Marketing trends

Journal of

Volume 2 Issue 1

January-June 2010

ISSn 0976-0881

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States
Gallayanee Yaoyuneyong Babu P George
University of Southern Mississippi, USA. Email: gallayanee.yaoyuneyong@usm.edu University of Southern Mississippi, USA. Email: babu.george@usm.edu

Abstract
Teenagers have emerged as a vital consumer segment in the recent times. The present paper explores some important aspects associated with the impulse buying Behaviour of teenagers in the case of apparel products. In particular, it examines which apparel products teenagers buy most impulsively, how teenagers buy impulsively, and how in-store browsing is associated with teenagers impulse buying of apparel products. It tests some of the relationships in the generic impulse buying model in the special case of teenage consumers. Theoretical, managerial, and consumer implications of the study are also discussed. Key Words Impulse Buying, Apparel Products, Teenagers, In-Store Browsing, Spending Power, United States.

Introduction
When people shop in stores, they often buy more than they originally intended. This type of purchasing Behaviour is referred to as impulse or unplanned purchasing. Iyer (1989) claimed that impulse buying Behaviour is a fact of life, since almost all customers have made an unplanned purchase at least once in their life while shopping. Therefore, it is not surprising that researchers in consumer Behaviour and retailing have been investigating this topic for more than fifty years (Clover, 1950; West, 1951). Since impulse buying has received much attention, it has got many different definitions (Piron, 1991). For example, Engel and Blackwell (1982) gave the definition of an impulse purchase as a spontaneous intention or a buying action undertaken without a problem previously having been consciously recognized prior to entering the store. Rook (1987) also defined impulse purchasing as a sudden, powerful and persistent urge to buy something. For this study, the definition of impulse buying is a sudden and immediate purchase with no pre-shopping intentions either to buy the specific product category or to fulfill a specific buying task, which was used by Beatty and Ferrell (1998).

Journal of

Marketing trends

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

However, this study is limited to the purchasing of apparel products. Previous impulse buying studies have been published in marketing and psychology journals. Most of the data in these surveys was collected in shopping malls or college classrooms. A review of the literature revealed a lack of research regarding the apparel product impulse buying habits specifically of teenagers. According to US Census Bureau National population report (2008), the United States population as of July 2007 for the age group 10-19 years was 41,787,999 people, while the population of the age group 20-29 years was 42,090,102 people and 30-39 years was 40,709,680 people. In addition, the male population in this age group was 21,406,796 people and the female population was 20,381,203 people. Although the population of the age group 20-29 years was greater than the age group 10-19 years, teenagers still represent a very large segment of the market, and have substantial purchasing powers compared to other segments such as working people, those with children, and older people. Shim and Koh (1997) stated that the teen population and its purchasing power are increasing more than any other population. In 2006, 12-to-19-yearold spent approximately $172 billion, with an average of $102 per week in the United States (Gale, 2007). Additionally, teenagers have their own strong opinions of how they want to spend their money and what to buy (Zollo, 1995), as well as influencing family spending decisions (Gale, 2007). Approximately two decades ago, many big companies (e.g. Coca-Cola, Revlon, and McDonalds) began to realize that the teen market segment could not be ignored any longer, since they have high spending power and also influence their parents choices of what to buy. Furthermore, popular apparel companies opened new stores targeting teens. For example, Hollister (a lower-key clothes store owned by Abercrombie & Fitch) expanded to 260 U.S. stores and had a 33% increase in sales (Riper, 2006). Many studies indicate that teenagers spent most of their money on clothes (Gunter & Furnham, 1998). According to Business Wire online magazine (2008), fashion, beauty and personal care, home furnishing, video games, digital media, and restaurants were the categories teenagers most spend their money in. Also, Hollister, West Coast Brands (e.g. Pacific Sunwear, Volcom, Quicksilver, Zumiez), American Eagle, Abercrombie & Fitch, and Forever 21 were ranked as the top apparel stores by teenagers. For girls, Hollister was rated as most preferred while West Coast Brands were voted to be the favorite store of young men.

The Study
The purpose of this study was to focus on the impulse buying Behaviour of youth from 14-21 years of age and their apparel purchasing tendencies. In other words, the study will indicate the relationship among impulse buying tendency, in-store browsing, and impulse buying for teenagers. Objectives and Research Questions This study was designed to:

Examine which apparel products teenagers buy most impulsively. Examine how teenagers buy impulsively. Interpret how in-store browsing is associated with teenagers impulse buying of apparel
products. On the one hand, the findings could be useful for storeowners, the marketers of such stores, and department managers. Results may facilitate increased sales and profits based on a
Journal of
Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

Marketing trends

better understanding of these potential customers because the storeowners, the marketers, and the department managers will have a better understanding of the impulse purchases of teenagers, their reactions to marketing strategies, and tactics to assess their needs and desires. On the other hand, the findings could increase teenagers awareness of impulsive buying habits and encourage them to make better use of their financial resources. The following specific research questions were used in this investigation:

Research Question 1: Are there associations among the in-store browsing, impulse
buying, and actual purchasing of apparel products (top/ bottom apparel products, jewellery, and accessories?

