ROMANIAN JOURNAL OF

EXPERIMENTAL APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY

VOL. 4, ISSUE 4 – www.rjeap.ro

54

THE EFFECT OF SHELF DISPLAY ON PURCHASING

DECISION

TUDOR CAIUS-CIPRIAN a

, TOMA ANDREEA ALEXANDRAb

a,b University of Bucharest,

Department of Psychology

Abstract

The present study is centered on supermarket retail merchandising techniques and

their effects on the consumer’s choice. Method: Participants were a number of 42 people

answered the questionnaire, aged between 18 and 30 years old, intellectuals that surf the

web on a daily basis, 31 women and 11 men. The consumer buyer survey (Tudor & Toma,

2013) is a questionnaire composed of 3 types of multiple choice questions. Results: The

first hypothesis concerning the difference between the opinions stated by psychology

students and their buying habits for some of the products they regularly buy has been

confirmed (p<0.05). The second and the third hypotheses regarding the consumer behavior

influenced by salary and gender have not been confirmed (p>0.05).

The final results show that, even though the students know that they should act like

rational buyers, who choose products according to their intrinsic value, when describing

how they act in real situations, they basically admit to behaving differently, in the sense

that they are influenced in one way or another by marketing policies, regardless of gender

or salary level.

Keywords: shelf display, purchasing decision, consumer behaviour, retail.

Cuvinte cheie: așezare pe raft, decizie de cumpărare, comportamentul

consumatorului, comerț cu amănuntul.

1. INTRODUCTION

In the last two decades, countless specialists have tried to explain how

favourable presentation of goods influences consumer purchasing decision. From

*Corresponding author: Caius Ciprian Tudor. Email: caiustudor@yahoo.com

55

placing chocolates at the eye level of little children, up to offering coupon

discounts, so the customer can have a benefit only by returning to the same store,

we can say that merchandisers have tested almost everything. One day, for

instance, Wal-Mart has shortened the shelf road between diapers and beer, because

retailers observed that most buyers of diapers were family men that had the habit of

purchasing their merchandises on Fridays, before weekend. But the same men were

also the traditional buyers of beer, unless they somehow forgot to do so. The

decision to place an "island" of beer near the shelves with diapers increased sales

of both products. All shelf presentation experiments were compared relentlessly

with sales results. So today, any change in goods presentation that produces an

increase of sales is considered "good". For example, changing the shelf for a

solicited product in order to persuade customers to visit less frequented areas it is

no longer seen by retailers as an unpleasant problem for buyers, it's just a

"marketing technique." As psychologists, the authors wanted to know if the buyers

are or are not fully aware that they accept to be "seduced" by special techniques

that influence their purchasing decision. The purpose of this paper is precisely to

make a comparison between what customers think about their method of buying

and their actual behaviour, which might be, in fact, suggested with ability by

merchandisers.

The first theories of consumer purchasing behaviour were issued by

economists but, because processes that preceded the decision were structurally

different, in order to understand consumer’s way of thinking, in time, emerged the

need for comprehensive analysis, able to provide reliable predictions, and this

imposed an interdisciplinary approach in which psychology played an important

role. In the early 20th century, scientists (Adams, 1913 Hollingworth, 1913 Scott,

1908) said that attention, interest, desire and action are the four steps that

determine people to consume, and the acronym AIDA (Attention - Interest - Desire

- Action) consisting of the initials of the four stages of purchase, was the name of

the first successful marketing model, used even today, in many advertising

campaigns. Classical economic theory assumes that consumer behaviour always

involves a rational choice. This theory is structured around some axioms like: (1)

the consumer has complete knowledge on both his needs and the available

alternatives for satisfying these needs, (2) consumer preferences are independent

from the environment within they appear, (3) decision to buy a product consist in

resources allocation, considering a maximum of utility under the conditions

determined by the budget constraints, (4) the consumer evaluates each alternative

on the basis of coherence principle.

In the mid-twentieth century, while establishing the best methods of

promoting a product, researchers have reconsidered their views and concluded that,

in order to predict consumer behaviour, the necessary analysis will be not only

economical but also psychological, social or even socio-anthropological.

