CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction
The research design is based on “philosophy of science” which is established as per the
research question (Lawrence & Lawrence, 2000; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1995). Entire
methodology the philosophy, quantitative methodology, the data collection and analysis
method are originated by the research questions.
Chapter includes the research design, good reason for the usage of quantitative method,
procedure for the data collection and the statistical technique for data analysis. Problems
and solution related to “validity and reliability”, “sample selection”, “measure
development” discussed here.

3.2 Research Design

Research design is defined as researcher’s technical plan to counter the possible questions
neutrally, precisely, reasonably as well as through validity Kumar (1999.
Justification of scientific realism
The research design is based on positivism. Usually Positivist theories used in the
discipline of marketing because it “provide systemized structures capable of explaining
and predicting phenomena” (Hunt, 1991). But in marketing course of study real positivist
approaches are merely used as there is obvious difference among “ empirical observable
concepts and theoretical concepts”(Hunt, 1991). It was also mentioned that “pure
observable concept don’t exist” , there must be component of theoretical concept(Hunt,
1991). Scientific realism includes the supposition of positivism which means
“approximate truth” instead of “actual truth”. (Hunt 1991), and slightly differentiate it
from positivism as it recognized that real truth don’t existed(Weston, 1992). To
summarized scientific realism paradigm is adopted for the research that reflects aspect of
positivist approach.
Justification of survey research
In Second chapter five constructs were identified as proposed antecedents of attitudinal
brand loyalty, while three of behavioral brand loyalty. Survey is used for the data
collection purpose since “self-reported beliefs and behaviors are best measured through a
survey instrument”(Neuman & Lawrence, 2000). To conduct surveys we have three types
that are questionnaire and/or interview via phone or face to face. (Neuman 1997).
To test hypothesis an online questionnaire is created using Google form as it is
convenient to create and submit. This ease plays an important role in getting the correct
answers and reduces “low response rates” of the research study (Baldaof, Reisinger, &
Moncrif, 1999), moreover there less chances of interviewer prejudice while using this
practice (de Vaus, 1995; Green & Tull, 1988; Neuman & Lawrence, 2000). lack of direct
observations lessen control in online surveys therefore they are less successful when the
questionnaire is complicated as it entirely rely on respondent’s interpretation
skills(Dillman, 1978; Neuman & Lawrence, 2000).

1
Reliability and Validity
Reliability
To carry out reliability test all construct necessarily have two to three indicators (Joseph,
Ronald & Black, 1998). All construct are developed upon between 4 to 10 items, meeting
the criteria. Pilot testing is performed to measure the reliability by analyzing correlation
among the constructs. Results are satisfactory reliable when item score value is more 0.60
at p<0.05 level of significance.(Nunnally & Bernstein, 1995).
To make research more reliable we take care of systematic reliability measurement
errors. It is categorized into ”sample, transmittal, response, or analysis error” (Green &
Tull, 1988). Sample error is no comparability of the sample with the population(Green &
Tull, 1988). It is overcome by selecting the most renowned apparel brand J.J which is
equally famous among males and females of urban Pakistan. Transmitter error includes
the components of the instrument, involvement of the researcher and respondent’s
response(Green & Tull, 1988). It is minimized by designing and formatting the
questionnaire in a consistent way and used easily understandable words to reduce the
confusion. Response error is reduce by less involvement of researcher, as we used mail
questionnaire that submitted by the respondent thus reduce researcher biasness. Analysis
error occurred by incorrect coding or data entry(Green & Tull, 1988). It is overcome by
designing close ended questionnaire on likert scale.
Validity
Validity makes sure how a well–founded scale measures the construct what it claims to
measure (Green & Tull, 1988). It is the significant measuring tool to determine the
precision of research to overcome the chances of error.
Validity is of three types namely “content, construct and criterion validity” (Neuman
1997).Content validity determines the significance of calculated research sample to
denote the population of overall “items of the construct” (Nunnelly & Bernstain, 1994).
To overcome it, this research used scales presented in earlier researches.
Construct validity is about validating the association “among the items in the
measurement scale”, this association among items must be highly correlated in te scale
(Green, Tull and Albaum 1988). Construct validity are of two kind, convergent validity
and divergent validity (McColl-Kennedy & Fetter, 2001).Convergent validity discover
the relationship among all construct’s items of “perceived risk, brand Involvement,
customer satisfaction, brand trust, brand commitment and attitudinal brand loyalty”
where as Divergent discover negative or no relationship among the items of constructs
(Neuman 1997). For the pilot testing different scholar gave different suggestions,
(Hertzog, 2008) suggested that there should be no straight measurement for the sample.
Michael(1995) suggested that 10–30 respondent can fulfill the criteria; (Connelly, 2008;
Treece, 1982) recommended 10% of sample.
Criterion validity compared the resulted scale with “external measure of the same
construct” (Neuman 1997). Since social sciences constructs are mostly conceptual, it will

2
be hard to discover an appropriate “external measure” (Nunnally and Bernstein 1994),
hence it is not examined.

