i c a t e t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p by  d i n a l measures, hence p e r m i t t i n g o f the As  an  the a  by  research. investigation  r e l a t i o n s h i p between consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s and  t u d e s toward the  In t h i s  designed to f u l f i l l  Another i m p o r t a n t a r e a f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h on  instru-  c o u l d be p r o f i t a b l y d i r e c t e d toward  development o f a consumer response i n v e n t o r y  in  construc-  of developing a research  ment which might have a p p l i c a b i l i t y beyond a s i n g l e s t u d y . r e g a r d , subsequent r e s e a r c h  the  I t i s hoped  f i v e d i s p o s i t i o n s i d e n t i f i e d here w i l l prove a p p l i c a b l e  other purchasing s i t u a t i o n s . t i o n was  t o one  centres  specific atti-  A subsequent attempt s h o u l d  obtaining  appropriate  examination of the mediating  attitufunction  a t t i t u d i n a l component. defined  i n t h i s s t u d y , consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s r e p r e s e n t m i d d l e  level psychological a t t i t u d e s and  on  v a r i a b l e s w h i c h a r e on  the one  hand more g l o b a l  the o t h e r l e s s p e r v a s i v e than p e r s o n a l i t y  traits.  then As  203.  i n d i c a t e d , one a r e a f o r f u t u r e  research  i s t o e x p l o r e the l i n k s between  d i s p o s i t i o n s and b e h a v i o u r i n t h e form o f a t t i t u d e s .  Another  equally  i n t e r e s t i n g avenue o f e n q u i r y would be t o move i n the o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n and  trace  traits.  the c o n n e c t i o n s between consumer d i s p o s i t i o n s and p e r s o n a l i t y  BIBLIOGRAPHY  A d l e r , L. and I . C r e s p i (Eds.) (1966) Attitude American M a r k e t i n g A s s o c i a t i o n .  Research  at Sea.  A d l e r , L. and I . C r e s p i (Eds.) (1968) Attitude American M a r k e t i n g A s s o c i a t i o n .  Research  on the Rocks.  Armstrong, J . (1967) " D e r i v a t i o n o f Theory by Means o f F a c t o r A n a l y s i s o r Tom S w i f t and H i s E l e c t r i c F a c t o r A n a l y s i s Machine", The American Statistician, v o l . 25, no. 5, pp. 17-21. Bannister,  D. and J . M a i r (1968) The Evaluation Academic P r e s s .  of Personal  Constructs.  Baumol, W. and E . Ide (1956) " V a r i e t y i n R e t a i l i n g " , Management v o l . 3, no. 1, pp. 93-101. B e c k e r , W. (1967) Retail Store Image: A Conceptual Approach. T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia. Bern, D. (1970)  Berry,  Beliefs, Cole.  Attitudes  and Human Affairs.  Science,  M.B.A.  Belmont:  Brooks/  B. (1963) Commercial Structure and Commercial Blight. Unive r s i t y o f C h i c a g o , Department o f Geography R e s e a r c h Paper No. 85.  B e r r y , B. (1967) Geography of Market Centres and Retail Englewood C l i f f s : Prentice Hall.  Distribution.  Berry,  B. and W. G a r r i s o n (1958) "Recent Development o f C e n t r a l P l a c e Theory", Papers and Proceedings of the Regional Science Association, 4, pp. 107-20.  Berry,  L. (1968) The Components of Department Store Thesis, Arizona State U n i v e r s i t y .  B l a l o c k , H. (1960)  Social  Statistics.  New York:  Image,  McGraw  D.B.A.  Hill.  B r i g g s , R. (1973) "Urban C o g n i t i v e D i s t a n c e " , i n Downs, R. and D. S t e a (Eds.) Image and Environment. Chicago: A l d i n e , pp. 361-88. Brbdy, R. and S. Cunningham (1968) " P e r s o n a l i t y V a r i a b l e s and t h e Consumer D e c i s i o n P r o c e s s " , Journal of Marketing Research, v o l . 5, pp. 50-57.  - 204 -  Brown, F. and G. F i s k (1965) "Department S t o r e s and D i s c o u n t Houses: Who D i e s Next?", Journal of Retailing, v o l . 41. Brown, s.  (1974) An Investigation Spatial Behaviour. of A l b e r t a .  of the Determinants of Doctoral Dissertation,  Consumer University  Brush, J . and H. G a u t h i e r (1968) Service Centres and Consumer Trips. Research Paper #13, Department o f Geography, U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago. B u c k l i n , L.  (1967) Shopping Patterns in an Urban Area, i n s t i t u t e of B u s i n e s s and Economic Research, U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley.  B u c k l i n , L. (1967a) "The Concept o f Mass i n I n t r a - U r b a n Shopping", Journal of Marketing, v o l . 31, pp. 37-42. Bush, R. and F. M o s t e l l e r (1955) New York: W i l e y .  Stochastic  Models  for  Learning.  Carman, J . (1965) The Application of Social Class in Market Segmentation. I n s t i t u t e f o r B u s i n e s s and Economic R e s e a r c h , University of C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley. C h r i s t a l l e r , W.  C l a r k , W.  (1966) The Central Places of Southern Germany ( t r a n s . by C. B a s k i n ) . Englewood C l i f f s : Prentice Hall.  and G. Rushton (1970) "Models o f I n t r a - U r b a n Consumer B e h a v i o u r and T h e i r I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r C e n t r a l P l a c e T h e o r y " , Economic Geography , 46, pp. 486-97.  