56

1.1. THEORIES ABOUT CONSUMER’S PSYCHOLOGY

Starting from a fundamental tri-factorial model, based on cognition, emotion

and behaviour, building on the common sense that characterize them, Americans

have taken three basic verbs (to Learn, to Like and to Do) and by mixing them

have obtained the fundamentals for several theories. The six variants resulted refer

to the consumer's process of thinking while taking the decision to buy:

• Learning Theory (Learn - Like - Do);

• Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Do – Like – Learn);

• Minimal Involvement Theory (Learn – Do – Like);

• Impulse Buying Theory (Like – Do – Learn);

• Attributed Learning Theory (Like – Learn – Do);

• Promotions Theory (Do – Learn – Like).

Because this study is focused on investigating the relationship between the

shopping habits of supermarket customers, and the techniques used by merchants

to determine clients to buy, not what they want or what they need, but mainly what

the store wants to sell, we will present just those theories explaining the

effectiveness of the marketing methods that involve innovative shelf presentation.

One of the classic marketing methods relies on learning through observation.

This theory relies on the natural tendency of the individual to mimic herding

behaviour. The imitation is always a shorter path to learning, because the

individual should just copy other people's actions. As such, in order to stimulate

imitation, this kind of commercials offer images with people using the product and

enjoy notoriety and sympathy from the audience. If the advertisement is well done,

the consumer is half convinced. While he may still be skeptical, the client will buy

the product at least one time, to test it. In theory, the product quality should be the

feedback, positive or negative, which will stabilize the decision to purchase in the

future. If the product has those attributes that satisfy consumers’ expectations, the

advertisement will reach its goal (Kapferer, 2002). However, cognitive dissonance

theory shows that, even if he has been fooled, the client still will not rush to regret

the act of buying. The term „cognitive dissonance” designates an uncomfortable

feeling that occurs when a conflict arises between the beliefs, ideas, values or the

emotional responses of an individual. To avoid this discomfort, people

conveniently forget or minimize the negative aspects of their choice.

In marketing, the advertisement should help consumers feel the impulse of

buying immediately (so it starts with action - Do), promising that the merchandise

is so good that satisfaction is guaranteed (Like), while the client is supposed to

understand the product's qualities only by using it (Learn). To "force the hand", the

ad must contain pressure factors, such "limited offer", "just for those calling the

next minute," etc. The theory relies on the fact that the individual buys the product

57

as not to "lose" the opportunity and then deemed to have been a good decision just

to avoid the discomfort of thinking that he made a mistake. To avoid suffering, the

client refuses to acknowledge the positive aspects of the rejected alternative and

"forgets" the negative aspects of his election. This theory gave rise to consumer

loyalty campaigns in favour of known product brands (Festinger, 1957). Through

loyalty campaigns, the customer who already bought the product is ensured that he

made a good choice, and the manufacturer investments in new commercials are

meant to ensure the client that the producer is relentless to avoid any

disappointment in the future, hoping for a consistent and long-lasting relationship

with its customers.

Minimal involvement theory, formulated by Krugman (1962) says that an

advertising campaign quietly builds an intense and sustained influence on

consumers, the effect being more powerful when it relies on commercials using

dull messages, so common that are nearly trivial, as long as the message avoids all

negative elements, of course. In the first moment, the influence of such of a

campaign is low, but it will withstand in the long-term memory of all auditors, and

someday, when they will stand in front of a shelf, they will choose, without

knowing why, the most widely publicized product.

Since the early 20th century, by studying the way in which human perception

operates, Ebbinghaus (1902) has come to the conclusion that when an individual

must choose an object, a word or a product which he doesn't give too much

importance, he will choose the one that has been in his range of perception the

most times. Theory does not also work on objects, words or individual products to

which they attach importance, because there is a cognitive-affective "filter" before

the decision. Products and messages toward which individuals manifest little

interest or no interest at all were called by Krugman "trivia". They will be learned

and forgotten repeatedly from commercials until someday, when the individual will

consider them trustworthy and he will buy them. Krugman says that you never

know when the "day of action" will occur, but believes that an important catalyst is

the circumstantial context. That is exactly the shelf display policy!

Researchers say that there is a so-called "pure impulse" of purchasing which

determines people to buy, although the product purchased is absolutely unknown.

To explain this phenomenon some motivational and non-motivational models have

been proposed. When the new product meets the individual needs, the spontaneous

impulse is perfectly reasonable, in accordance with motivation principles.

Otherwise, another theory explains the phenomenon, stating that the impulse of

buying has an emotional component (Like) that causes the purchasing behaviour

(Do), and the individual will find out everything about the product (Learn) only

after using it. In this case, the buyer has only the "impression" that what he buys is

necessary, and experts say that he acquires the product as a result of self-image

(Dittmar et al., 1995). The more the product can reflect a desirable image about the

58

subject, the more that individual will be willing to pay extra for that product.

