Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Consumer Attitude Towards Sales Promotion Techniques: A Multi-Country Study
Consumer Attitude Towards Sales Promotion Techniques: A Multi-Country Study
net/publication/331720530
CITATIONS READS
7 1,335
6 authors, including:
13 PUBLICATIONS 20 CITATIONS
Victoria University of Wellington
42 PUBLICATIONS 707 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by James E. Richard on 07 September 2020.
Consumer
Consumer attitude towards attitude
sales promotion techniques: towards SPT
a multi-country study
Kim Fam
Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand and
Received 10 January 2018
Yatai Business School, Jilin University of Finance and Economics, Revised 16 July 2018
Changchun, China 6 September 2018
17 October 2018
Pedro Q. Brito and Mahesh Gadekar Accepted 23 October 2018
Faculty of Economics, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
James E. Richard
School of Marketing and International Business, Victoria University of Wellington,
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine and compare the influence of age, education, income,
product involvement and sales promotion (SP) characteristics on consumer attitudes towards SP across eight
culturally dissimilar environments.
Design/methodology/approach – A multi-country mall intercept and mail survey was conducted in Brunei,
China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore and Thailand (n ¼ 4,125 respondents).
Findings – Country, education level and income significantly influence consumer attitudes towards SP.
Some countries show a significant monetary value interaction effect. Consumers using delayed-reward SPT
reported a significantly more positive attitude towards SP. Discounts and coupons are the two most highly
ranked SP across the sampled countries.
Research limitations/implications – Limitations include the use of intercept and mail sampling.
Extending the study to include additional Asian countries and other regions would benefit the understanding
of cultural influences on SP.
Practical implications – Multinational marketing managers should consider three aspects of SP
implementation strategy: cultural and demographic factors, interaction between delayed-reward SP and
socio-demographics variables; country specific SP preferences to promote both sales and brand equity.
Originality/value – This study investigates and extends research on SP across cultures. In particular the
research helps better understand the impact of demographic factors and culture on attitudes towards SP,
and implementation of global promotions.
Keywords Culture, Consumer behaviour, Sales promotion, Multi-country, Consumer attitude
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Temporary incentives such as sales promotions (SP) targeted at consumers are often utilised as
weapons to provide a competitive edge (McNeill, 2013; Raju, 1995). In 2013, North American
investment in SP was US$176bn and is expected to grow 2.6 per cent in 2017, and
3.4 per cent in 2018 (Garibian, 2013; Statista, 2018). Although SP encourages customer
purchase, influences sales and brand choice decisions, and helps marketers sell products, not all Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing
and Logistics
SP meet their business objectives, and therefore some businesses are reducing their reliance on © Emerald Publishing Limited
1355-5855
SPs ( Jee and de Run, 2013; Roderick, 2016; Wierenga and Soethoudt, 2010; Yi and Yoo, 2011). DOI 10.1108/APJML-01-2018-0005
APJML The lack of SP success may be due to the failure to understand the cultural environment
(Markus and Kitayama, 1991), under-performing SP tools (Schultz and Block, 2014), customer
reservation of promotional claims (de Pechpeyrou and Odou, 2012; Odou and de Pechpeyrou,
2011) or difficulty in comprehending the promotion itself (Tan and Bogomolova, 2016).
In the long run successful SP increase sales volume (e.g. Boschetti, 2012; Santini et al.,
2016), positively influence consumer attitudes and perception of quality ( Jones, 2008;
Kwok and Uncles, 2005), increase customer loyalty (Omotayo, 2011; Rizvi and Malik, 2011)
and reduce switching cost (Esteban-Bravo et al., 2009; Omotayo, 2011). Studies have also
examined the effects of SP on consumer response to bundled promotions such as price deals
and promotions, and the use of coupons (e.g. Foubert and Gijsbrechts, 2007; Villarejo-Ramos
and Sánchez-Franco, 2005). While customers appear to enjoy SP, and SPs also provide
benefits to companies (Esteban-Bravo et al., 2009), some researchers have expressed
concerns that SPs suffer from poor planning and implementation, creating differentiation
and lack promotional options (Borges and Babin, 2012; Brito and Hammond, 2007;
Chandon et al., 2000). However, Laran and Tsiros (2013) found that marketing promotion
uncertainty explains some of the customer purchase response variability.
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
The primary objective of the current study is to examine and compare the influence of
age, education, income, product involvement (PI) and SP characteristics on consumer
examining consumer behaviour and attitude towards SP across culturally diverse countries,
and a number of researchers have called for additional cross-cultural research outside the
western influence (Akram et al., 2018; Stafford et al., 2004). Considering Hofstede’s (1980)
theoretical contribution to the influence of demographic variables, the current state of SP
theory (e.g. Chandon et al., 2000), and the economic growth within the Asia-Pacific, eight
countries were chosen to represent culturally diverse markets in the Asia-Pacific region:
Brunei, China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore and Thailand.
Given the general forecast growth in SP, and the concern regarding the value of
discounting, the study is important to marketing academics and practitioners. From an
academic perspective, the study helps identify and better understand the complex
relationships between culture and SP, practitioners will benefit from improved comprehension
of promotion strategies influenced by cultural and diverse customer needs, country-level
factors and cultural adaptation (Cavusgil et al., 1993; Jin and Sternquist, 2003; Kotler, 1986;
McNeill, 2013; Samiee, 1994).
2. Literature review
2.1 Sales promotion characteristics
The American Marketing Association (2017) defined SP as “The media and non-media
marketing pressure applied for a predetermined, limited period of time at the level of
consumer, retailer, or wholesaler in order to stimulate trial, increase consumer demand, or
improve product availability”. SP are considered as any short-term inducement used to
stimulate a desired response from consumers and tend to be used for a predetermined
limited period of time in order to arouse consumers’ desires, stimulate interest, encourage
customers to try new products, increase sales or incentivise trade (channel members)
(Ehrenberg et al., 1994; Gilbert and Jackaria, 2002; Ndubisi and Moi, 2005).
SPs are important strategic tools for marketing (Brito and Hammond, 2007; Thaler, 1983;
Liao, 2006; Fam et al., 2011). Successful SPs encourage consumers to purchase new products
while providing additional consumer benefits, such as monetary or non-monetary rewards.
Two important characteristics of SP are reward timing and incentive value. Promotion
timing, in the form of instant – or delayed – rewards, can affect buying behaviour. Monetary
incentives provide short-term economic motivations to consumers while non-monetary
incentives can yield long-term benefits for utilitarian products (Blattberg and Neslin, 1990;
Kwok and Uncles, 2005).
2.1.1 Sales promotion timing. The SP timing (instant or delayed) aspect can make a Consumer
difference to the adoption and use of the SP by consumers. Instant-reward sales promotion attitude
techniques (SPT) include coupons, discounts, point of purchase incentives, premiums,
refunds or free samples. Delayed-reward SPT include advertisements and consumer
towards SPT
contests. A number of studies found that instant-reward SPT provide short-term
revenue for companies and are preferred by consumers (Esteban-Bravo et al., 2009;
Santini et al., 2016; Yang et al., 2010). Ndubisi and Moi (2005) found that delayed rewards
tend not to increase sales revenue in the short term, but yield long-term benefits, via
increased brand promotion and brand reinforcement through entertainment and similar
activities (Chandon et al., 2000; d’Astous et al., 2004; Kwok and Uncles, 2005; Lee, 2002).
