Private Label Brand Purchase Intention - A Malaysian Study

Global Business and Management Research: An International Journal
Vol. 10, No. 1 (2018, Special Issue)
Private Label Brand Purchase Intention: A Malaysian

Study
N. Norfarah*
Graduate School of Business, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia
Email: norfarah@usm.my
P.M. Koo
A.K. Siti-Nabiha
* Corresponding Author
Abstract
Purpose: This research aims to determine the relationship between consumers’ perception of
store image, price conscious, perceived quality, and value conscious towards purchase intention
of private label brand (PLB) food products; and mediation effect of attitude in the relationships.
Design/methodology/approach: A survey-based research approach was used to understand the
factors that significantly contribute to consumers’ purchase intention towards PLB food
products. Participants were selected via a non-probability convenience sampling method. A total
of 222 Likert-scale survey questionnaires were collected from consumers in northern Malaysia.
Data analysis included multiple regressions and mediation analysis.
Findings: The results indicated that consumers’ perceived store images; product quality and
price consciousness influenced their purchase intention of PLB food. Consumers’ value
consciousness was an insignificant factor. Furthermore, consumers’ attitude towards PLB
mediates the relationship between store image and perceived quality to purchase intention.
Research limitations/implications: The study only sampled participants from northern
Malaysia with the assumption that business climate of PLB food retailers and characteristics of
consumers reflect the rest of the country.
Practical implications: Retailers should improve store image, product price and quality and
nurture consumers’ positive attitude towards PLB in their marketing to boost purchase.
Originality/value: Previous studies undermine the mediation effect of consumers’ attitude in the
relationship between price, value, quality, and store image towards purchase intention of PLB.
This study adds value to the limited research on this area particularly in Malaysia.
Keywords: Purchase Intention, Retailer, Private Label Brand, Food Product, Malaysia
197
Introduction
Private Label Brand (PLB), i.e. brands of a product which are produced by retailer and sold
under the retailer’s name in their outlets (Baltas, 1997; Porral and Mangin (2016) have expanded
globally and its market share has increased and received encouraging response from the market
(Lassoued and Hobbs, 2015). However, PLB are considered under-developed in Asian retailing
markets, despite its presence in Asian markets since the past quarter century (McCaskill, 2014).
Similarly in Malaysia, the growth rate of PLB is only at eight percent in 2011, a slight increase
from 2.3 percent in 2009 (A.C. Nielsen, 2010). This lower sales growth of PLB products is due
to overall low consumption among consumers (A.C. Nielsen, 2010; McCaskill, 2014).
Nevertheless, the Malaysian retailing industry has a huge potential to develop PLB products.
At least three well known foreign retailers have invested and developed their own PLB brands in
several product categories in order to attract more customers’ attention to their brands and
strengthen their competitive advantage in retailing industry. Retailers are also willing to spend a
lot of investment on the growth of PLB. Consequently, the branding awareness effort of the
foreign retailers, consumers are becoming more familiar with PLB items. PLB items have
expanded in their range from groceries, skin care, foods to household products (Veloussou et al.,
2004; Beneke, 2010) in order to provide more choices for customers that shop at their
hypermarkets. For example, Giant hypermarket has introduced over 1,000 varieties of private
brand products including daily essentials such as food products and non-groceries products at
low prices to consumers (The Star, 2016b).
As consumers have distinct responses towards different brands for different product categories
when making purchase decisions; (Veloutsou et al., 2004), a better understanding on consumer’s
attitude and purchase intention towards PLB food products is vital as they are important
consumers purchasing items (Lymperopoulos et al., 2010). Moreover, limited researches were
conducted to study consumers purchase intention towards PLB food products in the Malaysian
context. Hence, this study fills in the research gap by examining the factors that affect
consumer’s purchase intention towards PLB. This research also aims to examine consumers’
attitude as a mediator.
Retailers in Malaysia
Malaysian retailing industry has undergoes dynamic changes over the past few decades. Retail is
an active sub-sector in the Malaysian economy and has shown a steady growth. The market
growth rate for food, beverages and tobacco has also increased from 4.5% per annum in 2011 to
4.9% per annum in 2014 (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2015). Urban Malaysian consumers prefer
shopping at hypermarkets, which are more comfortable and spacious and have variety of
products. Moreover, consumers can easily access information on prices, hence comparative
prices between different brands of the same product category is feasible. This scenario is
perceived as transparency in product offerings to customer that improves the store image. This
competitive advantage of the foreign hypermarkets has threatened the smaller and traditional
retailers in Malaysia (Gonzalez-Benito, 2005; Rosmimah and Melewar, 2008). Consequently, the
competitive market has led to small retailers closing down due to loss of customers.
With the presence of hypermarkets, the retails sales in Malaysia are showing positive growth.
Since the early 1990s, Malaysia’s retail sector has experienced tremendous growth when the new
retail concepts have been introduced. International hypermarkets had introduced new retail
concepts named “all-under-one roof” and “one stop” in order to break into challenging retail
market in Malaysia (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2005). Many large foreign owned hypermarkets
198
such as Giant Retail, Aeon, Tesco, Carrefour and Parkson started to enter Malaysia’s retail
market to meet Malaysian consumer’s needs (Rosmimah and Melewar, 2008). As of the end of
2013, Giant had 78 hypermarkets outlets and 72 supermarkets outlets, UK-based Hypermarket
Company, Tesco had a total of 46 stores while Aeon of Japan had 58 stores after the acquisition
of France-based Carrefour (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2015). Most of the hypermarkets are
located in developed states in Malaysia such as Perak, Penang, Kuala Lumpur, Johor Baharu and
Melaka (Lim et al., 2003). Some retailers also begins to expand this business to less developed
states in Malaysia such as Kedah and Perlis in order to increase their market share and attract
more consumers from different states. Thus, the retail industry still has great potential to grow in
future.
Retailers in Malaysia developed their store brands product in order to increase their sales revenue
and set their products apart from other retail players. For instance, Tesco has launched their
business since 2002. Tesco offers more than 4000 products under three types of PLB. These
three Tesco product range can be differentiated based on the price and quality. Another
hypermarket, Giant also offers 1000 varieties house brands products including groceries such as
rice, oil and household cleaning products, as well as non-groceries (The Star, 2016b).
Private Label Brand