Women will buy jewelry and cosmetics on impulse, while men would rather buy a

car or sports items.

And lastly, there is the attributed learning theory, which emphasizes the

importance of "brand" in consumer's process of decision. This theory explains why

people are struggling to buy certain products, although most of the time they are

very expensive. Brand assures consumer's emotional involvement (Like) and

ensures the product has those qualities that the client already knows (Learn) even

before buying the product (Do). Currently, the consumer is saturated with offers,

so, for him, the brand is a certain amount of attributes of a product guaranteed by

the "impressions of other consumers that have already used" (Ogilvy, 1983).

Research shows that people who are emotionally attached to a brand sometimes

display „highly emotional often irrational behaviour, and tend to create explanatory

excuses, resembling obsessive-compulsive tendencies" (Iliescu & Petre, 2010).

1.2. SHELF DISPLAY TECHNIQUES

According to Udrescu (2006) to reach a final decision, the individual goes

through several stages: (1) awareness of the need, (2) searching for information, (3)

evaluation of alternatives, (4) purchase and (5) post-purchase evaluation. The

general scheme for purchasing decisions was outlined as follows:

Worldwide supermarkets have about the same policy of arranging the shelves,

not only because it is the most effective presentation, but also because buyers

behave the same everywhere.

Optimum sizing of these areas has immediate and direct consequences on

both the turnover and the level of customer service. All retailers can choose

between three basic options for the layout districts in store:

• Shaped grid layout: surface is rectangular and corridors are parallel. Shelf

display is formal and controlling the flow of customers in the store is guaranteed.

This kind of shelf display is adopted by supermarkets and self-services. It uses

efficiently the available space, creates a pleasant and organized environment and

facilitates the purchase of goods by placing the items in a standardized way.

• Irregularly shaped shelf display: is informal, using the setting of various

kinds and sizes (as in the bazaar). The essential advantage is to create a relaxing

atmosphere, a friendly environment that encourages the customer to buy more and

to increase the number of goods purchased on the spur of the moment. This type of

location does not use space as efficiently as the previous method and can create

safety problems, if appropriate measures in this regard are not provided.

• Arrangement in boutiques: it divides the store into a number of individual

sale areas, each with a specific type of products. Like a number of specialty stores

assembled together in one. The layout can create a unique purchase environment.

59

Department stores sometimes use this system to create a distinct image for each

buying zone.

Another aspect of goods display is shelf positioning. Based on the above

theories, traders know that the display of goods on the shelf may influence the

choice of the buyer, and therefore they try to implement strategies that give the

buyer the impression that he bought exactly what he wanted, when - in fact - he

bought just what the trader wanted to sell (Enache, 2005). One of the strategies

often used because it has good results is to place the goods within the reach of the

buyer. As mentioned by Scorţar (2005), there are three levels, different as potential

of sales, on which goods can be exhibited: the ground, the eye level and up above.

Even producers ask traders to position merchandise so as to be easily seen and

reached by shoppers, respectively on shelves at eye level. For their products to be

positioned in the desired place, manufacturers pay a so-called "preferred position

fee", which is just one of the many forms that toll shelf may take (Enache, 2005).

Shelf fee also applies to additional position (goods occupy more space than is

necessary), to the secondary position (an existing product on the shelf is also

displayed in another area of the store, usually somewhere on the main traffic route,

in the form of islands) or to exclusive placement (the manufacturer desires his

products to be displayed on a whole shelf) (Enache, 2005).

2. OBJECTIVE AND HYPOTHESES

2.1. OBJECTIVE

The exploration of a possible link between merchandising techniques and

the decisional process of buying in supermarkets and hypermarkets.

Highlighting possible connections between shelf placement and product

sales for master students of the College of Psychology and Educational

Sciences that are studying consumer psychology.

Highlighting differences between genders regarding the effectiveness of

shelf placement.

Highlighting differences between low and high income regarding the

effectiveness of shelf placement.

2.2. HYPOTHESES

There is a statistically significant difference between the opinions stated by

psychology students and their buying habits for some of the products they regularly buy.

Salary is a criterion that influences buying behaviour, in the sense that those with low salaries are more careful and therefore less affected by

60

merchandising.

Gender influences consumer behaviour in the sense that women are more careful and therefore less affected by merchandising.