Coker et al. (2010) found that consumers value SP timing benefits differently for high and
low-priced products, which helps explain variation in preferences for instant – rather than
delayed – reward SPT. Present or future consumer temporal orientation, and timing of
activities, influences consumer attitudes, actions (including products consumed) and
decision making (Bergadaà, 1990). Aggarwal (2004) found that some brand evaluations are
more positive when a request for help is delayed, compared to an immediate request, which
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
Entering and conducting business in foreign countries can be difficult; it is not unusual for
organisations to commit business and cultural mistakes when operating in foreign
environments. Such misunderstandings may manifest themselves as errors in adaption,
name use, promotion activities, translation, strategy and/or market research (Ricks, 1983).
Marketing mistakes by new entrants may be due to differences in cultural values, highly
saturated competitive markets and/or more experienced consumers (Irem Eren et al., 2010;
Lowe and Corkindale, 1998; Yang et al., 2010). Consideration must be given to cultural
boundaries when applying theories from individualistic society into collectivist society
(e.g. North America and Asia). For example, Iyengar and Lepper (1999), as well as McNeill
(2013), found that with appropriate modification theories developed in western societies,
such as cognitive dissonance theory and attribution theory, may be applied in both
individualist and collectivist societies. A number of researchers have suggested that
additional research and better understanding of cultural influence on consumer attitude
may help identify the suitability of SPTs within different countries (Culter et al., 2000;
Fam and Merrilees, 1998; Foxman et al., 1988; Jee and de Run, 2013; Jeon and Beatty, 2002;
Kwok and Uncles, 2005; Nickerson and Hoeken, 2003; Waller and Fam, 2000).
The purpose of this research is to compare and contrast differences in SP preferences
between eight countries. The research questions examine customer preference for SP (and
specific SPT) in cultural dissimilar environments in order to better understand the benefits
and influence of SP characteristics on consumer attitudes and SP uptake (see Figure 1).
The research questions are as follows:
RQ1. What is the influence of country (culture) on SPT preference and attitude towards SP?
RQ2. Do timing characteristics of SP influence attitude towards SP?
RQ3. Do value characteristics of SP influence attitude towards SP?
RQ4. Does PI influence attitude towards SP in cultural dissimilar environments?
RQ5. Do demographics influence attitude towards SP in cultural dissimilar
environments?
3. Methodology
The data used in this study to rank the SPT and estimate the attitude towards SPT were
collected from Hong Kong, China (Guangzhou, Shanghai and Wuhan), Brunei, Indonesia,
Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and New Zealand. Brunei, Malaysia and Indonesia are
APJML Demographics
• Product Involvement
• Gender
• Timing
• Age
• Value
• Education
• Occupation
• Income (annual)
Muslim majority countries, where Islam strictly prohibits games of chance, and SPs such as
sweepstakes, contests and lucky draws (Binde, 2007; Ministry of Endowments and Islamic
Affairs, 2016). China is an atheist society, with a growing number of practising Christians,
Taoists and Buddhists. To reflect the diverse representation of mainland China this study
included three key cities; Guangzhou (a key manufacturing base and richest city in
Mainland Chine per capita), Shanghai (most populous and wealthiest city in China) and
Wuhan (main transportation hub, high-tech, education and financial centre) (HKTDC
Research, 2018). Hong Kong, being a former British colony and Special Administrative
Region of the People’s Republic of China, has a free-market economy, highly dependent on
international trade and finance, with a population mixture of different religions and values,
and is considered a separate country from Mainland China for the analysis. Singapore is a
global financial centre with a highly developed and successful free-market economy
consisting of a multicultural population with a high proportion of Chinese, and lesser
numbers of Malays, and Indians. Thailand is a Buddhist nation with a relatively well-
developed infrastructure, and free-enterprise economy. New Zealand is predominantly an
Anglo Saxon country with an industrialised, free market economy that can compete globally
(CIA, 2018). These countries exhibit different values, religious beliefs, languages and level of
economics development. According to Fam (2008) these economic and cultural differences
influence consumers’ preference for advertising messages.
The data collected from four versions of the survey and four different research teams
were aggregated for analysis. Two surveys were administered by mail and two through
face-to-face interviews; Table I indicates the survey used in each location and the respective
sample sizes. The questionnaires used for mainland China and Hong Kong were translated
into Chinese by employing back-translation techniques to ensure meaning was as close as
possible to the original.
The data for Guangzhou, Hong Kong (MVA), Shanghai and Wuhan were collected using
mall intercept survey, a relatively inexpensive method to collect individual personal,
accurate, high quality data (Ducoffe, 1995; Jackson et al., 2011; Rice and Hancock, 2005).
Every third person walking past the researcher was asked to participate in the survey.
Refusal by the potential respondent resulted in intercepting the next potential respondent
until a respondent agreed to participate in the survey. After a positive response, the
intercept process returned to every third respondent. The interviews were undertaken from
mid-afternoon until 8 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday over two weekends.
Method Location/Country Frequency % Location/Country Frequency %
Consumer
attitude
Mail survey 1 Brunei 513 11.7 Brunei 513 11.7 towards SPT
New Zealand 274 6.3 China 1,158 26.5
Mail survey 2 Indonesia 495 11.3 Hong Kong 720 16.5
Malaysia 501 11.5 Indonesia 495 11.3
Singapore 250 5.7 Malaysia 501 11.5
Thailand 464 10.6 New Zealand 274 5.7
Intercept survey 1 Hong Kong (MVA) 300 6.9 Singapore 250 6.3
Hong Kong 420 9.6 Thailand 464 10.6 Table I.
Intercept survey 2 Guangzhou, China 318 7.3 Survey method and
Shanghai, China 420 9.6 sample sizes for
Wuhan, China 420 9.6 each location and
Total 4,375 100.0 Total 4,375 100.0 country summary
The data for Hong Kong were collected using the same mall intercept technique between
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
3 p.m. and 6 p.m. on one Saturday. New Zealand data were collected from a random sample
of 2,000 individuals selected from the NZ postal service database. The New Zealand
response rate was 13.7 per cent.
Mail surveys were randomly sent to 550 university student parents to collect data from
Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand. University students voluntarily
agreed to participate in the research by providing the contact details for their respective
parents. Parents were considered a better sample than university students, since they were
more likely to be employed, have more experience with a higher number and variety of SPs,
and more likely to have considered or used an SP recently. The survey was then sent to the
parents who were asked to respond anonymously or opt-out. The completed survey
response rates were Brunei (93.3 per cent), Indonesia (90.0 per cent), Malaysia (91.1 per cent),
Singapore (45.5 per cent) and Thailand (84.4 per cent).
The survey consisted of two sections, the first section had each participant: rank a list of
common SP (1 ¼ least preferred and 5 ¼ most preferred); provide information on a recent
purchase (product, brand, price and the SPT used); and indicate their attitude towards the
SPT used in that purchase on a six-item six-point semantic differential scale. The survey
items are shown in Appendix.
The research literature identifies a number of SPT developed primarily in the North
American and European markets. Although the SPT list was slightly different between the
four survey instruments, and varied from 8 to 18 items, all of the technique lists were
constructed from recent marketing and advertising textbooks (Yang et al., 2010). Table II
shows the final compiled list of eight aggregated SPT used for ranking sales promotion
technique in the data analysis.
The second section of the survey asked for demographic information, including gender,
marital status, education, occupation and income level. The dependent variables are the
SPT, and the attitude towards the sales promotion technique. Independent variables
included country, age, education, PI (high/low) and SPT used on last recalled purchase
(USPT). The data were analysed using SPSS version 18.
Table II.