Research Question 2: Is there any association between amount of money available for

teenagers to spend weekly and in-store browsing, impulse buying, and the purchasing of apparel products?

Since the literature indicates that teenagers have high spending power, research question two was created to identify the relationship between the money they have per week and the impulse buying Behaviour.

Theoretical Framework
The framework of this study used components of the Beatty and Ferrell (1998) impulse buying model shown graphically below in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Theoretical Model for Impulse Buying by Beatty and Ferrell (1998) In their model, Beatty and Ferrell (1998) adopted the definitions of an impulse buying tendency and in-store browsing from previous research. Gerbing, Ahadi, and Patton (1987) gave the definition of an impulse buying tendency as a tendency to respond quickly to a given stimulus, without deliberation and evaluation of consequences (p.357). Bloch, Ridgeway, and Sherrell (1989) defined in-store browsing as the in-store examination of a
Journal of
Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

Marketing trends

retailers merchandise for recreational and / or informational purpose without an immediate impulse to buy (p.14). Beatty and Ferrell labelled impulse purchase (for this study impulse buying and impulse purchasing will be used interchangeably) as a sudden and immediate purchase with no pre-shopping intentions either to buy the specific product category or to fulfil a specific buying task (p.170). Additionally, Beatty and Ferrell (1998) concluded that the positive affect or feeling reflects a feeling of enthusiasm a person may have. A person is in a state of high energy, full concentration, and pleasant engagement. On the other hand, the negative affect involves aversive mood states including disgust, anger, fear, guilt, etc. A person may feel distress and experience a non-pleasurable feeling. In other words, low positive affect involves sadness and lethargy while low negative affect suggests calmness and serenity. For time and money available, they defined the meaning as the availability of time, budget or extra money that a person has for shopping on that day. Beatty and Ferrell also clarified the meaning of the felt urge to buy impulsively as a state of desire that is experienced upon encountering an object in the environment and shopping enjoyment as the pleasure one obtains in the shopping process (p. 172).

Research on Impulse Buying

Many studies put emphasis on the buying decision that is made after the consumer enters a retail environment. There are a number of studies that significantly contribute to impulse buying research. Also, numerous studies extended impulse buying research by investigating how merchandising stimuli affected buying, such as retail shelf location (Patterson, 1963, as cited in Rook, 1987), and the amount of shelf space (Cox, 1964). Stern (1962) discovered the types of circumstances in which consumers buy things without prior planning, and Kollat and Willett (1967) examined the relationships between consumers demographic and lifestyle characteristics and their impulse buying susceptibility. In 1977, the beverage industry estimated that nearly two-thirds of all purchases in the supermarket were impulse purchases (Cobb & Hoyer, 1986). In 1997, Hoyer and MacInnis claimed that retailers continually try to increase the number of impulse purchases through product displays, store design, package design, and sales. Additionally, Beatty and Ferrell (1998) proposed the impulse buying model. Because of the prevalence of impulse buying in todays marketplace, academic research on impulse buying has increased during the last decade (Jones, Reynolds, Weun, & Beatty, 2003). Examples of academic research on impulse buying are a study by Hausman (2000) investigating consumers motivations to engage in impulse buying. The objective of her research is to explain why impulse shoppers do not feel guilty spending money, although they frequently engage in impulse buying. Youn and Faber (2000) studied the relationships between three personal traits (lack of control, stress reaction, and absorption) and specific impulse buying cues. Dholakia (2000) developed the integrated model of consumption impulse formation and enactment (CIFE). Baumeister (2002) examined the three types of self-control failure that may be a signification cause of impulse buying. In 2003, Coley and Burgess conducted a comparison study on the differences between genders in their cognitive and affective impulsive buying.

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products

Only a few studies have focused on the impulse buying of apparel products. Han, Morgan, Kotsiopulos, and Kang-Park (1991) focused their impulse buying study on apparel products.

Journal of

Marketing trends

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

They investigated three groups of female consumers (textiles and clothing [TC], non-TC students and older non-student consumers) on four impulse buying dimensions which were: Planned impulse buying Reminder impulse buying Fashion-oriented impulse buying Pure impulse buying In 2002, Chen-Yu and Seock compared male/female adolescents and impulse/non-impulse shoppers on clothing purchase motivations, information sources and store selection criteria. Furthermore, Park and Lenon (2004) explored the impulse shopping of apparel products through television program exposure and its Para social interaction.