3. METHOD

3.1. PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS

In order for the obtained results to be as representative as possible for the

chosen objective and topic, the effect of shelf display on purchasing decision a

questionnaire was made with items relating to consumer behaviour both indirectly

(by asking for opinions) and directly (using hypothetical situations). (See Annex 1)

The subjects were chosen from the ranks of master students of the College of

Psychology and Educational Sciences that are studying consumer psychology and

know all the theories regarding buying behaviour, as well as the techniques used by

merchants when selling their goods.

In order to obtain relevant information, the questionnaire’s items received

different scores, according to the measure in which the behaviour described by the

subject was more or less in line with store policies regarding the shelving of

products. After it was uploaded online the questionnaire, 42 people answered the

questionnaire. The characteristics of the participants were as follows: intellectuals

that surf the web on a daily basis; aged between 18 and 30 years old; 31 female and

11 male participants.

3.2. INSTRUMENTS

The consumer buyer survey (Tudor & Toma, 2013) can be seen at Anexa 1.

The primary instrument used was a questionnaire composed of 3 types of multiple

choice questions:

• a number of 5 questions relating to their personal preferences regarding

product types and buying behaviour (2, 3, 4, 5 and 10);

•a number of 5 questions relating to possible measures taken by the subject in

specific, predefined situations

(1, 6, 7, 8 and 9);

•a number of 3 questions relating to the subjects’ age, gender and income.

All answers were scored according to how much they represent buying

behaviour the store favourises through its self-placement.

61

3.3. PROCEDURE

The testing required accessing the questionnaire online in order to complete it.

All the 42 participants were asked to carefully read the text and express their

sincere opinion. Subject scores were compared according to these criteria:

• The importance of product self-placement;

• The differences between genders regarding self-placement influenced

buying behaviour.

• The differences between low and high income regarding self-placement

influenced buying behaviour.

3.4. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

This study is focused on the influence merchandising has on consumer buying

behaviour. As such, the dependent variable is represented by the numeric score

obtained by the subjects on the questions relating to measures taken in specific,

predefined situations, while their opinion in general is considered uninfluenced by

merchandising and therefore independent.

4. RESULTS

4.1 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE’S

RESULTS

The questionnaire’s multiple choice items were scored according to how closely

the answers matched merchandising policies, on a scale of 0 to 4, with 0 being the

lowest score. Any answers that were not chosen by any of the subjects were

omitted for the sake of brevity. The results have been organised into value tables

for each question, and can be seen in table 1 to 10.

Table 1. Item 1: Where do you think a supermarket product should be positioned

so you notice it more easily?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

On the stands next to cash registers 4 9.5 9.5 9.5

On the shelves themselves 14 33.3 33.3 42.9

At the ends of the shelf next to the promotional offers

9 21.4 21.4 64.3

The place does not matter, looking for the

desired product 15 35.7 35.7 100.0

Total 42 100.0 100.0

62

In table 1 can be observed that 33.3% from the participants choose the answer

“On the shelves themselves” and 35.7% choose the answer “The place does not

matter, looking for the desired product”. Hence we can conclude that consumers

are interested in a proportion of 35.7% in choosing the desired product.

Table 2. Item 2: When buying some shampoo what are your selection criteria?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Price 2 4.8 4.8 4.8

Brand 6 14.3 14.3 19.0

Promotional offers 2 4.8 4.8 23.8 Product quality 32 76.2 76.2 100.0

Total 42 100.0 100.0

In table 2 can be observed that 76.2%% from the participants are interested in

the “Product quality” and 4.8% are interested on the “Price”.

Table 3. Item 3: When buying some chocolate what are your selection criteria?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Price 2 4.8 4.8 4.8

Brand 7 16.7 16.7 21.4

Promotional offers 1 2.4 2.4 23.8 Product quality 32 76.2 76.2 100.0

Total 42 100.0 100.0

In table 3 can be observed that 76.2% from the participants are interested in the

“Product quality” and only a percent of 4.8% from the participants to the survey

are interested in “Price”.

Table 4. Item 4: When buying a package of flour what are your selection criteria?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Price 9 21.4 21.4 21.4

Brand 7 16.7 16.7 38.1

Placement on the shelf 6 14.3 14.3 52.4

Promotional offers 3 7.1 7.1 59.5

Product quality 17 40.5 40.5 100.0 Total 42 100.0 100.0

The participants at the survey are interested in a percent of 40.5% in “Product

quality” when they buy a package of flour and only 7.1 % in “Promotional offers”

(table 4).