C l a u s , J . and W. Hardwick (1972) The Mobile C o l l i e r Macmillan.  Consumer.  Don  Mills:  Cohen, J . , F i s h b e i n , M and A h t o l a , 0. (1972) "The Nature and Use o f E x p e c t a n c y - V a l u e Models i n Consumer A t t i t u d e R e s e a r c h " , Journal of Marketing Research, v o l . i x , pp. 456-60. Converse, P.  (1948) Consumer Buying Habits in Selected South Central I l l i n o i s Communities. B u s i n e s s S t u d i e s , No. 6, Urbana: University of I l l i n o i s .  C o o l e y , W.  and P. Lohnes (1971) York: Wiley.  Coembs, C.  (1950) " P s y c h o l o g i c a l S c a l i n g Without a U n i t o f Measurement", Psychological Review; v o l . 57, pp. 148-58.  C r a i k , K.  Multivariate  Data Analysis.  New  (1969) " A s s e s s i n g E n v i r o n m e n t a l D i s p o s i t i o n s " , Paper p r e s e n t e d at the A n n u a l M e e t i n g o f t h e American P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , Washington.  Craik, K. (1970) "The Environmental Dispositions of Environmental Decision-Makers", Annals of the Ameviean Academy of P o l i t i c a l and Social Science, 389, pp. 87-94. Cronbach, L. and P. Meehl (1955) "Construct V a l i d i t y i n Psychological Tests", Psychological B u l l e t i n , 52, pp. 281-302. Cyert, R. and J . March (1963) A Behavioral Theory Englewood C l i f f s : Prentice H a l l .  of the Firm.  Dalrymple, D. and D. Thompson (1969) R e t a i l i n g , An Economic New York: Free Press. Day, G. (1972)  View.  "Evaluating Models of Attitude Structure", Journal Marketing Research, v o l . 9, pp. 279-86.  of  Doddridge, P. (1972) "Dimensions of Alternatives i n S p a t i a l Choice Behavior", Proceedings of International Geographical Union, pp. 538-41. Dornoff, D. and D. Tatham (1972) "Congruence Between Personal Image and Store image", Journal of the Market Research Society, v o l . 14, no. 1. Downs, R.  (1970) " C o g n i t i v e Structure of an Urban Shopping Centre", Environment and Behavior-, v o l . 2, no. 1, pp. 13-39.  Downs, R.  (1970a) "Geographic Space Perception", i n Board, C., et al. (Eds.) Progress in Geography, 2, London: Edward Arnold, pp. 65-108.  Downs, R. and D. Stea (Eds.) (1973) Image and Environment: Cognitive Mapping and Spatial Behavior. Chicago: Aldine. Edwards, A. (1957) Edwards' Personal Preference Psychological Corporation.  Schedule  Engel, J . K o l l a t , D. and R. Blackwell (1968) Consumer New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.  Manual.  Behavior.  Evans, F. (1959) "Psychological and Objective Factors i n the P r e d i c t i o n of Brand Choice", Journal of Business, v o l . 32, pp. 340-69. Evans, F. (1968) "Ford versus Chevrolet: Park. Forest Revisited", Journal of Business, v o l . 41, pp. 445-59. Farley, J . and L. Ring (1970) "An Empirical Test of the Howard-Sheth Model of Buyer Behavior", Journal of Marketing Research, v o l . 7, pp. 427-438.  F i s h b e i n , M. (1963) "An I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e • R e l a t i o n s h i p s Between B e l i e f s about an O b j e c t and t h e A t t i t u d e Toward t h a t O b j e c t " , Human Relations, v o l 16, pp. 233-40. F i s h b e i n , M.  (1965) "A C o n s i d e r a t i o n o f B e l i e f s , A t t i t u d e s and T h e i r R e l a t i o n s h i p " , i n S t e i n e r , I . and M. F i s h b e i n (Eds.) Current Studies in Social Psychology. New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t and Winston, pp. 107-20.  F i s h b e i n , M. (1967) "A C o n s i d e r a t i o n o f B e l i e f s and T h e i r R o l e i n A t t i t u d e Measurement", i n F i s h b e i n , M. (Ed.) Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement. New York: Wiley, pp. 257-66. F i s h b e i n , M. (1967a) "A B e h a v i o r Theory Approach t o t h e R e l a t i o n s Between B e l i e f s About an O b j e c t and t h e A t t i t u d e Toward the O b j e c t " , i n F i s h b e i n , M. (Ed.) Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement. New York: W i l e y , pp. 389-400. F i s h b e i n , M. (1972) "The S e a r c h f o r A t t i t u d i n a l - B e h a v i o r a l C o n s i s t ency", i n Cohen, J . (Ed.) Behavioral Science Foundations of Consumer Behavior. New York: F r e e P r e s s , p p . 24252. F i s h e r , R. (1936) "The Use o f M u l t i p l e Measurements i n Taxonomic Problems", Ann. Eugenics, v o l . 7, pp. 179-99. F i s k , G. (1961) "A C o n c e p t u a l Model f o r S t u d y i n g Customer Image", Journal of Retailing, v o l . 37, no. 4, pp. 1-8. Gayler,  H. (1974) Consumer Spatial Behavior and Its Relation to Social Class and Family Status in Metropolitan Vancouver. D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia.  G o l l e d g e , R. (1967) " C o n c e p t u a l i z i n g t h e Market D e c i s i o n P r o c e s s " , Journal of Regional Science, 7 (no. 2 S u p p l e m e n t a l ) , pp. 239-258. G o l l e d g e , R. (1969) " G e o g r a p h i c a l R e l e v a n c e o f Some L e a r n i n g T h e o r i e s " , i n Cox, K. and R. G o l l e d g e (Eds.) Behavioral Problems in Geography. E v a n s t o n : Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y . G o l l e d g e , R. (1970) "Process Approaches t o t h e A n a l y s i s o f Human S p a t i a l Behavior". Ohio S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , Department o f Geography, D i s c u s s i o n Paper #16. G o l l e d g e , R. and L. Brown (1967) "Search, L e a r n i n g and t h e Market D e c i s i o n P r o c e s s " , Geografiska Annaler, 49B1, p p . 