Brand is the distinguishable points of products or services (Wood, 2000). Thus, retailers have
developed products under their own brands, i.e., the private label brand, to set their products
apart from other seller’s in order to attract more customers’ attention. Traditionally, PLB are
developed by retailers to increase their profit margin and market distinction (Burt & Davies,
2010). During the past decade, PLB has been deemed to be of lower quality and lower price
products. Retailers started to improve their PLB products quality, despite the lower prices, to
compete with manufacturer brands (A.C. Nielsen, 2014). In recent years, PLB products are
becoming more popular due to consumers’ changing perception towards PLB, which then leads
to growth of PLB product categories in grocery store (Sathya, 2013). Thus, PLB are available in
wide range of food products and non-food products.
PLB developed in five stages or generations (Burt and Sparks, 2002). The first generation PLB
was basic and functional products sold without specific name or brand. The product’s quality in
this generation is lower as compared to the manufacturers’ brands. Second generation products
were sold under their own-label which has medium quality, but is still considered as lower
quality than the manufacturer brands. The third generation PLB has comparable quality as
manufacturer brands products. The fourth generation extended their own brands by segmenting
their products and producing some unique products. The product quality in this generation is
same or better than manufacturer brands. The fifth generation of PLB is also named as corporate
brand, as they produce positive identity products for the retailers. The retailers focused on
delivering value through the PLB products.
As the prices of significant food items, i.e. flour, rice, vermicelli, cooking oil and etc. have
increased during the past decade, the availability of PLB at almost all supermarkets in urban
areas provides the options for Malaysian to consider purchasing PLB to lower their food
consumption expenditure. Interestingly, consumers, even those within the higher income group
are willing to accept the PLB product in order to save more money (Conroy, 2010). A survey
conducted by A.C. Nielsen (2014) found that around 66 percent of the respondents from Asia
Pacific region purchased the PLB product in order to save money. Moreover, around 51 percent
of consumers mentioned that switch to PLB has improved their household saving (A.C. Nielsen,
199
2015). Hence, PLB products are also consumed by wider income group consumers who look for
quality product at affordable price (Kwon et al, 2008). Retailers that offer PLB with high product
quality and lower prices plays ‘value for money’ sentiment to sway the market brings intense
competition to popular manufacturer brands. In fact, PLB have become an integral element in the
retail industry (Glynn and Chen, 2009).
Literature Review
Purchase Intention
Purchase intention refers to predisposition to purchase a product (Wu et al. 2011). Many research
studies related to purchase intention of private label brand product had applied Theory of
Planned Behaviour (TPB) proposed by Ajzen (1991) to explain the antecedents of purchasing
behaviour. Based on TPB model intention is influenced by attitude, subjective norm and
perceived behavioral control. However, Blackwell et al. (2001) defined intention as a subjective
judgments on a person whether to behave in certain ways in future. Many studies had used
purchase intention to predict the purchase behavior of goods or services (Shao et al, 2004). The
chance for a purchase to actualize is higher if the purchase intention is strong (Hansen et al,
2004; Lee and Lee, 2013). However, Zeithaml (1988) research found that purchase intentions are
influenced by external factors such as the product’s price, quality and value. On the other hand,
Lin and Lekhawipat (2014) found that store image has positively affects on customer’s
satisfaction in their shopping experience and ultimately influenced ones’ purchase intention. As a
conclusion, purchase intention are influenced by perceptual factors such as attitude, norms,
perceived behavioral control, product’s price, quality, value and store image.
Price Consciousness
Consumers’ price consciousness is defined as the degree to which consumers focus on paying for
lower prices (Lichtenstein et al., 1993, pp.235). For price conscious consumers, their evaluation
purchase depends heavily on lower price products (Kukar-Kinney et al. 2012). Price conscious
consumers are more sensitive to the price. In order to make purchase decision, cheaper price
products is preferred and this is selected by comparing products from the same category based on
the price. Furthermore, Jin and Sternquist (2004) also stated that these types of consumers are
willing to sacrifice other resource such as time and effort to shop at more store to get products
with the lowest price. The level of price consciousness can be differed by various product
categories (Monroe and Krishnan, 1984). Some consumers define their degree of price
consciousness based on product categories due to different perceived risk, while some consumers
are more to price consciousness regardless on the product categories (Sinha and Batra, 1999).
Price can bring different perception to different consumers. Lichtenstein et al. (1993) mentioned
that high priced products cause negative perception to price conscious consumer. It plays both
positive and negative roles in affecting consumer’s behavior. Consumers with high price
consciousness focus more on low priced products compared with those consumers with low price
consciousness (Thanasuta, 2015). In addition, price conscious consumers are less focus on the
product quality when they are searching for products with lowest prices (Martínez and Montaner,
2006). Hence, price conscious consumers are willing to switch to another brand or to try new
brand when the said brand offers them the lowest price.
The price of PLB products is typically lower than national brands products (Laaksonen and
Reynolds, 1994). Consumers with high price consciousness are more easily attracted to the low
priced PLB products and consider them as the preferable choice (Raju et al., 1995). For price
200
conscious consumers, price is an important determinant to predict the consumption of PLB in

