An executive summary for

managers and executive

readers can be found at the
end of this article

A multi-method investigation of
consumer motivations in
impulse buying behavior
Angela Hausman

Assistant Professor of Marketing, Division of Management/Marketing,

Lewis College of Business, Marshall University, Huntington, West
Virginia, USA
Keywords Consumer behaviour, Consumer marketing, Shopping
Abstract This study used both qualitative and quantitative data to test hypotheses related
to consumers' motivations to engage in impulse buying. A grounded theory approach was
used to develop hypotheses from in-depth interviews. These hypotheses were tested by the
collection and analysis of survey data. Data support the theory that impulse buying is a
common method of product selection, in part, because the shopping act and impulsive
product selection provide hedonic rewards. Further information-processing overload
confounds product selection, reinforcing the rewards to be obtained from alternative
section heuristics, like impulse buying.

Impulsiveness

Introduction
Impulse buying behavior is an enigma in the marketing world, for here is a
behavior which the literature and consumers both state is normatively wrong,
yet which accounts for a substantial volume of the goods sold every year
across a broad range of product categories (Bellenger et al., 1978; Cobb and
Hoyer, 1986; Han et al., 1991; Kollat and Willet, 1967; Rook and Fisher,
1995; Weinberg and Gottwald, 1982). Possibly, these negative evaluations of
impulse buying behavior emanate from psychological studies of
impulsiveness that characterize impulse behavior as a sign of immaturity and
lacking behavioral control (Levy, 1976; Solnick et al., 1980) or as irrational,
risky, and wasteful (Ainslie, 1975; Levy, 1976; Rook and Fisher, 1995;
Solnick et al., 1980).
Rook and Fisher (1995) were among the first marketing researchers to
suggest that these normative evaluations act to moderate individual
impulsive traits and, thus, reduce consumer impulse buying behavior. In
other words, consumers attempt to control their innate impulsive tendencies
because they do not want to be perceived as immature or irrational.
However, this moderating effect does not conform with the high reported
incidence of impulse buying behavior in studies conducted over the last four
decades. These studies show that most people almost 90 per cent make
purchases on impulse occasionally (Welles, 1986) and between 30 per cent
and 50 per cent of all purchases can be classified by the buyers themselves as
impulse purchases (Bellenger et al., 1978; Cobb and Hoyer, 1986; Han et al.,
1991; Kollat and Willett, 1967).

Normative evaluations

This discrepancy raises interesting questions regarding why negative

normative evaluations have so little observed impact on aggregate impulse
buying behavior. For instance, do some consumers consider impulse buying
behavior appropriate, especially under certain circumstances, as proposed by
Rook and Fisher (1995)? And, if so, what conditions allow consumers to
justify their impulse buying behavior and override societal pressures to make
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
http://www.emerald-library.com

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000, pp. 403-419, # MCB UNIVERSITY PRESS, 0736-3761

403

purchase decisions rationally? This paper proposes that impulse buying

behavior is much more complex than previously conceptualized; that this
behavior stems from the desire to satisfy multiple needs that underlie many
types of buying behavior. Specifically, this paper will explore needs for
novelty, social interaction, and ``fun'', commonly termed hedonic motives,
as contributors to impulse buying behavior. Further, this paper will explore
and test several possible conditions that may allow consumers to view
impulse buying behavior as a rational response to the complexities in their
environment. For instance, information processing overload or other
decision-making difficulties may encourage consumers to use less
demanding decision-making strategies, such as using schemata or heuristics
to simplify decision making.
Consumers' motivations

In an attempt to address the complex issues raised in this study, a

combination of qualitative and quantitative methods is used to gain a better
understanding of why consumers appear to utilize impulse buying behavior
with such frequency. These methods are used to develop and test a set of
hypotheses related to consumers' motivations behind impulse buying
behavior. The study ends with suggestions for retailers and consumers to aid
in channeling this type of behavior more constructively.
Review of the current literature
Most early efforts to study impulse buying behavior those before 1987
were concerned with definitional issues and attempted to classify impulse
into one of several sub-categories, rather than to understand why so many
consumers appear to act on their buying impulses so frequently. This concern
with developing classificational schemata has generated a body of research
that ignores the behavioral motivations leading to impulse buying behavior
for a large variety of products and instead focuses on a small number of
relatively inexpensive products. More recent studies have reported impulse
purchases across a broad range of product offerings in a variety of price
ranges (Cobb and Hoyer, 1986; Rook, 1987; Rook and Fisher, 1995). The
pervasiveness of impulse buying, even for relatively expensive products, is
counter-intuitive and has led to a few preliminary studies looking at impulse
buying as an inherent individual trait, rather than a response to inexpensive
product offerings.

Definitions

What is impulse buying?

Definitions of impulse buying prior to 1982 focused on the product rather
than the consumer as the motivator of impulse purchases. For instance, Stern
(1962) provides the foundation for defining impulse buying behavior, which
classifies the act as planned, unplanned, or impulse. According to this
scheme, planned buying behavior involves a time-consuming information
search followed by rational decision making (Piron, 1991; Stern, 1962).
Unplanned buying refers to all purchases made without such advance
planning and includes impulse buying, which is distinguished by the relative
speed with which buying ``decisions'' occur.
Subsequent to 1982, when researchers began to re-focus attention on impulse
buying behavior, researchers began to investigate the behavioral dimensions
of impulse buying. Most recently, researchers appear to agree that impulse
buying involves a hedonic or affective component (Cobb and Hoyer, 1986;
Piron, 1991; Rook, 1987; Rook and Fisher, 1995; Weinberg and Gottwald,
1982). For instance, Rook (1987) reports accounts by consumers who felt the
product ``calling'' them, almost demanding they purchase it. This emphasis

404

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

on the behavioral elements of impulse buying led to the definition of impulse

as follows:
Impulse buying occurs when a consumer experiences a sudden, often powerful and
persistent urge to buy something immediately. The impulse to buy is hedonically
complex and may stimulate emotional conflict. Also, impulse buying is prone to
occur with diminished regard for its consequences (Rook, 1987, p. 191).