3.3 Sampling Size

For calculating the sample population researcher has gathered information from Pakistan
Bureau of Statistics. Census of Pakistan shows that a total of 41.72 million people were
employed in the year of 2017-2018 out of which 32.57 were male and 9.15 million were
females(“Pakistan Bureau of Statistics,” 2017).. Out of which 19.09 millions are
employed in urban cities(Pakistan Economic Survey 2015-16, 2015). In the absence of
available data we are assuming 19.09 million as population size. Roscae (1975)
recommended sample size more than 30 and fewer than 500 as a rule of thumb.
Tabachnick(1989) recommended sample size to be 200-300. Rao Soft is an online
calculator for the sample size estimation. Calculated sample is 384 at 95% confidence
Interval with 5% error margin. Recommendation made above, researcher consider sample
size as 389 for this research

3.4 Sampling Technique

A sample can be described as a fraction of “target population”, chosen cautiously to
symbolize the whole population (Cooper & Schindler, 1998). For sampling, researcher
needs plenty of occurrences of the “target population” in order to formulate findings
related to the whole population it include to calculate “population, sampling frame,
sampling method, sample size and sample selection” (Zikmund,1994).
A “population” is the sum of occurrences that include a number of chosen provisions,
which could be “people, events, or things of interest to the researcher” (Sekaraan &
Boguie, 2016). Due to time and resource constraint, this research proposed
“Convenience Sampling technique” for data collection. Non-probability sampling counts
on “personal judgment of the researcher than chance to select samples” (Malhotra and
Desh. 2011).
Data are collected by several process that include “mail, face-to-face, telephone,
electronic mail, and a combination of these methods”(Coopar & Schindler, 1998;
Sekaraan & Boguie, 2016; Zikmond, 1994).

3.5 Respondents Profile

A total 389 questionnaires have received, out which 167 are male while 221 are females.
The age of the “respondents” is among 18 to 60 years out of which 43.2% are married
while 56.8% are unmarried. Around 38.6% of the respondents are earning more than Rs.
50,000, 13.6% are earning Rs. 35,000-50,000, 12.9% are earning 25,000- 35,000 and
12.6% are earning below 25,000 and interestingly 22.4% are the respondent without
earning. Most of the respondents are educated, nearly 33.2% acquired bachelor while
29.8 acquired Master degree.

3
3.6 Scale and Measurement
This questionnaire of this study is designed on the base of research objective(Aaker,
Kumar, & Day, 1998). Collected data is based on “opinion, beliefs and attitude” of the
respondents,. Positive questions are asked which are applicable for all, avoided the bias
question (Cooper & Schindler, 1998; Zikmund, 1994). Survey questions are mostly close
ended which allow to be similar for all the respondents, reduces not only interviewer
“biasness” but also decreases thinking effort for the respondents(Hair, Bush, & Ortinau,
2000). Scale of measurement is included for the respondent “Point of agreement”(Alrack
& Settle, 1995). Likert scale of five categories is designed for the survey question.
Summarized results are illustrated in Table2.

Table 2: Summary of Scale and measurement

Construct Source Items
Brand Commitment (Bennett, 2001; Ernnest, 2016;Dahlgren, 2016) 8
Brand Trust (Akhgari,2015;Chaudhuri, 2001; Gecti, 2013; Dahlgren, 2016) 8
Customer Satisfaction (Akhgari,2015; Bennett, 2001; Li, 2009 ) 8
Brand Involvement (Akhgari,2015; Dahlgren, 2016) 8
Brand Perceived Risk (Ward, 2008) 7
Attitudinal Brand Loyalty (Gecti, 2013; Srinivasana2002; Jaiswal, 2010) 7
Behavior Brand Loyalty (Gecti, 2013; Srinivasana2002; Chaudhuri, 2001) 7

3.7 Research Technique

Data Analysis
To make our findings precise and valid, the relationship among the constructs is analyzed
by quantitative approach. In order to confirm the claimed hypothesis, data is analyzed by
SPSS, the technique this research applied are Normality distribution, correlation and
regression.

