The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1753-8335.htm
JPMD
14,2
222
Received 23 June 2020
Revised 24 August 2020
19 September 2020
Accepted 28 September 2020
Journal of Place Management and
Development
Vol. 14 No. 2, 2021
pp. 222-238
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1753-8335
DOI 10.1108/JPMD-06-2020-0053
The importance of distance and
attraction in patronizing a
shopping mall
Marsela Thanasi-Boçe, Piotr Kwiatek and Lasha Labadze
College of Business Administration, American University of the Middle East,
Egaila, Kuwait
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to establish mall attractiveness factors in Kuwait, examine the
relationship between mall dimensions and mall patronage and explore the impact of mall size and distance on
mall patronage.
Design/methodology/approach – Data from 190 shopping mall visitors were analyzed using Stata
software. Factor analysis was used to identify the mall attraction factors, and regression models were run to
analyze their relationships with people’s frequency of visits to shopping malls and the amount of time spent
per visit.
Findings – The results unearth five important factors, namely, performance of buying, entertainment,
social activities, physical atmosphere and location. Analysis reveals that the performance of buying and
social activities factors had a significant impact on the frequency of visits, while the amount of time
spent per visit was significantly affected only by the social activities factor. Furthermore, mall size is
more important than distance to the mall. Finally, gender differences in shoppers’ mall preferences and
behaviors were reported.
Practical implications – On the practical level, shopping mall developers and managers can use the
attraction scale to develop attractive malls and effective marketing strategies. Researchers can use findings to
confirm the factors extracted in the study and for further research on the topic.
Originality/value – This study extends theories on consumers’ preferences and behaviors. It provides
empirical evidence about the impact of attractive mall dimensions on shoppers’ patronage in Kuwait, an
understudied context.
Keywords Shopping mall (SM) attractiveness, Distance, Size, Frequency of visits,
Time spent per visit
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The transformation of shopping malls (SMs) over the years has reflected continuous
changes in consumer behavior and preferences. SMs successfully fulfill shoppers’ needs,
providing them with a pleasant one-stop-shop experience.
Particularly, the Middle East region represents a distinctive and unsaturated
large market with a high purchasing power in which SMs serve as lifestyle hubs that
satisfy essential cultural and social needs. According to Mall Middle East (2019),
mall projects today in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries are worth close to
$7.8bn, indicating an increase in the possibility of investors’ capitalizing on a grand
scale.
Despite the favorable climate investment, the high density of SMs in the region demands
mall differentiation which presents a necessity to explore the factors that distinguish SMs
and contribute to enhanced patronage. Due to the intensified competition among SMs
(Koksal, 2019) and the availability of other retail formats, mall managers and researchers are Importance of
calling for a deeper analysis of the pull factors that attract customers to SMs (Calvo-Porral distance and
and Lévy-Mangín, 2018) with more attention paid to consumers’ shopping perceptions,
attraction
motives, feelings and behaviors regarding all shopping aspects.
The relative evaluations of competitive malls in a market are related to the value
consumers’ opinion on various mall image dimensions, which, in turn, determine the
patronage level achieved by a mall (Finn and Louviere, 1996). Attractive factors in a SM
reflect its image attributes. The proposed research models in wider literature have
223
established common ground including the retail location and store image theories
(Stoltman et al., 1991). Due to diverse contexts found in different countries there are a
variety of attributes that are applicable in some and not in other contexts, however
most dimensions of mall attractiveness proposed in the literature overlap with each
other.
Only a few studies related to mall choice behavior have been introduced in the
Middle East (Al-Otaibi, 2005; Bagnied and Cader, 2016; El-Aldy and Eid, 2017; Koksal,
2019) despite the attractiveness of the region to global companies and the huge success
the SM model has in the area. Particularly, in Kuwait, a relatively small country with an
estimated area of about 17,820 square kilometers and a strategic location in the Arabian
Gulf, more than 60 SMs operate scattered all over the country with an abnormal
density. Yet, the Global Retail Development Index ranked Kuwait among the top 30
emerging retail destinations of the world in 2015 with low risk and an unsaturated
market (Kearney, 2015).
The high profits generated by massive oil reserves in Kuwait have prompted national
economic development and increased consumers’ disposable incomes, making it one of the
richest countries per capita in the world.
A strong level of mall occupancy at 93% in 2019 is a significant indicator of retailers’
growth (Marmore-Mena Intelligence, 2019). Moreover, other factors such as the hot weather,
less developed public transportation associated with a high number of cars in circulation,
and low fuel costs provide the basis for Kuwait to become a target place where malls can
thrive.
As a result, the blossoming of many modern malls with large retail space along with a
new emerging lifestyle demand in-depth research to explore mall patronage behavior. In this
regard, the research goals of this study are to establish mall attractiveness factors in
Kuwait, examine the relationship between mall amenities and mall patronage, and explore
the impact of mall size and distance on mall patronage.
The study begins with a thorough review of the relevant literature related to mall image
dimensions, distance and frequency of mall visits. The research framework creates the
ground for hypotheses development. Further, the explanation of the methodology is
followed by the results of the research, discussions, implications for researchers and mall
managers, conclusions and possible limitations of the research.