Buying behavior

Recent research on impulse buying behavior indicates that individual

consumers do not view their specific purchases as wrong and indeed
retrospectively report a favorable evaluation of their behavior. Specifically,
in the Rook (1987) study, a relatively small number of informants (only 20
percent) report feeling ``bad'' about their impulse buying, but an
astonishingly large number of informants (41 percent) report that they
actually feel good about their impulse purchases. These results are surprising
after reviewing prior literature and definitions of impulse buying, possibly
because they looked at individual consumers' evaluations of and motivation
for a particular impulse purchase, rather than their attitudes toward impulse
buying in general. The results reflect that, at least in this context, a large
number of consumers failed to view impulse buying as normatively wrong.
Following this unexpected result, Rook and Fisher (1995) developed a scale
to measure impulsive buying tendencies, proposed as a surrogate for impulse
buying behavior. They propose that this individual behavioral trait moderates
the negative norms prevalent in society against impulse buying, thus
reducing or eliminating negative feelings or conflict over impulse purchases.
In other words, consumers still view impulse buying as ``bad'', but feel
unable to control their impulsive tendencies, an inherent behavioral trait.
Several alternative explanations, however, are possible and two of them are
explored in this paper. The first alternative proposed in this study is that
consumers use shopping to satisfy a number of needs, not just their need for
the products they acquire during the shopping excursion. In other words, the
shopping act itself satisfies certain needs and the products purchased during
these trips, since their purchase was unanticipated, fall into the realm of
impulse buying behavior. In addition, consumers may purchase products
during these shopping trips that were not anticipated but, once consumers see
the product during the shopping exploration, they recognize its suitability for
satisfying a particular need. Thus, consumers may use the shopping
experience and resulting impulse buying behavior to satisfy a number of
needs which do not fit into theories of economic utility (Boone and Kurtz,
1995).

Empirical study

Theory development
Our efforts to study empirically the impulse buying process and how theories
of information processing might account for the relative frequency of
reported impulse buying behavior led to the use of both qualitative and
quantitative data collection techniques. First, due to the exploratory nature of
our initial propositions, this paper used semi-structured interviews to explore
consumers' emotions regarding shopping, how they make buying decisions,
and why these decisions often result in impulse buying. Using this
exploratory study, as well as the literature as a guide, this paper next
developed a set of hypotheses related to impulse buying (testing these
hypotheses required development of a scale to measure hedonic buying) and
administered this scale, in combination with appropriate existing scales, to a
convenient sample of consumers.

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

405

Qualitative study
In order to gain a better understanding of the way consumers viewed their
buying and decision-making behavior, 60 semi-structured interviews were
conducted by trained interviewers. Informants consisted of a convenience
sample of consumers representing both sexes and various income and age
brackets. On average, interviews lasted approximately 20 minutes and were
recorded and later transcribed by the interviewers. To avoid contamination of
the data by attempts to portray actions in a socially desirable light,
informants were not asked directly about impulse buying and interviewers
were not told the exact nature of the project. Rather, both informants and
interviewers were told that the project was designed to explore shopping
behaviors, and the incidence of impulse buying was allowed to emerge
naturally.
Interviews

Analysis of the interviews progressed using the techniques for theory

development suggested by Glaser and Strauss (1967). This method of theory
generation involves a rigorous process of evaluation whereby the data are
analyzed iteratively to identify categories, code incidents, and organize the
data through theoretical memos. As the categories begin to emerge, constant
comparison is employed until theoretical saturation is achieved. This
methodology yields hypotheses empirically grounded in the data. These
hypotheses may later be tested quantitatively or through further qualitative
data collection. A grounded theory approach was selected because it helps
discover, develop, and verify theory, which is the primary goal in this study
(McDonald, 1996; Glaser and Strauss, 1967). This makes grounded theory a
valuable tool because it concentrates on concepts and relationships or
linkages between concepts; thus it is a suitable method for creating a
framework directly from data (McDonald, 1996; Glaser and Strauss, 1967).
Further, the grounded theory approach, because it uses the constant
comparison method, allows theory behind actions to emerge (Glaser and
Strauss, 1967).
Using this theoretical approach, this paper was able to detect a variety of
hedonic needs that appeared to motivate consumers' impulse buying
behavior. In addition, interviews detected the use of hedonic need
satisfaction as a retrospective rationale for purchases made during a shopping
excursion. Because the interviews were conducted to generate an
understanding of the impulse buying process, it is impossible to determine
reliably the temporal precedence for the hedonic need. Among the hedonic
needs identified were fun, novelty, and variety.