Normality Distribution Test

Normal distributions test are used in the social science research to identify whether our
data set is well-modeled by a normal distribution or not. .
Regression Analysis
 Regression is a statistical process applies to analyze relationship among the variables
(independent and dependent variable). This study is computing regression on 95% of
confidence Interval with P value (margin of error) at 0.05.
Correlation
Correlation analysis inspects the association among the constructs. It is performed to
calculate positive or negative relationship amongst the variables.

3.8 Summary
Chapter of this research has along with the discussion given reasoning for using the
design approach and validity and reliability of the data. Online and offline mail survey is
used to verify a theoretical model of brand loyalty. All the relationships are taken the

4
previous studies.

5
 CHAPTER 4: DATA RESULTS
Results
This chapter will discuss the outcome of Descriptive analysis, Correlation and Regression
and mediating Analysis.

4.1 Pilot testing

Before conducting desired complete data collection for the research, first a pilot testing
has undertaken on small number of individuals to see if this questionnaire is reliable for
the research. In this study pilot testing has carried out on 20 respondents to determine
construct’s reliability and it was found to be 0.977. Overall reliability of the 53
constructs is (α=.977) which ensured the validity of the questionnaire for conducting
complete research survey. The result of the reliability analysis is mentioned in table 3
presented in Appendix B.

4.2 Descriptive Analysis

Descriptive Analysis has been used out to analyze the reliability and normality of our
data. Results are illustrated in Table 4

Table4: Summary of Descriptive Analysis

Descriptive Statistics

  Cronbach Alpha Mean Std. Deviation Skewness Kurtosis

Brand Commitment .947 2.63 0.96 0.94 -3.80
Brand Trust .921 2.28 0.78 1.70 -3.20
Customer Satisfaction .947 2.41 0.89 2.25 -2.20
Brand Involvement .913 2.80 1.00 -0.55 -2.17
Brand Perceived Risk 890 3.32 0.81 -0.56 2.30
Attitudinal Brand Loyalty .892 2.50 0.85 1.16 -1.89
Behavioral Brand Loyalty .923 2.53 0.90 1.54 2.60

Descriptive Statistics
Cronbach
  Alpha Mean Std. Deviation Skewness Kurtosis
Brand Commitment 0.947 2.6323 .96006 0.94 .247
Brand Trust 0.921 2.2774 .78134 1.7 .247
Customer Satisfaction 0.947 2.4111 .89414 2.25 .247
Brand Involvement 0.913 2.8010 1.00335 -0.55 .247
Brand Perceived Risk 890 3.3196 .81026 -0.56 .247
Attitudinal Brand 2.4962 .84868 .247
0.892 1.16
Loyalty
Behavioral Brand 2.5268 .90198 .247
0.923 1.54
Loyalty

6
As mentioned in Table 4 Brand Commitment has the highest Cronbach alpha value (α=
0.947, Mean = 2.63, Std. Dev = 0.96) while Brand Perceived Risk has lowest value (α =
0.890, Mean = 3.3, Std. Dev = 0.81). All the construct’s Alpha Cronbach values are
greater than 0.7 signifying satisfactory internal reliability (Bryman & Bell, 2015). Brand
Involvement has the lowest skewness (SK=-0.55) and brand trust has highest skewness
(SK= 1.7). All the construct’s skewness values lies between the range of +1.96 to -1.96
that shows construct have the normality (Bryman and Bell, 2015). While the lowest
kurtosis value is of attitudinal brand loyalty (KR= -1.89) and highest is of Brand
Commitment (KR=-3.8). The Kurtosis values of most variables lie below +3 to -3 which
show constructs have the normality (Kallner, 2018).

4.3 Correlation Analysis

Correlation analysis make sure that all the constructs of this research are unique and there
is no issue of multicollinearity. Results are illustrated in Table 5

Table 5: Correlation Analysis of constructs with Attitudinal & Behavioral Brand

loyalty
  1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Brand Commitment 1            
Brand Trust .726** 1          
** **
Customer Satisfaction .776 .868 1        
** ** **
Brand Involvement .754 .712 .814 1      
** ** ** **
Brand Perceived Risk .355 .316 .372 .631 1    
** ** ** ** **
Attitudinal Brand Loyalty .773 .749 .801 .806 .409 1  
** ** ** ** ** **
Behavioral Brand Loyalty .793 .750 .795 .780 .370 .889 1
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
The highest correlation (r=.889) is among the construct Attitudinal brand loyalty (Mean=
2.49, SD=.0.84) and Behavioral brand loyalty (Mean= 2.52, SD= 0.90). And the lowest
correlation(r=.316) is between the construct Brand trust (Mean=2.27, SD=0.78) and
Brand perceived risk (Mean=3.32, SD=0.81). All the Correlation results fall between the
ranges of .30 and .90 which indicates that there is no multi-collinearity and all the
constructs adopted are unique.