List of eight sales
Advertisement Point of purchase (PoP) promotion techniques
Contests (includes sweepstakes and games) Premiums (incl. gifts, patronage and novelties) from the survey data
Coupons (incl. web and mobile) Refunds (incl. cash, rebates and trade-ins) used in the analysis
Discounts (incl. trade-in and price packs) Samples (incl. tie-ins) (RSPT)
APJML 4. Results
The compiled data set sample consisted of 4,375 responses, however, Singapore respondents
did not provide ranking data, and therefore only 4,125 responses were used in the ranking
analysis. Table I shows the location and country sample sizes. The respondents were fairly
evenly distributed with respect to gender (female ¼ 54.9 per cent and male ¼ 44.8 per cent;
seven participants did not answer the question). Marital status of the sample included
45.5 per cent married, 38.4 per cent single, 1.4 per cent divorced, 0.3 per cent indicated other
and 14.4 per cent did not provide a status.
Table III shows that across the seven countries (Hong Kong listed separately)
46.4 per cent of respondents have an annual income greater than NZ$20,000, with the
majority employed in a professional capacity (38.3 per cent). Indonesia, Malaysia and
Thailand report more than 90 per cent of respondents have an annual income less than
NZ$40,000. The annual income and prices reported by the respondents were converted into
New Zealand currency across all countries.
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
Hong New
% Brunei China Kong Indonesia Malaysia Zealand Singapore Thailand Average
Gender
Male 47.6 51.0 48.6 51.3 52.1 24.8 44.4 38.8 44.8
Female 52.4 49.0 51.4 48.7 47.9 73.4 55.6 60.8 54.9
Age
Under 25 15.0 0.3 4.9 31.5 38.1 16.4 14.4 31.3 19.0
25–34 46.2 47.8 31.9 33.9 15.8 43.8 52.4 20.3 36.5
35–44 33.5 27.4 26.1 20.6 14.8 28.5 28.0 23.7 25.3
45–55 5.1 24.1 30.0 11.5 23.4 0.0 4.0 18.5 14.6
Over 56 0.2 0.4 7.1 2.4 7.6 10.6 1.2 5.4 4.4
Education
Primary school 0.4 25.9 9.9 0.6 12.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2
Secondary school 25.9 46.6 58.6 61.6 58.5 0.0 26.4 19.8 37.2
Tertiary 73.7 72.5 31.5 37.8 25.9 0.0 73.2 79.3 49.2
Occupation
Professional 80.1 30.5 23.9 37.6 18.2 73.4 43.2 0.0 38.3
Employed (not
professional) 9.0 53.5 50.6 21.6 18.0 15.3 26.0 0.0 24.2
Own business 0.8 7.3 2.9 3.0 6.8 0.4 11.6 0.0 4.1
Student 3.5 2.5 4.6 32.3 33.3 0.0 12.4 0.0 11.1
Unemployed 0.6 5.7 14.6 1.4 0.0 3.6 4.8 0.0 3.8
Other 0.6 0.5 3.5 1.6 13.0 6.6 1.2 0.0 3.4
Annual income (NZ$)
No income 6.2 1.9 15.3 25.9 32.1 0.0 13.6 7.8 12.8
Less than $20,000 26.1 39.0 22.4 65.7 59.7 12.0 21.2 80.6 40.8
$20,000–$29,999 36.3 8.7 15.4 1.6 5.8 16.1 20.0 4.7 13.6
$30,000–$39,999 18.3 7.3 19.9 2.0 0.8 11.3 17.2 0.2 9.6
$40,000–$49,999 5.3 9.2 10.4 0.0 0.0 12.0 13.6 0.6 6.4
$50,000–$69,999 3.3 12.0 4.9 0.4 0.4 16.4 8.0 0.2 5.7
$70,000–$100,000 2.5 11.4 6.7 0.4 0.0 19.7 2.0 0.2 5.4
Table III.
Demographic More than
information $100,000 0.2 10.4 1.5 0.2 0.2 9.9 1.2 0.4 3.0
by country Notes: The columns are the percentages by country. The “Average” column indicates the overall percentage
(in percentages) across countries
The majority of respondents are in the 25–34 age group (36.5 per cent), while 49.2 per cent Consumer
have indicated some level of tertiary education. Table III shows that across the attitude
seven countries (Hong Kong listed separately) 46.4 per cent of respondents have an annual towards SPT
income greater than NZ$20,000, with the majority employed in a professional capacity
(38.3 per cent). Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand report more than 90 per cent of
respondents have an annual income less than NZ$40,000. The annual income and prices
reported by the respondents have been converted into New Zealand currency across all
countries for comparison and consistency purposes.
Preferences
Sales promotion technique 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Total
Brunei Coupons 2.56 POP 2.61 Premium 2.74 Contests 2.81 Samples 2.83
China Discount 2.14 Premium 2.48 Samples 2.60 Contests 2.93 Advert 3.04
Hong Kong Discount 2.46 Premium 2.53 Samples 2.58 Contests 2.83 Coupon 2.86
Indonesia Coupons 2.29 Premium 2.43 Adverts 2.78 Discounts 2.85 Refund 2.89
Malaysia Discount 2.21 Premium 2.65 Coupon 2.82 Refund 2.86 Samples 3.01 Table V.
New Zealand Discount 1.19 Coupon 2.58 Premium 2.91 Refund 2.91 POP 2.99 Ranked sales
Thailand Discount 2.58 Samples 2.67 Premium 2.75 Coupon 2.75 Refund 2.76 promotion technique
Notes: 1 ¼ 1st preferred; 5 ¼ 5th preferred preference by country
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
Table VI.
by country
APJML
Sales promotion
technique mean rank
Kruskal–Wallis Advertised specials Contests Coupons Discounts Point of purchase Premiums Refunds Samples
2
χ 183.0 251.1 526.2 638.8 170.3 380.9 431.8 355.1
df 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
p o0.001 o0.001 o0.001 o0.001 o0.001 o0.001 o0.001 o0.001
Country Mann–Whitney U rank order test
Brunei x 2.87c, g 2.81b, e, f 2.56b, c 3.13b, c, e, f, g 2.61b, c, d, e, g 2.74d 2.91b 2.83f
N 214 251 330 308 157 356 373 151
SD 1.23 1.42 1.48 1.53 1.29 1.39 1.27 1.50
China x 3.04d, g 2.93a, e, f 3.23a, c, d, e, f, g 2.14a, c, d, e, f, g 3.08a 2.48f, g 3.36a, c, d, e, g 2.60d, e, f
N 840 1004 1081 1153 970 1070 991 957
SD 0.74 0.83 1.12 0.97 0.85 0.97 1.09 0.95
a, d, g d, e, f, g a, b, d a, b, d, f a b, g
Hong Kong x 3.15 2.83 2.86 2.46 3.11 2.53 3.06 2.58d, e, f
N 478 510 621 674 458 648 633 594
SD 0.73 0.82 1.17 1.04 0.58 1.12 1.22 1.00
Indonesia x 2.78b, c, e, g 3.06c 2.29b, c, e, g 2.85b, c, e, f 3.31a 2.43a, f, g 2.89b 2.93b, c, f
N 99 139 168 397 80 396 288 352
SD 1.07 1.23 1.42 1.63 1.39 1.34 1.24 1.39
Malaysia x 3.26d 3.20a, b, c 2.82b, d 2.21a, c, d, f, g 3.06a 2.65 2.86b 3.01b, c, f, g
N 96 222 154 393 213 362 251 333
SD 1.28 1.30 1.52 1.41 1.37 1.29 1.38 1.37
a, b, c b a, b, c, d, e, g b, d a, b, c, d, e, f
New Zealand x – 3.28 2.58 1.19 2.99 2.91 2.91 3.92
N – 78 119 240 138 85 32 50
SD – 1.23 1.20 0.64 1.26 1.33 1.38 1.01
a, b, c, d c b, d a, b, e, f a b, d b, c
Thailand x 3.37 3.11 2.75 2.58 3.07 2.75 2.76 2.67e, f
N 128 196 247 349 139 339 230 331
SD 1.25 1.29 1.44 1.43 1.27 1.31 1.31 1.33
Total x 3.07 2.95 2.91 2.35 3.05 2.57 3.08 2.73
N 1,855 2,400 2,720 3,514 2,155 3,256 2,798 2,768
SD 0.91 1.04 1.29 1.29 1.00 1.19 1.23 1.18
Notes: aBrunei significantly different; bChina significantly different; cHong Kong significantly different; dIndonesia significantly different; eMalaysia significantly
different; fNew Zealand significantly different; gThailand significantly different. 1 ¼ Most preferred; 5 ¼ Least preferred. Kruskal–Wallis ANOVA; Mann–Whitney U-
rank order test, comparing each pair of countries, with Bonferroni adjusted α (α ¼ 0.007). All significant differences at p o 0.05
relationship between countries and individual STP ranking indicates that amongst the eight Consumer
countries the discount SPT is most preferred (x ¼ 2.35, SD ¼ 1.29), and refunds are least attitude
preferred (x ¼ 3.08, SD ¼ 1.23). towards SPT
4.1.1 Rank by age and income. The overall SPT ranking by age has discounts being
ranked first preference for all age groups (x ¼ 2.35, SD ¼ 1.29). The least preferred SPT varies
between age groups; advertisements are least preferred for the under 25 (x ¼ 3.18, SD ¼ 1.32),
and over 56 age groups (x ¼ 3.42, SD ¼ 1.36), and refunds are least preferred for the 25–34
(x ¼ 3.11, SD ¼ 1.25), 35–44 (x ¼ 3.10, SD ¼ 1.20) and 45–55 (x ¼ 3.20, SD ¼ 1.15) age groups.