Hedonic desires

Hedonic motivation for impulse buying

Among the higher-order needs elucidated through consumer reports in the
literature are needs for novelty, variety, and surprise (Holbrook and
Hirschman, 1982; Hirschman, 1980). Similarly, consumers report that
impulse buying satisfies a number of hedonic desires (Piron, 1991; Rook,
1987; Thompson et al., 1990). In addition, emotional support needs may also
be satisfied by the social interaction inherent in the shopping experience. For
instance, consumers report feeling uplifted or energized after a shopping
experience in several qualitative studies (Cobb and Hoyer, 1986; Rook,
1987). These sources appear to offer conceptual support for a link between
hedonic shopping motives and impulse buying behavior.
Our first effort was to identify some of the hedonic needs consumers seek to
satisfy during their shopping experience in order to develop the hedonic

406

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

needs scale. Based on our informants' reports, needs for fun, novelty, and
surprise were identified.
Shopping experience

The following reports emphasize the fun or psychological lift consumers feel
during and after a hedonic shopping experience. Especially evident is the
contrast between the emotions evoked by the shopping experience and
aspects of routine existence:
I usually only shop for clothes when I need something specific or for a pick-me-up.
Just the atmosphere of new or different things makes me feel better . . . I mean
work is stressful enough. I don't want to go home to face a whole bunch more
work.
So yeah, basically it does make me feel better. I shop to pass the time and to visit
friends and, on occasion, to check out new items in the store, but mostly to pass the
time. Because, after a busy work day, sometimes I like to relax and walk up and
down aisles of stores.
I like to go to the mall or some of the little shops. For me, it's therapy. Just getting
into the department stores, into the mall is therapy. And I'll probably spend the
same amount as going to a therapist, so it doesn't matter. Shopping is therapy.
I feel good when I buy myself something and treat myself to stuff and going home
and looking through my bags and seeing what I bought.

Similarly, the following is characteristic of reports emphasizing the novelty

aspects of hedonic shopping. This shows that shopping has, for some people,
become a surrogate for more primal types of hunting and that the search and
acquisition of goods are the reward, not any utility resulting from the
purchase:
My favorite store would be Merlin's BookStore on Fowler and I love going in
there and finding the Japanese animation stuff that I like and I love it when I walk
in there and I see something that I did not see before . . . that [finding a new
Japanese animation item] is really neat and cool. And I buy it.

This theme is re-emphasized in the following passage: ``[It's] like I'm on a

mission. Seriously, I'm on a mission to find something different. Something
that nobody else has.''
Satisfaction

These reports suggest that consumers shop to satisfy a variety of hedonic

needs and the specific products acquired during these excursions is secondary
to the action of shopping. Since the goal of the shopping experience is to
provide satisfaction of hedonic needs, the products purchased during these
excursions appear to be chosen without prior planning and represent an
impulse buying event. This suggests the following hypothesis:
H1. Individual consumers' impulse buying is correlated with their desires to
fulfil hedonic needs, such as for fun, novelty, and surprise.
In addition to these hedonic motivations for impulse buying that were
predictable from extant literature, additional motivating needs were
identified in the interview data. Thematic analysis of the interview
transcripts indicated that these additional motivating needs could be loosely
grouped according to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (Maslow, 1968) and that
efforts to satisfy the higher-order needs in this hierarchy led to different
types of impulse buying behavior. Attempts by consumers to satisfy
physiological and safety needs conform with economic theories and do not,
per se, represent attempts to satisfy additional needs that might lead to
impulse buying. However, efforts to satisfy esteem and self-actualization
needs appeared to impel consumers to make specific purchases that provided
satisfaction for those particular needs. In addition, attempts to satisfy social

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

407

needs, while less likely to prompt a specific purchase, as reflected in these

reports, relied on the shopping experience itself to provide the desired
satisfaction and the purchases made were of little consequence in fulfilling
specific needs.
Social needs

Prevalent feelings that the shopping experience satisfied social needs was
probably the most commonly expressed reason given for impulse buying
behavior in the data. Typical of statements made by informants was the
following:
One of my enjoyable shopping experiences was last month, after Christmas. My
friends and I went shopping . . . I thought we would just shop for some shoes and
some casual clothes. But when we got to the mall . . . there were sales . . . sales . . .
sales. Everything looked good on me, but I can't buy them all.
I know my girlfriend likes to shop, so it's something we can do together when we
can't come up with anything else to do.
I went into K-Mart today and my daughter helped me pick out something for my
son's birthday and we had a lot of fun looking at purses. We weren't in any big
hurry and we found things we like and some we need. We just had fun.

In these reports, the expression of social needs appeared unintentionally to

lead to impulse buying behavior, in that the purchases were incidental to the
more important need to interact and garner approval from a significant other
or a group. Thus, this motivation differs from desires to fulfil safety and
physiological needs that directed consumers toward specific purchases.
H2. Individual consumer impulse buying behavior is correlated with desires
to satisfy social needs.
Informants expressed their esteem needs through the credence given to their
desires to remain fashion-conscious. Statements indicate that informants
readily recognized that others judged them by their appearance, especially
their clothing. Thus, purchasing the right clothing was of primary
importance. Despite the weight placed on acquiring acceptable clothing, it
was surprising that many of these purchases were not planned in advance.
Sometimes, the informant would find a particularly suitable article of
clothing while shopping for other needed items and purchase the item on
impulse. In other cases, the informant was searching for a special occasion
outfit, without pre-determining the criteria for its purchase, as is portrayed in
the following statement:
A beautiful dress. I didn't believe it . . . it was cheap. It was a long black dress . . . it
was like a prom dress, but better. This dress really caught my eye. When I went in
and tried it on, it really fit. It was like the dress was really made for me. I wore it to
my friend's wedding. Everybody at the wedding looked at me . . . boy, that made
me feel good.

H3. Individual consumer impulse buying behavior is correlated with desires

to satisfy esteem, as measured by style consciousness.
Self-actualization

Examples of needs for self-actualization which were satisfied by the

shopping experience and resulted in impulse buying behavior were also
detected. In the following reports the consumers used the shopping
experience as a means of establishing identity:
I like to go shopping because if allows me to have some control over an aspect of
my life. I am not Ernest's wife or Nicholas and Zachary's mom, I am Julie.
One time I got this watch. I got it at the Disney store. It is just perfect for me. It
was not an impulse, but I knew I wanted it, but I wasn't shopping for it. I had it in

408

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

mind for a couple of months. Not like exactly this, but like kinda what I wanted.
And when I saw it, I knew that was it. It's the one for me. It was like sparks went
off and we knew we were meant to be together.

