Disclaimer: This is an example of a student written essay.
Click here for sample essays written by our professional writers.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UKEssays.com.

The Broad Models Of Consumer Behaviour Marketing Essay

Paper Type: Free Essay Subject: Marketing
Wordcount: 5249 words Published: 1st Jan 2015

Reference this

This chapter commences with a brief overview of the broad models of consumer behaviour and goes on to review literature and research on consumer brand behaviour, the relationship between self-concept and brands, the various consumer constructs and the cultural differences that influence consumer brand choice. The purpose of this review is to construct an overview of the issues under consideration, examine existing literature and research on specific relevant subjects, identify and place results of existing research under appropriate categories, identify areas of important scholarship, and attempt to resolve apparent conflicts and contradictions between different studies.

2.2. Consumer Behaviour

Consumer behaviour is defined as “the process and activities people engage in when searching for, selecting, purchasing, using, evaluating, and disposing of products and services so as to satisfy their needs and desires” (Belch, 2007)

Consumer products like tomato ketchup, shampoo or chocolates for that matter are designed to have product attributes that are appealing to consumers, encouraging them to purchase these products (Patel & Schlijper, 2008). Whilst R & D and production functions of modern day organisations, to that end, concentrate on understanding and modifying product attributes, buying behaviour is not merely a product function; indeed in many cases it is accepted to be more a function of consumers, their social surroundings of other consumers, competing marketplace products, and brand marketing strategy (Patel & Schlijper, 2008). Successful marketing thus greatly depends the understanding of consumer psychology and sociology of consumer networks (Patel & Schlijper, 2008).

Consumer behaviour, very briefly, relates to (a) individuals, on their own, or in a group or organisational context, (b) the utilisation and disposal of items, as also the study of why and how they are bought, and purchased, and (c) services and ideas, in addition to tangible and specific products.

Models for consumer behaviour have evolved steadily, starting with Anderson’s model (1965), followed by the Howard and Sheth Model, (1969), the Nicosia Model (1976), the Engel-Kollat-Blackwell Model (1995), and others. Two of the most often discussed models are the Engel-Kollat-Blackwell Model and the Howard and Sheth Model (Howard & Sheth, 1969, p 9 to 28) (Engel, & Others, 1995, p 3 to 16) (Nicosia, 1987).

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!

Essay Writing Service

The Engel-Kollat-Blackwell Model states that consumer purchasing behaviour moves through five basic decision stages, namely (a) recognition of need or problem, (b) search for alternatives, (c) evaluation of alternate evaluation, (d) purchase, and (e) outcomes, even though some of the intermediate stages may on be omitted (Engel, & Others, 1995, p 3 to 16). The Howard Sheth Model approaches the issue from another angle, stating that decision making occurs at three levels, namely (a) the first level, where consumers need detailed inputs for their buying decisions, (b) the second level, where information requirements are limited, and (c), where information requirements are limited and buying decisions are habitual (Howard & Sheth, 1969, p 9 to 28).

The Howard Sheth Model states that consumer behaviour is determined by four key variables, inputs, perceptual and learning constructs, outputs, and exogenous variables (Patel & Schlijper, 2008). Inputs comprise of three types of environmental stimuli; (a) signicative stimuli, (the marketer provides brand or product information, (b) symbolic stimuli (visual or verbal product features) and (c) social stimuli (the social environment of consumers) (Patel & Schlijper, 2008).

The model focuses on the involvement of psychological variables for consumer decision making. Some of these factors are perceptual and concern receipt and comprehension of input stimuli and distortion can occur when consumers either do not understand messages or distort them in line with their socialisation or perceptions. Variables include learning constructs consumer goals, brand information, preferences and buying purposes are all included. The decision making process occurs during the receipt of inputs. The model does not give any relevance to religion as a customer decision influencer. The Howard Sheth and Engel-Kollat-Blackwell Models are detailed in Appendices 1 and 2 of this study.