4.4 Effect of Brand Commitment, Brand Trust, Customer Satisfaction, Brand

Involvement and Brand Perceived Risk on Attitudinal Brand Loyalty

Multiple regression analysis is used to determine the combine outcome of all predictors
on Attitudinal Brand loyalty. Results are sum up in Table 6.

Table 6: Multiple Regression Analysis on Attitudinal brand loyalty

Model Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.

7
 Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) .367 .106   3.456 .001
Brand Commitment .213 .039 .241 5.440 .000
Brand Trust .170 .057 .156 2.958 .003
Customer Satisfaction .152 .062 .160 2.445 .015
Brand Involvement .348 .050 .411 6.912 .000
Brand Perceived Risk -.048 .037 -.046 -1.302 .194
a. Dependent Variable: Attitudinal Brand Loyalty, R2=.745, Adj. R2=.741, F(388,5-223.547<0.005)
The results explain that the predictors (Brand Commitment, Brand Trust, Customer
Satisfaction, Brand Involvement, Brand Perceived Risk) aggregately explains 74 .of the
variance F =223.5, p=0< 0.05.
Hypothesis 1 states that Brand trust positively impact attitudinal brand loyalty, the results
support the hypothesis refers to the table 6. Hypothesis 2 states that Brand commitment
positively impact on attitudinal brand loyalty, the results support the hypothesis refers to
the table 6. Hypothesis 3 states that Brand perceived risk positively impact on attitudinal
brand loyalty, the results support the hypothesis refers to the table 6
Hypothesis 4 states that Brand Involvement positively impact on attitudinal brand loyalty,
the result support the hypothesis refers to the table 6. Hypothesis 5 states that Customer
Satisfaction positively impact on attitudinal brand loyalty, the result support the
hypothesis refers to the table 6.
It is shown from table 6 that Attitudinal Brand loyalty is getting significantly influence by
Brand Involvement (ß = .411, p<.05), followed by Brand Commitment (ß = .241, p<.05),
Brand Trust (ß = .156, p<.05), Customer Satisfaction (ß = .160, p<.05). However
Attitudinal brand loyalty is not significantly influenced by Brand Perceived Risk (ß =
-.046, p>.05).

4.5 Effect of Brand Commitment, Brand Trust, Customer Satisfaction on

Behavioral Brand Loyalty
Multiple regression analysis is used to determine the combine effect of all predictors) on
Behavioral Brand loyalty. Results are summarized in Table 7.

Table 7: Regression Analysis on Behavioral brand loyalty

Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .267 .079   3.385 .001
Customer Satisfaction .335 .061 .332 5.473 .000
Brand Trust .177 .064 .154 2.762 .006
Brand Commitment .398 .041 .424 9.694 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Behavioral Brand Loyalty, R2=.715, Adj. R2=.713, F(388,3-322.4<0.005)
Hypothesis 6 states that Brand trust positively impact on attitudinal brand loyalty, the
results support the hypothesis refers to the table 7. Hypothesis 7 states that Brand
8
commitment positively impact on attitudinal brand loyalty, the results support the
hypothesis refers to the table 7. Hypothesis 8 states that Customer Satisfaction positively
impact on attitudinal brand loyalty, the result support the hypothesis refers to the table 7
It is shown in table 7 the predictors (Brand Commitment, Brand Trust, Customer
Satisfaction) aggregately explains 71 of the variance F =322.4, p=0< 0.05. It is shown
from table 7 that Behavioral Brand loyalty is getting significantly influence by Brand
Commitment (ß = .331, p<.05), Brand Trust (ß = .165, p<.05), Customer Satisfaction (ß =
.145, p<.05).

4.6 Linear Regression of Attitudinal and Behavioral Brand Loyalty

Linear regression analysis is used to determine the effect of attitudinal brand loyalty on
Behavioral Brand loyalty. Results are summarized in Table 8.

Table 8: Regression Analysis of Attitudinal and Behavioral brand loyalty

Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .169 .065   2.586 .010
Attitudinal Brand Loyalty .945 .025 .889 38.155 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Behavioral Brand Loyalty, R2=.790, Adj. R2=.789, F(388,1-1455.840<0.005)

Hypothesis 9 states that attitudinal brand loyalty positively impact on behavioral brand
loyalty, the results support the hypothesis refers to the table 8. It is shown in table 4.6 the
predictors (Attitudinal Brand loyalty) 79 of the variance F =1455.8, p=0< 0.05. It is
shown from table 8 that Behavioral Brand loyalty is getting significantly influence by
Attitudinal brand loyalty (ß = .889, p<.05).