In-store Browsing
Although the information in regards to in-store browsing helps companies and marketers better understand impulse buying, it has received minimal attention in the literature (Beatty & Ferrell, 1998, cf. Bloch, Ridgway, & Sherrell, 1989, Bloch, Sherrell, & Ridgway, 1986). In 1961, Downs (as cited in Bloch, Ridgway, & Sherrell, 1989) argued that there are three possible outcomes from shopping: goods, information, and recreation. However, in 1979, Olshavsky and Granbois (as cited in Bloch, Ridgway, & Sherrell, 1989) stated that consumers pay more attention in their shopping trips to only two outcomes: information, and recreation. Regarding Bloch, Sherrell and Ridgway (1989), browsing could be considered as an ongoing search, which is a search activity that is independent of specific purchase needs or decisions. They stated that the ongoing search is similar to the pre-purchase search except it is not the center of attention for the upcoming purchasing problem. In other words, ongoing search is a regular Behaviour that happens on a regular basis, not only when needs exist. Jeon (1990) also claimed that browsing provides a recreational experience beyond the actual purchasing. Moreover, Bloch, Ridgway, and Sherrell (1989) based their browsing framework on the definition of browsing used by Bloch and Richins in 1983 as the in-store examinational and/or recreational purpose without an immediate intent to buy (p. 14).

In-store Browsing and Impulse Buying

In 1990, Jeon proposed that the components of impulse buying derive from the concepts of mood, psychological situation, in-store browsing, and impulse buying. Jeon (1990) also pointed out that pre-shopping mood has an influence on psychological situation, and instore browsing, which, in turn, affect impulse buying. Moreover, in-store browsing has a positive impact on the psychological situation. Finally, impulse buying should have a positive effect on the post-shopping mood. In-store browsing is a central Behaviour that will lead to impulse buying (Jeon, 1990). There are three main reasons for its significance.

First, a positive pre-shopping mood will enable customers to commit to a long shopping

time and more browsing. Basically, people in a good mood tend to have more confidence and freedom about what they are doing. Therefore, a customer in a good mood has a tendency to do more browsing because browsing helps to maintain the good mood.

Journal of

Marketing trends

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

 Second, in-store browsing has a positive influence on the psychological situation. In

other words, the longer one browses, the higher the likelihood of additional positive enforcement (i.e., the greater the favourableness of the psychological situation).

Third, due to the greater volume of encounters with potential in-store stimuli, when
someone browses longer and is exposed to more in-store stimulus, the greater the opportunity to buy impulsively.

Impulse Buying Tendency

Impulse buying occurs when one makes an unintended, immediate, and unreflective purchase. It is an unintended purchase because it happens while the shopper had no preshopping plan to purchase that item, and is not a part of the shopping task. This kind of purchase will be associated with a sudden urge to buy a specific item while shopping. The shopper will experience the desire and make a purchase right after seeing the article. However, not all unintended and unplanned purchases will be categorized as an impulse buying (Iyer, 1989; Kollat & Willett, 1967; Rook, 1987; Rook & Fisher, 1995). Rook (1987) affirmed that the impulsive buyer is less likely to consider the consequences or to think carefully before they purchase. Weun, Jones, and Beatty (1998) asserted that impulsive shoppers are focused only on the immediate gratification of responding to the urge to buy rather than on solving a pre-existing problem or on finding an item to fill a predetermined need. Thus, in the short run, they will make their decision to buy right after they see the products. It could be said that the impulsive buyer responds to the urge and makes a spontaneous decision to buy the item without delay.

Impulsive Buying Model: Situational Issues

Beatty and Ferrell (1998) developed a full model, including a set of both situational and individual variables. Many variables have been used in this model, including situational variables, individual difference variables, dependent variables that are positive and negative effects, browsing activity, and the urge to buy, all affecting whether or not an impulse purchase happens. The impulsive buying model (Figure 1) is concerned with situational issues since it can be focused on one point in time. In the model, time available, money available, and negative affect are assumed be positive, except the negative affect. This indicates that a positive mood has more effect on impulse than a negative mood. In addition, this model shows that impulse buying can be influenced by both individual difference variables, which are shopping enjoyment and an impulse buying tendency that in turn impact the endogenous and situational variables which are the opposites of time pressure and money available. This model is a result of many well-known studies regarding each variable. For example, the influences of in-store browsing and felt urge to buy impulsively were derived from studies such as Watson, Clark, and Tellegen (1988), Jarboe and McDaniel (1987), and Hoch and Lowenstein (1991). Positive and negative effect of mood variables on impulsive buying occurrences were influenced by the research of, for instance, Rook and Gardner (1993), Donovan and Rossiter (1982), Weinberg and Gottwald (1982), and Watson and Tellegen (1985).