116-24.  208.  G o l l e d g e , R.  and Rushton, G. (1970) "Multidimensional Scaling: Review and G e o g r a p h i c a l A p p l i c a t i o n s " , Paper p r e s e n t e d f o r I.G.U. Commission on Q u a n t i t a t i v e Geography.  Green, P. and F. Carmone Techniques Bacon.  (1970) Multidimensional in Marketing Analysis.  Scaling and Related Boston: A l l y n and  Green, P. and V. Rao (1972) Applied Multidimensional Scaling: A Comparison of Approaches and Algorithms. New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t and Winston. G u i l f o r d , J . (1965) H a i n e s , G.  Haley, R.  (1969) New (Ed.)  Hansen, F.  Psychometric  Methods.  Consumer Behavior: York: Free P r e s s .  Learning  (1972) Attitude Research Marketing A s s o c i a t i o n .  (1972) Consumer Choice  New  Behavior.  York:  McGraw H i l l .  Models  of  in Transition.  New  York:  Purchasing.  American  Free Press.  H a r r i s o n , J . and P. S a r r e (1971) " P e r s o n a l C o n s t r u c t Theory i n the Measurement o f E n v i r o n m e n t a l Images", Environment and Behavior, v o l . 3, no. 4, pp. 351-374. Harvey, D.  Hess, C.  (1969) "Conceptual and Measurement Problems i n t h e C o g n i t i v e - B e h a v i o r a l Approach t o L o c a t i o n Theory", i n Cox, K. and R. G o l l e d g e (Eds.) Behavioral Problems in Geography: A Symposium. Evanston: Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y , pp. 35-68.  (1966)  " G e o g r a p h i c a l A s p e c t s o f Consumer B e h a v i o r i n the R e t a i l S e r v i c e Area o f Greater Alborg", Geografisk Tiddsskrift, v o l . 65, pp. 1-26.  Howard, J . and J . Sheth (1969) York: Wiley.  The  Theory  of Buyer  Behavior.  New  Hudson, R.  (1970) " P e r s o n a l C o n s t r u c t Theory, L e a r n i n g T h e o r i e s and Consumer B e h a v i o r " , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i s t o l , Department o f Geography, Seminar Paper A21.  Hudson, R.  (1971) "Towards a Theory o f Consumer S p a t i a l B e h a v i o r " , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i s t o l , Department o f Geography, Seminar Paper A22.  H u f f , D.  (1962) Determination of Intra-Urban Retail Trade Areas. Los Angeles: R e a l E s t a t e R e s e a r c h Program, U n i v e r s i t y o f California.  H u l l , C. (1962)  A Behavior  H u r s t , M. (1972)  System.  A Geography  New York:  of Economic  Wiley.  Behavior.  Duxbury P r e s s .  J a n i s , I . (1959) "Motivational Factors i n the Resolution o f Decisional C o n f l i c t s " , i n Jones, R. (Ed.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln: Nebraska U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Jonassen, c . (1955) The Shopping Centre versus Downtown: Motivation Research on Shopping Habits and Attitudes in Three Cities. Bureau o f B u s i n e s s Research, Ohio S t a t e Univ. K e l l e y , E. (1956) Shopping Centres: Locating Controlled Regional Centres. Saugatuck, Conn.: The Eno F o u n d a t i o n f o r Highway T r a f f i c C o n t r o l . K e l l y , G.  (1955) The Psychology Norton.  of Personal  Constructs.  New  York:  Kenny-Levick, C. (1969) "Consumer M o t i v a t i o n s : Examples from t h e G r o c e r y Trade", British Journal of Marketing. (Spring) pp. 2-8. K e r l i n g e r , F. (1964) Foundations of Behavioral H o l t , R i n e h a r t and Winston. K i n g , C. and D. T i g e r t Heights.  Research.  New  (Eds.) (1971) Attitude Research Reaches American M a r k e t i n g A s s o c i a t i o n .  York:  New  Koponen, A. (1960) "Personality C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Purchasers", Journal of Advertising Research, v o l . 1, pp. 6-12. K u n k e l , J . and L. B e r r y (1969) "A B e h a v i o r a l C o n c e p t i o n o f R e t a i l Image", Journal of Marketing, v o l . 32, pp. 21-27. L e i g h , R.  (1965) Specialty Vancouver:  Levy, S. (1966)  Retailing: Tantalus.  A Geographic  Analysis.  " S o c i a l C l a s s and Consumer B e h a v i o r " , i n Newman, J . (Ed.) On Knowing the Consumer. New York: W i l e y , pp. 146-60.  Lewin, K. (1936) A Dynamic Hill.  Theory  Lewin, K. (1936a) Principles McGraw H i l l . Lewin, K. (1951)  Field  Theory  of Personality.  of Topological  and Social  New York: McGraw  Psychology.  Science.  New  New York:  York:  Harper.  L i k e r t , R.  (1932) "A Technique f o r t h e Measurement o f A t t i t u d e s " , Archives of Psychology, no. 140, pp. 44-53.  M a r g u l i s , H. (1972) "A Note on Consumer C h o i c e , B e l i e f P e r c e p t i o n and the I n t r a - U r b a n Journey-to-Shop", Proceedings of the International Geographical Union, pp. 566-69. M a r t i n e a u , P. (1958) " S o c i a l C l a s s e s and Spending B e h a v i o r " , of Marketing, v o l . 23, no. 2, pp. 121-30. M a r t i n e a u , P. (1958a) Business Massy, W.  Journal  "The P e r s o n a l i t y o f t h e R e t a i l S t o r e " , Review, v o l . 