The overall SPT ranking by income level also has discounts (x ¼ 2.35, SD ¼ 1.29) ranked
first, however, the no income group ranked premiums first (x ¼ 2.55, SD ¼ 1.29) by a small
margin. The least preferred SPT is refunds for the $20k–$30k, $30k–40k, $50k–$70k,
$70k–$100k and more than $100k income groups (x ¼ 3.08, SD ¼ 1.23). The no income and
less than $20k groups least preferred advertisement, while the $40k–$50k group least
preferred point of purchase (x ¼ 3.23, SD ¼ 1.01).
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
4.2.2 Age and income. ANOVA used to investigate age influence on respondents’ attitude
to SP was statistically significant indicating that the respondents’ attitude towards SP were
influenced by age, F(4, 4,296) ¼ 37.23, po0.001. However, the effect is small, η2 ¼ 0.04
(Cohen, 1988). Post hoc analysis with Tukey’s HSD revealed that except for the 25–34 and over
56 age groups, all other age groups differed significantly from each other (po0.05).
In particular, the under 25 years of age group (x ¼ 4.55, SD ¼ 0.94) had a significantly less
positive attitude towards SP than the 45–55 year group (x ¼ 4.70, SD ¼ 0.86, d ¼ 0.10), and a
significantly more positive attitude than the 25–34 (x ¼ 4.28, SD ¼ 0.83, d ¼ 0.21), 35–44
(x ¼ 4.43, SD ¼ 0.92, d ¼ 0.08), or over 56 year (x ¼ 4.18, SD ¼ 0.99, d ¼ 0.14) groups, although
as indicated the effects (d ) are small.
Of particular interest is the significant interaction of country and age on respondents’
attitude towards SP (see Figure 2). The statistical significant interaction indicates that the effects
of age on attitude to SP depends on the country of the respondent, F(27, 4,262) ¼ 3.91, po0.001,
partial η2 ¼ 0.02. Simple effects analyses indicated that age has a statistically significant effect
on attitude towards SP respondents from China, F(4, 4,262) ¼ 26.13, po0.001, Hong Kong,
F(4, 4,262) ¼ 12.53, po0.001 and Singapore, F(4, 4,262) ¼ 3.79, p ¼ 0.004.
In China, favourable attitude towards SP increases over age, but decreases significantly
in the over 56-year of age group. The 25–34 years of age group (x ¼ 4.31, SD ¼ 0.69) is
significantly less positive towards SP than the 35–44 (x ¼ 4.67, SD ¼ 0.83, d ¼ 0.41) and
45–55 (x ¼ 4.80, SD ¼ 0.72, d ¼ 0.54) year groups. The over 56-years of age group (x ¼ 3.87,
SD ¼ 0.29) is significantly less positive than the 45–55 year group (x ¼ 4.80, SD ¼ 0.72,
d ¼ 0.16). Hong Kong respondents indicate a similar trend, with the over 56-years
of age group (x ¼ 3.77, SD ¼ 0.79) significantly less favourable towards SP than the 25–34
(x ¼ 4.37, SD ¼ 0.86, d ¼ 0.33), 35–44 (x ¼ 4.49, SD ¼ 0.87, d ¼ 0.39) or the 45–55 (x ¼ 4.50,
SD ¼ 0.91, d ¼ 0.40) age groups. The results from Singapore show a similar positive age
group trend, with the 45–55 age group (x ¼ 5.38, SD ¼ 0.57) significantly more positive
towards SP than the 25–34 age group (x ¼ 4.62, SD ¼ 0.62, d ¼ 0.45).
The tertiary educated respondents (x ¼ 4.49, SD ¼ 0.88) reported being significantly
more positive towards SP than respondents with a secondary education (x ¼ 4.61,
SD ¼ 0.89), F(2, 3,722) ¼ 8.37, p o0.001. Primary level education appeared not to make any
significant difference with respect to attitude towards SP.
ANOVA used to investigate income influence on respondents’ attitude to SP was
statistically significant, indicating that the respondents’ attitude towards SP was influenced
by income, F(7, 4,205) ¼ 45.73, p o0.001. This is considered a medium size effect η2 ¼ 0.071.
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
Country Advertised specials Contests Coupons Discounts Point of purchase Premiums Refunds Samples
b, d, e, g, h b, c, d, e b, c, d, e, f, g, h b, d, e, g, h d
Brunei x 3.51 3.83 3.25 3.53 3.65 3.60 3.72 3.50d, e, g
N 17 7 8 219 4 33 5 6
SD 0.29 0.18 0.18 0.33 0.10 0.32 0.18 0.42
China x 4.85a 4.59 4.58a, f 4.25a, d, e, f, g, h 4.65c 4.46a, c, d, e 4.57f 4.49
N 11 18 56 445 34 60 29 25
SD 0.76 0.99 0.79 0.65 0.89 1.16 0.63 1.03
Hong Kong x 4.28 3.90 4.53a, f 4.17a, d, e, f, g, h 3.31b, e, g 3.95b, d, e, g, h 4.81f 4.51
N 5 6 15 279 9 63 15 11
SD 0.59 0.17 0.79 0.93 0.46 1.08 0.68 0.85
a a, f a, b, c, f, g, h a, b, c a, f
Indonesia x 4.81 4.80 5.22 5.01 5.30 5.14 5.09 4.79a
N 70 9 13 218 2 76 17 80
SD 0.69 0.71 0.66 0.82 0.99 0.62 1.04 0.81
a a, f a, b, c, f, h c a, b, c f
Malaysia x 4.82 4.80 4.53 4.99 4.75 4.96 5.20 4.96a
N 35 1 14 296 48 72 3 20
SD 0.86 – 0.80 0.75 0.97 0.73 0.20 0.72
New Zealand x – – 3.21b, c, d, e 3.24a, b, c, d, e, g, h – – 2.87d, e, g –
N – – 16 199 – – 4 –
SD – – 0.33 0.35 – – 0.09 –
Singapore x 4.75a 4.80 3.53 4.76a, b, c, d, f 5.00c 4.77a, c 3.80 4.89a
N 21 4 3 125 4 62 2 9
SD 1.05 0.00 1.27 0.64 0.46 0.61 0.00 0.32
a a, b, c, d, e, f a, c
Thailand x 4.59 4.53 – 4.57 4.30 4.86 4.53 4.48
N 82 3 – 130 2 59 3 5
SD 0.92 0.50 – 0.92 0.14 0.79 0.76 1.27
Total x 4.63 4.45 4.35 4.31 4.56 4.63 4.59 4.69
N 241 48 125 1911 103 425 78 156
SD 0.88 0.77 0.93 0.91 0.97 0.95 0.88 0.86
Notes: aBrunei significantly different; bChina significantly different; cHong Kong significantly different; dIndonesia significantly different; eMalaysia significantly
different; fNew Zealand significantly different; gSingapore significantly different; hThailand significantly different 1 ¼ Least positive attitude; 6 ¼ Most positive attitude.