10

Journal of

Marketing trends

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

The Research Method

Pilot Study To test the survey instrument, a pilot study of the survey was conducted among youth group members in the Ann Arbor Assembly of God Church. Respondents were asked to complete the questionnaire and identify any confusing questions or words. Their input was used to revise and ensure the survey questions were appropriate. The Instrument The impulse buying survey instrument consisted of items designed to measure: 1) instore browsing, 2) impulse buying tendency, and 3) actual impulse buying. Also, personal information was included in this instrument. The in-store browsing was measured using the six item 7 point Likert scale from 1) strongly disagree to 7) strongly agree from Beatty and Ferrell (1998). Respondents were asked to examine the statements regarding browsing Behaviour and indicate whether or not they agree with each statement. Six items of in-store browsing (e.g. I spent a lot of time just looking around) investigate the frequency of in-store browsing and scrutinize the reasons for the browsing whether for information or pleasure. To assess whether the six items that were summed to create the in-store browsing score formed a reliable scale, Cronbachs alpha was computed. The alpha for six items was 76 (mean = 27.22, SD = 6.7), which indicates that the items form a scale that has reasonable internal consistency reliability. The impulse buying tendency examined in this study was measured using two subscales from Beatty and Ferrell (1998). The propensity of impulse buying Behaviour has five items (e.g. When I go shopping, I buy things that I had not intended to purchase). Respondents were requested to indicate the degree of impulse buying Behaviour. The first two items were rated on a 7-point Likert scale from 1) very rarely to 7) very often. Respondents rated their level of agreement with the other three items along a 7-point continuum ranging from 1) strongly disagree to 7) strong agree. Five-point Likert type scales were used to measure both items of the impulsivity (e.g. My friends would describe me as). The impulse buying tendency scale demonstrated internal consistency with an alpha of .77 (mean = 21.98, SD = 6.14). The actual impulse buying consists of three categories which are 1) top apparel products (e.g. blouses, flannel shirts, sweaters, etc.), 2) bottom apparel articles (e.g. skirt, jeans, pants, etc.), and 3) jewellery and accessories (e.g. belt, hat, necklace, etc.). The questionnaire of each category was composed of two parts: five self-report descriptions in detail of the actual impulse purchase (e.g. What did you purchase?) and five 7-Likert scales in which respondents were asked to circle their level to agreement of each statement, ranging from 1) strongly disagree to 7) strongly agree. The alpha for the actual impulse buying of top apparel product (.81), (mean = 22.23, SD =6.5), for the actual impulse purchasing of bottom apparel article (.85), (mean = 21.89, SD = 6.9), and for the actual impulse jewellery and accessories purchase (.84), (mean = 23.12, SD = 6.7), indicated good internal consistency. The demographic information was the last part of this survey instrument. Respondents were requested to place a checkmark in the blank that corresponds to their answer. The six questions focused on gender, ethnicity, age, how much of amount of weekly spending money, shopping frequency, and shopping companion. The researchers received

11

Journal of

Marketing trends

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

permission from Beatty and Ferrell (1998) to use the self-administered questionnaire from her previous study. Two questions that tested for in-store browsing were taken from the empirical investigation of the relationship between affective states, in-store browsing, and impulse buying by Jeon (1990). In this survey, Eastern Michigan Universitys (EMU) Distributive Education Clubs of America (DECA) representatives helped to distribute the self-administered questionnaire to high school teachers in Michigan. Returned surveys were each assigned a number. Demographic information was summarized using means and frequencies. The research used sample means and frequencies to analyze the demographic information and used the descriptive statistical analysis to categorize and interpret Behaviour components of impulse buying. The Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was computed to assess the differences among shopping frequency on in-store browsing, impulse buying tendency, actual impulse buying of tops, bottom articles and jewellery / accessories. To determine the relationship between in-store browsing, reported urges to impulse buying, money availability, and also actual impulse buying, a Pearson correlation was used. t-test was utilized to compare the difference between males and females in regard to their in-store browsing, impulse buying tendency, top products, bottom articles, and jewellery / accessories.

Description of the Products included in the Survey

This survey included three groups of apparel products: top clothing, bottom clothing, and jewellery and accessories. For this investigation, each product was also categorized into subgroups as follows: For the top clothing, the three categories were: Casual wear including tank tops, t-shirts, sweatshirts, jerseys, tops, jackets, and hoodies. Dressy wear including blouses, poly shirts, suits, and sweaters Miscellaneous articles were coats, costumes, and underwear. For the bottom product, the two categories were: Casual wear including jeans and shorts. Dressy wear including dress, trousers and skirts. For jewellery and accessories, the four categories were; Jewellery including bracelets, chains, earrings, necklaces, rings and watches. Hair and makeup including lipsticks, makeup and nails. Shoes including shoes and boots. Other accessories including caps, hats, gloves, wallets, sunglasses, and purses.