Literature review
Mall image is a composite of mall attributes that, when experienced by consumers, creates
different perceptions of the benefits of SM activities (Jackson et al., 2011).
Considering the retail gravitational approach, mall attractiveness is a function of
shoppers’ utilitarian needs that can be best satisfied when the needed assortments are found
at the nearest accessible mall (Stoltman et al., 1991), are accessible via available
transportation infrastructure (Teller and Schnedlitz, 2012), and the mall has a large retail
JPMD space and many stores that offer several brands (Chebat et al., 2010; Kalvo and Sevtsuk,
14,2 2018).
Apart from gravity factors, hedonic factors have been used to explain satisfying
shopping experiences and patronage intentions through the pleasure of socializing and
entertaining in a pleasant, well-designed, clean and secure environment (Kim and Han,
2019).
224 Depending on the country context and other demographic factors, researchers have
presented different results regarding the attractive factors that lead to SM choice.
Mohammad Shafiee and Es-Haghi (2017) report that the mall loyalty of consumers in
Tehran is more related to pleasure and fun rather than to doing task-oriented activities. Key
factors of attractiveness for Polish customers were social positioning and mall atmosphere
(Debek, 2015). Urban shoppers in Malaysia placed a high value on parking facilities and
child-friendliness factors (Wong and Nair, 2018). The most attractive factor for Saudi
Arabian shoppers was product variety (Ahmad, 2012), while Kuwaitis appreciated the
availability of different shops and a nice environment (Bagnied and Cader, 2016).
Calvo-Porral and Lévy-Mangín (2018) highlight the positive relationship between SM
patronage behavior and purchase intentions when a good balance is achieved between the
tenant variety with different stores and commercial offers provided, and a pleasant and
attractive internal environment and leisure activities. Consequently, there is a persistent
need to view a shopping experience as that which is composed of various factors of
attraction where shopping performance and pleasure are achieved simultaneously (Gilboa
et al., 2016).

Research framework
The attractiveness of SMs can emerge from their ability to accomplish shoppers’
cognitive, physiological and social needs (Ng, 2013). SMs cope with this challenge by
focusing on providing shoppers with a unique experience, based on offering a variety of
choices at a pleasant, aesthetic, and social environment with many entertainment
options. However, motivation theory alone cannot fully explain mall patronage.
Supported by the central place and gravitational theories, situational factors such as
mall size and distance to the mall can affect shoppers’ decisions to patronize one mall
over another. This study framework suggests that the relationship between mall
attraction factors and dependent variables (mall visit frequency and time spent per visit)
can be affected not only by motivational factors but also by situational ones, such as
mall size and distance (Figure 1).

Figure 1.
Research framework
Performance of buying Importance of
Performance of buying (PoB) is a dimension related to accomplishing utilitarian tasks. The distance and
proliferation of SMs is based on their capability to offer a one-stop shopping solution with a
tenant mix that satisfies shoppers’ needs. The size of the SM and tenant variety affect the
attraction
consumers’ excitement and desire to stay, which leads to re-patronage intentions (Wakefield
and Baker, 1998; Chebat et al., 2010). However, it is easier for consumers nowadays to switch
to other malls, especially because most of them offer identical goods and services. (Aliagha 225
et al., 2015).
Mall attractiveness is affected by the perception related to the range of available shops
and the diversity of brands. Mall campaigns can affect mall choice (Can et al., 2016) and gifts
and incentives can engage customers in word of mouth behavior. However, price is not
always a decisive factor in shoppers’ attractiveness. Bagnied and Cader (2016) report that
Kuwaiti shoppers place more value on quality than price and they are mainly influenced by
advertising, family, peers and friends to select their products.
Finally, shoppers may consider the existence of some facilities that support PoB such as
banks and post office services important (Wong and Nair, 2018). Based on these
considerations, the first hypothesis is formulated:

H1. Buying performance has a positive impact on the frequency of visits.

Entertainment
Nowadays, the strong competitiveness between SMs is enacted through their offering of a
variety of entertainment alternatives for creating a more pleasant shopping experience.
Entertainment can become a means of mall image differentiation, especially for a specific
segment of consumers who are seeking this.
The literature has loosely defined and conceptualized mall entertainment as a
unidimensional construct, where social activities are incorporated. To address this concern,
Sit et al. (2003) explore three key entertainment attributes of SM images, namely, specialty
entertainment, special event entertainment and food. Mall events were further categorized
by Khare et al. (2019) under six different subcategories: product launch events, events to
promote, social cause, commemorate festivals, celebrity nights, retailers’ events and theme
events.

Social activities
The social activities’ construct is conceptualized separately from entertainment,
acknowledging the characteristic of Kuwaitis’ lifestyle that includes spending time and
socializing in multicultural restaurants and coffee bars located within SMs. This strong
preference for food consumption is also reflected in Kuwait’s long-term strategy to become
the world’s food capital by 2030.
Shoppers would prefer to visit a mall that is popular and aligned with their shopping
orientation. When shoppers have hedonic orientations (i.e. shopping for fun and excitement),
they tend to spend more time in the SM and retail crowding is perceived positively (Baker
and Wakefield, 2012). Consequently, the second hypothesis is formulated:

H2. Entertainment and social activities in a SM have a positive impact on the frequency
of visits (a) and time spent per visit (b).
JPMD Physical atmosphere
14,2 This construct explains a mall’s physical features and its facilities. According to Heide and
Grønhaug (2006), the atmosphere consists of three factors: ambiance, interaction and design.
The ambiance comprises elements such as odor, temperature, color and air quality. Other
features such as ceiling, lighting, painting, internal views and landscaping (Aliagha et al.,
2015) require proper consideration when designing a mall due to how difficult it is to change
226 them later on (Frasquet et al., 2002).
Some elements of the physical atmosphere include the safeness and cleanness of the
environment and particularly convenient facilities such as parking since most shoppers
drive to reach their preferred malls (Wong and Nair, 2018). However, these characteristics
may not contribute significantly to mall differentiation since almost all SMs nowadays
provide a safe and clean environment with free available parking.
Aesthetic design and natural eco-environment incorporated in a large mall can draw the
consumers’ attention, enhance their positive experience and affect their intention to revisit
the mall (Ortegon-Cortazar and Royo-Vela, 2017). A pleasant physical environment can
determine the frequency of visits to a mall (Calvo-Porral and Lévy-Mangín, 2018) and the
willingness to spend more time in it. Consequently, the hypothesis is formulated:

H3. The physical atmosphere in a SM has a positive impact on the frequency of visits (a)
and time spent per visit (b).

