Factors Affecting the Extent of Buying Behavior among Male and Female

College Students in Calapan City

A Research paper

Presented

To the Inquiries, Investigation, and Immersion

In Partial Fulfillment of

The subject Inquiries Investigation and Immersion

Angelyn Kristine Baylon

Hansriel Blanco

Jan Christian Babao

February 2023
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Background of the Study

Buying behavior is the selecting, purchasing, using, or disposing of products, service and

ideas or experience by individuals, group, and organizations to meet their needs and desires

(Solomon 2006). Consumers will make decisions based on price and quality. Tastes and preferences

are generally inferred from observing the quality of the product in the consumer (Karen

Gibler,2003).

According to Collins Marfo Agyeman (2014) Consumers are increasing and are willing to pay

more for products. An increasing number of consumers who prefer and are willing to buy these

products are undergoing the buying process. Consumers have different buying habits, and these

habits are constantly changing because of having the best alternatives to choose from. (Kotler,2015).

Buying behavior is affected by social factors such as reference groups, family etc. and the

family members are the most influential reference group for an individual’s decision making with an

emphasis on the purchase of certain goods and services (Keller,2015).

Hair, Lamb, and McDaniel (2012) explained that consumer buying behavior describes how

consumers make purchasing decisions and how they use the purchased products. Consumer buying

behavior involves a long process where the consumer must identify the product, study it carefully

and decide whether to buy it or not.

Price, brand, and quality are commonly cited as the primary factors that influence

consumers’ buying decisions. Price refers to the cost of a product, while brand relates to the

reputation and image of a company, and quality pertains to the perceived excellence of a product.

Understanding how these factors affect the buying behavior of college students can help businesses

develop effective marketing strategies that target this demographic. (Schittman, et.al 2010).
 Additionally, impulsiveness is a behavior that is often associated with college students.

Impulsive buying refers to the tendency to make unplanned purchases without considering the

consequences. By studying the relationship between impulsiveness and buying behavior, this

research can provide insights into the buying habits of college students and how businesses can

appeal to this behavior (Rook,1987).

Chae, (2011) Women consider shopping as a fun activity. They tend to enjoy spending time

in the store comparing the prices, styles, and qualities before they choose the one, they like the

most. While men in contrast, are a shopper who tend to get in and out as quick as possible. Men go

shopping because they need something. When they go to the store, they tend to buy the product

directly rather than spending time walking around the store.

(Markus, 1989) Differences when it comes to thinking, reasoning and perceiving things

always occur depending on a person. Gender must have to do with it as well since there are some

natural behaviors and feelings between men and women. Students are the best example of people

who are of the age that they need to decide on their own. They tend to experience the reality of life

and sometimes rely on their own decision making. Researchers can gain a deeper understanding of

the buying behavior among male and female college students to have a better understanding to

their needs, preferences, and decision-making processes. This knowledge can inform marketing

strategies, which can help businesses develop more effective marketing strategies.

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to determine the comparative between the buying behavior of male and female

college students.

Specially, it seeks to fine answer to the following questions:

1.What is the level of Buying behavior among Male College students in terms of.

a. Social
 b. personal

c. Psychological

2.What is the level of Buying behavior among Female College students in terms of.

a. Social

b. personal

c. Psychological

3.Is there a significant difference between the level of buying behavior of male and

female college student

Theoretical Framework

Social
Self Learning
Concept Theory
Decision-making theory

The theories discussed in this response, such as social learning theory, self-concept theory,

and gender schema theory, provide a framework for understanding how gender influences buying

behavior.

Social Learning Theory

Social Learning Theory was developed by Canadian psychologist Albert Bandura in 1970.

Bandura proposed that people learn by observing and imitating the behaviors of others in their
social environment. According to social learning theory, males and females learn their gender roles

from their social environment, and this influences their buying behavior (Bandura, 1977).

This theory provides a framework for understanding how people acquire new behaviors,

attitudes, and beliefs through observation, modeling, and reinforcement. It suggests that individuals

learn not only from direct experience but also from the observation of others. (Albert

Bandura,1971). In this theory, the emphasis is on the social context in which learning occurs, as well

as on the cognitive processes that enable individuals to learn from observation. (Bandura, A. 1977)

Self-Concept Theory

Self-Concept Theory was developed by Russell Belk, a marketing scholar, in collaboration

with Hedwig Peelen and Güliz Ger, in the late 1980s.The self-concept influences consumer behavior

by affecting the consumer’s perception of products and services.(Solomon & Dahl ,2014).This theory

explains that individuals have a self-concept, which is the sum total of their beliefs, feelings, and

attitudes about themselves.(Bem, 1972).Gender is an important part of an individual’s self-concept

and influences their buying behavior (Sirgy et al., 2000).Self-concept theory is important for

understanding consumer behavior, as individuals often use products and brands to express and

reinforce their self-concept.

Self-concept theory in buying behavior provides a framework for understanding how

consumers’ self-image and self-esteem influence their purchasing decisions. Consumers who see

themselves as environmentally conscious may be more likely to purchase eco-friendly products to

reinforce their self-concept (Bamberg & Möser, 2007). Consumers who have a self-concept of being

adventurous may be more likely to purchase products that they perceive as risky or exciting

(Puccinelli et al., 2013).