Analysis and Discussion

Demographic Profile The age of respondents ranged from 14-21 with an average age of 16.75 (SD = 1.04). The respondents were further sub grouped by sex, though both male and female age groups were very similar in age. Male respondents were in the age group ranging from 14-21 with an average age of 16.97 (SD = 1.05). Female respondents were in the age group ranging from 14-19 with an average of 16.55 (SD = 0.99). The majority of the respondents were Caucasian but other ethnic groups were included. The average income was $ 53.02 per

12

Journal of

Marketing trends

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

week (SD = 47.85) which had a range of $2-300 where 40.30% of the respondents went shopping mostly 2-3 times a month. However, 42.1% of the females shopped 2-3 times a month, the highest percentage. This result is similar to the outcome of Chen-Yu and Seocks study in 2002. Higher frequency shopping, such as 4-6 times a week, was found to be largely done by females (27.6%). The data also indicated that most shopping was done after 3 pm. Overall for top clothing, 71.57% of the population went shopping in the late afternoon or evening. By gender, 70.73% of the male shoppers and 72.77% of female shoppers purchased top clothing articles during this later time period. Likewise, bottom clothing products were purchased primarily in the late afternoon or evening overall (74.44%) with males at 75% and females at 72.23%. For jewellery and accessory products, 72.63% of purchases overall were made during these later hours by 73.17% of the male shoppers and 72.22% of the female shoppers. It appears that higher levels of business were conducted in the late afternoon and evening than in the morning. Since the buyers in this study were from the school-age population, most of the shopping was done after school (after 3 p.m.) or during evening hours. According to the companion survey, 44.8% of the respondents went shopping with friends. Although they go shopping alone sometimes, they prefer the companionship of friends, or family because the response for this option was significantly higher for friends and family versus alone. Most Popular Impulse Buying Products Descriptive analysis was also used to further investigate the frequent impulse buying articles in each category. The top three items in the top clothing category for the total population were shirts (25.20%), t-shirts (23.57%), and sweaters (10.57%). For male respondents, a shirt was the most popular purchase (29.82%) followed by t-shirts (26.32%) and then hoodies (8.77%) and sweaters (8.77%). For female respondents, a shirt was also the most popular purchase (24.24%) followed by sweaters (18.18%) and t-shirts (18.18%) as the second-most-purchased products. Tank tops (12.12%) were the third choice and sweatshirts (10.61%) ranked fourth among popularly purchased items. Regarding bottom clothing products, jeans were the most popularly purchased product for both males and females, which matches the current trend of casual dressing. Jeans were purchased overall 52.63%, by 43.49% of males, and by 40.91% of females. Pants were the second-most-popular purchase, where the total respondents showed 43.16% and males and females at 41.51% and 28.79% respectively. The skirt was the third-most-popular item among female respondents, purchased by 24.24%. Shorts were the third-most-popularly purchased bottom product for males (13.21%). The most popularly purchased jewellery / accessory product was shoes (23.62% for overall, 24.14% for males, and 23.19% females). A hat was the most popular purchase in accessories for male buyers, which represented 27.59%. The necklace was the second place for female respondents (15.94%); however, necklaces were the third-most-popular purchased product for male respondents at 10.34%. The third-most-popular for female respondents was earrings, which were 13.04% of purchases.

Responses to Research Questions

Research Question 1: Are there associations among the in-store browsing, impulse buying, and actual purchasing of apparel products (top, bottom apparel products and jewellery / accessories)?

13

Journal of

Marketing trends

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

Table 1 shows that all 10 pairs of variables were significantly correlated. The strongest positive correlation, which would be considered a large effect size according to Cohen (1988), was between top and bottom apparel articles, r (128) = .702, p =.00. This means that teenage shoppers who buy top articles were likely to buy bottom apparel products. Buying tops was also positively associated with jewellery and accessories as well [r (118) = .682, p = 00]; this is a large size effect according to Cohen (1988). The smallest group of positive associations, which would also consider a small to medium effect size, is a correlation between in-store browsing and impulse buying tendency, top apparel products, accessories, and bottom apparel articles in that order, r (145, 128, 130, and 123) = .374, .305, .269, and .208, p < .01. This suggests that teenage buyers who browse more were likely to have a high tendency to be impulse shoppers, and purchase top and/or bottom articles and/or jewellery / accessories. Table 1: Inter correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations for Five Variables S. No. 1 2 3 4 5
*p < 0.01

Variable Browsing N Impulse Buying N Top Articles N Bottom Articles N Accessories N

1 ------

2 .374* 145 -----

3 .305* 128 .507* 128 ----

4 .208* 123 .457* 123 .702* 118 ---

5 .269* 130 .385* 130 .682* 118 .622* 114 --

M 4.55 4.40 22.23 21.89 23.12

SD 1.12 6.51 6.91 6.75 1.23

In addition, Pearson correlations were computed among fifteen pairs of variables, which were how people would describe the respondents impulsive Behaviour, lack of preshopping intention, impulse buying tendency, and all three apparel product categories (Table 2). The results indicate that all pairs of variables were significantly correlated. Even though the highest correlation between impulse buying tendency and buying things with no pre-shopping intention was negative: r (141) = -.650, p < .01. The 5 point Likert scale ranged from 1) almost every shopping trip to 5) almost no shopping trips. It actually means that teenagers who have a high impulse buying tendency were likely to buy things for which they have no pre-shopping intention.