Location and distance

It can be convenient to visit a mall more frequently and patronize it if it is built in a good
location (Aliagha et al., 2015). The term “good location” is relevant to a shopper’s specific
situational factors such as how easily they can reach a mall, proximity to their place of
living, or location in a convenient area where the shopper can satisfy other needs
simultaneously. According to Huff’s model (1963), the probability of a shopper visiting a
given commercial place is a function of the distance to and attractiveness of that destination
compared to other competing locations around it (Davies and Rogers, 1984).
However, various factors such as internet shopping, the expansion of cities,
transportation facilities, the concentration of malls in a central area, and the advent of new
large retail formats away from city centers have lessened the importance of mall location
(Wong and Nair, 2018).
A variety of measures of distance to reach a mall has been applied in patronage research
such as map distance (Granbois, 1977), perceived distance by rating one’s proximity to a SM
(Gentry and Burns, 1978), and drive time (ELSamen and Hiyasat, 2017).
The perceived driving time to reach a mall was used as a more accurate measurement of
distance in the current study.
The living population in Kuwait is 4.4 million inhabitants and nearly 98% of the
population is urbanized (CSBK, 2019). The accessibility of malls in Kuwait is highly
dependent on cars. Less developed public transportation in the country, very low gasoline
prices per liter (around $0.342), and a high number of cars per capita (approximately 0.5)
have turned Kuwait into a car-dependent place. However, road traffic jams, which people
would like to avoid, may affect shoppers’ mall’s choice and frequency of visits.
Referring to “Reilly’s Law” of Gravity (1953), shoppers tend to travel long distances to
reach larger SMs as they experience a greater attraction to them. Accordingly, the following
hypothesis is formulated:

H4. Mall size has a greater impact on the frequency of visits than mall distance.
Gender and age Importance of
The literature addresses some differences related to shoppers’ mall preferences and behavior distance and
with regard to age and gender. One of the few studies conducted in Kuwait reveals that
females and younger people tend to favor modern SMs over traditional malls (Bagnied and
attraction
Cader, 2016). Young people value atmospheric experience (Haytko and Baker, 2004; Debek,
2015), aesthetics, and architectural design, while the adults are more interested in the quality
of products, reputable brands (Idoko et al., 2019), convenience and monetary savings (Khare, 227
2011). Youngsters are more likely to look for social and exciting experiences and are oriented
toward feeling gratifying moments and participating in entertaining activities during their
shopping trips (El Hedhli et al., 2016).
Regarding gender differences in mall preferences and behavior, researchers report that
compared to males, females window shop more (Kuruvilla et al., 2009). Further, they value
mall hygiene factors more (Jackson et al., 2011), visit a higher number of stores, go to the
mall more frequently (Bagnied and Cader, 2016), and spend more time on a shopping trip as
they are less prone to look for time-saving mechanisms (Sohail, 2015). Females consider the
shopping process as a leisure activity deriving greater levels of hedonic shopping value
from a mall trip (Jackson et al., 2011), and express more enjoyment than males at the SM
(Haiyan and Jasper, 2004). Females view the shopping process as an interactive social
activity which improves their shopping experience and results in extended shopping time
(Cachero-Martínez and Vazquez-Casielles, 2018).

Mall patronage: frequency of visits and time spent in the shopping mall
Understanding SM patronage is critical for mall managers since they need to identify and
target mall shoppers’ intentions (Calvo-Porral and Lévy-Mangín, 2018). Mall patronage is
relevant to the level of satisfaction and the overall perceived value of the mall shopping
activities.
Researchers have used a variety of operational measures of patronage. The most popular
is the frequency of visits (Gentry and Burns, 1978). Nevertheless, patronizing a mall implies
more than simply visiting a mall frequently. Howell and Rogers (1981) use four measures of
mall patronage such as the number of purchases, frequency of visits, the amount of money
spent over the last three months, and the number of weeks since the last purchase (recency).
However, scholars argue about the impact of purchase recency on mall patronage, since a
shopper may visit a mall only once a year and spend a higher amount of money compared to
someone who visits more frequently and spends less (Kwaitek and Thanasi-Boçe, 2019).
Mall patronage in this study is measured by the frequency of visits since frequent
shoppers can be satisfied more easily (Orozco-Gomez et al., 2017) and time spent in the SM
as it affects consumers’ patronage intentions (Wakefield and Baker, 1998).