4.7 Mediating effect of Attitudinal Brand Loyalty

Customer Satisfaction, Attitudinal Brand Loyalty and Behavioral Brand Loyalty

The mediating role of attitudinal behavioral loyalty is examined through two steps. In
step one the relationship between customer satisfaction and behavioral brand loyalty is
ascertain. In step two multiple regression analysis was carried out in which the predictors
are customer satisfaction and attitudinal brand loyalty (mediating variable).The
summarized results are presented in table 9 and table 9A.

Table 9: Direct Relationship between Customer Satisfaction and Behavioral Brand

Loyalty
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .594 .080 7.422 .000
Customer Satisfaction .802 .031 .795 25.743 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Behavioral brand loyalty, R2=.631, Adj R2=.630, F(388,1=662.708<0.005)

9
Table 9A: Relationship with Attitudinal Brand Loyalty
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .098 .063 1.550 .122
Customer Satisfaction(IV) .232 .038 .230 6.190 .000
Attitudinal Brand loyalty(MED) .749 .040 .704 18.945 .000
Dependent variable: Behavioral brand loyalty, R2=809, Adj R2=808, F(386,2-817.281<0.005)

The results show that customer satisfaction and behavioral brand loyalty relationship is
significant. After incorporating attitudinal brand loyalty (mediator) as a predictor the
relationship of customer satisfaction and attitudinal brand loyalty is also significant refer
to table 9A. The results further show that after incorporation of attitudinal brand loyalty
as a predictor, the beta value of customer satisfaction has significantly decreased. Thus it
is inferred that attitudinal brand loyalty mediates customer satisfaction and behavioral
brand loyalty (Chiou & Droge, 2006b; Anand K Jaiswal & Niraj, 2011).

Brand Trust, Attitudinal Brand Loyalty and Behavioral Brand Loyalty

The mediating role of attitudinal behavioral loyalty was examined through two steps. In
step one the association between brand trust and behavioral brand loyalty was ascertain.
In step two multiple regression analysis was carried out in which the predictors were
brand trust and attitudinal brand loyalty(mediating variable) .The summarized results are
presented in table 10 and table 10 A.

Table 10: Direct Relationship between Brand Trust and Behavioral Brand Loyalty
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .556 .093 5.946 .000
Brand Trust .865 .039 .750 22.285 .000
2 2
a. Dependent Variable: Behavioral Brand Loyalty, R =.562, Adj. R =.561, F(388,1-496.6<0.005)

Table 10 A: Relationship with Attitudinal Brand Loyalty

Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .046 .066 .691 .490
Brand Trust .221 .039 .191 5.656 .000
Attitudinal Brand Loyalty .792 .036 .746 22.040 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Behavioral Brand loyalty, R2=806, Adj. R2=805, F(388,2-802<0.005)

The results show that brand trust and behavioral brand loyalty relationship is significant.
After incorporating attitudinal brand loyalty as a predictor the relationship of brand trust
and attitudinal brand loyalty is also significant refer to table 10 A. The result also show

10
after incorporation of attitudinal brand loyalty as a predictor the beta value of brand trust
has significantly decreased. Thus it is inferred that attitudinal brand loyalty mediates
brand trust and behavioral brand loyalty(Liu et al., 2011).

Brand Commitment, Attitudinal Brand Loyalty and Behavioral Brand Loyalty

The mediating role of attitudinal behavioral loyalty with brand commitment is examined
through two steps. In step one the relationship between brand commitment and
behavioral brand loyalty is ascertain. In step two multiple regression analysis is carried
out in which the predictors were brand commitment and attitudinal brand
loyalty(mediating variable) .The summarized results are presented in table 11 and table
11 A.

Table 11: Direct Relationship between Brand Commitment and Behavioral Brand
Loyalty
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std.Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .556 .081 6.938 .000
Brand Commitment .745 .029 .793 22.622 .000
2 2
a. Dependent Variable: Behavioral Brand loyalty, R =.629, Adj. R =.628, F(388,1-656<0.005)

Table 11 A: Relationship with Attitudinal Brand Loyalty

Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std.Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .057 .063 .915 .361
Brand Commitment .248 .032 .264 7.713 .000
Attitudinal Brand Loyalty .728 .036 .685 20.019 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Behavioral Brand loyalty, R2=818, Adj. R2=817, F(388,2-867<0.005)

The results show that brand commitment and behavioral brand loyalty relationship is
significant. After incorporating attitudinal brand loyalty as a predictor the relationship of
brand commitment and attitudinal brand loyalty is also significant refer to table 11 A.
The result further also shows that after the incorporation of attitudinal brand loyalty as a
predictor, the beta value of brand commitment has significantly decreased. Thus it is
inferred that attitudinal brand loyalty mediates brand commitment and behavioral brand
loyalty (George & Stavros, 2013).
.