United States (Sinha and Batra, 1999). Thus, price conscious consumers are the most likely to
purchase PLB than national brands in order to save money especially during economic downturn.
Perceived Quality
Product quality is divided into two dimensions, which are objective quality and subjective
quality (Anselmsson et al, 2007). Objective quality refers to the direct measurement on product.
Meanwhile, subjective quality is defined as the quality perceived by consumers. Consumers
always judge the product’s quality based on the product performance and whether it conforms to
the expected standards (Agarwal and Teas, 2004) and perceived quality is the subjective notion
that was set in a consumer’s mind towards to a particular product. According Huddleston et al,
(2009), perceived quality is another important factor which influences the purchase intention.
Therefore, when consumers perceive a brand as of superior quality, they have higher purchase
intention towards that brand’s products and vice versa. Hence, perceived quality is one of the
determinants of a private label brand’s success (Sprott and Shimp, 2004).
PLB have been evaluated as low quality products (Bao et al, 2011). Richardson et al. (1996)
reported that PLB food products have lower quality in term of taste, nutrition level and
ingredients compared with national brands. However, the improvement on the quality of PLB
has increased the purchase intention of the brands. For instance, Wulf et al. (2005) study found
that PLB food products in Belgium like orange juice brands have the same or better quality
compared with national brands. The improvement in the product quality might affect the
consumer’s perceived quality of the products and influences their purchase intention. Wells et al.
(2007) also found that the improvement of product quality of British’s retailer PLB products has
also improved the market share of the retail brands.
Value Consciousness
Value consciousness is linked to consumer’s needs and satisfaction to the products or services.
Apart from that, value conscious consumer can also be defined as the consumer who focuses on
the quality in relation to the price that they pay for certain items (Zeithaml, 1988). With the
improvement in term of quality by offering in competitive price, PLB are perceived as “value”
product by consumers (Thanasuta, 2015). Therefore, PLB with “value” products attract more
consumers especially value to have high purchase intention towards PLB. This situation also
brings a strong competition to national brands.
Based on Garretson et al. (2002), product value is a determinant for PLB product evaluation
from the consumers’ perspective. Value conscious consumers are more sensitive to the value in
order to ensure them are getting best value during shopping. They always have a perception that
“they must get a good deal” in their mind. Hence, value conscious consumers are not only
searching for low priced product, but they also search for a product with equivalent quality with
the price they paid in order to get a good deal. With the economic slowdown in the market, the
value conscious shoppers are constantly to look for good deal products (AC Nielsen, 2011).
Therefore, rather than basing their purchase intention solely on either price or quality, some
consumers would like to assess the products based on its value in order to get the good deal.
Store Image
Store image is consumer’s perception on the store based on a combination of store’s attributes
such as product variety, store environment and store services (Ailawadi and Keller, 2004). The
201
store image can also be evaluated based on five dimensions which are product, variety, product
quality, price, value-for-money and store atmosphere (Collins-Dodd and Lindley, 2003). In fact,
there are two main aspects which affect the store image namely utility aspects and impression
aspects (Saraswat et al., 2010). Utility aspect refers to physical store function such as the store
layout, the product choice offered by the store or the price of the product sold in the store. On the
other hand, impression aspects refers to the feeling and experience gained by consumers that
store conveyed. Hence, consumers will evaluate the store image mainly based on their feeling
and experience when shopping in the store.
Store image is also a factor that influences consumer’s store choice and store loyalty (Lewis and
Hawlsley, 1990; Osman, 1993). Hence, consumer will choose their preferred store based on
their subjective store image perception. In addition, store image is also another important factor
for consumers to evaluate the PLB image (Ailawadi and Keller, 2004). It acts as an element to
judge the product quality (Dawar and Parker, 1994) and direct affects consumer’s evaluation on
PLB (Wu et al, 2011; Diallo et al., 2013). Thus, it might influence their purchase intention
towards PLB based on the store image. In fact, store image is also one of the main contributions
to the store equity (Ailawadi and Keller, 2004). Therefore, the success of the PLB depends on
the store equity as well.
Attitude towards PLB

Attitude refers to feeling or experience that forms a tendency to act towards a person, things or
situation (Diallo et al., 2013). Attitude influence ones’ decision whether accept or reject a
product based on ones’ experience and personal view. In TPB, attitude is defined as
predisposition to respond either favorably or unfavorably towards a certain behavior (Ajzen and
Fishbein, 1991). Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) stated that attitude affects on both intention and
behavior. Ajzen and Fishbein (1991) also mentioned that an attitude towards certain behavior is
conceptualized by the beliefs attached to the behavior and the expected outcome. Attitude
towards PLB is defined as the tendency to respond to the PLB after evaluating the brands
(Burton et al., 1998). Attitude is formed by trust and familiarity to the PLB products
(Chaniotakis et al., 2009). Consumer will easily form positive attitude towards PLB when they
are familiar and trust a product.
Theoretical Framework and Hypothesis Development

Cue Utilization Theory mentioned that consumers’ decision on their purchase is depends on their
evaluation on the combination of direct and indirect cue on likely performance of a product.
Examples of indirect cue for purchase decision making are the customers’ attitude towards the
brand, buying experience (i.e. atmosphere of the store), packaging and price. The direct cue
refers to the texture and taste of the product. The relationship between independent and
dependent variable of this research are bonded by Cue Utilization theory. Theoretical framework
for this study was adapted from Garretson et al. (2002), Jin and Suh (2005) and Lin et al. (2009).
Indirect and direct cues or perceptual factors from past studies have been chosen to be examined
are price consciousness, perceived quality, value consciousness and store image. Three factors
(i.e. price consciousness, perceived quality and value consciousness) are adapted from previous
theoretical framework model which was developed by Garretson et al. (2002) and Lin et al.
(2009). Store image was added into the proposed theoretical framework as suggested by Liu and
Wang (2008) and Semijin et al. (2004). The mediation effect of attitude on the relationship
between independent variables to purchase intention is also included based on studies by Jin and
202
Suh (2005) and Lin et al. (2009). Thus, this research attempts to empirically test a mediation
model which incorporates attitude as mediator in this proposed theoretical framework in
Malaysian context. The following is the proposed theoretical framework.
Price
consciousness
H1
Perceived
quality H2
H5
Attitude towards PLB purchase
H3 PLB intention
Value
consciousness
H4
Store image
Figure 1: Theoretical framework of study
Based on the theoretical framework illustrated in figure 1 five hypotheses had been developed to
be tested the relationship and to answer the research objectives.
1. Price Consciousness towards Purchase Intention

Price consciousness is defined as “the degree which consumers focus on paying lower prices”
(Lichtenstein et al., 1993, pp.235). There are several past researches that support the price as the
main reason to influence purchase intention and have been studied as one of the important
determinants that influence purchase intention (Batra and Sinha, 2000; Jin and Suh, 2005). Batra
and Sinha (2000) mentioned that price consciousness is a strong determinant of PLB purchase
intention. The research done by Jin and Suh (2005) found that low price private label products
have increased the consumer intention to purchase products in Korean discount stores. Thanasuta
(2015) suggested that Thai consumers are more likely to purchase PLB products because the
price is low than national brands. Hence, based on the findings as above, this study hypothesizes
that:
Hypothesis 1: Price consciousness is positively correlated to purchase intention towards
PLB among northern Malaysia consumers.
2. Perceived Quality towards Purchase Intention