Methodology
Sample
Data was gathered during Spring 2019 at five SMs located in different districts of Kuwait.
The data sample was dominated by female respondents (61%). The age of 52% of
respondents was between 18 and 25; 26% were aged between 26 and 35, and 89% of
respondents were Kuwaitis. The selection of SMs was based on their retail space area, and
the largest five were selected for the study [1]. The research population comprised randomly
chosen visitors to SMs. Participants were not remunerated for their participation.
JPMD Measurements
14,2 The survey instrument was used for primary data collection. The research questionnaire
was designed based on previous empirical literature and pre-tested through personal
interviews with marketing students and academic staff before distribution.
A list of thirty-nine mall image attributes was generated based on the literature review.
The items retained were those most represented and validated in previous studies
228 (Appendix). The items were measured on a five-point Likert-type scale (from 1, strongly
disagree to 5, strongly agree), and questions about shopping preferences, driving time
distance, frequency of visits, and time spent per visit were included.
Every questionnaire was personally handed out, and instructions were given to each
respondent before they completed the questionnaire. A total of 250 structured
questionnaires were distributed to respondents and 190 were returned, leading to a response
rate of 76%.
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to evaluate different patterns of SMs’
attractiveness, using STATA 15 (StataCorp, 2017). The scope of this analysis was to
identify how these patterns affect the shoppers’ mall patronage explained by the frequency
of visits and time spent per visit.
There are several approaches available for factor identification in EFA (Schmitt, 2011).
Factors are usually extracted based on a predetermined eigenvalue threshold (above 1;
Kaiser, 1960) with the support of a scree plot analysis which helps in tackling possible
overestimation in a number of factors (Field, 2009). Prior to further analysis, the correlation
matrix was evaluated. All the correlations were within 6 0.3 1 to 6 0.82 range, thus all the
items were retained concluding that multicollinearity was not a threat in this study. Next, to
indicate the suitability of data for structure detection, KMO and Bartlett’s test of sphericity
were performed. KMO is a measure of sampling adequacy which investigates the proportion
of variance in variables that might be caused by underlying factors. With a KMO of 0.78 and
a significant Bartlett’s test, the authors concluded that the data set was acceptable for EFA
(Kaiser, 1974).

Results
In total, five constructs that account for 68% of variance were obtained, namely: PoB, location,
physical atmosphere, entertainment and social activities (Table 1). PoB items explained 39% of
the total variance. Principal component analysis retained three factors but only the first one
was meaningful with a significantly higher coefficient. According to the default mineigen (0)
criterion, a factor must have an eigenvalue greater than zero to be retained. Additionally, the
criterion used in this study to choose the factor is that it must have eigenvalues greater than 1.
The most important determinant for buying performance was the quality of the offered brands.
In addition, luxury brands and the variety of brands were considered more important than
prices, promotions, and loyalty programs offered by the SMs.
The location pattern was defined using the responses to the separate three statements
about the choice of the SM. Through factor analysis, only the first factor was retained
because the eigenvalues associated with the remaining two factors were negative. Overall,
these items explained 18.08% of the total variance.
Among the Physical atmosphere (11.83% of variance) items, the cleanness of the SM
seemed to be the most important determinant factor. The least important was convenient
parking, while most of the SMs have good parking infrastructure in Kuwait.
Entertainment (13.2% of variance) was defined based on the importance of SM amenities.
Among them kid’s entertainment had the lowest indicator that can be explained by the
demographics of our sample who were predominantly youngsters. Overall, 38.5% of the
Item PoB LOC PP ENT SOC
Importance of
distance and
1.Buying performance (PoB) (R2= 0.68) attraction
I choose a SM which has many brands 0.675
I choose a SM where I can find a lot of luxury brands 0.691
I choose a SM which offers high quality of brands 0.732
I choose a SM which offers good prices for me 0.533
I choose a SM which offers a lot of promotions 0.549 229
I choose a SM which offers loyalty programs 0.549
2.Location (LOC) (R2=0.1808)
I choose a SM located where I can find all I need 0.390
I choose a SM which is close to my home 0.807
I choose a SM which I can reach in a short time 0.798
3.Physical Presence (PP) (R2=0.1183)
I choose a SM which has a convenient parking 0.464
I choose a SM which is big enough 0.564
I choose a SM which is nicely designed/has a nice view 0.668
I choose a SM which is clean 0.723
It is important for me to feel secure and safe in a SM 0.491
4.Entertainment (ENT) (R2=0.385)
I choose a SM which has a cinema 0.648
I choose a SM which offers entertainment for me 0.711
I choose a SM which offers entertainment for kids 0.467
I choose a SM which offers a variety of fun and entertainment programs 0.630
5.Social Activities (SOC) (R2=0.1071)
I choose a SM which offers a variety of coffee shops and restaurants 0.575 Table 1.
I choose a SM to celebrate with my family or to meet with friends or colleagues 0.579 Factor analysis with
I choose a SM which is popular 0.608 factor loadings

total variance is explained by all items together. Through factor analysis, only one factor
was retained where the most important determinant variable was entertainment options for
visitors.
Social Activities factor (10.71% of variance) was defined using the responses to the three
statements about why people choose a specific SM. All items were almost equally important.
Regarding the statistics for the frequency of visits, 81% of respondents confirmed they
visit more than one SM every week. However, the decision to visit one mall more frequently
than others was influenced by the shopping needs they had to accomplish. From the data
analysis, shoppers in Kuwait visit malls primarily to buy clothing and accessories (47 %),
second for socializing while frequenting restaurants/bars (42 %) and third for entertainment
(38 %).

Hypotheses testing
Simple linear regression analysis was applied to understand what affects the frequency of
visits to and time spent per visit in a SM (Table 2). In addition to those latent variables that
were created using the EFA, age and gender were included among the explanatory
variables.
Data analysis results show that H1 is fully supported as the frequency of SM visits
significantly depends on buying preferences. Malls with a stronger buying performance
dimension were visited more frequently.
JPMD The social activities factor was significant for the frequency of visits and time shoppers
14,2 spend on a trip. Shoppers prefer to visit and stay longer in SMs that emphasize socializing
especially when they offer a variety of restaurants and coffee bars.
It was surprising that the entertainment factor did not significantly affect any of the
dependent variables. Thus, the second hypothesis was partially supported. The explanation
for this may be that the majority of respondents were young people, keen to explore
230 entertainment options elsewhere rather than in SMs. Moreover, SMs may not have the
entertainment capability to attract young people as malls appeal more to families (Haynes
and Talpade, 1996).
Also, the physical atmosphere factor did not have any significant impact on the
frequency of visits and time spent per visit, indicating that H3 is not supported. However,
the atmosphere can support other attraction dimensions. A well-designed environment,
pleasant music and vivid atmosphere make a mall more appealing, especially for social-
oriented customers.
The factor correlation analysis (Table 3) found that shoppers with a higher emphasis on
the PoB, also choose SMs with a convenient location (r = 0.36, p < 0.05). Those who select a
SM for socializing have a stronger preference for the mall’s atmosphere and spend more time
there per visit.