One-way ANOVA comparing each pair of countries, with Bonferroni adjusted α (α ¼ 0.007)
Consumer
attitude
towards SPT
(USPT) by country
recalled purchase
promotion mean
Table VIII.
sales promotion
attitude by individual
APJML 5.50
Age
Post hoc analysis revealed that the no income group (x ¼ 4.70, SD ¼ 0.88) and the less than
$20k group (x ¼ 4.63, SD ¼ 0.87) were significantly more positive towards SP than all other
income groups. The $20k–$30k group (x ¼ 4.07, SD ¼ 0.81) is significantly less positive
towards SP than the $30k–$40k group (x ¼ 4.25, SD ¼ 0.83) and the more than $100k group
(x ¼ 4.35, SD ¼ 0.89). The significant interaction effect of country and income on the
respondents’ attitude towards SP F(45, 4,153) ¼ 2.50, po 0.001, partial η2 ¼ 0.026, indicates
that income has a statistically significant effect on SP attitude in China F(7, 4,153) ¼ 11.50,
p o0.001, Hong Kong F(7, 4,153) ¼ 2.52, p ¼ 0.014 and Singapore F(7, 4,153) ¼ 2.22,
p ¼ 0.030, but not in the other countries. This interaction effect is not consistent between
countries and income levels (see Figure 3).
Mainland Chinese respondents in the more than $100k income group favour SP
significantly more than other income groups, while Singapore respondents in the no income
group are more positive towards SP. Hong Kong respondents in the no income group
indicated the least positive attitude towards SP.
5.70
5.60
5.50
5.40
Attitude towards sales promotion
5.30
5.20
5.10
5.00
4.90
4.80 China
4.70
4.60 Hong Kong
4.50
Singapore
4.40
4.30
Figure 3. 4.20
Significant country 4.10
and income interaction No Less than $20,000– $30,000– $40,000– $50,000– $70,000– More
effect on attitude income $20,000 $29,999 $39,999 $49,999 $69,999 $100,000 than
towards sales $100,000
promotion
Income levels (NZ$)
4.2.3 Product categories and product price. Each recollected purchase identified by a survey Consumer
participant was assigned to a product category (see Table IX). ANOVA was used to attitude
investigate product categories influence on respondents’ attitude to SP. The respondent’s
attitude towards SP was significantly influenced by product category, F(9, 4,234) ¼ 19.35,
towards SPT
p o 0.001. However, the effect is small, η2 ¼ 0.04. Post hoc analysis revealed that the attitude
towards SP was significantly more positive for apparel (x ¼ 4.57, SD ¼ 0.86) than furniture
and appliances (x ¼ 3.92, SD ¼ 0.87, d ¼ 0.30), household goods (x ¼ 4.24, SD ¼ 0.90, d ¼ 0.17),
personal goods (x ¼ 3.48, SD ¼ 0.46, d ¼ 0.15) or food (x ¼ 4.13, SD ¼ 0.95, d ¼ 0.21).
ANOVA results indicate that respondents who purchased lower priced products
were more positive towards SP than those who purchased higher priced products,
F(5, 4,192) ¼ 6.21, p o0.001. Post hoc analysis revealed that the attitude towards SP was
significantly less positive for purchases between $2,000 and $19,999 (x ¼ 4.57, SD ¼ 0.86)
and all purchases below $2,000; less than $100 (x ¼ 4.48, SD ¼ 0.90), $100–$499 (x ¼ 4.43,
SD ¼ 0.87), $500–$999 (x ¼ 4.34, SD ¼ 0.82) or $1,000–$1,999 (x ¼ 4.41, SD ¼ 1.01).
4.2.4 Product involvement. Table IX lists the mean attitude towards SP by product
categories, and reported product category frequency, as provided by the respondent
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
information. PI refers to the personal relevance and the general level of interest in a product or
product category and is a key moderator of purchase decisions (Zaichkowsky, 1994). High PI
tends to involve low frequency, high price, high risk purchase, invoking higher cognitive
processes to evaluate the product for purchase, while low PI includes “force of habit”, low risk
purchases and appears to invoke more superficial methods of evaluation and product analysis
(Gu et al., 2012; Holmes et al., 2014; Ministry of Economic Development, 2000).
As an indicator of PI a high/low dummy variable was created based on the perceived
cognitive processing required to purchase the product within each category and price
(as an indicator of relative risk) (Laurent and Kapferer, 1985; Willis, 2004). As Sun (2010)
found in their study of PI and trivial attributes, higher priced products tends to attract
more attention and involvement from consumers. Considering product category, and the
PI criteria listed above, for purposes of this study products identified as high risk, low
purchase frequency and costing more than $2,000 was considered high involvement, while
low involvement consisted of products with little perceived cognitive processing
requirements, considered frequent (habitual purchase) and low risk (e.g. cost less than
$100, depending on the product).
To investigate whether PI influences the attitude towards SP in general the dummy
variable high/low PI, was created as a PI proxy by aggregating the high involvement
Product category N x SD
SD ¼ 0.88) had a significantly more positive attitude towards SPT than those reporting a
preference for instant SPT (x ¼ 4.40, SD ¼ 0.93).
ANOVA was used to investigate the influence of SP value on respondents’ attitude to
SPT [1]. The ANOVA was not statistically significant, indicating that the respondent’s
attitude towards SPT was not influenced by the monetary (x ¼ 4.56, SD ¼ 0.92) or non-
monetary value (x ¼ 4.61, SD ¼ 0.90), F(1, 2,557) ¼ 1.19, p ¼ 0.275.
4.2.6 Country, product category, product involvement, timing, and value interactions. A
factorial between groups ANOVA was conducted to investigate the interaction of country,
product category, PI, SP timing (instant or delayed) and SP value (monetary or non-
monetary)[2] on respondents’ attitude towards SP. There was no statistical significant
interaction between country and product category, F(14, 1,503) ¼ 1.27, p ¼ 0.219; country
and PI, F(1, 1,503) ¼ 1.02, p ¼ 0.312; or country and promotion timing, F(6, 1,503) ¼ 1.47,
p ¼ 0.185 on attitude to SP.