Similarly, there is evidence in the reports of consumers using impulse buying

behavior as a means of self-reward based on having made sacrifices to
achieve desired long-term goals. Much like the dieter who rewards him- or
herself for having lost weight, these consumers allow themselves to buy
things they did not need, in their efforts to reward themselves. For instance:
``After an exam . . . that's when I like to shop because I've worked hard in
preparation for that exam and I deserve some new threads.''
Psychology

Insights from information processing

Much of the psychological literature on impulse and impulsive decision
making appears to make the implicit assumption that acting on impulse
results in poor decision quality, while the thoughtful search and evaluation
necessary for rational decisions result in better decisions. Supporting this
statement, Levy (1976) and Solnick et al. (1980) both include terms like
``wasteful'' and ``risky'' in their conceptualizations of impulse. Empirical
studies support contentions that rational decisions made after an adequate
search and evaluation of alternatives, such as the decisions made utilizing
planned buying behavior, result in accurate decisions, but impulsive
decisions result in decision errors (Halpern, 1989; Johnson-Laird, 1988).
More specifically related to impulse buying, this behavior is linked with
increased probability of negative consequences (Cobb and Hoyer, 1986;
Rook and Fisher, 1995; Weinberg and Gottwald, 1982).
This negative evaluation of impulsive decision making may be true when
discussing impulse in general, but may not apply to impulse buying
decisions, for several reasons. The first reason why impulse buying decisions
may be accurate deals with the definition of accuracy employed and the
second deals with increasing evidence that rational decision making is not
inherently any more accurate than other decision-making alternatives, such
as heuristics. Therefore, determination of what is meant by the term accuracy
in connection with buying decisions is necessary.

Objective criteria

Since buying decisions are, almost by definition, complex, no single

objective criterion suffices as a measure of accuracy. For instance, lowest
possible price or other criterion cannot be used as a surrogate measure of
accuracy and subjective criteria may be more useful in making these
evaluations. If consumers are allowed to judge the accuracy of their buying
decisions, through satisfaction with the purchase, then impulse purchases
appear to be fundamentally accurate. For instance, in Rook's (1987) study,
41 per cent of consumers reported that they were satisfied with their impulse
purchases.
Again, using the criterion of customer satisfaction as a measure of decisionmaking accuracy, questions arise regarding the relative accuracy of rational
vs impulse buying decisions. Baron (1994) and Bettman et al. (1991) were
among the first researchers to postulate that consumer decision making is so
complex that consumers may not feel certain of the accuracy of their
decisions despite the expenditure of a significant cognitive effort. In part,
these uncertainties may arise due to numerous equivocal product features
that make direct comparisons across products nearly impossible. One
product, for example, may offer more style and a more reputable brand
name, while another offers an appealing color and costs substantially less.
The decision between these two products is difficult to reduce to a simple

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

409

algorithm. Further, the average consumer is ill-prepared to reduce this

complicated decision to a manageable cognitive task using decision-making
aids familiar to many business executives. Thus, impulse buying occurs,
which reduces cognitive effort. Past experiences of the consumer have
shown that this produces acceptable purchases and may be particularly
appealing to the average consumer. This leads to the following hypothesis:
H4. Perceptions of decision-making accuracy moderate the impulse buying
behavior.
Cognitive effort

The decision-making complexity outlined in the previous section may affect

impulse buying behavior in other ways. Not only may consumers begin to
question the accuracy of their rational decisions, especially in relation to the
amount of cognitive effort expended to reach the decisions, but they may
also begin to feel overwhelmed and frustrated trying to deal with the volume
of complex information they experience (Bettman et al., 1991). This
phenomenon is termed information processing overload and may increase
customer feelings of anxiety and unpleasantness associated with the
decision-making process (Baron, 1994; Herbig and Kramer, 1994).
Importantly for this analysis, information processing overload is
compounded by the variety often available in many shopping venues.
The combined effects of decision-making complexity and information
processing overload may substantially diminish judgment quality or
accuracy (Bettman et al., 1991; Herbig and Kramer, 1994; Kahneman,
1973). Thus, despite concerted efforts to make the ``right'' decision,
consumers may actually make worse decisions under these conditions
(Kahneman, 1973). Therefore, as consumers increase their cognitive efforts
in attempts to reach accurate decisions, both their dissatisfaction with the
process increases and their decision accuracy declines. This leads to the
following hypotheses regarding impulse buying:
H5a. Perceived decision effort is negatively correlated with perceptions of
decision accuracy made by consumers.
H5b. Perceptions of decision effort moderate the impulse buying trait.
Methodology
Testing the hypotheses proposed in the previous section involved developing
and administering a questionnaire to a convenience sample of consumers,
assessing the reliability and validity of the scales employed, and conducting
a series of ANOVAs after establishing three levels of impulse buying among
respondents.