Dependent Variable Dependent Variable

Frequency of Visits Time Spent per Visit
Factor b Std. Err. P>t b Std. Err. P>t

Physical presence (PP)
0.310 0.297 0.297
0.037 0.075 0.623

Location (LOC) 0.149 0.287 0.605 0.004 0.073 0.951
Performance of buying (PoB) 0.641** 0.286 0.026
0.015 0.073 0.837
Entertainment (ENT)
0.365 0.319 0.254 0.000 0.082 0.997
Social (SOC) 0.752** 0.357 0.037 0.260*** 0.091 0.005
Age
0.606*** 0.217 0.006 0.024 0.055 0.666
Gender 0.973** 0.448 0.031 0.208* 0.114 0.071
Table 2. Notes: *_ statistically significant at 10% significance level; constant was omitted; **_ statistically
Regression analysis significant at 5% significance level; ***_statistically significant at 1% significance level

Construct M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. PoB 0.00 0.90

2. LOC 0.00 0.87 0.36**
3. PP 0.00 0.86 0.41** 0.31**
4. ENT 0.00 0.80 0.29** 0.29** 0.27**
5. SOC 0.00 0.80 0.37** 0.21** 0.36** 0.56**
6. AGE 2.15 0.45
0.09 0.11 0.05
0.26**
0.16**
7. GENDER 0.61 0.49 0.15** 0.03 0.13*
0.01 0.05 0.00
Table 3.
Constructs means Notes: PoB = Performance of Buying; LOC = Location; PP = Physical Presence; ENT = Entertainment;
and correlations SOC = Social activities; **-significant at 95%, *-significant at 90%
Effect of distance Importance of
To investigate the impact of distance on mall choice, respondents were asked about the distance and
number of times per week they visit each of the five SMs included in the study and
the driving time it takes to reach them. When a respondent reported frequency and distance
attraction
(commuting time) for visiting two SMs a week, two observations were considered in the
regression analysis, leading to an increase in the number of visits observed to 569.
Mall size was another pull factor that helped in exploring the relationship between
distance and frequency, assuming that a higher number of retailers offering a higher
231
number of brands operate in a larger retail space. Therefore, the regression analysis
included the retail space in square meters for each SM and concluded that mall size had a
significant impact on mall patronage.
The new regression model analyzed the relationship between explanatory variables,
such as mall dummy variables, distance (measured in commuting time), and the frequency
of visits:

Frequency of visits ¼ b 0 þ b 1 distance þ b 2 Mall1 þ b 3 Mall2 þ b 4 Mall3 þ b 5 Mall4

þu (1)

These variables explained an 8.6% variation in frequency (R2 = 0.086). The distance was
found to be statistically significant ( b = 0.104; p = 0.010). Also, coefficients for three malls,
360 Degrees ( b = 0.336), Avenues ( b = 0.498), and Gate mall ( b = 0.301) were significant
(p < 0.001), meaning that the frequency of visits to these SMs was significantly higher than
to Souq Sharq mall (which was omitted to avoid the dummy variable trap) and Marina mall.
The use of mall dummy variables allowed this study to control for mall-specific effects in the
regression analysis.
Variable distance had three values based on time required to reach SM: up to 20 min, 20–
40 min, and above 40 min. When the commute time was less than 20 min, the estimated
average frequency was 1.37. When it fell between 20 and 40 min, the frequency increased to
1.5, and above 40 min, the frequency was 1.62. These results explain that bigger SMs are
located in more remote areas and the size/retail space matters more for Kuwaitis than the
driving time. Indeed, the size of SMs explained a 4% variation in the frequency of visits,
while distance explained only 1.6% (based on OLS regression R2 results).
The coefficients of the regression analysis demonstrated that the size of SMs is an
important factor. The larger the SM, the more frequently people visit it. Concretely, the
average visits to Avenues (the largest SM in Kuwait, with a retail space of 1,200,000 square
meters) was 1.67, while the frequency of visits to a much smaller retail space, such as Souq
Sharq mall, averaged 1.16.

Gender and age effects

The results of the study reveal that the adults visit SMs less frequently than young people,
but they spend more time per visit in SMs. Similar to Bagnied and Cader’s (2016) results,
females visited SMs more frequently and spent more time there per visit compared to males.
According to the t-test, males’ average frequency was 4.2, while females scored 5.4. This
difference was found to be statistically significant (p = 0.0047). The results would not
change with the assumption that unpaired data had unequal variances.
On average, females placed more value on the mall’s physical atmosphere (p = 0.0385)
and the PoB (p = 0.0174) compared to males. The t-tests showed that the average values of
JPMD the atmosphere and PoB constructs were statistically different depending on gender. All
14,2 other constructs were not significantly different.