14

Journal of

Marketing trends

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

Table 2: Inter correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations for Six Variables S. No. Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6
*p < 0.01

1 -------

2 -.487* 140 ------

3 .619* 141

4 .425* 124

5 .319* 121

6 .344* 127

M 2.94 2.98 4.40 22.23 21.89 23.12

SD 1.01 1.23 1.23 6.51 6.92 6.75

Describe as N No pre-shop intent N Impulse Buying N Top Articles N Bottom Articles N Accessories N

-.650* -.519* -.469* -.417* 141 125 122 128 ----.507* 128 ---.457* 123 .702* 118 --.385* 130 .682* 118 .622* 114 --

Research Question 2: Is there any association between amount of money available for teenagers to spend weekly and in-store browsing, impulse buying, and the purchasing of apparel products? To investigate if there was a statistically significant association between amount of money available for teenagers to spend weekly and in-store browsing, impulse buying, and all three apparel categories respectively, a correlation matrix for several variables was computed. The results showed that there was not a correlation between amount of available money and other variables at all. The possible explanation could be that teenagers still received allowance from their parents as well as extra money from their part-time jobs, which indicate that they may have money available all the time. Therefore, weekly available money is not considered a significant factor for their impulse buying Behaviour. One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was computed to assess the differences among shopping frequency on in-store browsing, impulse buying tendency, actual impulse buying of top, and bottom articles and jewellery / accessories. A statistically significant difference was found among the shopping frequency on impulse buying tendency, F(3, 140) = 3.66, p = .014, on actual purchase of top product, F(3, 123) = 8.38, p < .01, on actual buying of bottom apparel articles, F(3, 118) = 5.09, p = .002, and on actual buying of jewellery / accessories, F(3, 125) = 2.88, p = .039. Tables 3 and 4 show means and standard deviations comparing among the frequency of monthly shopping. Post hoc Tukey HSD tests indicate that impulse buying tendency differed significantly only with the once a month shopping trip and the more than 6 times a month shopping trip (p <.05). Likewise, there were also significant mean differences on actual impulse purchasing of top apparel products between once a month shopping trips and the other three groups (p <.05). For the actual impulse purchasing of bottom apparel products and jewellery / accessories, post hoc Tukey HSD tests show that only once a monthly shopping trips and more than 6 times shopping trips monthly differed significantly (p <.05).

15

Journal of

Marketing trends

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

Table 3: Means and Standard Deviations Comparing Four Monthly Frequent Apparel Shopping Groups on in-Store Browsing and Impulse Buying Tendency Shopping Frequency Once 2-3 times 4-5 times 6 times Total n 41 58 20 25 144 Browsing M 4.44 4.47 4.69 4.85 4.56 SD 1.37 0.91 0.99 1.19 1.12 Impulse M 3.97 4.42 4.68 4.90 4.41 SD 1.22 1.00 1.04 1.58 1.22

Table 4: Means and Standard Deviations Comparing Four Monthly Frequent Apparel Shopping Groups on Actual Impulse Purchase of Apparel Products Shopping Frequency Once 2-3 times 4-5 times 6 times Total Top n 38 55 16 18 127 M 19.08 22.35 24.63 27.06 22.32 SD 6.15 5.40 6.60 6.49 6.44 Bottom n 36 53 17 16 122 M 19.03 22.58 22.24 26.48 21.99 SD 6.39 6.33 6.09 7.89 6.86 Jewellery n 37 55 17 20 129 M 21.14 23.09 24.88 26.05 23.22 SD 7.21 6.27 6.19 6.16 6.67

t-test was utilized to compare the difference between males and females in regards to their in-store browsing, impulse buying tendency, actual impulse buying of top products, bottom articles, and jewellery / accessories. Table 5 shows that males were significantly lower than females on in-store browsing, impulse buying tendency, top products, bottom articles, and jewellery / accessories respectively, (p < .05). This finding supports previous research indicating that women were more likely to buy impulsively on apparel products (Coley & Burgess, 2003; Dittmar, Beattie, & Friese, 1995, 1996; Rook & Hoch, 1985). Table 5: Comparison of Male and Female Teenagers on In-store Browsing, Impulse Buying Tendency, Top Apparel Articles, Bottom Apparel Products, and Jewellery / Accessories
Variable Browsing Males Females Impulse Males Females Top Males Females Bottom Males Females Jewellery Males Females N 69 76 69 76 59 69 55 68 60 70 M 4.23 4.84 3.81 4.93 20.76 23.48 20.22 23.25 21.68 24.36 SD 1.32 .81 1.19 1.01 6.73 6.09 6.96 6.62 7.03 6.29 T -3.31a -6.10 -2.40 -2.47 -2.29 Df 110.2a 143 126 121 128 P .001 .000 .018 .015 .024

a. The t and df were adjusted because variances were not equal.