Perceived quality is defined as consumer’s judgment on the product’s performance which is
influenced by product associated attributes (Zeithaml, 1988). Nowadays, the quality of PLB
products is comparable to manufacturer brands (Johansson and Burt, 2004) since the retailers are
aggressively improving their PLB product’s quality. DelVecchio (2001) study finds that the
perceived quality acts as the determinants for the success of PLB in America. Therefore, positive
perceived quality of PLB products will improve purchase intention towards PLB among
Malaysian.
Quality is one of the important considerations when consumers make a purchase decision.
Perceived quality is an antecedent of consumer’s purchase intention towards PLB (Das, 2014).
203
Thus, when consumers make a purchase decision, perceived quality directly influence the
purchase intention towards PLB products (Porral and Lang, 2014). Richardson et al. (1994)
proved that the consumer’s PLB purchase intention is influenced by perceived quality rather than
value. Bao et al. (2011) also shows that perceived quality has direct effect on consumer purchase
intention towards PLB products. Therefore, based on the findings as above, this study
hypothesizes that:
Hypothesis 2: Perceived quality is positively correlated to purchase intention towards PLB
among northern Malaysia consumers.
3. Value Consciousness towards Purchase Intention

Value consciousness is defined as the price that you pay to get the equivalent quality of the
products or service. Today, PLB products have competitive price and are continuously improved
in terms of quality. In fact, PLB products have been judged as “value for money” products
among value conscious consumers (Thanasuta, 2015). Therefore, consumers choose to purchase
PLB products with good quality, lower price and carry good product value.
Value is strong determinant of private label brand and positively correlated to the consumer’s
purchase intention (Burton et al., 1998). Jin and Suh (2005) mentioned that the direct effect of
value consciousness on purchase intention towards PLB is significant when consumer purchase
home appliance products. Moreover, Diallo et al. (2013) also mentioned that value consciousness
has shown stronger positive effect to purchase intention towards PLB in French market.
Therefore, based on the findings as above, this study hypothesizes that:
Hypothesis 3: Value consciousness is positively correlated to purchase intention towards
PLB among northern Malaysia consumers.
4. Store Image towards Purchase Intention

PLB are deemed as parent brands for the store. It is an extension of the store name in the
marketplace. Consumer always evaluates the PLB based on the store image. Hence, store image
can be an extrinsic cue to evaluate the PLB (Collins-Dodd and Lindley, 2003) and it also
influences the judgment towards PLB image (Dhar and Hock, 1997). Thus, high perception from
consumers towards the store image leads to positive PLB image. This is especially true when the
consumers are unfamiliar to certain private label brand. Hence, store image is a good determinant
for them to evaluate the brand’s product and its quality when they are making purchasing
decisions.
Store image has a direct influence on consumer’s purchase intention of PLB and ultimately
increases the sales volume of PLB product (Wu et al., 2011). Porral and Mangin (2016) also
suggested that store image has positively affected the purchase intention of PLB food products.
PLB products from different store may differentiated by store image and lead to different
purchase intention from consumers (Bao et al., 2011). Consumer’s perception on store image is
important to determine their purchase intention on PLB products in Brazil market (Diallo et al.,
2015). Therefore, positive store image can increase high purchase intention from consumers.
Based on the findings as above, this study hypothesizes that:
Hypothesis 4: Store image is positively correlated to purchase intention towards PLB
among northern Malaysia consumers.
204
5. Mediation Effect of Attitude

Several studies have obtained support for mediation role of a person’s attitude between price,
value, quality and store image towards purchase intention (see Burton et al., 1998; Lin et al.,
2009; Garretson et al., 2002; Hansen et al., 2006). A significant mediating effect of attitude
between price conscious, towards PLB purchase intention was also reported in the study by Jin
and Suh (2005) and Liu and Wang (2008). Jin and Suh (2005) concurs the same results in their
research of purchase intention for PLB home appliances and food product categories in Korea.
Attitude exerts the effect of store image to purchase intention in research by Semeijn et al.
(2004) and Jin and Suh (2005). Therefore the following hypotheses are proposed to be tested in
Malaysian consumer context.
Hypothesis 5(a): Attitude towards PLB is positively mediates the relationship between price
consciousness and purchase intention.
Hypothesis 5(b): Attitude towards PLB is positively mediates the relationship between
perceived quality and purchase intention.
Hypothesis 5(c): Attitude towards PLB is positively mediates the relationship between value
consciousness and purchase intention.
Hypothesis 5(d): Attitude towards PLB is positively mediates the relationship between store
image and purchase intention.
Method
Data were collected through survey questionnaires using non-probability sampling. Convenient
sampling technique was employed to collect responses from consumers who visited and shopped
at selected hypermarkets located in northern Malaysia. Through convenience sampling, data is
collected from respondents who are easily accessible. This method is fairly easy to administer,
requires less time and is more cost-effective. The survey questionnaire contained three sections
and comprised 28 items. The survey was distributed face-to-face and the potential respondents
were approached at selected hypermarkets across four main states in northern Malaysia, namely
Penang, Kedah, Perak and Perlis. Participation was on a voluntary basis. A total of 222 useable
questionnaires were collected for data analysis. Reliability analysis is used to test how consistent
the measures are measuring its intended constructs. Table 1 presents the reliability of the scale
used in this research.
Table 1: Reliability Coefficients
Variables No. of items Cronbach’s alpha
Price Consciousness 6 0.923

Perceived Quality 4 0.932
Value Consciousness 5 0.918
Store Image 6 0.863
Attitude 3 0.802
Purchase Intention 4 0.930
Table 1 show that all the six constructs has Cronbach’s alpha value of more than 0.6. A value of
0.6 or higher is generally indicated a high reliability (Hair et al., 2006).
205
Multiple Regression Analysis and Mediation Analysis

Prior to multiple regression analysis, SPSS procedures for testing the assumptions are carried
out. Then the simultaneous multiple regression analysis is done. In the proposed model, it is
hypothesised that indirect effect occurs when the relationship between price conscious, value
conscious, perceived quality and store image towards purchase intention are intervened by
attitude. This third type of variable (attitude) is referred as mediator variable. In this study,
mediation analysis steps as proposed by Baron and Kenny (1986) are adopted.
Findings
Background of Respondents
Table 2 below provides demographic data collected from the respondents.
Table 2: Demographic of profile