Questionnaire

410

Sample
Based on extant literature and the hypotheses developed through the theory
generation phase of this project, a 75-item multi-indicator questionnaire was
developed. The initial questionnaire was assessed for clarity, face validity,
and necessary completion time by a group of eight members who had been
involved in the qualitative data gathering phase of this project. After several
rounds of modification, an acceptable questionnaire was administered by
these group members to a convenience sample of 290 consumers using an
intercept technique. Of the sample collected, 18 responses were removed due
to incompleteness, leaving a final sample of 272 consumers. Table I displays
the demographic characteristics of this sample, showing a reasonable mix of
demographic groups represented in the data.
JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

Characteristic
Age (years)
Under 21
21-29
30-39
40-49
50-65
Over 65
Sex
Male
Female
Marital status
Married
Not married
Children
Yes living with me
Yes but not in my home
No
Employment type
Full-time
Part-time
Unemployed

Percentage of total sample

15.3
41.3
21.9
14.8
6.6
0.0
41.3
56.7
37.3
60.7
25
17
56.5
57.4
30
11.6

Note: n = 272

Table I. Sample demographics

Measures
Hedonic consumption scale development. Using extant literature and the
interviews as a guide, a 13-item scale to measure the hedonic tendencies
of our consumer respondents was developed. The hedonic consumption scale
incorporated the fun scale developed by Farber and O'Guinn (1988), the
novelty scale originally developed by Unger (1981), and several items
suggested by the interview data. The initial pool of items was reviewed
by the interviewers and modifications made to several of the items. All
items were measured using five-point Likert type scales. Data generated
by the questionnaire were used to purify this scale based on the
recommendations of Churchill (1979), resulting in a unidimensional,
seven-item scale. The items comprising the hedonic consumption scale
are contained in Appendix 1.
Testing hypotheses

Use of existing measures

In addition, existing scales were used for hypotheses testing. The impulse
buying scale, developed by Rook and Fisher (1995), was modified by the
addition of two items suggested by the semi-structured interviews. One of
these items, as well as one of the items originally appearing in the Rook and
Fisher impulse scale, was later removed from the analysis based on low itemtotal correlations. This resulted in the seven-item Likert-type scale. Final
items in this scale are displayed in Appendix 2.
Other scales included credit usage, adopted from Darden and Ashton (1975)
and Houston et al.'s (1987) visual processing style scale.
Results
Psychometric properties of scales utilized
In addition to tests of face validity conducted earlier, the reliability of the
scales was evaluated by calculating:

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

411

(1) Cronbach's  (Table II);

(2) assessing factor structure using exploratory factor analysis (Table III); and
(3) inter-item correlations, and scale correlations (Table II) for each
measured scale.
Results indicate acceptable reliability for all measured constructs and
construct validity (based on factor analysis). In addition, the pattern of
correlations support nomological validity to the extent that they correspond
with theory. All factor analyses were conducted using Maximum Likelihood
extraction method, rotated using oblique rotation to a simple solution.
Hedonic scale

Assessment of the hedonic scale developed for this study indicated that three
factors emerged, rather than the preferred single factor, from the initial pool
of items. Regarding the three factors, the first (which accounted for 47.3 per
cent of the variance) seemed to represent the fundamental elements of
hedonic shopping as presented earlier in this study, namely the novelty,
entertainment, and emotional lift achieved by consumers through their
shopping behavior. The second factor, which accounted for 8.4 per cent of
the variance, only contained three items which cross-loaded on the first
factor. The third factor also contained items cross-loading on the first, and a
high factor inter-correlation. Thus, hypothesis testing involved the items
loading only on the first factor (see Appendix 1). In addition to good face
validity, this unidimensional scale produced good reliability, convergent,
discriminant, and nomological validity (see Table II).
Recall that the impulse trait scale was fundamentally the one employed in
prior research, with small changes as a result of the qualitative portion of this
study. The reliability of this scale was good (see Table II) and, after deletion
of one of the reverse score items, unidimensional. Further, the scale
demonstrated good convergent and discriminant validity. The social scale
Trait
Trait
Hedon
Effort
Accur
Style
Age
Gender
Marital
Employmnt

0.8605
0.2773**
0.2375**
0.1153
0.3064**
0.0618
0.0403
0.1193
0.0679

Hedon

Effort

Accur

Style

0.8596
0.0182
0.1599
0.4845**

0.8228
0.4254**
0.0380

0.8162
0.0216

0.7492

Notes:
n = 245; ** p < 0.001
Cronbach's alpha reliabilities on the diagonal
Trait = impulse buying trait; Hedon = hedonic consumption; Effort = decision effort;
Accur = decision accuracy; Style = consumer stylishness

Table II. Correlation matrix

Source

df

SS

MS

Hedonic
Accuracy
Effort
Style

2
2
2
2

16.209
5.571
6.336
24.658

8.105
2.786
3.107
12.329

0.0000
0.0289
0.0208
0.0000

Table III. ANOVA summary table

412

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

developed for this study did not provide adequate psychometric properties in
terms of reliability and validity. All other scales used in this study provided
acceptable reliabilities and validity without making any modifications to the
initial scales (see Table II).
Analysis