16

Journal of

Marketing trends

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

The results from this study revealed the most frequently impulsively bought products in each category. This investigation also provided the outcomes of the most repeatedly impulsively purchased products by gender. In addition, this research found that there was a strong association on buying bottom clothing products while purchasing top clothing products, as well as buying jewellery and accessories while purchasing top clothing products. Also, buying jewellery / accessories has a strong relationship with buying bottom apparel articles. However, the amount of money available for teenagers each week does not have any association with any variables at all, which turned out to be a surprise since it is indicated in the literature that they have high spending power.

Concluding Remarks
The research findings have the potential to enrich the body of knowledge among academics as well as practitioners. By adapting the original model of Beatty and Ferrell for this study, the three variables (the Impulse Buying Tendency, In-store Browsing, and Impulse Buying) were tested only on the teenage age group. According to the research questions and objectives, teenagers who have an impulse buying tendency tended to do more impulse purchasing. However, the results show that this relationship only has a small to medium effect compared to the relationship among the purchasing of apparel products. In regard to the results of this study, retailers and manufacturers should create products that will attract purchasers for impulse buying interest of these three apparel categories. Consequently, the store display is found to be very important for teenagers. Iyer (1989) suggested three traditional perspectives to be used to explain unplanned purchasing: (1) characteristics of the product being purchased, (2) characteristics of the consumer, and (3) characteristics of the store display. For the third perspective, the characteristics of the store display, the Progressive Grocer (as cited in Iyer, 1989) reported that MaKenna (1966) and McClure and West (1969) all agreed that point-of-purchase and end-of-aisle displays have been shown to stimulate unplanned buying. It should be noted that the research questions in this investigation were directed towards teenagers and on apparel products only. In other shopping situations and other age groups, the process of impulse buying may function quite differently. Moreover, in this study, the researcher adapted the original model of Beatty and Ferrell (1998) by studying only three of their variables as shown in Figure 1. Limitations associated with the sample used for data collection needs some mention, too: First, the majority of the sample in this study is Caucasian. Therefore, these results might not represent other ethnic groups. However, there was a limited diversity of ethnic participants in this study. Second, this research was conducted in high schools in a Midwestern state. These results may reflect the population of the mid-west area in the United States, but there is a possibility that a majority of the results could apply to other areas in the United States. Third, for the survey questionnaire, it might be difficult to get accurate information for actual impulse purchases because the respondents did not always answer this questionnaire correctly after their shopping experiences. Moreover, in addition to the survey questionnaire, interviews could be conducted that will strengthen results.

17

Journal of

Marketing trends

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

References
Baumeister, R.F. (2002), Yielding to Temptation: Self-Control Failure, Impulsive Purchasing, and Consumer Behaviour, Journal of Consumer Research, 28(4), 670-676. Beatty, S.E. and Ferrell, M.E (1998), Impulse Buying: Modeling its Precursors, Journal of Retailing, 74(2), 169-191. Bloch, P .H. and Richins, M.L (1983), A Theoretical Model for the Study of Product Importance Perceptions, Journal of Consumer Research, 47, 69-81. Bloch, PH., Sherrell, D.L. and Ridgeway, N.M. (1986), Consumer Search: An Extended Framework, Consumer Research, 13, 119-126. Bloch, P .H., Ridgeway, N.M. and Sherrell, D.L. (1989), Extending the Concept of Shopping: An Investigation of Browsing Activity, Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 17, 1321. Chen-Yu, H.J. and Seock, Y. K. (2002), Adolescents Clothing Purchase Motivations, Information Sources, and Store Selection Criteria: A Comparison of Male/Female and Impulse/Nonimpulse Shoppers, Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 31(1), 50-77. Clover, V.T. (1950), Relative Importance of Impulse Buying in Retail Stores, Journal of Marketing Channels, 25, 66-70. Cobb, C.J., & Hoyer, W.B. (1986), Planned Versus Impulse Purchase Behaviour, Journal of Retailing, 62(4), 384. Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical Power and Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Coley, A. and Burgess, B. (2003), Gender Differences in Cognitive and Affective Buying, Journal of Fahsion Marketing and Management, 7(3), 282 - 295. Cox, K. (1964), The Responsiveness of Food Sales to Shelf Space Changes in Supermarkets, Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 1(2), 63-67. Dholakia, U.M. (2000), Temptation and Resistance: An Integrated Model of Consumption Impulse Formation and Enactment, Psychology & Marketing, 17(11), 955-982. Dittmar, H., Beattie, J., and Friese, S. (1995), Gender Identity and Material Symbols: Objects and Decision Considerations in Impulse Purchases, Journal of Economic Psychology, 16, 491-511. Dittmar, H., Beattie, J. and Friese, S. (1996), Objects, Decision Considerations and SelfImages in Mens and Womens Impulse Purchases, Acta Psychological, 93(1-3), 187206. Donovan, R.J. and Rossiter, J.R. (1982), Store Atmosphere: An Environmental Psychology Approach, Journal of Retailing, 58(1), 34. Engle, J. and Blackwell, R. (1982), Consumer Behaviour. Chicago: Dryden Press. Gale, D. (2007, March 16, 2009). Purchasing Power of Kids and Teens: Restaurants Need to Recognize the Influence and Consumer Strength of Young Customers Restaurants & Institutions. Gerbing, D.W., Ahadi, S.A., and Patton, J.H. (1987), Toward a Conceptualization of Impulsivity: Components Across the Behavioural and Self-Report Domains, Multivariate Behavioural Research, 22(3), 357. Gunter, B., and Furnham, A. (1998), Children as Consumers London: Routledge.
Journal of
Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