Characteristics No. of Respondents Percentage (%)
Gender
Female 150 67.6
Male 72 32.4
Age
Below 20 years old 17 7.7
20 - 29 years old 95 42.8
30 - 39 years old 73 32.9
40 - 49 years old 22 9.9
50 years old and above 15 6.8
Marital status
Single 121 54.5
Married 96 43.2
Others 3 2.3
Monthly household income
Below RM 2,000 60 27.0
RM 2,000 – RM 2,999 48 21.6
RM 3,000 – RM 3,999 52 23.4
RM 4,000 – RM 4,999 26 11.7
RM 5,000 and above 36 16.2
Shopping frequency at hypermarket
Once a week 117 52.7
Twice a week 75 33.8
More than twice a week 30 13.5
States
Perak 96 43.2
Penang 77 34.7
Kedah 32 14.4
Perlis 17 7.7
206
Table 2 shows that the majority of respondents, 150 (67.6%) are female. Highest age groups
were between 20 to 29 years old, 95 (42.8%) and second highest age groups were between 30 to
39 years old, 73 (32.9%). In terms of marital status, more than half of the respondents (54.5%)
are single and 43.2% are married. Table 2 also shows that 48.6% of respondents earned less than
RM3,000 per month.
Test of Hypothesis 1 to 4 Using Multiple Regression Analysis

Relationship between Consumers Perceptual Factors on Purchase Intention
In order to test the hypotheses H1 to H4, multiple regression analysis is employed. Summary of
the multiple regression result for four independent variables is presented in Table 3. The
regression model explained (R2) 45.6 percent of variance in purchase intention.
Table 3: Multiple regression of consumer perceptual factors (x1, x2, x3 and x4) on Purchase
Intention(Y)
Equation: Y=b1x1+b2x2+b3x3+b4x4+e
Standardized Coefficients
Variables t-stat Sig.
Beta
Price Consciousness, x1 0.201 3.110 0.002**

Perceived Quality, x2 0.365 6.037 0.001**
Value Consciousness, x3 -0.142 -1.894 0.060n.s.
Store Image, x4 0.409 5.637 0.001**
R2=0.456 α=0.01 Y: Purchase intention
As shown in table 3, the effect of price consciousness on purchase intention is positive and
significant (Beta=0.201, t=3.110, p=0.002). The effect of Perceived quality on purchase intention
is positive and significant (Beta = 0.365, t=6.037, p-value = 0.001) and the effect of store image
to purchase intention is also positive and significant (Beta = 0.409; t=5.637, p-value = 0.000).
The results provide strong support for hypothesis 1, 2 and 4. This is denotes by these three
variables. Whereas value consciousness has a negative effect on purchase intention (shows by
beta value of -0.142) but this relationship is not significant (p-value = 0.060>0.01). Hence,
Hypothesis 3 is not supported.
The result indicates that store image has the strongest relationship to purchase intention with the
highest beta value (Beta = 0.409) compared with others independent variables in this study
although another two independent variables namely price consciousness and perceived quality
also made a statistical significant contribution with low beta value to purchase intention.
Mediation Analysis on Attitude

Baron and Kenny (1986)’s four steps mediation analysis was employed to examine the mediation
effects of attitude in the relationship between the hypothesized factors and purchase intention
towards PLB (Hypothesis 5a. to Hypothesis 5d.). Based on Table 4, only perceived quality and
store image met the four conditions of mediation analysis as proposed by Baron and Kenny
(1986). The beta value for perceived quality and store image with the relationship of purchase
intention is significantly decreased when the mediator variable (attitude towards PLB) is
207
included in the analysis. The beta value for perceived quality decreased from 0.365 to 0.157 (at p
= 0.011) and beta value of store image decreased from 0.409 to 0.259 (at p = 0.001). However,
the effect of perceived quality and store image on purchase intention maintained significant (p <
0.05) in the presence of attitude as mediator. Therefore, it implies attitude only plays partial
mediating effect on the relationship between perceived quality, store image and purchase
intention. Therefore, only hypothesis 5(b) and 5(d) are supported.
Table 4: Mediation analysis results

Criterion Variable
Step 1: Step 2: Step 3: Step 4:
Purchase Purchase Purchase

Attitude
Intention Intention Intention
towards PLB
Predictor Variables towards PLB towards PLB towards PLB
Std. Beta Std. Beta Std. Beta Std. Beta

Value Value Value Value
Independent Variables
Price Consciousness 0.201** 0.121 0.146*
Perceived Quality 0.365** 0.456** 0.157*
Value Consciousness -0.142 -0.040 -0.124
Store Image 0.409** 0.329** 0.259**
Mediator
Attitude towards PLB 0.700** 0.456**
R Square 0.456 0.480 0.490 0.564

Adjusted R Square 0.446 0.471 0.487 0.553
R Square Change 0.456 0.480 0.490 0.108
F Change 45.398** 50.156** 211.162** 53.449**
*p<0.05; **p<0.01
Discussion and Conclusion

The findings revealed that Malaysian consumers purchase intention has a significant relationship
with consumers’ perception on the store image, perceived product quality and price
consciousness. However, purchase intention has a negative relationship to consumers’ value
consciousness. Secondly, consumers attitude towards PLB food significantly mediates the
relationship between store image, product quality and price consciousness to purchase intention.
The effects of store image, price conscious and perceived quality on purchase intention are better
exerted by consumers’ attitude towards PLB food. The result is consistent with the findings from
past research studies by Wu et al. (2011), Bao et al. (2011), Diallo et al. (2013), and Porral and
Mangin (2016). For example, Diallo et al (2013) found that products price and quality provide an
array of cues that acts as indicator to consumers. These cues can be classified to extrinsic and
intrinsic to the products.
208
On the other hand, store image acts as an extrinsic cue to consumers as the determinant of PLB’
purchase intention. It will be accounted into their consideration when making a purchase
decision especially on food products. This is particularly important determinant in the case where
the consumers are unfamiliar to certain items. The consumer might judge the product’s quality
based on the store image (Porral and Mangin, 2016).
The findings have several important implications for Malaysian food retailers’ in formulating
strategies to further enhance consumers purchase intention of PLB food which discussed as
follows:
1. Improvement on store image:

For Malaysian consumer store image dimensions such as layout, merchandise and services
influenced consumer decision to purchase PLB food products. This is consistent with Ailawadi
and Keller (2004) and Diallo et al. (2013). Service provided by retailers’ employees are also
important i.e. informative, knowledgeable and prompt response promotes better purchase
intention of PLB products. This implies that proper training related to promote PLB food product
plays an important role in enhancing the image of a retail store (Bao et al., 2011 and Diallo et al.,
2013).
2. Improving PLB food product quality