11
 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Discussion
Consumer purchasing is complex behavior, there might be many factors that can help
persuading consumer to purchase. The aim of the thesis is to better understand both the
dimensions (attitudinal and behavioral) of brand loyalty together. For achieving this aim
a new model is developed based on multidimensional brand theory, attitudinal and
behavioral brand model, the results have answered all the objectives.
5.2 Brand Trust and Attitudinal Brand Loyalty
The first objective of this thesis was to assured that brand trust positively impact on
attitudinal brand loyalty. This research question is answered through H1 that stated that
brand Trust has a positive impact on attitudinal brand loyalty, Brand Trust (ß = .156,
p<.05), The results are consistent with the earlier studies (Aaker, 1991a; Assael, 1998;
Betty & Kahle, 1988; Jacoby & Chesnut, 1978; Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001).
Correlation results also show strong positive association among Brand Trust and
Attitudinal Brand Loyalty (Table 6).

5.3 Brand Commitment and Attitudinal brand loyalty

The second objective of this thesis was to assured that brand commitment positively
impact on attitudinal brand loyalty. This research question is answered through H 2 which
stated that brand commitment has positive effect on attitudinal brand loyalty Brand
Commitment (ß = .241, p<.05). The results are consistent with the earlier studies
(Gundlch, Achrol, & Mentzar, 1995; Morgan & Hunt, 1994c; Marshall, 2010).
Correlation results show strong positive association between Brand Commitment and
Attitudinal Brand Loyalty. (Table 6).

5.4 Brand Perceived Risk and Attitudinal brand loyalty

The third objective of this thesis was to assured that brand perceived risk has significant
positive relationship with attitudinal brand loyalty. This research question is answered
through H3 which stated that brand perceived risk does not have major positive impact on
attitudinal brand loyalty, Brand Perceived Risk (ß = -.046, p>.05). The results are not
consistent with the earlier studies (Jacoby & Chesnut, 1978; Sheth & Venkatesan, 1968;

12
Stone & Mason, 1995). Correlation results also do not show strong positive association
between Brand Perceived Risk and Attitudinal Brand Loyalty. (Table 6)

5.5 Brand involvement and Attitudinal brand loyalty

The fourth objective of this thesis was to assured that brand involvement has significant
positive relationship with attitudinal brand loyalty. This research question is answered
through H4 which stated that brand involvement has important positive effect on
attitudinal brand loyalty, Brand Involvement (ß = .411, p<.05). The results are consistent
with the earlier studies (Oliva, Oliver, & MacMillan, 1992; Traylor, 1981; Russall-
Bennett et al., 2007). Correlation result also shows strong positive association between
brand involvement and attitudinal brand loyalty (Table 6).

5.6 Customer Satisfaction and Attitudinal brand loyalty

The fifth objective of the study was to assured that customer satisfaction has a
noteworthy positive association with attitudinal brand loyalty. This research question is
answered through H5 which stated customer satisfaction has important positive impactt
on attitudinal brand loyalty, Customer Satisfaction (ß = .160, p<.05). The results are
consistent with the earlier studies (Dick,1994; Härtel et al., 2005; Jaiswal & Niraj, 2010;
Rauyruen & Miller, 2007). Correlation result also shows strong positive relationship
between Customer Satisfaction and Attitudinal Brand Loyalty. (Table 6).

5.7 Brand Trust and Behavioral brand loyalty

The sixth objective of this study was to assured that brand trust has a significant positive
relationship with behavioral brand loyalty. This research question is answered through H 6
which stated that brand trust has a significant positive effect on behavioral brand loyalty,
Brand Trust (ß = .165, p<.05). the results are consistent with the earlier studies
(Anuwichanont, 2011a; Hanzaee & Andervazh, 2012; Matzler et al., 2006a, 2008a; Ok et
al., 2011). Correlation result also shows a strong positive association between brand trust
and behavioral Brand Loyalty (Table 7).

5.8 Brand Commitment and Behavioral brand loyalty

The seventh objective of this study was to assured that brand commitment has a
significant positive relationship with behavioral brand loyalty. This research question is
answered through H7 which stated that brand commitment has a significant positive effect
on behavioral brand loyalty, Brand Commitment (ß = .331, p<.05). The results are
consistent with the earlier studies (Dholakia, 1997). Correlation result also shows strong
positive relationship between brand commitment and behavioral brand loyalty(Table 7).