A statistical significant interaction indicates that the effects of SP value on attitude to SP
depends on the country of the respondent, F(6, 1,503) ¼ 2.65, p ¼ 0.015, partial η2 ¼ 0.010
(see Figure 4). Simple effects analyses indicated that SP with monetary value has a
statistically significant positive effect on attitude towards SP for respondents from
Indonesia, F(1, 1,503) ¼ 11.84, p ¼ 0.001, and Malaysia, F(1, 1,503) ¼ 8.26, p ¼ 0.004.
However, the SP value does not significantly influence attitude to SP for other countries.
5. Discussion
Positive response to SP in globalised markets is crucial, however, marketers struggle to
design and attain profitability from promotional campaigns (Laran and Tsiros, 2013). This
study examined the influence of demographics, PI and SP characteristics affecting
consumer attitudes towards SP in cultural dissimilar environments. The results show that
country (location) does affect a customer’s SP preference and attitude towards SP.
The results of this study clearly indicate that location (country and culture) has a
significant effect on the perception and value of specific SPT, for example, New Zealanders
rank discounts significantly higher and samples significantly lower than the other seven
countries. Indonesia and Malaysia show the most favourable general attitude towards SP,
with New Zealand expressing the least favourable attitude. The concept of self-construal
could explain the difference in attitude towards SP between Asia and western societies.
Self-construal describes how an individual view themselves in relation to others and the
premiums deliver a tangible product, and hence provides a perceived additional value, not
otherwise available to the no income group. The trends from the results indicate that
refunds are least preferred for respondents with incomes greater than $20,000. Refunds
require time and energy (additional cost) to use, and respondents with income may
consider, and put more weight on, the cost-benefit trade-off (Blattberg and Neslin, 1990).
Respondents with incomes less than $20,000 least preferred Advertised Specials,
possibly since low-income groups have little disposable income to spend on brand
advertised specials.
In general, there is a favourable attitude to SP across the eight countries studied. There
are significant differences between countries and the attitude towards the different SP.
Country and location do make a significant difference towards the attitude to SP. Indonesia
and Malaysia have the most favourable attitude to SP, while Brunei and New Zealand have
the least favourable attitude to SP. This result implies that individual country differences
should be taken into account when developing a SP campaign.
Age has a significant effect on attitude towards SP and is influenced by country.
Regardless of age customers show a positive attitude towards SP, however, older customers
have a less positive attitude towards SP, more so in some countries than others.
In particular, attitude towards SPs decrease for older groups in China, Thailand, Indonesia
and Hong Kong, whereas older groups in Singapore, Malaysia and Brunei report a more
positive attitude to SPs. The effect of age on New Zealand respondents’ attitude to SP
remains low and show little overall change.
The age effect may be due to the fact that young consumers shop more frequently and
are more susceptible to impulse purchase tendency, or that older consumers in some
countries have limited income (Chang et al., 2014). Regardless of country, respondents
with annual income less than NZ$20,000 reported a significantly more positive attitude
towards SP. Income has an inconsistent influence on the respondents’ attitude towards SP
depending on country, with China, Hong Kong and Singapore respondents demonstrating
significant different effects. Respondents with a tertiary education exhibited a more
favourable attitude towards SP.
Those respondents who purchased apparel tended to be significantly more positive
towards SP, while respondents who purchased personal goods and furniture indicated the
least favourable attitude. The more positive attitude towards apparel promotions may be
a result of continuous changing fashion trends, pressure to update personal apparel
and regular promotional activities which include multiple and varied sensory cues
(Hultén and Vanyushyn, 2014).
As a main effect, monetary value did not significantly influence the attitude towards SP. Consumer
However, there is a country by monetary value interaction effect. In particular, the results attitude
for Indonesia and Malaysia show that monetary value (vs non-monetary value) positively towards SPT
affects attitude towards SP. One explanation is that Indonesia and Malaysia are multi-racial
countries and culturally neutral promotions (e.g. monetary focused) are encouraged and
preferred (Tong et al., 2012). In addition, the majority (96.8 per cent) of Indonesia
and Malaysia respondents reported the lowest annual personal incomes amongst the
countries surveyed, less than NZ$40,000 per annum, and hence consumers may consider
monetary value SPT significantly more important when the shopping budget is limited.
Respondents who purchased products using delayed-reward SPT reported a
significantly more positive attitude towards SP. This result appears counter-intuitive.
However, delayed-reward SPT (e.g. consumer contest) are differentiated from other SP
techniques through a demonstration of individual consumer skill and/or athleticism, and
include an element of risk. These two features provide a level of surprise, uncertainty
and skill, which some consumers appreciate as additional entertainment in the purchase
process (Laran and Tsiros, 2013; Liu et al., 2007).
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
The results show that purchasers of low involvement products tend to have a
significantly more positive attitude towards SP. A possible explanation is that consumers
tend to be price sensitive for low involvement products, and from a naïve theory perspective
SP could be interpreted as a good deal (Deval et al., 2013; Mitra and Lynch, 1995). Similarly,
purchasers of higher priced products showed significantly less positive attitude towards SP.
Although product SP are used as an appeal to attract consumer, they may be interpreted as
a deal on an inferior product (Alvarez and Casielles, 2005; Lichtenstein et al., 1989).
Second, high-priced products decisions are more considered and undergo a more rational
decision-making process, and therefore may not be as susceptible to SP.
Multiple regression analysis found that as education and income increase the overall
attitude towards SP it decreases. The implication being that SP, in general, are more
effective targeted at less educated lower income consumers. Education and income levels are
associated with consumer involvement in shaping attitude towards SPT (Lee et al., 2012).
A possible explanation is that consumers with higher (lower) education attach less (high)
importance to symbolic product aspects. Expressive products aspects are aesthetic or
symbolic while functional product aspects focus on practicality, ease of use and quality
(Creusen, 2010).
In general, regardless of country, age, income, education or marital status, the
respondents indicated a significant positive attitude towards SP.
Notes
1. Data were not available for Guangzhou or New Zealand.
2. Data were not available for Guangzhou or New Zealand.
References
Aggarwal, P. (2004), “The effects of brand relationship norms on consumer attitudes and behavior”,
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 87-101.
Akram, U., Hui, P., Khan, K.M., Tanveer, Y., Mehmood, K. and Ahmad, W. (2018), “How website quality
affects online impulse buying: moderating effects of sales promotion and credit card use”,
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 235-256.
Alvarez, B.A. and Casielles, R.V. (2005), “Consumer evaluations of sales promotion: the effect on brand
choice”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39 Nos 1/2, pp. 54-70.
American Marketing Association (2017), “AMA dictionary: sales promotion”, available at: www.ama. Consumer
org/resources/Pages/Dictionary.aspx?dLetter=S (accessed 24 April 2017). attitude
Bergadaà, M.M. (1990), “The role of time in the action of the consumer”, Journal of Consumer Research, towards SPT
Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 289-302.
Binde, P. (2007), “Gambling and religion: histories of concord and conflict”, Journal of Gambling Issues,
Vol. 20, pp. 145-165.
Blattberg, R.C. and Neslin, S.A. (1990), Sales Promotion: Concepts, Methods, and Strategies, Prentice
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Borges, A. and Babin, B.J. (2012), “Revisiting low price guarantees: does consumer versus retailer
governance matter?”, Marketing Letters, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 777-791.
Boschetti, R.I.B. (2012), “Non-monetary sales promotion and its effects on the purchase intention and
the choice of the brand of financial services”, master’s thesis, Pontifica Catholic University of
Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre.
Brito, P.Q. and Hammond, K. (2007), “Strategic versus tactical nature of sales promotions”, Journal of
Marketing Communications, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 131-148.
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
Buil, I., de Chernatony, L. and Montaner, T. (2013), “Factors influencing consumer evaluations of gift
promotions”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 47 Nos 3/4, pp. 574-595.
