Elsevier

Journal of Business Research

Volume 59, Issue 9, September 2006, Pages 974-981
Journal of Business Research

Hedonic and utilitarian shopping value: Investigating differential effects on retail outcomes

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.03.006Get rights and content

Abstract

Previous research on both hedonic and utilitarian shopping value has focused much effort on the antecedents of shopping value with very little emphasis on the outcomes of shopping value. This study investigates the complex interrelationships between satisfaction with the retailer, hedonic and utilitarian shopping value, and important retail outcomes. Both hedonic and utilitarian shopping values are found to influence key retail outcomes. The results also support predicted differences in the relative influence of hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Hedonic and utilitarian shopping values are also found to moderate a number of relationships between satisfaction and retail outcomes.

Introduction

Research supports the notion that shopping can provide both hedonic and utilitarian value (e.g., Babin et al., 1994, Babin and Darden, 1995). Hedonic shopping value reflects the value received from the multisensory, fantasy and emotive aspects of the shopping experience, while utilitarian shopping value reflects the acquisition of products and/or information in an efficient manner and can be viewed as reflecting a more task-oriented, cognitive, and non-emotional outcome of shopping (Babin et al., 1994, Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982). In general, utilitarian shopping value reflects the task-related value of a shopping experience while hedonic shopping value reflects the value found in the shopping experience itself independent of task-related activities (Babin and Attaway, 2000).

Since the establishment of the Personal Shopping Value scale approximately a decade ago (Babin et al., 1994), research has focused almost exclusively on antecedents to both hedonic and utilitarian shopping value (cf. Babin et al., 1994, Babin and Darden, 1995, Griffin et al., 2000, Babin and Attaway, 2000, Babin and Babin, 2001, Stoel et al., 2004, Babin et al., 2005). Interestingly, in much of this published research, calls have been made to further explore the important relationships with retail outcome variables. To date, only a few studies have attempted to correlate shopping value to retail variables such as satisfaction (Babin et al., 1994, Babin et al., 2005), customer share (Babin and Attaway, 2000), and repatronage intentions (Stoel et al., 2004). However, none of these studies have as their central focus the complex interrelationship between shopping value and retail variables, even though such relationships would seem to be particularly important given the tremendous amount of resources and expenses that retailers are devoting to create satisfied and loyal customers.

The purpose of the research presented here is to investigate how hedonic and utilitarian shopping values differ in their relationships with several important retail outcome variables. The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. First, we discuss relevant literature and hypotheses, followed by a discussion of our method and the results of model estimation. Finally, we conclude with a general discussion of the findings, limitations of the research, and avenues for future research.

Section snippets

Shopping value and satisfaction

Satisfaction judgments are thought to be comprised of both affective (Mano and Oliver, 1993, Westbrook, 1987) and cognitive elements (Oliver, 1993, Oliver and Swan, 1989). Theoretically, this notion is embodied in the “two-appraisal” model of satisfaction evaluation (Oliver, 1989, Weiner, 1986), which posits that affective responses arise from evaluation of the outcomes of product/service usage, followed by cognitive interpretation and related processes (e.g., expectancy-disconfirmation) which

Method

Upper-level undergraduate marketing students trained in data collection procedures were used as interviewers. Interviewers were instructed to recruit non-student participants only. A total of 245 respondents participated in the survey. Every respondent was contacted at a later date to validate the sample and no problems were detected. Approximately 62% of the sample was female. The age groups represented in the sample varied greatly with 25.7% of the sample between 18 and 24, 20.4% between 25

Results

The hypotheses were tested using multiple regression with each of the retail outcome variables serving as the dependent variable (see Table 1, Table 2). As indicated in Table 1, H1a, H1b were supported as both hedonic shopping value (β = 0.493, t-value = 8.90) and utilitarian shopping value (β = 0.153, t-value = 2.76) had positive influences on satisfaction. A general F test was used to test Hypothesis 1c (Neter et al., 1985). The F test was significant (F = 12.35, p < 0.01) indicating that the coefficient

Discussion

This research provides insight into the complex interrelationship between shopping value and important retail outcome variables, showing the differential effects that hedonic and utilitarian shopping value can have. This research also extends previous research, which has focused primarily on main effects of value and satisfaction (cf. Cronin et al., 2000), by finding support for significant interactions between satisfaction and both types of shopping value.

A broader view of these results

Limitations and future research

The results from this research should be interpreted relative to certain limitations. Although the generalizability of the results was enhanced by collecting data across retail types, this method precluded testing differences in the proposed model across types of retailers. While studies have investigated emotional response in many different retail formats (e.g., Babin and Darden, 1996, Donovan et al., 1994), few studies have explored the effects of systematic variation due to retail format on

References (69)

  • L. Stoel et al.

    Attribute beliefs and spending as antecedents to shopping value

    J Bus Res

    (2004)
  • K.L Wakefield et al.

    Excitement at the mall: determinants and effects on shopping response

    J Retail

    (1998)
  • K.L. Wakefield et al.

    Retailing hedonic consumption: a model of sales promotion of a leisure service

    J Retail

    (1996)
  • L.S. Aiken et al.

    Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions

    (1991)
  • J.C. Anderson et al.

    Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach

    Psychol Bull

    (1988)
  • B.J. Babin et al.

    Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value

    J Consum Res

    (1994)
  • B.J. Babin et al.

    Modeling consumer satisfaction and word-of-mouth: restaurant patronage in Korea

    J Serv Mark

    (2005)
  • R. Batra et al.

    Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes

    Mark Lett

    (1991)
  • E. Berscheid

    Emotion in close relationships

    (1983)
  • A. Chaudhuri et al.

    The chain of effects from brand trust to brand affect to brand performance

    J Mark

    (2001)
  • S. Dawson et al.

    Shopping motives, emotional states, and retail outcomes

    J Retail

    (1990)
  • R. Dhar et al.

    Consumer choice between hedonic and utilitarian goods

    J Mark Res

    (2000)
  • E.A. Dichter

    How word of mouth advertising works

    Harvard Bus Rev

    (1966)
  • A.S. Dick et al.

    Customer loyalty: toward an integrated conceptual framework

    J Acad Mark Sci

    (1994)
  • R.J. Donovan et al.

    Store atmosphere: an environmental psychology approach

    J Retail

    (1982)
  • J.F. Engle et al.

    Consumer behavior

    (1969)
  • M. Fishbein et al.

    Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research

    (1975)
  • C. Fornell

    A national customer satisfaction barometer: the Swedish experience

    J Mark

    (1992)
  • C. Fornell et al.

    Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error

    J Mark Res

    (1981)
  • S. Fournier et al.

    Rediscovering satisfaction

    J Mark

    (1999)
  • E. Garbarino et al.

    The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships

    J Mark

    (1999)
  • M.P. Gardner

    Mood states and consumer behavior: a critical review

    J Consum Res

    (1985)
  • M. Guiry et al.

    Defining and measuring recreational shopper identity

    J Acad Mark Sci

    (2006)
  • M.D. Hartline et al.

    Employee performance cues in a hotel service environment: influence on perceived service quality, value, word of mouth intentions

    J Bus Res

    (1996)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text