5.9 Customer Satisfaction and Behavioral brand loyalty

The eight objective of this study was to assured that customer satisfaction has a
significant positive association with behavioral brand loyalty. This research question is

13
answered through H8 which stated that customer satisfaction has a significant positive
effect on behavioral brand loyalty, Customer Satisfaction (ß = .145, p<.05).
The results are consistent with the earlier studies (Ganesh et al., 2000; Lee & Lee, 2013;
Traylor, 1981; Zeithaml, 1981c). Correlation result also shows strong positive
relationship between customer satisfaction and behavioral brand loyalty (Table 7).

5.10 Behavioral brand loyalty and Attitudinal Brand loyalty

The ninth objective of this study is to assured that there is significant relationship among
attitudinal and behavioral brand loyalty. This research question is answered through H 9
which declared that attitudinal brand loyalty has a significant positive impact on
behavioral brand loyalty, (ß = .889, p<.05). The results are consistent with the earlier
studies (Bennett, 2002; Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001b; Halim, 2006; Mackay, & Rundle-
Thiele, 2001;Zhang & Huang, 2008). Correlation results also show a well-built positive
association among attitudinal brand loyalty and behavioral brand loyalty (Table 8).

5.11 Mediating role of Attitudinal Brand Loyalty between Customer Satisfaction

and Behavioral Brand Loyalty
The tenth objective of this study is to assured the mediating role of attitudinal brand
loyalty among customer satisfaction and behavioral brand loyalty. This research question
is answered through H10 which stated that attitudinal brand loyalty mediates the effect of
customer satisfaction on behavioral brand loyalty. Results in table 9 signify that customer
satisfaction has positive impact on behavioral brand loyalty when interacted directly (ß
= .795, p<.05), on the other hand after the inclusion of attitudinal brand loyalty as
mediating variable the beta value of customer decreased significantly (ß = .230, p<.05)
refer to table 9A. This clearly indicates the mediating role of attitudinal brand loyalty.
The findings are consistent with the earlier studies (Chiou & Droge, 2006b; Anand K
Jaiswal & Niraj, 2011).

5.12 Mediating role of Attitudinal Brand Loyalty between Brand Trust and
Behavioral Brand Loyalty
The eleventh objective of this study is to assured the mediating role of attitudinal brand
loyalty between brand trust and behavioral brand loyalty. This research question is
answered through H11 which stated that attitudinal brand loyalty mediates the effect of
brand trust on behavioral brand loyalty. Results in table 10 signify that brand trust has
positive effect on behavioral brand loyalty when interacted directly (ß = .750, p<.05), on
the other hand after the inclusion of attitudinal brand loyalty as mediating variable the
beta value of customer decreased significantly (ß = .191, p<.05) refer to table 10 A. This
clearly indicates the mediating role of attitudinal brand loyalty. The findings are
consistent with the earlier studies (Liu et al., 2011).

14
5.13 Mediating role of Attitudinal Brand Loyalty between Brand Commitment and
Behavioral Brand Loyalty
The twelve objective of this thesis is to assured the mediating role of attitudinal brand
loyalty among brand commitment and behavioral brand loyalty. This research question is
answered through H12 which stated that attitudinal brand loyalty mediates the effect of
brand commitment on behavioral brand loyalty. Results in table 11 signify that brand
commitment has positive impact on behavioral brand loyalty when interacted directly (ß
= .793, p<.05), on the contrary after the inclusion of attitudinal brand loyalty as
mediating variable the beta value of customer decreased significantly (ß = .264, p<.05)
refer to table 11 A. This clearly indicates the mediating role of attitudinal brand loyalty.
The results are consistent with the earlier studies (George & Stavros, 2013).