Campbell, L. and Diamond, W.D. (1990), “Framing and sales promotions: the characteristics of a
‘good deal?’ ”, The Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 25-31.
Cavusgil, S.T., Zou, S. and Naidu, G.M. (1993), “Product and promotion adaptation in export ventures:
an empirical investigation”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 479-506.
Chandon, P., Wansink, B. and Laurent, G. (2000), “A benefit congruency framework of sales promotion
effectiveness”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 64 No. 4, pp. 65-81.
Chang, H.J., Yan, R.-N. and Eckman, M. (2014), “Moderating effects of situational characteristics on
impulse buying”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 42 No. 4,
pp. 298-314.
Cheung, M. (2009), “Sales promotion communication as social processes and schematic structures”,
The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, Vol. 2, pp. 32-44.
CIA (2018), “The world factbook”, Central Intelligence Agency, available at: www.cia.gov/library/
publications/resources/the-world-factbook/ (accessed 25 May 2017).
Cochrane, L. and Quester, P. (2005), “Fear in advertising”, Journal of International Consumer
Marketing, Vol. 17 Nos 2/3, pp. 7-32.
Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., Lawrence Erlbaum,
Hillsdale, NJ.
Coker, K.K., Pillai, D. and Balasubramanian, S.K. (2010), “Delay-discounting rewards from consumer
sales promotions”, The Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 19 No. 7, pp. 487-495.
Creusen, M.E.H. (2010), “The importance of product aspects in choice: the influence of demographic
characteristics”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 26-34.
Culter, B.D., Thomas, E.G. and Rao, S.R. (2000), “Informational/transformational advertising:
differences in usage across media types, product categories, and national cultures”, Journal of
International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 69-83.
d’Astous, A., Legoux, R. and Colbert, F. (2004), “Consumer perceptions of promotional offers in the
performing arts: an experimental approach”, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences,
Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 242-254.
de Pechpeyrou, P. and Odou, P. (2012), “Consumer skepticism and promotion effectiveness”, Recherche
et Applications en Marketing (English Edition), Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 45-69.
DelVecchio, D., Henard, D.H. and Freling, T.H. (2006), “The effect of sales promotion on post-promotion
brand preference: a meta-analysis”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 82 No. 3, pp. 203-213.
APJML Deval, H., Mantel, S.P., Kardes, F.R. and Posavac, S.S. (2013), “How naive theories drive
opposing inferences from the same information”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 39
No. 6, pp. 1185-1201.
Dholakia, U.M. (2001), “A motivational process model of product involvement and consumer risk
perception”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35 Nos 11/12, pp. 1340-1362.
Ducoffe, R.H. (1995), “How consumers assess the value of advertising”, Journal of Current Issues &
Research in Advertising, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 1-18.
Ehrenberg, A.S.C., Hammond, K. and Goodhardt, G.J. (1994), “The after-effects of price-related
consumer promotions”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 11-21.
Esteban-Bravo, M., Múgica, J.M. and Vidal-Sanz, J.M. (2009), “Magazine sales promotion”, Journal of
Advertising, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 137-146.
Fam, K.-S. (2008), “Attributes of likeable television commercials in Asia”, Journal of Advertising
Research, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 418-432.
Fam, K.-S. and Merrilees, B. (1998), “Exploring the relevance of strategic promotion management
approach among small independent retailers”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
Iyengar, S.S. and Lepper, M.R. (1999), “Rethinking the value of choice: a cultural perspective on
intrinsic motivation”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 349-366.
Jackson, V., Stoel, L. and Brantley, A. (2011), “Mall attributes and shopping value: differences
by gender and generational cohort”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 18 No. 1,
pp. 1-9.
Jee, W.T. and de Run, E.C. (2013), “Consumers’ personal values and sales promotion preferences effect
on behavioural intention and purchase satisfaction for consumer product”, Asia Pacific Journal
of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 70-101.
Jeon, J.O. and Beatty, S.E. (2002), “Comparative advertising effectiveness in different national cultures”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 55 No. 11, pp. 907-913.
Jin, B. and Sternquist, B. (2003), “The influence of retail environment on price perceptions: an
exploratory study of US and Korean students”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 20 No. 6,
pp. 643-660.
Jones, J.M. (2008), “An exploratory study on attitude persistence using sales promotion”, Journal of
Managerial Issues, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 401-416.
Josiam, B.M., Kinley, T.R. and Youn-Kyung, K. (2005), “Involvement and the tourist shopper: using the
involvement construct to segment the American tourist shopper at the mall”, Journal of Vacation
Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 135-154.
Khare, A., Achtani, D. and Khattar, M. (2014), “Influence of price perception and shopping motives on
Indian consumers’ attitude towards retailer promotions in malls”, Asia Pacific Journal of
Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 272-295.
Kim, C., Takashima, K. and Newell, S. (2018), “How do retailers increase the benefits of buyer
innovativeness?: an intra- and inter-organization perspective”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing
and Logistics, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 571-586.
Kotler, P. (1986), “Global standardization – courting danger”, The Journal of Consumer Marketing,
Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 13-15.
Krugman, H.E. (1966), “The measurement of advertising involvement”, Public Opinion Quarterly,
Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 583-596.
Kwok, S. and Uncles, M. (2005), “Sales promotion effectiveness: the impact of consumer differences
at an ethnic-group level”, The Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 14 Nos 2/3,
pp. 170-186.
Kwon, K.-N. and Kwon, Y.J. (2007), “Demographics in sales promotion proneness: a socio-cultural
approach”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 34, pp. 288-294.
Laaksonen, P. (1994), Consumer Involvement: Concepts and Research, Cengage Learning, London.
APJML Laran, J. and Tsiros, M. (2013), “An investigation of the effectiveness of uncertainty in marketing
promotions involving free gifts”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 77 No. 2, pp. 112-123.
Laurent, G. and Kapferer, J.N. (1985), “Measuring consumer involvement profiles”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 41-53.
Lee, C.W. (2002), “Sales promotions as strategic communication: the case of Singapore”, The Journal of
Product and Brand Management, Vol. 11 Nos 2/3, pp. 103-114.
Lee, S.H., Bai, B. and Murphy, K. (2012), “The role demographics have on customer involvement in
obtaining a hotel discount and implications for hotel revenue management strategy”, Journal of
Hospitality Marketing & Management, Vol. 21 No. 5, pp. 569-588.
Liao, S.-L. (2006), “The effects of nonmonetary sales promotions on consumer preferences: the
contingent role of product category”, Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge,
Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 196-203.
Lichtenstein, D.R., Burton, S. and O’Hara, B.S. (1989), “Marketplace attributions and consumer
evaluations of discount claims”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 163-180.
Liu, D., Geng, X. and Whinston, A.B. (2007), “Optimal design of consumer contests”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 71 No. 4, pp. 140-155.
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
Lowe, A.C.-T. and Corkindale, D.R. (1998), “Differences in ‘cultural values’ and their effects on
responses to marketing stimuli: a cross-cultural study between Australians and Chinese from
the People’s Republic of China”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 32 Nos 9/10, pp. 843-867.
McNeill, L. (2013), “Sales promotion in Asia: successful strategies for Singapore and Malaysia”, Asia
Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 48-69.
Mano, H. and Elliott, M.T. (1997), “Smart shopping: the origins and consequences of price savings”,
in Brucks, M. and MacInnis, D.J. (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Association for
Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 504-510, available at: http://acrwebsite.org/volumes/8093/
volumes/v24/NA-24
Markus, H.R. and Kitayama, S. (1991), “Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and
motivation”, Psychological Review, Vol. 98 No. 2, p. 224.