Marketing literature acknowledges the importance of consumer brand behaviour in the success of marketing of products and services. Specific research has been conducted about relationship between consumer brand behaviour and various cultural, social, personal, and psychological influences. The illustration provided below provides an overall view of the different areas of consumer behaviour influencers studied by researchers to better determine what aspects combine to drive consumer choices about products and brands.

Consumer Behaviour Influencers

Source: http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~market/courses/380/consbehv.html.

2.3. Consumer Brand Behaviour

Whilst the various models of consumer behaviour detailed earlier would suggest, as also stated in the previous chapter, would suggest that consumers are logical, intelligent and rational in their decision making process, thus implying that they consider a range of factors and alternatives and thereafter logically go about making the best possible choice (Zaichkowsky, 1985, p 341 to 352). Extensive research has revealed that a significant proportion of such decision making does not involve extensive research or evaluation (Zaichkowsky, 1985, p 341 to 352). In fact their decision making process is greatly influenced by their preconceived notions about brands, which often take precedence over other important factors in the progression of the decision process (Zaichkowsky, 1985, p 341 to 352).

Brands, it is widely believed, influence consumers, consciously and unconsciously, through intent or behaviour, to purchase and repurchase specific brands; such behaviour provides brands with immense advantages over their competitors and occur because of a range of psychological factors. Marketers and advertisers constantly work towards creating brand loyalty, breaking consumer perceptions and habits, motivating and guiding them to acquire new viewpoints and habits, and reinforcing such behavioural factors through constant brand reinforcement strategies.

Kotler and Armstrong suggest that, notwithstanding the apparent belief in consumer rationality and logic of the numerous customer behaviour models, customers are strongly influenced by a range of factors that are separate from apparent product features and attributes and are dependent upon a range of intangible personal, social, cultural and psychological reasons (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16).

Cultural factors are very important influencers of consumer behaviour. Extensive research by Hofstede on national cultures reveals that the basic cultural traits, as indicated through five key dimensions namely (a) power distance, (b) individualism, (c) Masculinity, (d) uncertainty avoidance and (e) long term orientation, differ significantly between the peoples of different nations and even between people of different regions in geographically large countries like China, India, Russia and Brazil (Hofstede, 1967). Whilst national groups like the Irish, the Hispanics and the Italians have distinct ethnic preferences, racial groups like different Asian communities and Afro-Americans have distinctive cultural attitudes (Hofstede, 1967). Such cultural factors influence the way people think, eat and dress and have a strong bearing on their buying decisions (Hofstede, 1967).

Whilst culture provides the basic foundation of human behaviour issues like social class, determined by factors like income, education, occupation, wealth and other factors also play significant roles in impacting cultural behaviour (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16).

Consumer behaviour is also significantly influenced by social factors like families, communities, groups, both in and out of work, status and social roles (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16). Whilst groups can strongly influence the consumer behaviour of their members, social status can encourage or restrict many buying decisions (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16).

Personal factors like the age of buyers, their lifecycle stages, their occupation, lifestyle, personality and their self concept also have substantial bearing on their buying decisions (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16).

Kotler and Armstrong stress that consumer behaviour is deeply influenced by four important psychological variables, namely perception, learning, motivation and attitudes and beliefs (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16). Motivation is caused by the desire of consumers to fulfil their physical, emotional and psychological needs (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16). Robert Maslow’s work on human needs and the desire of individuals to satisfy their needs forms a foundation for behavioural investigation and analysis (Maslow, 1968). Whilst motivation makes people ready to take action, their actual actions are influenced by their perceptions of particular situations (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16). To elaborate, whilst two people may be motivated by the same need, their different perceptions may well guide them to act in distinctly different ways (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16). Perception being a process through which individuals choose, organise and interpret data to form relevant pictures, individuals can well create different perceptions from similar stimuli due to the action of three perceptual processes, exposure, distortion and retention (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16).