Hypothesis testing
Hypothesis testing involved correlational and ANOVA analysis. These tests
resulted in several interesting and unexpected results. Perhaps the most
interesting came from the correlational analysis, which indicated that the
impulse buying trait did not correlate at the 0.01 level with any of the
demographic variables assessed (see Table II). This is surprising since both
academic and anecdotal sources imply strong gender and income effects;
therefore the lack of any demographic effects represents a contribution.
H1 hypothesizes that consumers engage in impulse buying to satisfy hedonic
desires for fun, novelty, and variety. Again, correlational analysis supports
this hypothesis ( p = 0.001). ANOVA also demonstrates that consumers who
are more impulsive are more likely to shop for hedonic reasons than those
who possess a small or moderate score on impulsiveness (see Table III).
H2 could not be tested quantitatively due to the poor performance of the
social scale. Qualitative data do support this hypothesis and suggest the need
for further testing.
H3 proposes that impulsiveness is correlated with consumers' desires to
fulfil higher order needs such as esteem and self-actualization. These needs
were operationalized as style consciousness, based on qualitative data
analysis. This hypothesis is supported since the data show a significant
correlation between style consciousness and impulsiveness ( p = 0.001) and
ANOVA results demonstrate a significant increase in impulsiveness among
increasingly style conscious consumers (see Table III).
H4 is also supported by the data gathered in this study. This hypothesis
proposes a relationship between impulse buying and perceived accuracy.
While results suggest that both less impulsive and more impulsive consumers
view their decision accuracy equally, moderately impulsive consumers view
their decisions as less accurate than the other two groups.
Although the data do not support H5a, relating to decision-making effort and
accuracy, they do support H5b, indicating that more impulsive consumers
appear to view their buying decisions as more laborious. Results show a
significant negative correlation between perceptions of decision-making
effort expended and impulsiveness ( p = 0.001), which is supported by
ANOVA results.

Consequences

Discussion
Much of the work on impulse buying behavior inherently attributes negative
consequences to the behavior. Prior research also assumes that society
imposes negative normative evaluations on impulse behavior, including
impulse buying. Drawing on the research of Rook and Fisher (1995), this
paper proposes that impulse buying is not always viewed negatively by
consumers, but represents a rational alternative to more time-consuming
search behaviors. The paper attempts to explain why consumers employ this
purchasing strategy so frequently and do not feel that impulse buying is
overwhelmingly wrong.
One explanation for this phenomenon is that consumers buy products for a
variety of non-economic reasons, such as fun, fantasy, and social or emotional

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

413

gratification. As some previous respondents suggest, buying impulsively feels

a little freer and a little like doing something naughty, but relatively innocent
(Rook, 1987). Since these benefits are normally not included in calculations
of consumer utility, previous researchers conclude that impulse buying
violates assumptions of profit maximization and is irrational. Once hedonic
components are added to the equation, impulse buying can be viewed as a
valued pastime rather than just a means of acquiring goods.
Accuracy effects

Another possible explanation revolves around accuracy effects. This paper

proposes that accuracy effects may moderate impulse buying behavior by
affecting the perceived trade-off between cognitive effort and decisionmaking accuracy. Information overload may further enhance this moderating
effect by further decreasing perceived accuracy or reducing actual accuracy
(Kahneman, 1973).
This discussion does not imply that these are the only factors that moderate
impulse buying decisions, but they do introduce perspectives not currently
addressed in extant literature. This literature currently identifies several
contexts effects which also affect impulse buying. For example, low risk,
familiarity with options, the number of decisions required, and temporal
considerations influence impulse buying decisions (Bettman et al., 1991;
Cialdini, 1993; Sujan, 1985).
This analysis it is not complete by far. Besides accuracy effects and noneconomic benefits, there are undoubtedly other situations and personality
factors that motivate this behavior. Moreover, this analysis does not attempt
to explain all impulse buying behavior. For instance, children probably have
an entirely different set of variables that motivate their buying impulses.
Similarly, impulses experienced while shopping with a purchase pal
probably involve additional social variables.
Finally, the hypotheses presented here require further empirical testing.
Testing is complicated because consumers generally have little or no
retrospective access to spontaneous decisions, like impulse decisions
(Nisbett and Wilson, 1977). Options such as in-depth interviews or
participant observation may be able to tease out the relationship of impulse
to the constructs raised here, however.

Promoting impulse buying

Management and consumer implications

The managerial implications of this analysis should be fairly obvious. If
retailers wish to promote impulse buying, they should create an environment
where consumers can be relieved of their negative perceptions of impulse.
Retailers may stress the relative rationality of impulse buying in their
advertising efforts. Similarly, they may stress the non-economic rewards of
impulse buying.
Additionally, retailers can make the environment more complex, further
straining consumers' abilities to process information accurately. Such
techniques as stocking more merchandise, creating stimulating atmospherics,
and increasing information may be useful to stimulate impulse buying.
Retailers can make impulse purchasing more risk-free, through convenient
return policies, or increase enablers such as credit and store hours (Rook and
Fisher, 1995).
Importantly, this model also offers options for consumers to control their
buying impulses, if they choose to, or feel better about their impulse buying,
by relieving their negative evaluations of impulse. Consumers should
recognize that heuristics and impulse are not bad, but implicitly involve a

414

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

trade-off between rapid, hedonically satisfying purchases and less affective,

but more thoughtful planned purchases. Once consumers recognize that
products are more than commodities and that they are buying to please their
hedonistic desires as well as their physical desires, they will feel more
comfortable with the impulse buying decision.
Consumers