36, no. 1, pp. 47-55.  Harvard  (1965) " D i s c r i m i n a n t A n a l y s i s o f Audience C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s " , Journal of Advertising Research, v o l . 5, pp. 39-48.  Massy, W.,  F r a n k , R., and T. L o d a h l Personality Attributes. Pennsylvania Press.  (1968) Purchasing Philadelphia:  Behavior and University of  McKehnie, G. (1972) A Study of Environmental Life-Styles. Doctoral D i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley. M u r d i e , R.  (1965) " C u l t u r a l D i f f e r e n c e s i n Consumer T r a v e l " , Geography, v o l . 41, pp. 211-33.  Economic  Murphy, P.  (1970) A Study of the Influence of Attitude As a Behavioral Parameter on the Spatial Choice Patterns of Consumers. D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n , Ohio State U n i v e r s i t y .  Murphy, P. and R. G o l l e d g e (1972) " A t t i t u d e as a V a r i a b l e i n Urban G e o g r a p h i c R e s e a r c h " , Ohio S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , Department o f Geography Seminar Paper. N i c o s i a , F. (1966) Consumer Decision Prentice H a l l . N u n n a l l y , J . (1967)  Psychometric  Processes.  Theory.  Englewood C l i f f s :  New York:  McGraw  Osgood, C., S u c i , G. and Tannenbaum, P. (1957) Measurement Urbana: U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s P r e s s . O v e r a l l , J . and c. K l e t t (1972) Applied York: McGraw H i l l . P a h l , R.  (1965)  P a t t e r s o n , M.  Multivariate  Hill. of  Analysis.  Meaning.  New  "Urbs i n Rure: The M e t r o p o l i t a n F r i n g e i n H e r t f o r d s h i r e " , London S c h o o l o f Economics G e o g r a p h i c a l Papers no. 2.  (forthcoming) Factorial Ecology of Metropolitan M.A. T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia.  Vancouver.  211.  R e i l l y , W.  R i c h , S.  (1931) The Law o f Texas.  (1963)  R i c h , S. and  Rogers, C.  of Retail  Gravitation.  Austin:  Shopping Behavior of Department Store Boston: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press.  University  Customers.  S. J a i n (1968) " S o c i a l C l a s s and L i f e - C y c l e as P r e d i c t o r s o f Shopping B e h a v i o r " , Journal of Marketing Research, v o l . 5, pp. 41-49.  (1965)  Client-Centred  Therapy.  Attitudes Inc.  and  Boston: Values.  Houghton M i f f l i n .  Rokeach, M.  (1968) Beliefs, Jossey-Bass  San F r a n c i s c o :  Rokeach, M.  (1969) "The R o l e o f V a l u e s Public Opinion Quarterly,  Romney, A.,  N e r l o v e , S. and S h e p a r t R. (1972) Multidimensional Scaling: Theory and Applications in the Behavioral Sciences. (2 v o l s . ) New York: Seminar P r e s s .  i n P u b l i c O p i n i o n Research", v o l . 32,pp. 547-59.  Rosenberg, M.  (1956) " C o g n i t i v e S t r u c t u r e and A t t i t u d i n a l A f f e c t " , Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, v o l . 53, pp. 367-72.  Rosenberg, M.  (1960) Public  Rosenberg, M.  (1965) " I n c o n s i s t e n c y A r o u s a l and R e d u c t i o n i n A t t i t u d e Change", i n S t a i n e r , I . and M. F i s h b e i n (Eds.) Current Studies in Social Psychology. New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t and W i n s t o n , pp. 121-34.  "A S t r u c t u r a l Theory o f A t t i t u d e Dynamics", Opinion Quarterly, v o l . 24, JJ>. 319-40.  Rushton, G.  (1969) "Temporal Changes i n Space P r e f e r e n c e S t r u c t u r e s " , Proceedings of the Association of American Geographers, 2, pp. 129-132.  Rushton, G.  (1970) " P r e f e r e n c e and C h o i c e i n D i f f e r e n t Environments", Proceedings of the Association of American Geographers , 3, pp. 146-50.  Rushton, G.  (1971) " P o s t u l a t e s o f C e n t r a l P l a c e Theory and the P r o p e r t i e s o f C e n t r a l P l a c e Systems", Geographical Analysis, 8, pp. 140-56.  Sampson, P.  (1972) "Using t h e R e p e r t o r y G r i d T e s t " , Journal Research, v o l . 9, pp. 78-81.  Sheth,  J.  (1967) "A Review o f Buyer B e h a v i o r " , Management v o l . 13, no. 12, B-718-B-786.  of  Marketing  Science,  212.  Spence, K. (1951) " T h e o r e t i c a l I n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f Learning", i n Stevens, S. (Ed.) Handbook of Experimental Psychology. New York: Wiley. Stephenson, P. (1969) Journal  " I d e n t i f y i n g t h e D e t e r m i n a n t s o f R e t a i l Image", of Marketing, v o l . 33, no. 3, pp. 57-61.  Stone, G. (1954) " C i t y Shoppers and Urban I d e n t i f i c a t i o n " , Journal of Sociology, v o l . 59, pp. 36-45. Thomas, K. (Ed.) (1972) Attitudes Penguin Books.  and Behavior.  American  Harmondsworth:  Thompson, D. (1966) "Future D i r e c t i o n s i n R e t a i l A r e a Research", Economic Geography, v o l . 42, no. 1, pp. 1-18. T i t t l e , C. and R. H i l l (1967) " A t t i t u d e Measurement and P r e d i c t i o n o f Behavior: An E v a l u a t i o n o f C o n d i t i o n s and Measurement T e c h n i q u e s " , So dome try, v o l . 30, pp. 199-213. Tolman, E. (1932) Purposive Behavior in Animals Appleton-Century-Crofts.  and Man.  Tolman, E . (1952) "A C o g n i t i o n - M o t i v a t i o n Model", Review, v o l . 