Research and managerial implications

This study provides important insights for managers of SMs. First, it confirms that the size
of a SM is more important than the perceived distance to the mall. In this sense, it can be
232 noted that bigger is better, according to Reilly’s gravity theory. Shoppers do not consider
distance as a barrier to visiting a mall when its bigger size has the potential to provide a
superior set of benefits for them. Perceived distance describes customers’ experience with a
SM more accurately than geographical distance.
Of course, the physical expansion of a SM may not always be feasible, and this study
encourages SM managers to provide a rich tenant-mix to increase the perceived size of the
mall in such circumstances. A few small malls such as Bairaq, Sama, 89, Arabia and Aliwan
malls are located very close to Gate Mall, which is a recently developed (in 2014), modern,
and well-designed mall, with the highest zone gravity. In such a situation, the lesson enacted
by these mall developers is that size and a well-planned location are crucial, while other mall
managers must learn to survive by differentiating themselves based on the quality of their
tenant mix and developing attractive mall amenities.
Second, the managers can focus on the determination of the retail trade area to design
effective marketing mix strategies. Since both size and location factors affect SM patronage,
although the study emphasizes the importance of mall’s size over distance, mall developers
should consider optimizing retail locations and sizes of SMs to achieve the optimal retail
trade area. This recommendation is in line with Kalvo and Sevtsuk’s (2017) study which
reveals that “location and size adjustments to already planned retail centers in a town can
yield a 10% increase in estimated store visits” (p. 508).
Third, the social activities at a SM affect the frequency of visits and time spent the most.
Spending time with friends and family members while dining is a key factor for Kuwaiti
customers in this regard. Though it may sound cliché, to boost shopping performance,
managers need to deliver a pleasant and engaging atmosphere that goes beyond the pure
shopping experience. More specifically, SM managers are encouraged to respond to social
cues with marketing communication rather than trying to foster brand-customer
communication.
Through exploring gender differences, the results reveal that females in Kuwait visit
SMs more frequently than males, spend more time per visit and get more involved in social
activities while shopping. For this group of shoppers, mall and store managers are
encouraged to incentivize impulse purchasing. Lee et al. (2005) argue that shopping is often
conducted in pairs or groups, and males represent a group that is more difficult to satisfy in
this regard. Consequently, managers need to better understand male shoppers’ behavior and
use adequate strategies to gain their patronage.
Another implication relates to the impact of the age factor on mall patronage. Although
approximately 45% of Kuwait’s population is aged between 20 and 39 with a high slope
towards purchasing international brands in SMs (Mordor Intelligence, 2019), this study
reveals that SMs in Kuwait do not exhibit entertainment capability to attract youngsters. In
this regard, mall managers are encouraged to expand their retail space or redesign it to
improve the attractiveness of the entertainment component and satisfy the hedonic needs of
this promising category of shoppers.
Interestingly, the physical atmosphere of a SM did not affect customers’ choices. This
finding is in line with the previously reported low impact of a mall’s physical features and
its facilities on mall choices for young people (Can et al., 2016). Atmosphere is treated as a Importance of
hygienic, while customers simply expect all malls to be hygienic and safe. distance and
Customers are far more interested in the quality of merchandise and variety of brands
than the mall design. Moreover, shoppers place more importance on quality than price,
attraction
indicating that the success of SMs depends on the choice of tenant mix and their careful
selection of brands.
Finally, these findings can be used by researchers to confirm the factors extracted in the
study and to progress research on the topic. This work extends existing theory in
233
understanding and conceptualizing mall consumers’ choices based on their overall
experience in the retail space.

Conclusion
This study makes an important contribution to retail literature in an understudied context
like Kuwait, analyzing a set of factors that create the basis for malls to thrive. This is a call
for investors to estimate and embrace this opportunity, leading to a higher potentiality for
the economic development of the country.
Linking theory to practice, the study establishes mall attractiveness factors and
examines the relationship between mall dimensions and patronage. On a practical level,
understanding what consumers in Kuwait value most when visiting a SM should encourage
mall managers to develop certain mall characteristics and shopping environment attributes
that comply with Kuwait’s culture, with a greater emphasis on social shopping.
Another aspect highlighted in this study is that SMs in Kuwait are places where gender
relations develop. Providing further analysis of gender-based differences related to mall
preferences and behavior would support mall managers’ decisions in developing strategies
that generate greater value perception from different genders.
The examination of mall size and distance impact on mall patronage provides insights
for mall developers in related decisions. The findings reveal that mall size is more important
than location and perceived distance in this context. Longer commute time will not affect
shopper decision to visit a mall if a mall’s retail space provides a pleasurable overall
experience. Developing relatively small-sized malls is not recommended unless the mall
differentiates its attraction attributes significantly in a highly competitive environment.

Limitations and future research

Mall patronage in the study was explained by the frequency of visits and time spent per
visit only. Theoretically, it would have been richer and operationally more meaningful and
reliable if other indicators were considered in measuring mall patronage (e.g. mall patronage
intentions). It is essential to note that the frequency of visits is a construct that measures
shoppers’ past behavior, while mall patronage presents current and future behavior.
Although the shoppers’ future behavior can be based on the analysis of their past behavior,
more accurate results could be attained if shoppers reported their intended purchase
behavior.
Apart from gravitational factors, other shopping motives could be used to explain mall
patronage behavior. For example, a utilitarian shopper’s prime motive to visit a mall might
be their patronage to one of the mall’s anchor stores and this would affect the frequency of
their visits to that mall.
Another potential limitation is that this study relies on the self-reporting of participants
about their perceptions of mall attraction factors in general, which may have caused various
biases.
JPMD To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study in Kuwait that incorporates
14,2 mall attraction dimensions and situational factors to explain shoppers’ mall patronage.
Although the results can be applied in most Middle East countries, researchers and
managers should be prudent when generalizing the findings due to the small sample size
and the study’s singular country context. Researchers are encouraged to examine the
resulting factors and analyze relationships in other contexts.
234
Note
1. Al Kout mall, 300000 sqm of retail space was under construction at the time of this survey.