18

Marketing trends

 Han, Y.K., Morgan, G.A., Kotsiopulos, A., and Kang-Park, J (1991), Imoulse Buying Behaviour of Apparel Purchasers, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 9(3), 15-21. Hausman, A. (2000), A Multi-method Investigation of Consumer Motivations in Impulse Buying Behaviour, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(5), 403-419. Hoch, S. J. and Loewenstein, G. F. (1991), Time consistent Preferences and Consumer Self-Control, Journal of Consumer Research, 17(4), 492-507. Hoyer, W. D. and MacInnis, D. J. (1997). Consumer Behaviour New York Houghton Mifflin. Iyer, E. S. (1989),Unplanned Purchasing: Knowledge of Shopping Environment and Time Pressure, Journal of Retailing, 65(1), 40. Jarboe, G. R. and McDaniel, C. D. (1987), A Profile of Browsers in Regional Shopping Malls, Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 15(1), 46-53. Jeon, J.O. (1990), An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship between Affective States, In-store Browsing, and Impulse Buying, Unpublished Dissertation, University of Alabama, Tuscalossa. Jones, M.A., Reynolds, K.E., Weun, S., and Beatty, S. E. (2003), The Product Specific Nature of Impulse Buying Tendency, Journal of Business Research, 56(7), 505-511. Kollat, D. T. and Willett, R. P . (1967), Customer Impulse Purchasing Behaviour. Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 4(1), 21-31. Park, J. H., and Lennon, S. J. (2004), Television Apparel Shopping: Impulse Buying and Perasocial Interaction, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 22(3), 135-144. Piron, F. (1991), Defining Impulse Purchasing, Advances in Consumer Research, 18(1), 509-514. Riper, T.V. (2006), Brand me, Retrieved March 16, 2009 from http://www.forbes. com/2006/02/08/pepsi-nike-threadless-cx_tvr_0209teenbrands.html Rook, D.W. (1987), The Buying Impulse, Journal of Consumer Research, 14(2), 189-199. Rook, D.W. and Fisher, R.J. (1995), Normative Influences on Impulsive Buying Behaviour, Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 305-313. Rook, D.W. and Gardner, P M. (1993), In the Mood: Impulse Buyings Affective . Antecedents, Research in Consumer Behaviour, 6, 1-28. Rook, D. W. and Hoch, S. J. (1985), Consuming Impulse, Advances in Consumer Research, 12, 23-27. Shim, S. and Koh, A. (1997), Profiling Adolescent Consumer Decision-Making Styles: Effects of Socialization Agents and Social-Structural Variables, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 15(1), 50-59. Sixteenth Semi-Annual Piper Jaffray: Taking stock with teens study indicates bottom may be nearing for discretionary recession. (2008, October 9). Business Wire. Retrieved May 18, 2009 from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2008_Oct_9/ai_n30883345/ Stern, H. (1962), The Significance of Impulse Buying Today, Journal of Marketing, 26(2), 59-62. U.S. Census Bureau (2008), National Sex and Age Population Estimate. Retrieved March 14, 2009 from http://www.census.gov/popest/national/asrh/NC-EST2007-sa.html Watson, D., Clark, L.A., & Tellegen, A. (1988), Development and Validation of brief Measures of Positive and Negative Affect: The PANAS Scales, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063-1070.
Journal of
Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States

19

Marketing trends

 Watson, D. and Tellegen, A. (1985), Toward a Consensual Structure of Mood, Psychological Bulletin, 98(2), 219-235. Weinberg, P and Gottwald, W. (1982), Impulsive Consumer Buying as a Result of . Emotions, Journal of Business Research, 10(1), 43-57. West, C. J (1951), Results of Two Years of Study into Impulse Buying, Journal of Marketing, 15(3), 362-363. Weun, S., Jones, M. A., and Beatty, S. E. (1998), Development and Validation of the Impulse Buying Tendency Scale, Psychological Reports, 82(2), 1123-1133. Youn, S., and Faber, R. J. (2000), Impulse Buying: Its Relation to Personality Traits and Cues, Advances in Consumer Research, 27(1), 179-185. Zollo, P . (1995), Talking to Teens, American Demographics, November, 17, 22

20

Journal of

Marketing trends

Impulse Buying of Apparel Products: A Study Conducted Among Midwestern Teenagers in the United States