63

Table 5. Item 5: When buying a bottle of water, what are your selection criteria?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Price 10 23.8 23.8 23.8

Brand 16 38.1 38.1 61.9 Placement on the shelf 4 9.5 9.5 71.4

Promotional offers 3 7.1 7.1 78.6

Product quality 9 21.4 21.4 100.0 Total 42 100.0 100.0

In table 5 can be observed that 38.1% from the participants are interested in the

“Brand” and only a percent of 7.1% from the participants to the survey are

interested in “Promotional offer” for the criteria “When buying a bottle of water”.

Table 6. Item 6: What do you do when you cannot find the particular brand you are looking for?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Grab what is handy 4 9.5 9.5 9.5 Take the most affordable product 8 19.0 19.0 28.6

Buy another product, with recognised

brand 14 33.3 33.3 61.9

Buy the desired brand from another

store 16 38.1 38.1 100.0

Total 42 100.0 100.0

In table 6 can be observed that 38.1% from the participants prefer to “Buy the

desired brand from another store” and only a percent of 9.5% from the participants

to the survey may “Grab what is handy” in the situation when they cannot find

their favourite brand.

Table 7. Item 7: How do you choose the supermarket you shop from?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

According to product prices 6 14.3 14.3 14.3 According to the variety of

products 6 14.3 14.3 28.6

The location of the hypermarket matters

27 64.3 64.3 92.9

Depending on the quality of

products 3 7.1 7.1 100.0

Total 42 100.0 100.0

In table 7 can be observed that 64.3% from the participants consider that “The

location of the hypermarket matters” and only a percent of 7.1% from the

participants to the survey choose “Depending on the quality of products” when

they choose the supermarket for going shopping.

64

Table 8. Item 8: Regarding fast moving consumer products for which you do not have favourite brand,

how do you choose what you buy?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Choose based on commercials 6 14.3 14.3 14.3 Accept a friend’s advice 10 23.8 23.8 38.1

Choose based on price 20 47.6 47.6 85.7

Take whatever is handy 5 11.9 11.9 97.6 Solicit a free sample 1 2.4 2.4 100.0

Total 42 100.0 100.0

In table 8 can be observed that 47.6% from the participants consider that

“Choose based on price” and only a percent of 2.4% from the participants to the

survey choose “Solicit a free sample” when answer the question “fast moving

consumer products for which you do not have favourite brand, how do you choose

what you buy?”.

Table 9. Item 9: In your usual hypermarket you know where various goods that you frequently buy are placed.

When their location changes, what do you do?

Frequency Percent Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Search the whole store for the desired

product 14 33.3 33.3 33.3

Choose a similar product 1 2.4 2.4 35.7

Look around at random 4 9.5 9.5 45.2 I give up on the product, but buy the rest 1 2.4 2.4 47.6

Ask the store employee 22 52.4 52.4 100.0

Total 42 100.0 100.0

In table 9 can be observed that 52.4% from the participants consider important

to “Ask the store employee” and only a percent of 2.4% from the participants to the

survey “Choose a similar product” when answer the question “In your usual

hypermarket you know where various goods that you frequently buy are placed.

When their location changes, what do you do?”.

Table 10. Item 10: If you have discovered that a new brand is high quality, but is not much better than the usual

product you buy, how do you choose between them?

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

Valid

Buy the usual product 11 26.2 26.2 26.2

Decide according to price 23 54.8 54.8 81.0

Buy the new brand 4 9.5 9.5 90.5 Check what's on offer 4 9.5 9.5 100.0

Total 42 100.0 100.0

65

In table 10 can be observed that 54.8% from the participants “Decide according

to price”, a percent of 9.5% from the participants to the survey “Buy the new

brand” and a percent of 9.5% from the participants to the survey “Check what's on

offer” when answer the question “If you have discovered that a new brand is high

quality, but is not much better than the usual product you buy, how do you choose

between them?”.

4.2 STATISTICAL PROCESSING OF THE OBTAINED DATA

In order to verify if the results are statistically significant through known and

standardised measures, whether the questionnaires results are similar to the normal

distribution must first be checked. Hence, in the first phase of the verification

process the Kolmogorov – Smirnov test was applied to the scores obtained (table

11).

Table 11. Kolmogorov-Smirnov test

1st sum 2nd sum

N 42 42

Normal Parametersa,b Mean 4.57 8.43

Std. Deviation 3.109 2.390

Most Extreme Differences

Absolute .193 .166

Positive .193 .089

Negative -.106 -.166

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z 1.253 1.075

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .086 .198

The values obtained (table 11) were sig. = 0.086 for the general situations and

sig. = 0.198 for the specific situations. As both sections of the questionnaire were

considered normal distributions (sig.>0.05), parametric tests were used to verify

the hypotheses.

In order to verify whether there is a statistically significant difference between

the opinions stated by psychology students and their buying habits for some of the

products they regularly buy (the first hypothesis), the paired sample t-test was used

(table 12).

66

Table 12. Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences

t df

Sig.

(2-tailed)

Mean

Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

Mean

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

1st sum – 2nd sum -3.857 3.745 .578 -5.024 -2.690 -6.674 41 .003

According the result from table 12, the first hypothesis has been confirmed (sig.

= 0.003 < 0.05).

Table 13. Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df

Sig.

(2-tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error

Difference

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

1st

sum

Equal

variances

assumed

.006 .937 -.228 40 .820 -.226 .989 -2.224 1.773

Equal

variances not

assumed

-.228 34.36 .821 -.226 .990 -2.237 1.785

2nd

sum

Equal

variances

assumed

.001 .980 .559 40 .579 .424 .758 -1.108 1.955

Equal

variances not

assumed

.567 36,26 .574 .424 .746 -1.090 1.937

To confirm that salary is a criterion that influences buying behaviour (second

hypothesis) the independent samples t-test was used for both general and specific

buying behaviour. According the results from table 13, the second hypothesis has

not been confirmed (sig. = 0.820 > 0.05, and sig. = 0.579 > 0.05) respectively, the

differences between salary groups is not considered to be statistically significant.

67

Table 14 – Independent Samples Test

Levene's

Test

t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df

Sig.

(2-

tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std.

Error

Difference

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

1st sum

Equal

variances

assumed

1.633 .209 -.415 40 ,680 -.457 1.102 -2.685 1.770

Equal

variances not

assumed

-.358 14.014 ,726 -.457 1.278 -3.199 2.284

2nd sum

Equal

variances

assumed

2.906 .096 -1.224

40 ,228 -1.021 .834 -2.706 .665

Equal

variances not

assumed

-1.426 24.373 ,167 -1.021 .716 -2.497 .456

As to whether gender is a criterion that influences consumer behaviour in the

sense that women are more careful and therefore less affected by merchandising,

the independent samples t-test was used for both general and specific buying

behaviour. In table 14 can be observed the results after applying the T students

statistical test for testing the third hypothesis. The results didn’t confirm the third

hypothesis (sig. = 0.680 > 0.05 for general buying behaviour, and sig. = 0.228 >

0.05) for specific buying behaviour.

5. CONCLUSIONS

To translate the statistical results into significant psychological conclusions a

synthesis of all information obtained is necessary. Statistical processing results

certify the rejection of the null hypothesis and accept the first hypothesis of the

study, which states: „There is a statistically significant difference between the

views of young people informed about the criteria for the purchase of products and

their actual buying behaviour”. Calculating the Cohen’s d the value d = 1.030 was

obtained, which indicates a large effect size. This means that the gap between

young people's views about their criteria for purchase and their buying behaviour is

considerable.

As such, we can say that although there are differences in purchasing behaviour

both between groups divided by gender and between groups divided according to

68

salary, these differences are not statistically significant, indicating that the observed

differences are – probably – the result of sampling error. Analysing how the big

stores understand the presentation of products at the point of sale, the study noticed

that the sales techniques are not always conducted in accordance with the

customer’s interests. On the contrary, due to the efficiency of marketing

techniques, the customer leaves the supermarket most often with other products

than those he had intended to buy. On the surface, after analysing this phenomenon

one might consider that, in order to successfully avoid the downside of applying

psychological theories explaining the mechanisms of buying behaviour, one of the

solutions within reach of the average consumer might be learning and

understanding these theories.

However, in conducting this study authors considered a priori that, although it

seems natural that an informed person will be harder to misled than a total

ignorant, all individuals are equally vulnerable when confronted with marketing

policies. Buyer’s vulnerability comes not necessarily from the lack of consumer's

understanding, and can also be generated by a number of other factors such as lack

of attention or the fast pace of today's society.

To test the theory that learning about consumer behaviour is not a shield against

marketing techniques, we have designed a questionnaire about buying habits and

we gave it to a group of master students that specialize in the field of consumer

psychology. The questions and scoring were designed so that, when an individual

adopts a submissive attitude towards marketing policies he receives a large number

of points, and when he resists temptation gets fewer points or not at all.