59. Warner, L. Meeker, M. and K. E e l l s (1949) Social Chicago: S o c i a l Research Inc. W e l l s , W.  New York:  Psychological  Class  in  America.  (1966) " G e n e r a l P e r s o n a l i t y T e s t s and Consumer B e h a v i o r " , i n Newman, J . (Ed.) On Knowing the Consumer. New York: Wiley.  White, I . (1966) "The P e r c e p t i o n o f V a l u e i n P r o d u c t s " , i n Newman, J . (Ed.) On Knowing the Consumer. New York: W i l e y , pp. 90-106. W i l k i e , W. and E. P e s s e m e i r (1973) " I s s u e s i n M a r k e t i n g ' s Use o f M u l t i - A t t r i b u t e A t t i t u d e Models", Journal of Marketing Research, v o l . x, pp. 428-41. W i n k e l , G. (1971) "Theory and Method i n B e h a v i o r a l Geography", Paper p r e s e n t e d a t Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f Geographers Annual Meeting. Waterloo, O n t a r i o . Zaltman, G., P a i s o n , C , and R. Angelmar (1973) Metatheory and Consumer Research. New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t and Winston.  APPENDIX A: CONSUMER SHOPPING SURVEY  CONSUMER SHOPPING SURVEY  INTERVIEW NO. . . INTERVIEWER . . . DATE OP INTERVIEW  SECTION 1. DISPOSITIONS  The following 60 statements are designed to find out the basis on which you choose the stores where you buy your major items of clothing (value over $10.00). Read each statement and indicate how i t corresponds to your personal opinion using the response categories provided. SD - Strongly Disagree D - Disagree N - Neutral or Don't Know A - Agree SA - Strongly Agree Record your answers by c i r c l i n g the category below the statement which seems to r e f l e c t your opinion most accurately. Don't be concerned i f some statements seem similar to ones you have previously answered. Remember throughout that your answers should r e f l e c t your opinions when buying clothes for yourself.  216. SD»Strongly Disagree, D=Dieagree, N=Neutral, A=Agree, SA=Strongly Agree  1.  2.  3.  I enjoy buying expensive c l o t h e s . SD  D  N  A  1  2  3  4 5  SD  D  N  1  2  3 4 5  D  D  4  D 2  1  A  SA  N  3  14»  A 4  15. SA  D  N  A  2  3  4 5  SD  D  N  1  2  3 4 5  A  I . l i k e to dress i n the l a t e s t fashions. A  1  2 3  A 4  SA  5  D  N  A  1  2  3  4 5  D  4  N 3  A  2  SA 1  SA  1  2  3  4 5  D  4  N  3  A  SA  2 1  D  4  N 3  A  SA  2 1  I'm q u i t e w i l l i n g to t r a v e l to the other s i d e of the c i t y to shop. D  4  IT A 3  SA  2 1  I don't see myself as one of the younger s e t . SD  5  D  4  11  3  A  SA  2 1  I t doesn't worry me to know tha.t other people own c l o t h e s i d e n t i c a l to mine.  I take care to ensure tha,t the. garments I buy are well-made. SD  1  A  5  19*  2  Shopping at e x c l u s i v e stores i s beyond my means.  I enjoy bargain hunting. N  A. SA  I'm w i l l i n g to s a . c r i f i c e q u a l i t y f o r low p r i c e s .  2 3 4 5 D  3  N  SD  SA  N  D  5  18.  4  SD  SD  SA  D  I huy at s t o r e s which u n d e r s e l l t h e i r competitors.  SD  17.  SA  I would not c o n s i d e r shopping i n a trendy boutique.  .5  SA  I regard shopping as a n e c e s s i t y r a t h e r tha.n a p l e a s u r e .  SD  4 5  I'm w i l l i n g t o expend s. l o t of time and miles to get what I want.  5  1  N  A  3  5  16.  D  N  2  SD  2 1  SD  1  10.  13.  I l i k e to shop i n elegant surroundings.  SD 9.  3  D  1  SD  N  N  SD  5  I'm more i n c l i n e d to buy expensive items i n f r e q u e n t l y than to make frequent cheap purchases. SD  8.  12.  A SA 4 5 I dori't p a t r o n i s e s t o r e s which have a r e p u t a t i o n f o r low p r i c e s .  5  7.  SA  2 3  SD  6.  A  L i g h t i n g e f f e c t s a.nd rock music c r e a t e a. s t o r e atmosphere which appeals to me.  1  5.  SA  I r e g u l a r l y read high f a s h i o n magazines.  I shop as i n f r e q u e n t l y as p o s s i b l e .  SD  4.  11.  SA  (1-10) (11-19)  SD  D  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4 5  217.  STtaStrongly Disagree, ]>=Disagree N=Neutral, A=Agree t  20.  21.  D  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4  5  u n e a s y i n an e x c l u s i v e  24.  26.  I'm a l w a y s s u s p i c i o u s  A 2  mainly SA  1  2  3  4  5  D 4  located N 3  A 2  SD  D  IT A  SA  1  2  3  5  4  I'm n o t i n t e r e s t e d i n what happens i n the world o f high fashion.  N 3  S h o p p i n g forms one o f my main leisure activities. D 4  N 3  A 2  D 4  N 3  I only easily  33.  34-  I like really  35*  D  N  A  SA  2  3  4  5  o r sound D 4  D 2  I appreciate service.  highly  SA 1  TJ  3  A 4  SA 5  D 4  H 3  A 2  SA 1  D 4  N 3  A 2  SA 1  displays D 2  N 3  A 4  SA 5  personalised S3) 1  D 2  N 3  A 4  SA 5  The n i c e t i e s o f s t y l e end. f a s h i o n a r e n o t i m p o r t a n t t o me. SD  D  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4  5  S t o r e s which c a t e r f o r t h e avant g a r d e a p p e a l t o me.  39»  SD  D  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4  5  I consider i t e s s e n t i a l that the m e r c h a n d i s e be n e a t l y a r r a n g e d . SD 5  (20-29)  / ™  A 2  t o f e e l t h a t my p a t r o n a g e i s appreciated.  