Mela, C.F., Gupta, S. and Lehmann, D.R. (1997), “The long-term impact of promotion and advertising on
consumer brand choice”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 248-261.
Michaelidou, N. and Dibb, S. (2008), “Consumer involvement: a new perspective”, The Marketing
Review, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 83-99.
Ministry of Economic Development (2000), “Electronic commerce in New Zealand: a survey of business
use of the internet”, Government report, Ministry of Economic Development, Wellington,
available at: www.med.govt.nz/templates/MultipageDocumentTOC____9884.aspx
Ministry of Endowments and Islamic Affairs (2016), “Islam on gambling”, available at: www.islamweb.
net/en/article/176683/islam-on-gambling (accessed 20 June 2018).
Mitra, A. and Lynch, J.G. Jr (1995), “Toward a reconciliation of market power and information
theories of advertising effects on price elasticity”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 21 No. 4,
pp. 644-659.
Narayana, C.L. and Raju, P.S. (1985), “Gifts versus sweepstakes: consumer choices and profiles”,
Journal of Advertising, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 50-54.
Ndubisi, N.O. and Moi, C.T. (2005), “Customers behaviourial responses to sales promotion: the role of
fear of losing face”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 32-49.
Nickerson, C. and Hoeken, H. (2003), “Remarkable or modest? The role played by culture in
advertising”, Business Communication Quarterly, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 61-71.
O’Cass, A. (2000), “An assessment of consumers product, purchase decision, advertising and
consumption involvement in fashion clothing”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 21 No. 5,
pp. 545-576.
Odou, P. and de Pechpeyrou, P. (2011), “Consumer cynicism”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45
Nos 11/12, pp. 1799-1808.
Omotayo, O. (2011), “Sales promotion and consumer loyalty: a study of Nigerian telecommunication Consumer
industry”, Journal of Competitiveness, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 66-77. attitude
Palazon-Vidal, M. and Delgado-Ballester, E. (2005), “Sales promotions effects on consumer-based brand towards SPT
equity”, International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 47 No. 2, pp. 179-204.
Park, E.J., Eun Young, K. and Judith Cardona, F. (2006), “A structural model of fashion-oriented
impulse buying behavior”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 10 No. 4,
pp. 433-446.
Raju, J.S. (1995), “Theoretical models of sales promotions: contributions, limitations, and a future
research agenda”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Ratchford, B.T. (2001), “The economics of consumer knowledge”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 397-411.
Rice, R. and Hancock, L. (2005), “The mall intercept: a social norms marketing research tool”,
The Report on Social Norms, Vol. 4 No. 7, pp. 4-7.
Ricks, D.A. (1983), Big Business Blunders: Mistakes in Multinational Marketing, Dow Jones-Irwin,
Homewood, IL.
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
Rizvi, S. and Malik, S. (2011), “Impact of sales promotion on organizations’ profitability and consumer’s
perception in Pakistan”, Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research In Business, Vol. 3
No. 5, pp. 296-310.
Roderick, L. (2016), “Why Unilever and P&G are pulling back from discounting”, Marketing Week,
available at: www.marketingweek.com/2016/11/01/why-unilever-and-pg-are-pulling-back-from-
price-promotions/ (accessed 10 September 2017).
Romaine, S. (1995), Bilingualism, 2nd ed., Wiley-Blackwell, Cambridge, MA.
Rosa-Diaz, I.M. (2004), “Price knowledge: effects of consumers’ attitudes towards prices, demographics,
and socio-cultural characteristics”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 13 No. 6,
pp. 406-428.
Samiee, S. (1994), “Customer evaluation of products in a global market”, Journal of International
Business Studies, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 579-604.
Santini, F.D.O., Vieira, V.A., Sampaio, C.H. and Perin, M.G. (2016), “Meta-analysis of the long- and short-
term effects of sales promotions on consumer behavior”, Journal of Promotion Management,
Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 425-442.
Schultz, D.E. and Block, M.P. (2014), “Sales promotion influencing consumer brand preferences/
purchases”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 212-217.
Stafford, T.F., Turan, A. and Raisinghani, M.S. (2004), “International and cross-cultural influences on
online shopping behavior”, Journal of Global Information Technology Management, Vol. 7 No. 2,
pp. 70-87.
Statista (2018), “Annual growth of advertising, sales promotion and sponsorship spending in North
America from 2010 to 2018”, Statista, New York, NY, available at: www.statista.com/statistics/
196872/change-in-advertising-sales-promotion-sponsorship-since-2008/ (accessed 16 August 1976).
Sun, P.-C. (2010), “Differentiating high involved product by trivial attributes for product line extension
strategy”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 44 Nos 11/12, pp. 1557-1575.
Tan, P.J. and Bogomolova, S. (2016), “A descriptive analysis of consumer’s price promotion literacy
skills”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 44 No. 12, pp. 1223-1244.
Thaler, R. (1983), “Transaction utility theory”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 10 No. 1,
pp. 229-232.
Tong, D.Y.K., Lai, K.P. and Tong, X.F. (2012), “Ladies’ purchase intention during retail shoes sales
promotions”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 90-108.
UN ESCAP (2013), Population Trends in Asia and the Pacific, United Nations Economic and Social
Commission for Asia and the Pacific, available at: www.unescap.org/our-work/social-development/
population-dynamics
APJML Vignali, C. (2001), “Kellogg’s – internationalisation versus globalisation of the marketing mix”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 103 No. 2, pp. 112-130.
Villarejo-Ramos, A.F. and Sánchez-Franco, M.J. (2005), “The impact of marketing communication and
price promotion on brand equity”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 431-444.
Wakefield, K.L. and Bush, V.D. (1998), “Promoting leisure services: economic and emotional aspects of
consumer response”, The Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 209-222.
Waller, D.S. and Fam, K.S. (2000), “Cultural values and advertising in Malaysia: views from the
industry”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 3-16.
Warner, M. (2000), “Introduction: the Asia-Pacific HRM model revisited”, The International Journal of
Human Resource Management, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 171-182.
Weng, T.J. and de Run, E.C. (2013), “Consumers’ personal values and sales promotion preferences effect
on behavioural intention and purchase satisfaction for consumer product”, Asia Pacific Journal
of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 70-101.
Wierenga, B. and Soethoudt, H. (2010), “Sales promotions and channel coordination”, Academy of
Marketing Science. Journal, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 383-397.
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
Williams, T.G. (2002), “Social class influences on purchase evaluation criteria”, The Journal of
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 19 Nos 2/3, pp. 249-276.
Willis, J.L. (2004), “What impact will e-commerce have on the U.S. economy?”, available at: www.
kansascityfed.org/Publicat/econrev/Pdf/2q04will.pdf (accessed 12 January 2012).
Yang, L., Cheung, W.-l., Henry, J., Guthrie, J. and Fam, K.-S. (2010), “An examination of sales promotion
programs in Hong Kong: what the retailers offer and what the consumers prefer”, Journal of
Promotion Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 467-479.
Yi, Y. and Yoo, J. (2011), “The long-term effects of sales promotions on brand attitude across monetary
and non-monetary promotions”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 9, pp. 879-896.
Zaichkowsky, J.L. (1985), “Measuring the involvement construct”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 341-352.
Zaichkowsky, J.L. (1994), “The personal involvement inventory: reduction, revision, and application to
advertising”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 59-70.
Appendix. Survey items Consumer
attitude
towards SPT
Downloaded by 94.60.250.98 At 08:04 13 March 2019 (PT)
Corresponding author
Pedro Q. Brito can be contacted at: pbrito@fep.up.pt
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com