Such learning helps marketers in building brands for products by associating them with robust drives, utilising motivating techniques, and using the same drives as their competitors in order to transfer loyalty, or designing brands to appeal to different drives, thus providing strong cues for switching products (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16). Marketers take great interest in beliefs formulated by people about particular products and services, because such beliefs and attitudes influence buying behavior (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16). People possess attitudes on various issues like religion, politics, music, food, and clothes (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16). Such attitudes represent relatively consistent assessments and feelings towards objects or ideas, and shape likes and dislikes (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16).

The buying behaviour of consumers is significantly shaped by the complex impact of various combinations of such cultural, social, personal, and psychological variables (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16). Whilst many of these variables are beyond the control of marketers, they help in the understanding of consumer behaviour and in the formulation of marketing strategies for influencing such behaviour (Kotler & Others, 2005, p 2 to 16).

The impact of such factors on consumer decisions has been taken up by researchers in for explanation and investigation through different routes. Three such areas relating to the relationship between customer behaviour and brand choice, namely (a) the Susceptibility to Normative Influence (SNI), (b) Relational Interdependence in Self-Construal (RISC) and (c) Brand Engagement in Self-Concept (BESC), affects consumer brand choice in different occasions (self-consumption, hosting and gifting), leading to the thesis questions. These along with the concept of self and associated issues are taken up for discussion in the following sections.

2.4. Self Concept and its Association with Brands

Susan Cross, in association with a number of collaborators like Madson, Bacon, Morris and Gore has conducted extensive research on the concept of self and its implications in the marketing world (Cross, Morris and Gore, 2002).

Self Concept can very simply be segregated into two specific categories, real self concept and ideal self concept (Cross, Morris and Gore, 2002). With real self concept representing a person’s idea of who and what he is and what he can or cannot do and ideal self concept concerning a person’s desire of what he would like to do or be, people work or at least think towards reducing the gap between their real and ideal self-concepts (Cross, Morris and Gore, 2002). Marketers use such beliefs to differentiate their products providing functional products for the real self and expressive products for the ideal self (Cross, Morris and Gore, 2002).

Cross however puts forward the view that self concept develops from individual perceptions about how people see themselves, how others see them, and how these opinions are integrated to determine how people visualise the world around them and how they choose to interpret the information that comes to them from the world around them, including others who have helped to define their self-concept (Cross, Morris, and Gore, 2002). The internal and external selves react and interact at the same time, illustrating the complexity of consumer behaviour as an internal and external process (Cross, Morris, and Gore, 2002). Involved in this self-concept is the connection of the definition of self with key cultural differences that are perceived, adding to the construct of the self (Cross, Morris and Gore, 2002).

Cross and Madson (1997) make the point that the self is responsible for the direction of a range of psychological and social occurrences; it regulates intentional behaviour and allows individuals to function effectively in their social world (Cross & Madson, 1997, p 5 to 37). Apart from being a significant influence on social behaviour the self is also a social product, constantly evolving through interaction with close people and the social world (Cross & Madson, 1997, p 5 to 37). However viewpoints regarding the character of the self differ significantly across the world, leading to differing models of the self (Cross & Madson, 1997, p 5 to 37).

Orth and Kahle (2008) state that that self-concept, when viewed in the perspective of social identity theory, has two distinct aspects, namely personal identity, (which includes particular like talent, competence, and sociability), and social identity, which comes about from membership in social group(s) (or groups) together with the value and emotional significance (Orth & Kahle,2008, p 423 to 447).

Self concept obviously plays an important role in the formulation of marketing strategy and branding efforts, as elaborated by Eitel and Spiekermann (Eitel & Spiekermann, 2007).

“The development of a Brand Core always starts in the existing culture and in the existing self-perception, reality, self-concept and outside perception. The Brand Personality works from the inside outwards on the basis of several key issues: Who are we, what we want to be, how we become what we want to be, what others believe we are and how would we like to be seen.” (Eitel & Spiekermann, 2007)

Many companies have tried to determine how a consumer will make their purchase decision based on these variables since it is believed that these “lifestyles produce needs and desires that ultimately affect the decision making of each consumer” (Ziemnowicz & Others, 2008, p 2). Research has established the connection between the types of products a person owns or would like to have and their perception of themselves (Escalas and Bettman, 2005, p 378 to 389). Research studies have further revealed that possessions helped people in asserting their individuality and reflecting their social, cultural and family ties (Escalas and Bettman, 2005, p 378 to 389).