Impulse buying processes are alternatives to planned decision making and

consumers must use these techniques with that in mind. If impulse is a
response to information overload, consumers may reduce the information
processing demands by restricting their search either to a few products or to
several features of a larger number of products. They may also develop
decision aids, such as lists, comparison tables or graphs, reducing reliance on
heuristics. Similarly, they can allow enough time for gathering information
and evaluating options before purchase. These options will help make
purposeful analysis less frustrating and more productive. Other options
include limiting unnecessary emotional distractions like shopping buddies,
especially children. Consumers can also choose other methods to moderate
their moods, rather than resorting to impulse buying for that purpose.
Consumers should be more aware of retailers' efforts to manipulate their
moods to influence their buying decisions. Moreover, they can reduce
enablers by only shopping when they need specific purchases and only
carrying enough cash or credit for necessary purchases.
References
Ainslie, G. (1975), ``Specious reward: a behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse
control'', Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 82 No. 4, pp. 463-96.
Baron, J. (1994), Thinking and Deciding, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Bellenger, D.N., Robertson, D.H. and Hirschman, E.C. (1978), ``Impulse buying varies by
product'', Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 18, pp. 15-18.
Bettman, J.R., Johnson, E.J. and Payne, J.W. (1991), ``Consumer decision making'', Handbook
of Consumer Behavior, pp. 50-84.
Boone, L.E. and Kurtz, D.L. (1995), Contemporary Marketing, 8th ed., Dryden Press, Orlando,
FL.
Churchill, G.A. (1979), ``A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs'',
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 16, February, pp. 64-73.
Cialdini, R.B. (1993), Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, 2nd ed., Quill, New York,
NY.
Cobb, C.J. and Hoyer, W.D. (1986), ``Planned versus impulse purchase behavior'', Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 62 No. 4, pp. 384-409.
Darden, W.R. and Ashton, D. (1975), ``Psychographic profiles of patronage preference
groups'', Journal of Retailing, Vol. 50, Winter, pp. 99-112.
Farber, R.J. and O'Guinn, T.C. (1988), ``Compulsive consumption and credit abuse'', Journal
of Consumer Policy, March, pp. 97-109.
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for
Qualitative Research, Aldine Publishing Company, New York, NY.
Halpern, D.F. (1989), Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking, 2nd ed.,
Erlbaum Publishing, Hillsdale, NJ.
Han, Y.K., Morgan, G.A., Kotsiopulos, A. and Kang-Park, J. (1991), ``Impulse buying
behavior of apparel purchasers'', Clothing and Textile Research Journal, Vol. 9 No. 3,
pp. 15-21.
Herbig, P. and Kramer, H. (1994), ``The effect of information overload on the innovation
choice'', Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 45-55.
Hirschman, E.C. (1980), ``Innovativeness, novelty seeking, and consumer creativity'', Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 7, December, pp. 283-95.
Holbrook, M.B. and Hirschman, E.C. (1982), ``The experiential aspects of consumption:
consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun'', Journal of Consumer Research, No. 9, September,
pp. 132-40.

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

415

Houston, M.J., Childers, T.L. and Heckler, S.E. (1987), ``Picture-work consistency and
elaborative processing of advertisements'', Journal of Marketing Research, No. 24,
November, pp. 359-74.
Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1988), ``A taxonomy of thinking'', in Sternberg, R.J. and Smith, E.E.
(Eds), The Psychology of Human Thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA,
pp. 429-57.
Kahneman, D. (1973), Attention and Effort, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Kollat, D.T. and Willett, R.P. (1967), ``Consumer impulse purchasing behavior'', Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 4, February, pp. 21-31.
Levy, M. (1976), ``Deferred gratification and social class'', The Journal of Social Psychology,
Vol. 100, pp. 123-35.
McDonald, W.J. (1996), ``Influences on the adoption of global marketing decision support
systems: a management perspective'', International Marketing Review, Vol. 13 No. 1,
pp. 33-45.
Maslow, A.H. (1968), Toward a Psychology of Being, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York,
NY.
Nisbett, R.E. and Wilson, T.D. (1977), ``Telling more than we can know: verbal reports on
mental processes'', Psychological Review, Vol. 84, pp. 231-59.
Piron, F. (1991), ``Defining impulse purchasing'', Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 18,
pp. 509-13.
Rook, D.W. (1987), ``The buying impulse'', Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14,
pp. 189-99.
Rook, D.W. and Fisher, R.J. (1995), ``Trait and normative aspects of impulsive buying
behavior'', Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 305-13.
Rook, D.W. and Hoch, S.J. (1985), ``Consuming impulses'', Advances in Consumer Research,
Vol. 12, pp. 23-7.
Solnick, J.V., Kannenberg, C.H., Eckerman, D.A. and Waller, M.B. (1980), ``An experimental
analysis of impulsivity and impulse control in humans'', Learning and Motivation,
Vol. 11, pp. 61-77.
Stern, H. (1962), ``The significance of impulse buying today'', Journal of Marketing, Vol. 26,
April, pp. 59-63.
Sujan, M. (1985), ``Consumer knowledge: effects on evaluation strategies mediating consumer
judgments'', Journal of Consumer Behavior, Vol. 12, pp. 31-46.
Thompson, C.J., Locander, W.B. and Pollio, H.R. (1990), ``The lived meaning of free choice:
an existential-phenomenological description of everyday consumer experiences of
contemporary married women'', Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 17 No. 3,
pp. 346-61.
Unger, L. (1981), ``Consumer marketing trends in the 1980s: when growth slows'', Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 69-73.
Weinberg, P. and Gottwald, W. (1982), ``Impulsive consumer buying as a result of emotions'',
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 10, pp. 43-57.
Welles, G. (1986), ``We're in the habit of impulsive buying'', USA Today, May 21, p. 1.
Appendix 1

Item
I like to shop for the novelty of it
Shopping satisfies my sense of curiosity
Shopping offers new experiences
I feel like I'm exploring new worlds when I shop
I go shopping to watch other people
I go shopping to be entertained
I get a real ``high'' from shopping

Factor loading

Mean

SD

0.6614
0.7891
0.8116
0.7793
0.4752
0.5901
0.6383

2.758
2.679
2.832
2.578
2.433
2.545
2.339

1.137
1.136
1.160
1.186
1.272
1.231
1.304

Note: Response format: 1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree

Table AI. Composition of hedonic consumption scale

416

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

Appendix 2

Item
I often buy things spontaneously
``Just do it'' describes the way I buy things
I often buy things without thinking
``Buy now, think about it later'' describes me
Sometimes I feel like buying things on the spur
of the moment
Sometimes I'm a bit reckless about what I buy
If I see something I want, I buy it