Perceived quality also has a positive and significant relationship with purchase intention towards
PLB. The finding is in line with the previous study of Aaker (1991), Bao et al. (2011), Porral and
Lang (2014) and Das (2015). It proves that Malaysian consumer relies on their perceived quality
of the food products when making a purchase particularly for food category. This indicate that
the quality of PLB in Malaysia had improved, at least from the perception of consumers (A.C.
Nielsen, 2014) and significantly increased the consumer’s intention to purchase PLB products.
The better perception toward the products quality, the higher the intention for consumer to
purchase the PLB products and hence, leading to increasing market demand for PLB products.
3. Strategies on offering reasonable low price PLB

Price consciousness also shows positive and significant effect on consumer’s purchase intention
towards PLB. The result of this study is consistent with Batra and Sinha (2000), and Jin and Suh
(2005). This result implies that for Malaysian price is an important determinant for consumers to
purchase intention. The consumers opted to purchase low price products with comparable quality
to the national brands. Therefore, PLB products retailers have to capitalize on low price strategy
to attract Malaysian consumers. This finding proves that PLB food products are a good
alternative for consumers who are looking for the products that have good quality with lower
price compared with national brands.
4. Promote value consciousness over price and quality

On the other hand, the findings also show that value consciousness has negative effect on
purchase intention towards PLB. This finding is consistent with Thanasuta’s (2015) study and Jin
and Suh’s (2005) study on food products. However, this finding contradicted with the previous
studies by Jin & Suh (2005); Diallo et al. (2013) and Beneke et al. (2013). The finding from this
study implies that consumers do not perceive buying food product from PLB with high quality
level and low price as a good deal.
209
5. Nurture positive attitude towards PLB food among customer