An array of consumer research about branding and consumers reveal that people enjoy brands is because they serve as symbols by which people define and measure themselves against others in terms of social acceptance, social status, or social expression (Sprott & Others, 2006, p 1 to 36). Marketers customise campaigns around products and brands that appeal to consumers needs for identification with products or brands before they decide to purchase them (Snyder & DeBono, 1985, p 586 to 597)

2.5. Susceptibility to Normative Influence

Susceptibility to Normative Influence (SNI) represents the process wherein consumers feel the need to identify with others and confirm to their expectations in the making of purchase decisions and in choosing products or services for fulfilment of needs (Bearden, Netemeyer, and Teel, 1989, p 473 to 481). With social and cultural factors being perceived to be extremely important influencers of consumer behaviour and choice, extensive research in the area has been conducted by people like Batra, Bearden, Ratneshwar and Hugenburg (Bearden, Netemeyer, and Teel, 1989, p 473 to 481). These researchers, on their own and with other people, have constructed a substantial repository of information on the subject (Bearden, Netemeyer, and Teel, 1989, p 473 to 481).

Social factors, elaborated at some length in the previous section, are viewed as strong influencers of consumer behaviour and choice because much of a person’s self-concept is tied into concern about what others determine is acceptable behaviour (Bearden, Netemeyer, and Teel, 1989, p 473 to 481). Included in this concern over social factors is the construct of the family in terms of one’s orientation toward specific values associated with economics, interpersonal relationships, religion, politics, and lifestyle (Bearden, Netemeyer, and Teel, 1989, p 473 to 481).

In terms of SNI, it is believed that social groups also influence consumer behaviour and shape purchase and brand decisions (Batra, Homer, and Kahle, 2001 p 115 to 128). Information is processed based on what have been termed as reference groups, which each consist of various types of social groups, such as colleagues, classmates, neighbours, etc., in which a person then measures themselves in self-appraisal or as a “source of personal norms and attitudes” (Batra, Homer, and Kahle, 2001, p.116). Reference groups are used by individuals to create frames of reference or context by which to compare one’s self (Batra, Homer, and Kahle, 2001 p 115 to 128).

Such reference groups include the aspirational reference group, in which an individual compares his own self against someone considered ideal or good (Batra, Homer, and Kahle, 2001 p 115 to 128). A prime example is the selection of a brand or product based on the endorsement of celebrities. An associative reference group consists of familiar people, (like peers), or those who can be realistically compared to by individuals (Batra, Homer, and Kahle, 2001 p 115 to 128). The dissociative reference group on the other hand consists of people that individual would not prefer to be compared to (Batra, Homer, and Kahle, 2001 p 115 to 128).

Researchers feel such behaviour to be part of a process to seek compliance and acceptance within society (Batra, Homer, and Kahle, 2001 p 115 to 128). The level of perceived acceptance and compliance tied to specific product attributes can vary across product classes or categories; and the same reference group may not hold the same degree of influence within every product category (Batra, Homer, and Kahle, 2001 p 115 to 128). The level of SNI may be greater for an automobile brand than for a brand of clothing for one person, and vice versa for another. However, the influence of reference groups does seem to establish a brand’s meaning because such groups may provide information about (a) brand attributes, and (b) whether brands have approval amongst these reference groups (Escalas and Bettman, 2005, p 378 to 389).

Find Out How UKEssays.com Can Help You!

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.

View our services

Orth and Kahle (2008) carried out an important examination of intra-personal variation in consumer susceptibility to normative influence (Orth & Kahle, 2008, p 423 to 447). Their study, which was conducted on choosing of Wine brands, is relevant to chocolates, the product chosen for this study (Orth & Kahle, 2008, p 423 to 447). Orth and Kahle (2008) build their study on the basis of extensive previous research work that showed “that choices in various information- processing situations are susceptible to the influence of reference groups, defined as groups, used as standards of comparison for self-appraisal or as a source of personal norms and attitudes”. (Orth & Kahle, 2008, p 423 to 447)

Their examination of contemporary research throws up a number of interesting findings.