Expanding the test group and especially changing the balance by interviewing a

larger number of male subjects would influence the results, highlighting gender or

revenue differentiation, so the final report would be more convincing. Otherwise,

as the results of this study illustrate, the only visible conclusion is that most of

young people, regardless of training, gender and salary level, behave submissively

to marketing policies practiced by department stores, meaning that young people

allow the "shelf" policy to easily influence their purchasing habits. Of course, in

this situation or civil consumer protection associations should intervene and impose

restrictions on large stores, but one of the problems is precisely the lack of

psychological training of the members of these associations.

As such, a related study could be, for example, conducted among public

employees that create the rules of commercial activities or, why not, even among

politicians, as they are the ones who govern and legislate. Such a study would

contribute to the awareness of decision makers on problems of modern commerce.

Perhaps in this way, by knowing and understanding the theories of consumer

psychology and the marketing policies operated by supermarkets, studies like this

one would lead to positive results for all buyers, meaning that - although the people

69

would remain vulnerable to a policy focused on profit, the downside of these

practices could be blocked by specific regulations.

Received at: 21.09. 2013, Accepted for publication on: 05.10.2013

REFERENCES

Adams, H.F. (1913). Advertising and its Mental Laws. New York: Macmillan.

Bobby, J. C., & Tybout, A.M. (1989). Interpretive, Qualitative, and Traditional

Scientific Empirical Consumer Behaviour Research. SV Interpretive Consumer Research,

199-208.

Burgess, T., & Sales, S.M. (1970). Attitudinal effects of „mere exposure”: A re-

evaluation. USA: Carnegie-Mellon University.

Calder, B.J. & Tybout, A.M. (1989). Interpretive, Qualitative, and Traditional Scientific

Empirical Consumer Behaviour Research, published in Association for Consumer

Research (Ed), Interpretive Consumer Research Review, 199-208, posted online la URL:

http://www.acrwebsite.org/search/view-conference-proceedings.aspx?Id=12185, accessed

la 12.04.2013.

Cătoiu, I. & Teodorescu, N. (1997). Comportamentul consumatorului. Teorie şi

practică. [Consumer behavior. Theory and practice]. Bucureşti: Ed. Economică.

Dittmar, H., Beattie, J. & Friese, S. (1995). Objects, decision considerations and self-

image in men’s and women’s impulse purchases. University of Sussex, posted online la

URL: <http://www.kent.ac.uk/ESRC/impulse.html>, accessed on 28.04.2013.

Ebbinghaus, H. (1902). Grundzüge der Psychologie, Leipzig: Veit.

Enache, I. (2005). Taxa la raft, subiect de dispută pe piața de retail, URL:

<http://www.wall-street.ro/articol/Companii/6088/Taxa-de-raft-subiect-de-disputa-pe-piata-

de-retail.html>, accessed on 24.04. 2013.

Festinger, L. (1957). An Introduction to the theory of dissonace. Evanston, Ill.: Row,

Peterson.

Hollingworth, H.L. (1913). Advertising ans Selling. New York: D. Appleton-Century.

Iliescu, D., & Petre, D. (2010). Psihologia reclamei şi a consumatorului. Bucureşti:

Editura Comunicare.ro.

Kapferer, J.N. (2002). Căile persuasiunii. Bucureşti: Comunicare.ro

Kotler, P. (1989), Principles of marketing. New York: Prentice International.

Kotler, P. (1997). Managementul marketingului [Marketing Management]. Bucureşti:

Ed. Teora.

Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G., & Saunders, J., & Wong, V. (1998). Principiile

marketingului. Bucureşti: Ed .Teora.

Kotler, P., & Fox, K. (1985). Strategic Marketing for Educational Institutions. New

York: Englwoord Cliffs Prentice Hall.

Krugman, H.E. (1962). Measurement of Advertising Involvement. Public Opinion

Quarterly, 30, 583-596.

MacKenzie, S. B., & Lutz, R. L. (1989). An Empirical Examination of the Structural

Antecedents of Attitude Toward the Ad in an Advertising Pretesting Context. Journal of

Marketing, 53 (2), 48 - 65.

70

Ogilvy, D. (1983). Ogilvy on Advertising. London: Pan Books.

Pamfilie R.(1999). Estetica mărfurilor [Estetique of goods]. București: Editura A.S.E.

Ristea A.L. & co.(1995).Tehnologie comercială [Trading technology]. București:

Editura Expert.