SD 1 36.  N 3  which e r e q u i e t and  I'm a t t r a c t e d by t a s t e f u l and d e c o r .  SA 1  1  5  SD 5  38.  SD  SA  4  SD 5  SA 1  I don't mind s h o p p i n g i n t h e p o o r e r parts o f the c i t y .  A  3  p a t r o n i s e s t o r e s which ? r e a c c e s s i b l e t o my home.  I prefer stores peaceful.  37.  A 2  N  2  SD 1  SA 1  I a v o i d s t o r e s w h i c h make u s e o f l i g h t i n g and sound e f f e c t s .  D  1  SD 5  leisure A 2  SD  which look  SA 1  o f low p r i c e s .  D 4  I avoid stores expensive.  SA 1  A  I'm n o t a t t r a c t e d t o s t o r e s i n low income a r e a s .  31.  32.  N  SD 5 29.  I) N 4 3  I w o u l d d e s c r i b e m y s e l f as a d i s c r i m i n a t i n g shopper.  SA 1  D  SD 5 28.  A 2  SD  SD 5 27.  N 3  I shop a t s t o r e s w h i c h a p p e a l t o t h e y o u n c e r age g r o u p .  SD 5 25.  D 4  store.  I don't r e g a r d distan.ce as v e r y import°nt when c h o o s i n g where t o shop. SD 5  23.  30.  SD  S3) 5 22.  f  I'm p u t o f f by l o t s o f s i g n s ? n d advertisements i n a s t o r e .  I feel  SA=Strongly Agree  ,  M  rn  n  rn  1  D 4  N 3  A 2  n—1—1  SA 1  218.  SD=.Strongly Disagree, D=Disagree, N=Neutral, A=Agree, SA=Strongly Agree 40.  41.  42.  43.  My f i r s t concern i s with the q u a l i t y of what I "buy. SD  D  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4  5  I p a t r o n i s e s p e c i a l t y stores even though I c o u l d p o s s i b l y buy s i m i l a r goods more cheaply elsewhere. SD  D  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4  5  My  SD  D  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4  5  taste i n clothes i s  conservative. D  5  45.  46.  47.  43.  49.  50.  4  I f i n d i t hard t o r e s i s t offers.  N  3  A  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4  5  SD  D  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4  5  Pew people can a f f o r d t o shop where I do. SD  D  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4  5  I enjoy l o o k i n g around stores even though I have no i n t e n t i o n of "buying anything. SD  D  N  A  SA  5  4  3  2  1  1  5  I t doesn't worry me produced c l o t h e s .  54«  N  A  SA  2  3  4  5  D  4  N  3  sales  2  to buy  mass-  SD  N  D  A  SA  2  1  A  SA  3  4  5  SD  D  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4  5  I'ro not d e t e r r e d by i m p o l i t e D  4  personnel, N  D  4  A  3  I l i k e to know that what I buy be bought f o r l e s s elsewhere.  SA  2  1  can't N  3  A  2  SA  1  I would be quite content to do a l l my shopping by phone. SD  D  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4  5  I'm a t t r a c t e d to stores which make shopping e x c i t i n g . SD  D  N  A  SA  1  2  3  4  5  I p r e f e r stores which "base t h e i r appeal on low p r i c e s .  1 60.  A  3  N  5  59«  N  2  SD  58.  4  D  5  57*  D  I f garments i n the s t o r e window aren't p r i c e d I wont go i n .  D  N  A  SA  2  3  4  5  I p r e f e r to buy s e v e r a l cheaper items than one expensive one.  5  SA  1  (40-50) SA  5  1  SD A  SA  4  SD  SD  D  A  3  I would enjoy shopping on Carnaby Street.  SD  and  I t ' s e s s e n t i a l to me that the s t a f f be w e l l - t r a i n e d . SD  5  56.  The s t o r e s I p a t r o n i s e base t h e i r r e p u t a t i o n on q u a l i t y .  N  2  I spend considerable time shopping around before making a purcha.se. SD  55«  D  SD  52.  1  SD  D  1  SA  2  sales  I l i k e to shop i n b r i g h t c o l o u r f u l surroundings.  I l i k e to shop where the s a l e s s t a f f know me end appreciate my needs. SD  53.  I r a r e l y shop outside my home neighbourhood.  SD  44.  51.  (51-60)  D  4  N  3  A  2  SA  1  219.  SECTION 2 . PAST CLOTHING PURCHASES PLEASE TELL ME ABOUT YOUR MOST RECENT CLOTHING PURCHASE.  Pla  AT WHAT STORE WAS THE PURCHASE MADE?  P2»  WHAT TYPE OP STORE IS THAT? HIGHER PRICED SPECIALTY  (l)  MEDIUM PRICED SPECIALTY  (2)  "BOUTIQUE"  (3)  REGULAR DEPARTMENT STORE  (4)  DEPARTMENT STORE - BUDGET FLOOR  (5)  BUDGET PRICED STORE  (6)  P3a  WHERE IS THE STORE LOCATED?  P4a  WHERE DID THIS PURCHASING TRIP ORIGINATE? HOME  (l)  WORK  (2)  OTHER (specify)  •  .  P5a  WHAT IS THE HUNDRED BLOCK ADDRESS OP THAT PLACE?  P6a  HOW PAR IS IT PROM THERE TO THE STORE?  P7»  HOW DID YOU TRAVEL TO THE STORE?  P8a  P9a  CAR  (1)  BUS  (2)  WALK  (3)  OTHER  (4)  MILES  •  WHAT WAS THE MAIN PURPOSE OP THIS TRIP? TO PURCHASE CLOTHING  (1)  TO MAKE OTHER SHOPPING PURCHASES  (2)  BUSINESS PURPOSES  (3)  SOCIAL PURPOSES  (4)  RECREATIONAL PURPOSES  (5)  HOW MANY CLOTHING PURCHASES VALUED OVER $10.00 HAVE YOU MADE AT THIS STORE IN THE LAST ONE  2 YEARS?  • •  (1)  TWO TO FIVE  (2)  SIX TO TEN  (3)  MORE THAN TEN  •  (4)  1—i—r  SECTION 2. PAST CLOTHING PURCHASES  PLEASE TELL ME ABOUT YOUR NEXT MOST RECENT CLOTHING PURCHASE.  Plb  AT WHAT STORE WAS THE PURCHASE MADE?  P2b  WHAT TYPE OP STORE IS THAT?  .  HIGHER PRICED SPECIALTY  (l)  MEDIUM PRICED SPECIALTY  (2)  "BOUTIQUE"  (3)  REGULAR DEPARTMENT STORE  (4)  DEPARTMENT STORE - BUDGET FLOOR  (5)  BUDGET PRICED STORE  (6)  P3b  WHERE IS THE STORE LOCATED?  