Significant consumer research has been conducted on the role of SNI as a driver of situational variation. Such research concentrated on product attributes (like price and quality) and did not take up the social psychological facets of brand characteristics, namely the gains individuals search in brands. It aimed to reduce this information gap because consumers, very often, seek brand benefits over product attributes, acting thus for a range of social psychological causes. With managers needing to be able to create brands that appealed across consumption conditions or fitted specific social situation, wherein offered gains appealed more than universal designs.

Substantial research reveals that the influence of other people impacts the behaviour of individuals. Individual choices are particularly susceptible to such interpersonal influence as its outcome is externally visible. Researchers stress that the impact of reference group effects should be greater for who can be influenced more and who are characterised by a specific susceptibility to interpersonal influence construct, which comprises of normative and informational dimensions. People with high levels of such a construct reveal a greater willingness to learn from others or conform to their expectations in their buying decisions. Such people have an inherently greater need to enhance their image in the view of others and are inclined to conform to their expectations. Such individuals should accordingly place greater emphasis on social brand advantages benefits because of their efforts at impressing others.

Individuals with low SNI levels on the other hand give much lesser importance to social brand gains. Purchase and consumption of products, in circumstances where reference groups are relevant, should be influenced by the need of individuals for public self-presentation, impress others, or enhance their private self-definition.

Scholars often segregate consumer values into internal, external, and fun and excitement values. Whilst external values stress on fulfilment that is beyond individual control, internal values represent individual belief in controlling of value fulfilment. Individuals who value fun define exercise greater control over their leisure actions than others and have lower SNI levels.

Orth and Kahle found that individuals could have distinctly different levels of SNI, depending upon their “reference group salience, personal values, and social identity”. (Orth and Kahle, 2008, p 443)

“The present findings suggest that more complex social identities are further associated with a higher relative importance of self-fulfillment, self-respect, and sense of accomplishment. Given the present findings, we find that individuals with more complex social identities appear to be less susceptible to normative influence and thus could be less attracted to social brand designs.”

They make the following marketing recommendations:

“Brand managers should probably make their communications emphasize benefits for the self, possibly in the context of multiple in-groups with little overlap.

To successfully manage social brands, managers should consider targeting individuals with less complex identities who are likely more susceptible to normative influence.

To be effective, brand communications should center on the most important in-group. “

2.6. Brand Engagement in Self Concept

The importance of self-concept in branding has achieved significant importance in recent years, with researchers like Escalas, Bettman (2004), Webb, (2005) and Sprott (2009) taking it up for detailed study.

Brand Engagement in Self Concept (BESC) concerns the degree of engagement between the self concept of individuals and brand attributes (Sprott & Others, 2009, p 92). It represents a general view concerning how consumers look at brands such that they relate brand features with their self concept (Sprott & Others, 2009, p 92). The basic premise of the theory concerns the different levels of engagement people show with brands, such engagement levels often determining their brand attachment, their willingness to overlook important factors like price and competing products, and finally their purchasing behaviour (Sprott & Others, 2009, p 92). The connection between brands and the self concept of individuals is represented by the extent of engagement that individuals are likely to have with specific brands (Sprott & Others, 2009, p 92). Greater levels of engagement are translated into faster brand recall, the conscious or unconscious elimination of stages in consumer purchasing decisions and even habitual purchases (Sprott & Others, 2009, p 92). Such a construct creates the foundation for exercises relating to tracking of brand loyalty, a phenomenon that arises out of entrenched customer beliefs that particular brands will deliver sets of attributes that connect with their perceptions of important issues and factors and leads to continued use and automatic repurchase of brands rather in engagement in evaluation of alternatives with the use of determinants like suitability, competing products or value for money (Sprott & Others, 2009, p 92).