Scott, W.D. (1908). The Psychology of Advertising. Boston: Small, Maynard & Co.

Schiffman, L.G., & Kanuk, L.L. (1997). Consumer Behaviour. Prentice Hall

Scorţar,L. (2005). Etalarea mărfurilor-Aspect estetic al magazinulu. URL:

http://steconomice.uoradea.ro/anale/volume/2005/management-si-marketing/51.pdf.,

accesat la 2.05.2013.

Thomas J. M.(1998). Manual de marketing [Handbook of Marketing]. București:

Editura Codecs, consultat online, URL:

<http://retail.about.com/od/storedesign/ss/store_layouts.htm>, accessed on 10.05.2013

Udrescu, M., Năstase, D. (2006). Studiul comportamnetului de cumpărare. URL:

<http://www.artifex.org.ro/departamente/biblioteca/Editura%20pt%20site%20artifex/d%20

nastase/Teoria%20studiului%20comportamentului%20consumatorului.pdf>, accesat online

la 30.04.2013.

Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, Monograph Supplement,9,1-27.

URL: <http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/10/6/224>, accessed on 28.04.2013.

Annex 1

QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Where do you think a supermarket product should be positioned so you notice it

more easily?

a. On the stands next to cash registers;

b. On the shelves themselves;

c. At the ends of the shelf next to the promotional offers;

d. The place does not matter, looking for the desired product.

2. When buying some shampoo what are your selection criteria?

a. Price;

b. Brand;

c. Promotional offers;

d. Product quality.

3. When buying some chocolate what are your selection criteria?

a. Price;

b. Brand;

c. Promotional offers;

71

d. Product quality.

4. When buying a package of flour what are your selection criteria?

a. Price;

b. Brand;

c. Placement on the shelf;

d. Promotional offers;

e. Product quality.

5. When buying a bottle of water, what are your selection criteria?

a. Price;

b. Brand;

c. Placement on the shelf;

d. Promotional offers;

e. Product quality.

6. What do you do when you cannot find the particular brand you are looking for?

a. Grab what is handy;

b. Take the most affordable product;

c. Buy another product, with recognized brand;

d. Buy the desired brand from another store.

7. How do you choose the supermarket you shop from?

a. According to product prices;

b. According to the variety of products;

c. The location of the hypermarket matters;

d. Depending on the quality of products.

8. Regarding fast moving consumer products for which you do not have favourite

brand,

how do you choose what you buy?

a. Choose based on commercials;

b. Accept a friend’s advice;

c. Choose based on price;

d. Take whatever is handy;

e. Solicit a free sample.

72

9. In your usual hypermarket you know where various goods that you frequently

buy are placed. When their location changes, what do you do?

a. Search the whole store for the desired product;

b. Choose a similar product;

c. Look around at random;

d. I give up on the product, but buy the rest;

e. Ask the store employee.

10. If you have discovered that a new brand is high quality, but is not much better

than the usual product you buy, how do you choose between them?

a. Buy the usual product;

b. Decide according to price;

c. Buy the new brand;

d. Check what's on offer.

REZUMAT

Studiul de faţă este focalizat pe pe prezentarea unor rezultate ce ţin de investigarea

comportamentului consumatorului în supermarket. Metoda:Participanţii au fost un număr

de 42 de persoane, cu vârsta cuprinsă între 18 şi 30 de ani, intelectuali, 31 de femei şi 11

bărbaţi dintre cei care navighează zilnic pe internet. Instrumente: Chestionarul de

investigare a comportamentului consumatorului (Tudor & Toma, 2013) este alcătuit din 3

tipuri de întrebări multiple. Rezultate: Prima ipoteza cu privire la diferenţele între opiniile

studenţilor la psihologie şi comportamentul de cumpărare obişnuit s-a confirmat (p<0.05).

Cea de-a doua şi cea de-a treia ipoteză cu privire la influenţa genului şi salariului asupra

comportamentul consumatoruliui nu s-au confirmat (p>0.05). Rezulatele finale au

evidenţiat că Altfel, aşa cum se prezintă rezultatele acestui studiu, singura concluzie

vizibilă este că cea mai mare parte a tinerilor, indiferent de pregătire, gen sau nivel de

salarizare, se comportă favorabil politicilor de marketing practicate de marile magazine,

în sensul că ei îşi fac cumpărăturile curente lăsându-se cu uşurinţă influenţaţi de politica

„de raft”.