P4b  WHERE DID THIS PURCHASING TRIP ORIGINATE? HOME  (1)  WORK  (2)  OTHER (specify)  P5b  WHAT IS THE HUNDRED BLOCK ADDRESS OP THAT PLACE?  P6b  HOW PAR IS IT PROM THERE TO THE STORE?  P7b  HOW DID YOU TRAVEL TO THE STORE?  P8b  CAR  (1)  BUS  (2)  WALK  (3)  OTHER  (4)  MILES  WHAT WAS THE MAIN PURPOSE OP THIS TRIP? TO PURCHASE CLOTHING  ^_ (1)  TO MAKE OTHER SHOPPING PURCHASES  (2)  BUSINESS PURPOSES  (3)  SOCIAL PURPOSES  (4)  RECREATIONAL PURPOSES  (5)  P9V--HOW MANY CLOTHING PURCHASES VALUED OVER $10.00 HAVE YOU MADE AT THIS STORE IN THE LAST ONE  (1)  TOO TO FIVE  (2)  SIX TO TEN  (3)  MORE THAN TEN  (4)  2 YEARS?  SECTION 2. PAST CLOTHING PURCHASES  PLEASE TELL ME ABOUT YOUR THIRD MOST RECENT CLOTHING PURCHASE.  Pic  AT WHAT STORE WAS THE PURCHASE MADE?  P2C  WHAT TYPE OP STORE IS THAT? HIGHER PRICED SPECIALTY  (l)  MEDIUM PRICED SPECIALTY  (2)  "BOUTIQUE"  (3)  REGULAR DEPARTMENT STORE  (4)  DEPARTMENT STORE - BUDGET FLOOR  (5)  BUDGET PRICED STORE  (6)  P3c  WHERE IS THE STORE LOCATED?  P4c  WHERE DID THIS PURCHASING TRIP ORIGINATE? HOME  (l)  WORK  (2)  OTHER (specify)  P5c  WHAT IS THE HUNDRED BLOCK ADDRESS OF THAT PLACE?  P6c  HOW FAR IS IT FROM THERE TO THE STORE?  P7c  HOW DID YOU TRAVEL TO THE STORE?  P8c  CAR  (l)  BUS  (2)  WALK  (3)  OTHER  (4)  MILES  WHAT WAS THE MAIN PURPOSE OF THIS TRIP? TO PURCHASE CLOTHING  (l)  TO MAKE OTHER SHOPPING PURCHASES BUSINESS PURPOSES  (3)  SOCIAL PURPOSES  (4)  RECREATIONAL PURPOSES P9c  (2).  _  HOW MANY CLOTHING PURCHASES VALUED OVER $10.00 HAVE YOU MADE AT THIS STORE IN THE LAST ONE  (1)  TWO TO FIVE SIX TO TEN  (2) (3)  MORE THAN TEN  (4)  2 YEARS?  (5)  P10. AT WHICH STORE DO YOU MAKE MOST OP YOUR CLOTHING PURCHASES? P l l . WHAT TYPE OP STORE IS THAT? HIGHER PRICED SPECIALTY MEDIUM PRICED SPECIALTY "BOUTIQUE" REGULAR DEPARTMENT STORE DEPARTMENT STORE - BUDGET FLOOR BUDGET PRICED STORE P12. WHERE IS THE STORE LOCATED?  SECTION 3. BIOGRAPHICAL DATA.  B l . HOW OLD ARE YOU? B2. SEX OP RESPONDENT:  MALE  (l)  FEMALE  (2)  B3. ARE YOU SINGLE OR MARRIED? SINGLE  (1)  MARRIED  (2)  WIDOWED  (3)  DIVORCED  (4)  B4. HOW MANY CHILDREN DO YOU HAVE LIVING AT HOME? B5. WHAT IS YOUR BEPO]  TAXES ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME? below $ 4 , 0 0 0 $4f ooo  -  (1) (2) (3)  7,999  _  8,000  - 11,999  _  12,000  - 15,999  16,000  - 19,999  _  (5)  20,000  _  (6)  24,000  - 23,999 - 27,999  28,000  - 31,999  _  (7) (8)  (4)  over $32,000  (9)  B6. WHAT IS THE HIGHEST LEVEL OP EDUCATION YOU HAVE REACHED? ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ONLY  (l)  SOME HIGH SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE  (2) (3) (4)  SOME POST SECONDARY UNIVERSITY DEGREE  (5)  POST GRADUATE  (6)  B7. WHAT IS THE OCCUPATION OP THE HEAD OP HOUSEHOLD? B8. HUNDRED BLOCK ADDRESS OP RESPONDENT  APPENDIX B: LETTER INTRODUCING THE SURVEY  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  VANCOUVER  DEPARTMENT OF  BRITISH 8,  COLUMBIA  CANADA  NoVeilber  GEOGRAPHY  1973,  I would l i k e to i n v i t e you to take part i n a study of shopping patterns i n Vancouver which i s the b a s i s of ray d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n i n the Department of Geography at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia.  The study i n v o l v e s c o l l e c t i n g information frora Vancouver  and  North Shore r e s i d e n t s to determine where they shop f o r c e r t a i n goods and f o r what reasons.  Your r e s i d e n c e may  be s e l e c t e d as p a r t of a sample of $00  households forming the b a s i s of the i n t e r v i e w programme. I f so,  an  a u t h o r i z e d i n t e r v i e w e r w i l l c a l l at your home w i t h i n the next few  days.  I hope you w i l l be able to spare about 2 0 minutes to speak to hira.  A l l information obtained w i l l remain s t r i c t l y  confidential.  No names or s p e c i f i c addresses w i l l be used and the data w i l l never appear i n any way  that could p o s s i b l y i d e n t i f y you as an  I w i l l be happy to answer any questions you may telephone number i s 4 3 4 - 7 8 6 7 .  Yours s i n c e r e l y ,  Martin  Taylor  individual.  have. My  APPENDIX C: INTERVIEWER'S MANUAL  INTERVIEWER'S MANUAL  227.  This manual has "been prepared to direct the oonduct of interviews and i s designed to follow the questionnaire sequence of questions. This manual should he read over at least once before going into the f i e l d , and should be read i n conjunction with the questionnaire. GENERAL POINTS - be p o l i t e at a l l times. - do not show offence at refusal to participate or to answer a particular question. - complete interview as quickly and e f f i c i e n t l y as possible. - as f a r as possible ensure that a l l questions have been answered. - sincerely thank respondents f o r their cooperation. - remember you are the only contact with the respondents; the success of the project therefore depends on how well you handle the task of face-to-face interviewing. FIELD PROCEDURES - i n each sample area deliver l e t t e r s to the f i r s t ten addresses l i s t e d on your assignment sheet. I f addresses include an apartment building to which entrance can be gained, deliver a l e t t e r to as many apartments as the number of remaining letters ( f o r that area) permits. - return to areas within three days, preferably during the early evening or on the weekend. - use random household number on assignment sheet to determine f i r s t c a l l i n each sample area. - introduce yourself eg.: "Hullo, I'm a geography student at U.B.C. and I'm an interviewer for the shopping survey described i n a l e t t e r you recently received. Is there a man/woman (required sex of respondent in each sample area i s shown on the assignment sheet) i n the household - over 17 who i s w i l l i n g to help i n this study?" - i f suitable respondent iss found, complete interview and proceed to next sample axea. - i f suitable respondent ie^ not found proceed to the next household at which l e t t e r was l e f t ; continue u n t i l respondent i s found; i f  respondent not found among ten households which have received a l e t t e r , phone me (Martin Taylor) at 4 3 4 - 7 8 6 7 . — repeat procedure i n other sample areas. — i f at any point the respondent asks questions about the survey which you are unable to answer, suggest that they phone me at 434-7867.  GUIDE TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE SECTION 1. DISPOSITIONS This section should be self-administered by the respondent. He/ she should be encouraged to give his/her f i r s t reaction to each statement, and not to linger and consider them more deeply. The section should take no longer than 10 minutes to complete; no statement should be l e f t unanswered. Avoid being drawn into debates a r i s i n g from the statements, Introduction might be: "Would you please read each of these statements and indicate how i t corresponds to your opinion when buying clothes for yourself. Just c i r c l e the appropriate response category beneath each statement." Provide a pencil. Point out and explain the response categories (SD — SA). Stress that answers must r e f l e c t opinions held when buying clothes. SECTION 2 . PAST CLOTHING PURCHASES Ask the respondent to r e c a l l the last three clothing purchases he/she has made for himself/herself valued over $10.00. Record details of each purchase beginning with the most recent. Note carefully the following points of c l a r i f i c a t i o n : PI  — record name of store.  P2  - 'HIGHER PRICED SPECIALTY eg. 'Jay David' and 'Mr Roberts' 1  for women; 'Edward Chapmans' for men. *MEDIUM PRICED SPECIALTY' eg. 'Jerraaines' for women; 'Fred Asher for men. 1  *BOUTIQUE' eg. HGP and 'Bootlegger'. 'REGULAR DEPARTMENT STORE' = 'The Bay', 'Woodwards', 'Eatons' and 'Simpson Sears' (excluding Budget Floor). 'DEPARTMENT STORE BUDGET FLOOR' « Budget Floors of 'Regular Department Stores*.  229. 1  BUDGET PRICED STORE' eg.  'Hamilton Harvey', 'Array and Navy',  'Fields'. N.B.  I f purchase was  made at a 'REGULAR DEPARTMENT STORE'  determine whether i t was P3  from the Budget F l o o r .  - determine hundred block address of s t o r e i f p o s s i b l e or name of shoppingoentre waere r e l e v a n t (eg.  P4  'Oakridge').  - 'OTHER' o r i g i n s are most l i k e l y to occur when the main purpose o f the t r i p was Write  something other than to purchase c l o t h i n g ( Q . P 8 ) .  i n 'OTHER' o r i g i n s (eg. home of r e l a t i v e or f r i e n d ) .  P5  - ensure that l o c a t i o n recorded r e f e r s to o r i g i n s p e c i f i e d i n  P6  - d i s t a n c e estimates w i l l i n e v i t a b l y be of v a r y i n g accuracy;  P4. don't  worry, accurate measurements w i l l be made p r i o r to coding.  P7) P8>  - (>/) t i c k the appropriate  category.  P9J Questions PI t o P9 are repeated twice before PIO t o P12 PIO} Pll\-  r e c o r d as f o r PI, P2 and  are asked.  P3.  SECTION 3. BIOGRAPHICAL DATA Suggested i n t r o d u c t i o n : "In order to help i n t e r p r e t shopping h a b i t s and opinions, I'd l i k e to f i n d out some b r i e f background i n f o r m a t i o n . " This s e c t i o n w i l l probably  r e q u i r e the most t a c t on your p a r t ; remind the  the respondent i f necessary Bl  that a l l information i s anonymous.  — i f respondent i s r e l u c t a n t to give exact age, p o l i t e l y an approximation (eg.  request  'thirties').  B2  - by  observation!  B3  - only r e c o r d 'WIDOWED' or 'DIVORCED' i f i n f o r m a t i o n i s volunteered.  B4  - r e c o r d number.  B5  - hand card to respondent to t i c k the appropriate income category and then t r a n s f e r i n f o r m a t i o n to q u e s t i o n n a i r e . Income recorded should represent a l l c o n t r i b u t i n g members of the household.  B6 ~ B7  - 'SOME POST SECONDARY' i n c l u d e s academic, t e c h n i c a l and p r o f e s s i o n a l training. — 'head of household* » husband i n nuclear f a m i l y ; = respondent i n s i n g l e person households, and i n s i t u a t i o n s where f r i e n d s are s h a r i n g accommodation. Record p r e c i s e job d e s c r i p t i o n .  B8  — by  observation.  APPENDIX D: INTERVIEWER'S ASSIGNMENT SHEET  231.  INTERVIEWER'S ASSIGNMENT SHEET  NAME;  SAMPLE AREA E.D. E.A.  NUMBER:  ADDRESSES  RANDOM HOUSEHOLD NUMBER  SEX OF RESPONDENT  INTERVIEW NUMBER  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0100000/manifest

Comment

Related Items