Sprott and others develop an eight point scale to measure BESC and demonstrate that such a scale captured the general engagement of customers with brands (Sprott & Others, 2009, p 92). These were as follows:

I have a special bond with the brands I like

I consider my favourite brands to be a part of myself

I often feel a personal connection between my brands and me

Part of me is defined by important brands in my life

I feel as if I have a close personal connection with the brands I most prefer

I can identify with important brands in my life

There are links between the brands that I prefer and how I view myself

My favourite brands are an important indication of who I am

Sprott’s studies validated the importance of BESC from relevant marketing perspectives.

In one test researchers conducted five studies to determine how it impacts how consumer use brand knowledge and attitudes in their behaviour related to purchasing decisions (Sprott & Others, 2009, p 92). The study provided evidence that favoured brands are related to the self in terms of stronger self-brand associations, for those individuals who have higher BESC construals (Sprott & Others, 2009, p 92).

The second study determined that BESC predicted the recall of brand names that were associated with material possessions (Sprott & Others, 2009, p 92). Other studies led to the conclusion that BESC is related to how consumer form decisions on the basis of their brand perception, how they look at logos and marketing tactics, and how they make decisions about brand loyalty (Sprott & Others, 2009, p 92). The researchers conclude that the BESC construct or construal is a valuable tool in terms of its ability to identify how a consumer makes decisions based on loyalty and brand knowledge (Sprott & Others, 2009, p 92).

2.7. Relational Interdependence in Self-Construal (RISC)

Relational Interdependence in Self-Construal (RISC) refers to the tendency of individuals to think of their own selves in terms of relationships with others (Cross, Bacon and Morris, 2000, P 791).

Western researchers have traditionally assumed only one model of the self, known as the independent self-construal (Cross, Bacon and Morris, 2000, p 791 to 808). Such understanding is primarily based upon Anglo-American beliefs about individuality, personal rights and liberties, and the independence of individuals from social groups (Cross, Bacon and Morris, 2000, p 791 to 808). Such a self construal is shaped by the premise that an individual is fundamentally separate from others, such separation being caused by “one’s unique traits, abilities, preferences, interests, goals, and experiences, (which are) differentiated from social contexts, interpersonal relationships, and group memberships” (Cross, Bacon and Morris, 2000, P 791). The maintenance of this view is dependent upon efforts to be autonomous from others (Cross, Bacon and Morris, 2000, p 791 to 808).

Cross-cultural behavioural scientists however argue that other communities, for example those of Japan or India, tend to think of themselves “as interdependent with close others and as defined by important roles and situations”, and such tendencies could be prevalent in different degrees in western societies as well. “Members of many ethnic and religious groups tend to think of themselves as interdependent or relational. Women are more likely than men in American society to construct an interdependent or relational self-view”. (Cross, Bacon and Morris, 2000, P 791)

In contrast with the traditional western perspective, the interdependent self-construal is shaped by the argument that individuals are connected to others, such that the self is defined, to some extent, by significant relationships, roles and group memberships (Cross, Bacon and Morris, 2000, p 791 to 808). Individuals with high relational interdependence are likely to think and act in ways that reinforce their connectedness to others and fortify existing relationships (Cross, Bacon and Morris, 2000, p 791 to 808).

Cross et al, (2000), carried out three studies to elaborate the evolution and justification of a measure of RISC (Cross, Bacon and Morris, 2000, p 791 to 808). The studies revealed that (a) individuals who scored well on the RISC scale thought of their key relationships to be closer and more steadfast than others, (b) such individuals were more liable to consider the requirements and desires of others whilst making decisions and (c) the partners of individuals who scored well on the RISC scale perceived them to be open and receptive to their wishes and worries (Cross, Bacon and Morris, 2000, p 791 to 808).

The concept of RISC has strong implications for marketers and brand management professionals (Cross, Bacon and Morris, 2000, p 791 to 808). With people high in their RISC quotient likely to be significantly influenced by the opinions of people close to them (Cross, Bacon and Morris, 2000, p 791 to 808).

 

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

DMCA / Removal Request

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have your work published on UKEssays.com then please: