A field study employing a shopping simulation compared the purchasing behavior of working and middle class housewives. Explanations of behavioral differences were sought through an analysis of the respondents’ personal attributes. Substantial variation was found in the nature of decision making by social class, even when observed behavior was similar.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrimOrville G., et al., Personality and Decision Processes, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1962.
2.
CrowneD. P. and MarloweDavid, The Approval Motive: Studies in Evaluative Dependence, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1964.
3.
CunninghamScott M., “Perceived Risk and Brand Loyalty,” in CoxDonald F., ed., Risk Taking and Information Handling in Consumer Behavior, Boston: Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, 1967.
4.
JanisIrving L. and FieldPeter B., “The Janis and Field Personality Questionnaire,” in HovlandCarl I. and JanisIrving L., eds., Personality and Persuasibility, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959.
5.
KatonaGeorge and MuellerEva, “A Study of Purchase Decisions,” in ClarkLincoln H., ed., Consumer Behavior: The Dynamics of Consumer Reaction, New York: New York University Press, 1955.
6.
McConnellJ. Douglas, “The Development of Brand Loyalty: An Experimental Study,” Journal of Marketing Research, 5 (February 1968), 13–9.
7.
Lee RainwaterRichard P. Coleman, and HandelGerald, Workingman's Wife, New York: Oceana Publications, Inc., 1959.
8.
TuckerWilliam T., “The Development of Brand Loyalty.” Journal of Marketing Research, 1 (August 1964), 32–5.
9.
WebsterFrederick E.Jr., “The Deal-Prone Consumer,” Journal of Marketing Research, 2 (May 1965), 186–9.
10.
WilsonClark L., “Homemaker Living Patterns and Marketplace Behavior—A Psychometric Approach,” Proceedings, National Conference, American Marketing Association, 1966.