From the mediation analysis’s result, it shows that only perceived quality and store image
fulfilled the Baron and Kenny (1986)’s four step conditions. However, attitude only has partial
mediating effect rather than full mediating effect as there is still statistically significant effect
between independent and dependent variables. In addition, store image is the most significant
relationship to purchase intention with attitude as mediator (Beta = 0.259), followed by
perceived quality (Beta = 0.157). This finding is consistent with the study of Lin et al. (2009).
Quality of the products is one of the critical factors to influence the consumers’ attitude and
ultimately affects the purchase intention towards PLB. It implies that high quality perception
from consumers to the products will create more positive attitudes and lead to the rise of
purchase intention among consumers.
As a conclusion, recommendations above are proposed with some limitation. Other than
controllable factors such as price and quality, some uncontrollable factor such as economic factor
is also important factor to be examined on the PLB purchase intention i.e. economic downturn
might influence consumers to switch from buying national brand to PLB, socio-economic,
demographic and proximity to retail store factors might also influence purchase intention. Hence
it is recommended that for future research consider both controllable and uncontrollable factors
and also demographic factors to be tested as the moderator variable shed better understanding on
factors that influence purchase intention towards PLB in Malaysia context.
References
A.C. Nielsen (2010). Retail and shopper trends Asia Pacific 2010. Retrieved from
http://sg.nielsen.com
A.C. Nielsen (2011). The rise of the value-conscious shopper. Retrieved from
http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/reports/2011/rise-of-the-value-conscious-
shopper.html
A.C. Nielsen (2012). Report 2012 Asia Pacific Retail and Shopper Trends. Retrieved from
http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2012/report-2012-asia-pacific-retail-and-
shopper-trends.html
A.C. Nielsen (2014). The state of private label around the world: Where it's growing, where it's
not, and what the future holds. New York: Nielsen.
A.C. Nielsen (2015), Malaysia consumer confidence index hits 10-year low. Retrieved from
http://www.nielsen.com/my/en/insights/news/2015/malaysia-consumer-confidence-
index-hits-10-year-low.html
Aaker, D. A. (1996). Measuring brand equity across products and markets. California
Management Review, 38(3), 103.
Agarwal , S. and Teas, R.K. (2004). Cross-national applicability of a perceived risk-value model.
Journal of Product & Brand Management, 13(4), 242-256.
Ailawadi, K.L. and Keller, K.L. (2004). Understanding retail branding: conceptual insights and
research priorities. Journal of Retailing, 80(4), 331-342.
Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1991). Atitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review
of empirical research. Psychology Bulletin, 84(5), 888.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. American Press, 50(2), 179-211.
210
Anselmsson, J., Niklas, V.B., and Ulf, J. (2009). Brand Image and customers’ willingness to pay
a price premium for food brands. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 23(2), 90-
102.
Baltas, G. (1997). Determinants of store brand choice: a behavioral analysis. Journal of Product
& Brand Management, 6(5), 315-324.
Bao, Y., Bao, Y. and Sheng, S. (2011). Motivating purchase of private brands: effects of store
image, product signatureness and quality variation. Journal of Business Research, 64(2),
220-226.
Baron,R.M. and Kenny,D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediators variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual strategic and statistical consideration. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
Batra, R. and Sinha, I. (2000). Consumer-level Factors Moderating the Success of Private Label
Brands. Journal of Retailing, 76(2),175-191.
Beneke, J. (2010). Consumer perceptions of private label brands within the retail grocery sector
of South Africa. African Journal of Business Management, 4(2), 203-220.
Beneke, J., Flynn, R. Greig, T. and Mukaiwa, M. (2013). The influence of perceived quality,
relative price and risk on customer value and willingness to buy: a study of private label
merchandise. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 22(3), 218-228.
Blackwell, R. D., Miniard, P. W., and Engel, J. F. (2001). Consumer Behavior (9th edition).
Mike Roche, Grove City: OH.
Boutsouki, C., Zotos, Y. and Masouti, Z. (2008). Consumer behaviour towards own label:
monitoring the Greek experience. Agricultural Economics Review, 9(1), 81-92.
Burt, S. and Davies, K. (2010). From the retail brand to the retailer as a brand: themes and issues
in retail branding research. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,
38(11/12), 865-78.
Burt, S and Sparks L (2002). Corporate Branding, Retailing, and Retail Internationalization,
Corporate Reputation Review, 5(2/3), 194-212.
Burton, S., Lichtenstein, D.R. and Netemeyer, R.G. (1998). A scale for measuring attitude
toward private label products and an examination of its psychological and behavioral
correlates. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(4), 293-306.
Chakraborty, S. (2011). Perceptions and buyer behavior towards private-label colas: an
exploratory study to understand the views of the store managers of United Kingdom. IUP
Journal of Marketing Management, 10(1), 7.
Chandon, P., Morwitz, V. G. and Reinartz, W. J. (2004). The short- and long-term effects of
measuring intent to repurchase. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(3), 566 -72
Chaniotakis, I.E., Lymperopoulos, C. and Soureli, M. (2009). A Research Model for Consumers'
Intention of Buying Private Label Frozen Vegetables, Journal of Food Products
Marketing, 15(2),152-163.
Collins-Dodd, C., Lindley, T., (2003). Store brand and retail differentiation: the influence of
store image and store brand attitude on store own brand perceptions. Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services,10, 345–352.
Connor, J.M., Rogers, R.T., and Bhagavan, V. (1996). Concentration change and countervailing
power in the U.S. food manufacturing industry. Review of Industrial Organization, 11(4),
473-492.
Conroy. P. (2010). Brand loyalty and the impact of private label products. Deloitte Debates.
Retrieved from http://www.deloitte.com/us/brandloyalty
211
Das, G. (2015). Linkages between self-congruity, brand familiarity, perceived quality and
purchase intention: A study of fashion retail brands. Journal of Global Fashion
Marketing, 6(3), 180-193.
Dawar, N., Parker, P., (1994). Marketing universals: consumers’ use of brand name, price,
physical appearance, and retailer reputations as signals of product quality. Journal of
Marketing, 58, 81–95.
DelVecchio, D. (2001). Consumer Perceptions of Private Label Quality: The Role of Product
Category Characteristics and Consumer Use of Heuristics. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 8, 239-249.
Dhar, S.K., Hock, S.J., (1997). Why store brand penetration varies by retailer. Marketing
Science,16(3), 208–227.
Diallo, M.F., Chandon, J.L., Cliquet, G. and Philippe, J. (2013). Factors influencing consumer
behaviour towards store brands: evidence from French Market. International Journal of
Retail & Distribution Management, 41(6), 422-411.
Diallo, M.F., Burt, S. and Sparks, L. (2015). The influence of image and consumer factors on
store brand choice in the Brazilian market. European Business Review, 27(5), 495-512.
Erdem, T., Zhao, Y. and Valenzuela, A. (2004). Performance of store brands: A cross-country
analysis of consumer store-brands preferences, perception and risk. Journal of Marketing
Research, 41, 86-100.
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction
theory and Research. Addision-Wesley Publishing, Ma, London.
Garretson, J. A., Fisher, D. and Burton, S. (2002). Antecedents of Private Label Attitude and
National Brand Attitude: Similarities and Differences. Journal of Retailing, 78, 91-99.
Glynn, M.S. and Chen, S.S. (2009). Consumer‐factors moderating private label brand success:
further empirical results. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,
37(11), 896-914
Gonzalez-Benito, O. (2005). Spatial competitive interaction of retail store formats: modelling
proposal and empirical results. Journal of Business Research, 58, 457-466.
Hair, Anderson, R., Tatham, R., and Black, W., (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis. Research.
1st Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hansen, T., Jensen, J. M., and Solgaard, H. S. (2004). Predicting online grocery buying
intention: a comparison of the theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned
behaviour. International Journal of Information Management, 24(6), 539 – 550.
Hansen, K., Singh, V. and Chintagunta, P. (2006). Understanding store-brand purchase behavior
across categories. Marketing Science, 25(1),75-90.
Hoch S.J. and Banerji, S. (1993). When do private label succeed? Sloan Manage, 34, 57-67.
Huddleston, P., Whipple, J., Mattick, R.N. and Lee, S.J. (2009). Customer satisfaction in food
retailing: comparing specialty and conventional grocery stores. International Journal of
Retail and Distribution Management, 37(1), 63-80.
Jin, B. and Suh, Y. G. (2005). Integrating Effect of Consumer Perception Factors in Predicting
Private Brand Purchase in a Korean Discount Store Context. Journal of Consumer
Marketing, 22(2), 62-71.
Jin, B. and Sternquist, B. (2004). Shopping is truly a joy. The Service Industries Journal, 24(6),
1-18.
212
Johansson, U. and Burt, S. (2004). The Buying of Private Brands and Manufacturer Brands in
Grocery Retailing: A Comparative Study of Buying Processes. Journal of Marketing
Management, 20(7/8), 799-824.
Karlsson, N., Garling, T. and Selart, M. (1999). Explanations of effect of prior income changes
on buying decisions. Journals of Economic Psychology, 20(4), 449-463.
Kotler, P. (2003). Marketing Management (11th edition). Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River: NJ,
Pearson Education.
Kukar-Kinney, M., Rigway, N.M. and Monroe, K.B. (2012). The role of price in the behavior
and purchase decisions of compulsive buyers. Journal of Retailing, 88(1), 63-71.
Kwon, K.N., Lee, M.H. and Kwon, Y.J. (2008). The effect of perceived product characteristics
on private brand purchases. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25(2), 105-114.
Laaksonen, H. and Reynolds, J. (1994). Own brands in food retailing across Europe. Journal of
Brand Management, 2(1), 37-46.
Lassoued, R. and Hobbs, J.E. (2015). Consumer confidence in credence attributes: the role of
brand trust. Food Policy, 52, 99-107.3.
Lee, J. and Lee, J. N. (2013). How purchase intention consummates purchase behaviour: the
stochastic nature of product valuation in electronic commerce. Behaviour & Information
Technology, 34(1), 57-68
Lewis, B.R. and Hawksley, A.W. (1990). Gaining a competitive advantage in fashion retailing.
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 18(4), 21-32.
Lichtenstein, D.R., Ridgway, N.M. and Netemeyer, R.G. (1993). Price perceptions and consumer
shopping behavior: a field study. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(2), 234-245.
Lim, Y.M., Nurwati, B. and Ghafar, A.A. (2003). Retail Activity in Malaysia: From Shophouse
to Hypermarket. Pacific Rim Real Estate Society 9th Annual Conference, 20-22 January
2003.
Lin, C. and Lekhawipat, W. (2014). Factors affecting online repurchase intention, Industrial
Management & Data Systems,114(4), 597-611.
Lin, C.Y., Marshall, D. and Dawson, J. (2009). Consumer attitudes towards a European retailer’s
private brand food products: an integrated model of Taiwanese consumers. Journal of
Marketing Management, 25(9/10), 875-891.
Liu, T.C. and Wang, C.Y. (2008). Factors affecting attitudes towards private label and promoted
brands. Journal of Marketing Management, 24(3-4), 283-298.
Lymperopoulos, C., Chaniotakis, I.E. and Rigopoulou, I.D. (2010). Acceptance of detergent-
retail brands: the role of consumer confidence and trust. International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, 38(9), 719-736.
Martínez, E. and Montaner, T. (2006). The effect of consumers psychographic variables upon
deal-proneness. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 13(3), 157-168.
McCaskill, A. (2014). Global perceptions about store brands improve, but share of basket varies
by country. Retrieved from http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/press-room/2014/global-
perceptions-about-store-brands-improve-but-share-of-basket-varies-by-country.html
Monroe, K.B. and Krishnan, R. (1984). The effect of price on subjective product evaluations. In
Jacoby, J. and Olson, J.C. (Eds), Perceived Quality: How Consumers View Stores and
Merchandise, D.C. Heath, Lexington, MA, 209-32.
Morganosky, M.A. (1997). Format change in US grocery retailing. International Journal of
Retails & Distribution Management, 25(6), 211-218.
213
Osman, M.Z. (1993). A conceptual model of retail image influences on loyalty patronage
behaviour. International Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer Research, 2,133-
48.
Porral, C.C. and Lang, M.F. (2015). The role of manufacturer identification, brand loyalty and
image on purchase intention. British Food Journal, 117(2) 506-522.
Porral, C.C. and Mangin, J.P.L. (2016). Food private label brands: the role of consumer trust on
loyalty and purchase intention. British Food Journal, 118(3), 679-696.
PricewaterhouseCoopers (2005). Global Retail and Consumer Study from Beijing to Budapest.
Malaysia, 94-105.
PricewaterhouseCoopers (2015). 2015-16: Outlook for the Retail and Consumer Products Sector
in Asia. Retrieved from http://www.pwc.com/kr/ko/publications/industry/retail-in-asia-
outlook_201516.pdf
Raju, J.S., Sethuraman, R. and Dhar, S.K. (1995). The introduction and performance of store
brands. Management Science, 41(6), 957-978.
Richardson P.S., Dick A.S., Jain, A.K. (1994). Extrinsic and intrinsic cue effects on perceptions
of store brand quality. Journal of Marketing, 58, 28-36.
Richardson P.S., Dick A.S., Jain, A.K. (1996). Household store brand proneness: A Framework.
Journal of Retailing, 72(2), 159-85.
Rosmimah, M.R. and Melewar, T.C. (2008). Hypermarkets and the small retailers in Malaysia:
Exploring retailers' competitive abilities. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business, 9(4), 329-343.
Saraswat, A., Mammen, T., Aagja, J.P., and Tewari, R. (2010). Building store brands using store
image differentiation. Journal of Indian Business Research, 2(3),166-180,
Sathya, R. (2013). Integrating effect of consumer perception factors towards private label brands
in food and grocery retail sector in Chennai Region. Arth Prabhand: A Journal of
Economics and Management, 2(6), 2278-2629.
Schiffman, L. G. and Kanuk, L. L. (2004). Consumer Behavior (8th edition). Prentice- Hall,
Upper Saddle River: NJ, Pearson Education.
Semeijn, Janjaap, Riel, Allard C. R. van and Ambrosini, Beatriz (2004). Consumer evaluation of
store brands: Effects of store image and product attributes. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services,11, 247-258.
Shao, C. Y., Baker, J. and Wagner, J. A. (2004). The effects of appropriateness of service contact
personnel dress on customer expectations of service quality and purchase intention: the
moderating influences of involvement and gender. Journal of Business Research,
57(10),1164 – 1180.
Sinha, I. and Batra, R. (1999). The effect of consumer price consciousness on private label
purchase. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 16(3), 237-251.
Sprott, D. E., & Shimp, T. A. (2004). Using product sampling to augment the perceived quality
of store brands. Journal of Retailing, 80(4), 305-315.
Thanasuta, K (2015). Thai consumers’ purchase decisions and private label Brands. International
Journal of Emerging Markets, 10(1),102 – 121.
Veloutsou, C., Giouslistanis, E., and Moutinho, L. (2004). Own labels choice criteria and
perceived characteristics in Greece and Scotland: Factors influencing the willingness to
buy. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 13(4), 228-241.
Wells, L. E., Farley, H. and Armstrong, G. A. (2007). The importance of packaging design for
own-label food brands. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,
35(9), 677-690.
214
Wood, L. (2000). Brands and brand equity: Definition and management. Management Decision,
38(9), 662-669.
Wu, P.C.S., Yeh, G.Y. and Hsiao, C.R. (2011). The effect of store image and service quality on
brand image and purchase intention for private label brands. Australasian Marketing
Journal, 19(4), 30-39.
Wulf, K. D., Goedertier, F. and Ossel, G. V. (2005). Consumer Perceptions of Store Brands
versus National Brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22(4), 223-232.
Zeithaml, V.A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model
and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2-22.
215
Copyright of Global Business & Management Research is the property of Global Business &
Management Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or
posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users
may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Private Label Brand Purchase Intention - A Malaysian Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Private Label Brand Purchase Intention - A Malaysian Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Global Business and Management Research: An International Journal

Vol. 10, No. 1 (2018, Special Issue)

Private Label Brand Purchase Intention: A Malaysian

Private Label Brand

conscious consumers, price is an important determinant to predict the consumption of PLB in

Attitude towards PLB

Theoretical Framework and Hypothesis Development

Figure 1: Theoretical framework of study

1. Price Consciousness towards Purchase Intention

2. Perceived Quality towards Purchase Intention

3. Value Consciousness towards Purchase Intention

4. Store Image towards Purchase Intention

5. Mediation Effect of Attitude

Table 1: Reliability Coefficients

Variables No. of items Cronbach’s alpha

Price Consciousness 6 0.923

Multiple Regression Analysis and Mediation Analysis

Table 2: Demographic of profile

Test of Hypothesis 1 to 4 Using Multiple Regression Analysis

Price Consciousness, x1 0.201 3.110 0.002**

Mediation Analysis on Attitude

Table 4: Mediation analysis results

Purchase Purchase Purchase

Std. Beta Std. Beta Std. Beta Std. Beta

R Square 0.456 0.480 0.490 0.564

Discussion and Conclusion

1. Improvement on store image:

2. Improving PLB food product quality

3. Strategies on offering reasonable low price PLB

4. Promote value consciousness over price and quality

5. Nurture positive attitude towards PLB food among customer

You might also like