5.14 Conclusion and Recommendation

The newly developed model was based on Multi dimensional theory. The data findings
specify that proposed model has better fit to the data sample. Outcome of almost every
antecedents of the proposed model (brand trust, brand involvement, brand commitment
and customer satisfaction) are positively associated with attitudinal and behavioral brand
loyalty and behavioral brand loyalty. The association among brand commitment and
attitudinal brand loyalty is significant. The level of commitment a brand has for its
customers affects the level of inclination towards the brand; therefore in order to increase
the brand loyalty level of brand commitment must be high. The association among brand
trust and attitudinal brand loyalty is significant, prior researches did not support the
findings (Morgen and Hunt 1994; Gundlech, Achrol and Mentzar 1995). The results
associated with brand perceived risk and attitudinal brand loyalty was inconsistent with
prior literature. There was an insignificant effect of brand perceived risk and attitudinal
brand loyalty. Current findings contradict the previous findings (Sheth&
Venkatesan,1968; Stone & Mason, 1995). The probable reason for this finding can be
J.dot is more committed and their customers are satisfied that they see no risk in using the
brand. The association of brand involvement and attitudinal brand loyalty is positively
associated, marketer should focus on creating high brand involvement because when
brand involvement is high attitudinal brand loyalty of customer will also be high and
there will be less chances of customer to switch the brand. The relationship of customer
satisfaction is positively related with attitudinal brand loyalty. The results are consistent
with the earlier studies (Ganesh et al., 2000; Lee & Lee, 2013; Traylor, 1981; Zeithaml,
1981c). The well built connection among customer satisfaction and attitudinal brand
loyalty specify that “emotions” take an important role in building brand loyalty.
Finding confirms the positive association of customer satisfaction and behavioral brand
loyalty which is reliable with the previous finding (Jeonghaon, 2013). Customer
satisfaction is identified as powerful factor in developing brand loyalty as it help
predicting the “future consumer purchase”. Positive connection among brand
commitment and behioral brand loyalty signify the importance of the construct as it not

15
only help to inclined customers towards the brand but also make them purchase
repeatedly, finding is reliable with the previous study (Dholkia, 1997).The outcome also
signify the importance of brand trust as it is also positively related with behavioral brand
loyalty which is consistent with the previous findings (Anuwichanont, 2011a; Hanzaee &
Andervazh, 2012; Matzler et al., 2008a; Ok, Choi, & Hyun, 2011).
Research findings support the view that attitudinal brand loyalty is positively related with
behavioral brand loyalty. Previous studies raised query on embracing attitudinal brand
loyalty in brand loyalty related (Dekempe, Stenkamp,Mellans and Abele 1997; Ehrenbarg
1997a), this study concluded that although attitudinal brand loyalty is not closet predictor
of behavioral brand loyalty, it is a significant predictor of behavioral brand loyalty.
Findings also confirmed the mediating role of attitudinal brand loyalty which is a proof of
key role of attitudinal brand loyalty in developing brand loyalty. Attitudinal brand loyalty
mediate the effect of customer satisfaction on behavioral brand loyalty which is
consistent previous study (Jaiswal & Niraj, 2011). Brand trust has direct and
indirect(mediated) relation with behavioral brand loyalty which prove the mediating role
of attitudinal brand loyalty and is reliable with the previous judgment. (Anuwichanont,
2011b; Gommans et al., 2001; Matzler et al., 2006b, 2008b; Ok et al., 2011). Attitudinal
brand loyalty mediate the impact of brand commitment on ehavioral brand loyalty which
is consistent with the previous study (George & Stavros, 2013).
All the results and their findings are positively significant and reliable with the proposed
model. Data findings concluded good performace of J dot as they are focused on brand
involvement and brand committed. Jdot customers are quite satisfied and they have firm
trust on Jdot.

5.15 Theoretical contribution

The major contribution of this study is broaden the “brand loyalty model”. This study has
determined that brand loyalty model consist of two dimensional approach that is
“attitudinal and behavioral brand loyalty”. The suggestion of the result is that, to
recognize brand loyal customers in such a challenging market, the brand loyalty model
must comprise of both behavioral dimension and attitudinal dimensions. Another
contribution is identifying the mediating role of attitudinal brand loyalty which suggest
that while developing strong brand loyalty attitudinal loyalty should be included as a
mediating factor.

5.16 Recommendations for Marketers and Organizations

Brand loyalty has always been important for the business firm in order to improve
brand’s association with the consumers. It can be further improve by some
recommendation for the marketers. Brand trust and brand commitment are the significant
constructs for effective cooperation amongst the brand and consumer, Brand should focus
them as it will help to boost the relationship marketing. It is also concluded in this thesis
that when consumers are involved through the brand emotions it plays a key role in

16
forming consumer attitude for the brand. It is worth noted that if the marketers need to
increase brand loyalty they should focus more on increasing the customer satisfaction.

5.17 Limitation and Future Research

This research study is an academic thesis therefore it has time and resource constraints.
The study is not conducted on large scale; sample size used in this thesis does not
symbolize the respondents of the all Jdot outlets. The study is conducted at Dolmen Mall
Karachi.
This study presented a realistic contribution for the marketing manager to better supervise
their consumers in order to gain brand loyalty. It can utilize as well as strategically tool
for the marketer while making the strategies and promoting the brand. It is recommended
to further work on the constructs effecting as moderator. There is need to study the
moderating impact of brand trust on customer satisfaction, attitudinal and behavioral
brand loyalty.

17
************** THANKS FOR YOUR TIME *******************

18