References
Ahmad, A.E.M.K. (2012), “Attractiveness factors influencing shoppers’ satisfaction, loyalty, and word
of mouth: an empirical investigation of Saudi Arabia shopping malls”, International Journal of
Business Administration, Vol. 3 No. 6, pp. 101-112.
Al-Otaibi, O. (2005), “The development of planned shopping centres in Kuwait”, Retailing
Environments in Developing Countries, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 109-131.
Aliagha, G.U., Qin, Y.G., Ali, K.N. and Abdullah, M.N. (2015), “Analysis of shopping mall attractiveness
and customer loyalty”, Jurnal Teknologi, Vol. 74 No. 2, pp. 15-21.
Bagnied, M. and Cader, H. (2016), “Shopping malls and commercial strips: an examination of factors
affecting shoppers’ behavior in Kuwait”, International Journal of Leisure and Tourism
Marketing, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 66-78.
Baker, J. and Wakefield, K.L. (2012), “How consumer shopping orientation influences perceived
crowding, excitement, and stress at the mall”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 40 No. 6, pp. 791-806.
Cachero-Martínez, S. and Vazquez-Casielles, R. (2018), “Developing the marketing experience to
increase shopping time: the moderating effect of visit frequency”, Administrative Sciences, Vol. 8
No. 4, pp. 77-98.
Calvo-Porral, C. and Lévy-Mangín, J.P. (2018), “Pull factors of the shopping malls: an empirical study”,
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 110-124.
Can, G.F., Kurtulmusoglu, F.B. and Atalay, K.D. (2016), “A case study on shopping malls attributes for
young consumers”, Young Consumers, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 274-292.
Chebat, J.C., Sirgy, M.J. and Grzeskowiak, S. (2010), “How can shopping mall management best capture
mall image?”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 63 No. 7, pp. 735-740.
Davies, R.L. and Rogers, D.S. (1984), Store Location and Store Assessment Research, John Wiley and
Sons Ltd.
De Juan Vigaray, M.D. (2004), “Why do people choose shopping malls? The attraction theory
revisited: a spanish case”, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 1,
pp. 71-96.
Debek, M. (2015), “What drives shopping mall attractiveness?”, Polish Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 67-118.
El Hedhli, K., Zourrig, H. and Chebat, J.C. (2016), “Shopping well-being: is it just a matter of pleasure or
doing the task? The role of shopper’s gender and self-congruity”, Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, Vol. 31, pp. 1-13.
El-Aldy, M.I. and Eid, R. (2017), “Dimensions of the perceived value of malls: Muslim shoppers’
perspective”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 45 No. 1,
pp. 40-56.
ELSamen, A.A.A. and Hiyasat, R.I. (2017), “Beyond the random location of shopping malls: a GIS Importance of
perspective in”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Amman, Jordan, Vol. 34, pp. 30-37.
distance and
Field, A. (2009), Discovering Statistics Using SPSS: Introducing Statistical Method, 3rd ed., Sage
Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
attraction
Finn, A. and Louviere, J.J. (1996), “Shopping center image, consideration, and choice: anchor store
contribution”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 241-251.
Frasquet, M., Vallet, T. and Gil, I. (2002), “Key factors in shopping Centre management: evidence from
Spain”, the international review of retail”, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 12 No. 4,
235
pp. 337-354.
Gentry, J.W. and Burns, A.C. (1978), “How ‘important’ are evaluative criteria in shopping center
patronage?”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 73-85.
Gilboa, S., Vilnai, -Yavetz, I. and Chebat, J.C. (2016), “Capturing the multiple facets of mall experience:
developing and validating a scale”, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 48-59.
Gonzalez-Hernandez, E.M. and Orozco-Gomez, M. (2012), “A segmentation study of Mexican consumers
based on shopping centre attractiveness”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, Vol. 40 No. 10, pp. 759-777.
Granbois, D.H. (1977), “Shopping behavior and preferences”, Selected Aspects of Consumer Behavior,
National Science Foundation, Washington, DC. pp. 259-298.
Haiyan, H. and Jasper, C. (2004), “Men and women: a comparison of shopping mall behavior”, Journal of
Shopping Center Research, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 114-131.
Haynes, J. and Talpade, S. (1996), “Does entertainment draw shoppers? The effects of entertainment
centers on shopping behaviors in malls”, Journal of Shopping Center Research, Vol. 32 No. 2,
pp. 29-48.
Haytko, D.L. and Baker, J. (2004), “It’s all at the mall: exploring adolescent girls’ experiences”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 80 No. 1, pp. 67-83.
Heide, M. and Grønhaug, K. (2006), “Atmosphere: conceptual issues and implications for hospitality
management”, Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 271-286.
Howell, R.D. and Rogers, J.D. (1981), “Research into shopping mall choice behavior”, ACR North
American Advances, Vol. 8, pp. 671-676.
Idoko, E.C., Ukenna, S.I. and Obeta, C.E. (2019), “Determinants of shopping mall patronage frequency in
a developing economy: evidence from nigerian mall shoppers”, Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, Vol. 48, pp. 186-201.
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.
Kalvo, R. and Sevtsuk, (2018), “Patronage of urban commercial clusters: a network-based extension of
the huff model for balancing location and size”, Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics
and City Science, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 508-528.
Kaiser, H.F. (1960), “The application of electronic computers to factor analysis”, Educational and
Psychological Measurement, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 141-151.
Kaiser, H.F. (1974), “An index of factorial simplicity”, Psychometrika, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 31-36.
Khare, A. (2011), “Mall shopping behavior of indian small-town consumers”, Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 110-118.
Khare, A., Awasthi, G. and Shukla, R.P. (2019), “Do mall events affect mall traffic and image? A
qualitative study of Indian mall retailers”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics,
Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 343-365.
Kim, S.S. and Han, J.J. (2019), “The effects of fit between complex shopping mall and restaurant on store
loyalty: focus on mediating role of the store engagement”, Culinary Science and Hospitality
Research, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 12-20.
JPMD Koksal, H. (2019), “Shopping motives, mall attractiveness, and visiting patterns in shopping malls in
the Middle east: a segmentation approach”, Contemporary Management Research, Vol. 15 No. 1,
14,2 pp. 1-23.
Kuruvilla, S.J., Joshi, N. and Shah, N. (2009), “Do men and women really shop differently? An
exploration of gender differences in mall shopping in India”, International Journal of Consumer
Studies, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 715-723.
236 Lee, S.L., Ibrahim, M.F. and Hsueh-Shan, C. (2005), “Shopping-centre attributes affecting male shopping
behavior”, Journal of Retail and Leisure Property, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 324-340.
Marmore-Mena Intelligence (2019), “Kuwait retail sector positioned for significant growth”, available
at: marmoremena.com. (accessed 21 August 2020).
Mittal, A. and Jhamb, D. (2016), “Determinants of SM attractiveness: the Indian context”, Procedia
Economics and Finance, Vol. 37, pp. 386-390.
Mohammad Shafiee, M. and Es-Haghi, S.M.S. (2017), “Mall image, shopping well-being, and mall
loyalty”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 45 No. 1,
pp. 1114-1134.
Mordor Intelligence (2019), “Retail industry in Kuwait – Growth, trends, and forecasts (2020– 2025)”,
available at: www.mordorintelligence.com. (accessed 21 August 2020).
Ng, K.Y. (2013), “Shopper typology on the relationship between shopping mall attractiveness and
shopper patronage”, ASEAN Journal on Hospitality and Tourism, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 141-162.
Orozco-Gomez, M.M., Gonzalez, E.M. and Rialp, J. (2017), “Impact of the attractiveness of a shopping
center in the consumer satisfaction: the moderator role of the motivations and the frequency of
visits”, in Becerra, E.P., Chitturi, R., Henriquez Daza, M.C., Roldan, JCL. (Eds), LA – Latin
American Advances in Consumer Research, Association for Consumer Research, Duluth, MN
Vol. 4, pp. 120-121.
Ortegon-Cortazar, L. and Royo-Vela, M. (2017), “Attraction factors of shopping centers”, European
Journal of Management and Business Economics, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 199-219.
Rousseau, G.G. and Venter, D.J.L. (2014), “Mall shopping preferences and patronage of mature
shoppers”, Journal of Industrial Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 1-12.
Schmitt, T. (2011), “Current methodological considerations in exploratory and confirmatory factor
analysis”, Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 304-321.
Singh, H. and Prashar, S. (2013), “Factors defining shopping experience: an analytical study of Dubai”,
Asian Journal of Business Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 36-51.
Sit, J., Merrilees, B. and Birch, D. (2003), “Entertainment-seeking shopping centre patrons: the missing
segments”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 80-94.
Sohail, M.S. (2015), “Gender differences in mall shopping: a study of shopping behaviour of an
emerging nation”, Journal of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour in Emerging Markets, Vol. 1
No. 1, pp. 36-46.
StataCorp (2017), Stata Statistical Software: Release 15, StataCorp LLC, College Station, TX.
Stoltman, J.J., Gentry, J.W. and Anglin, K.A. (1991), “Shopping choices: the case of mall choice”, in
Holman RH. and Solomon, Michael R. (Eds), NA – Advances in Consumer Research, Association
for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, Vol. 18, pp. 434-440.
Teller, C. and Reutterer, T. (2008), “The evolving concept of retail attractiveness: what makes retail
agglomerations attractive when customers shop at them?”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 127.143.
Teller, C. and Schnedlitz, P. (2012), “Drivers of agglomeration effects in retailing: the shopping mall
tenant’s perspective”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 28 No. 9-10, pp. 1043-1061.
Wakefield, K.L. and Baker, J. (1998), “Excitement at the mall: determinants and effects on shopping
response”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 74 No. 4, pp. 515--539.
Wong, S.C. and Nair, P.B. (2018), “Mall patronage: dimensions of attractiveness in urban context”, Importance of
International Journal of Business and Society, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 281-294.
distance and
Further reading attraction
Gomes, R.M. and Paula, F. (2017), “Shopping mall image: systematic review of 40 years of research”,
The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 1-27.
No
Reilly, W.J. (1931), The Law of Retail Gravitation, Pillsbury Publishers: New York, NY.
237
Rogers, D.S. (1984), Store Location and Store Assessment Research, John Wiley and Sons New York, NY.
Redefining the concept of malls to drive footfalls and accommodate a dynamic retail landscape (2019),
2nd Annual Mall Middle East Conference, April, Dubai, pp. 16-18, available at: www.iqpc.com/
events-mallsmiddleeast/
JPMD Appendix
14,2
Gonzalez-
Hernandez
De Juan and Orozco- Mittal and Teller and Rousseau Singh and
Mall attractiveness Ahmad Vigaray, Gomez Jhamb Sit et al. Reutterer and Venter Prashar
attributes (2012) (2004) (2012) (2016) (2003) (2008) (2014) (2013)
238
Variety of brands and        
product assortment
Prestigious brands 
Quality of      
merchandise
Good prices       
Promotional       
campaigns
Availability of loyalty   
programs
Mall accessibility and        
location
Cleanness     
Safeness     
Nice design/view     
Mall size    
Convenient parking        
Variety of     
entertainment
programs
Existence of fun   
space for kids
Presence of cinemas   
in the mall
Variety of coffee     
shops and restaurants
Table A1. Popularity of the mall   
Source of scales Mall atmosphere  

Corresponding author
Marsela Thanasi-Boçe can be contacted at: Marsela.Thanasi@aum.edu.kw

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
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further
reproduction prohibited without permission.