Factor loading

Mean

SD

0.723
0.781
0.837
0.838

3.29
2.75
2.59
2.64

1.21
1.27
1.26
1.28

0.488
0.533
0.555

3.29
2.95
3.23

1.11
1.16
1.16

Note: Response format: 1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree

Table AII. Composition of impulsive trait scale

&

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

417

This summary has been

provided to allow managers
and executives a rapid
appreciation of the content
of this article. Those with a
particular interest in the
topic covered may then read
the article in toto to take
advantage of the more
comprehensive description
of the research undertaken
and its results to get the full
benefit of the material
present

Executive summary and implications for managers and

executives
Shopping should be fun it is your job to make it so
We are ``taught'' to see impulse buying as a slightly irresponsible act
wasteful, frivolous and just a little wicked. Why? We all make many purchase
decisions on the spur of the moment. But this does not mean that such actions
are wasteful or unthinking.
Reading Hausman's research reveals that, far from impulse purchases being
unthinking, they are very often the culmination of a longer purchase decision
process. The decision to buy a new dress, for example, might be made in
principle (``I need a new outfit for Steve and Claire's wedding'') but that
specific decision might be made ``on impulse'' (``I saw the dress in a shop
window, it looked right and it fitted, so I bought it'').
In essence the impulse purchase is satisfying a set of human wants that are
``uneconomic''. From the rationalist point of view, impulse buying seems
wrong. The individual has not researched and assessed the needs to be
fulfilled so is making an ``irrational'' decision. However, as Hausman makes
clear, the real situation is that an impulse purchase is satisfying real needs,
albeit needs that are of a higher order than those that concern the
rationalist.
Marketers have long recognised the significance of impulse. The result is
advertising that features spontaneity, elaborate window dressing and, at
another level, the use of dump bins and counter displays to stimulate impulse
purchase. But these activities to exploit impulse purchase reflect only a
simple understanding of this particular type of consumer behaviour.
Hausman shows us that the phenomenon of impulse buying is more
complicated and multi-faceted than we have assumed.
Reasons for buying on impulse
We have already referred to one reason for the impulse buy the ``decision
in principle''. We want a dress but have not made a specific choice nor have
we undertaken a systematic search. We are not shopping for any particular
purpose; indeed we may be simply passing by the store on some other
errand.
There are, however, other factors that influence the impulse purchase. The
most significant of these is the view of shopping as a social pleasure.
Hausman's focus groups reveal that consumers see shopping as ``retail
therapy'', as a way of getting over the stresses of a working day or simply a
fun day out.
We can, by looking at this view of shopping, begin to return to a rational
explanation for shopping behaviour. If the rationalist sees shopping purely in
terms of obtaining goods, then impulse buying does not make sense. But if we
rationalise shopping as pleasure seeking, then the impulse purchase becomes
more understandable.
The impulse purchase is not the result of a specific search to satisfy a
particular requirement since the satisfaction comes from the act of shopping
itself. Purchases are incidental to this process although they do provide
proof of the enjoyment. Chances are that, if we ``go to look round the
shops'', we will return having made some form of purchase. And that
purchase will have been made on impulse.

418

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

So what does this mean for the retailer and the marketer?
The first lesson for the retailer is that the impact of the store is crucial to
success. In many cases the store visitor has not set out with the specific
purpose of visiting your store they are simply ``out shopping''. In these
circumstances, it is worthwhile understanding what merchandise triggers
impulsive reactions.
Second, we need to appreciate that many shoppers do not have a specific
objective or purpose. They may make a purchase, but this is as likely to be
because they have seen something that cries out ``buy me'' as to satisfy some
existing requirement or desire.
The lesson from these behaviour revelations is that marketers need to focus
as much on entertainment, interest and excitement as they do on getting the
mix of merchandise right and the pricing spot on. If the balance is wrong
then the shopper may see your store as ``stuffy'' or ``unfriendly''.
If you have the space, put on events that encourage visitors. Have special
demonstrations. Use special offers to stimulate sales. Shopping may be great
fun to many people but it will be even more fun if the retailers set about
providing some additional entertainment.
Get the right employees and train them well
Traditional retail training (where it is given) has focused on giving
employees observational and service skills. We need to extend this
understanding to add the idea of giving pleasure and satisfaction to buyers
and non-buyers alike. If your employees realise that one aspect of a
successful store is that shopping there is fun, then they will be able to
develop ways with your encouragement to improve the shoppers' in-store
experience.
The recruitment and training of employees are often overlooked as an aspect
of good retail marketing. Yet the way in which shop workers engage with the
customer is perhaps the most important element of marketing a retail
business. At the same time you need to provide the opportunities for staff to
make that difference.
One obvious example can be seen in toy stores like Hamley's in London or
FAO Schwartz, New York, where young employees demonstrate simple,
cheap toys yo-yos, bubble guns, boomerangs, etc. These activities make the
store livelier and provide an opportunity to capture the impulse buyer.
Another approach is the use of humour in labelling UK wine merchant
chain, Oddbins, has made a feature of this approach. And the comments all
come from the employees themselves following regular wine tasting sessions.
Not only do the staff know about the wine but they are encouraged to be just
a little irreverent in the way they describe it and the way they sell it.
Remember then that shopping is fun. If you do, and you encourage your
employees, then the impulse shoppers will come to your store because it is a
pleasure. And they will buy.
(A precis of the article ``A multi-method investigation of consumer
motivations in impulse buying behavior''. Supplied by Marketing
Consultants for MCB University Press.)

JOURNAL OF CONSUMER MARKETING, VOL. 17 NO. 5 2000

419