Decision-making theory
 Decision-making theory was founded by Herbert A. Simon in the 1950s. In 1955, proposed a

new way of thinking about decision-making that emphasized the cognitive processes involved in

making choice that it challenged the prevailing view of decision-making as a purely rational and

logical process and instead emphasized the role of psychological factors such as bounded rationality,

heuristics, and biases. To understand how people make choices in a wide variety of contexts, from

everyday life to high-stakes business and policy decisions.

Decision-making theory provides a framework for understanding how individuals, groups,

and organizations make choices in various contexts. It seeks to explain the cognitive, social, and

environmental factors that influence decision-making processes. This suggests that decision-making

processes should consider the cognitive limitations of decision-makers and focus on finding “good

enough” solutions rather than seeking perfection .

Conceptual Framework

Buying Behavior of Male Buying Behavior of Female

College students College students

Figure 1: Comparative between the buying behavior of male and female college students

The Conceptual Framework shows the variables of the study. The two headed arrow

indicate the difference between the Level of buying behavior of male and the Level of

buying behavior of female college students.

Statement of Hypothesis

Based on the problem, it hypothesized that.

1.There is no significant difference between the buying behavior of male and female college

students

Scope and delimitation

The present study aims to investigate difference in the buying behavior of male and female

college students. This study was conducted in Calapan City during the Second Semester of the school

year 2022-2023. The method though survey questionnaire employed for the present study was

simple random sampling.

Significance of the study

Knowing how someone perceives and behaves in a situation will be a guide for future

scenarios in life like buying goods and services. The study will be beneficial for the following:

Financial Management can apply to both genders equally. While there may be variations in
individual preferences and spending habits, the principles of financial management are universally
applicable and can benefit all college students, regardless of their gender.
Business Owners, aim to understand their target audience, adapt their strategies. Competitive
pricing strategies can make their products or services more affordable and attractive to college
students. Offering student discounts or special promotions can encourage both male and female
students to choose their business over competitors, influencing their buying behavior.
Definition of term

There are terms that are used in this study to make it more understandable and easier to

understand:

Buying Behavior – the decisions and actions of people who buy and use items.

Social Factor – are those causes that affect an individual through social support, social networking,

and so on.

Personal Factor- a characteristic such as age, gender, sociocultural identification, organic systems,

abilities, and so on.

Psychological Factor- are aspects of your personality that limit or increase your ability to think .

CHAPTER 2

Review of Related Literature

According to Schiffman & Kanuk (2010). This explores the psychological, social, and

cultural factors that influence consumer behavior, including perception, motivation,

learning, attitudes, and personality This implies that the understanding of these factors can

help marketers to design products and services that meet consumers’ needs and

preferences.

According to Solomon, (2019) that the comprehensive overview of consumer

behavior, including how consumers make decisions, the influence of culture and social

factors on buying behavior, and the role of marketing in shaping consumer attitudes and

perceptions. This implies that the marketers can use this knowledge to develop more

effective marketing campaigns and product strategies that resonate with their target

audience.

According to Dellaer & Van Soest (1998), that the consumer decision-making, finding

that consumers are less likely to choose complex products and are more likely to make

trade-offs between different attributes of a product. This implies that the marketers should

design products that are easy to understand and use and should provide clear information

about product attributes to help consumers make informed choices.

According to a study by Cialdini and Goldstein (2004), people are more likely to buy a

product or service when they see others doing the same. This phenomenon is known as

social proof, and it is a powerful force in shaping consumer behavior. Social proof can take

many forms, including customer testimonials, celebrity endorsements, and online reviews.
 This implies that the companies can use social proof to influence consumer behavior

by highlighting positive reviews, showcasing customer testimonials, and leveraging the

power of social media influencers. It is important to note, however, that social proof can

work in the opposite direction if negative reviews or comments are more prevalent.

According to a study by Aaker and Benet-Martinez (2001), personality traits can

influence consumer behavior. For example, individuals who score high on measures of

openness to experience may be more likely to try new products and engage in experiential

consumption, while those who score high on measures of conscientiousness may be more

likely to engage in careful research and decision-making before making a purchase.

This implies that the companies can use personality traits to develop marketing

strategies that appeal to different consumer segments. For example, a company may target

consumers who score high on openness to experience unique and innovative product

offerings, while targeting consumers who score high on conscientiousness with detailed

product information and reviews. However, it is important to note that not all consumers fit

neatly into personality categories, and individual differences should be considered when

developing marketing strategies.

According to a study by Schiffman and Kanuk (2007), consumers are more likely to

buy products that fulfill their higher-level needs, such as esteem and self-actualization once

their basic needs have been met. For example, a person who has access to food and shelter

may be more likely to purchase luxury items or experiences that fulfill their higher-level

needs for self-expression and personal growth This implies that the companies can use

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs to develop marketing strategies that appeal to consumers’

higher-level needs. However, it is important for companies to also consider consumers’

lower-level needs, such as safety and physiological needs, when developing marketing

strategies
 Chapter 3

Research Methodology

This chapter presents the design and method which were used in the present study.

Research Design

This study employed descriptive-comparative research, Descriptive comparative

design is an appropriate choice when the research aims to identify the similarities and
differences between the two variables. This is most used method to determine the
difference between the buying behaviour among Male and Female college students.

Respondents of the Study:

The study will use ninety (90) college students to meet the objective of the study.

Gender Total population Sample size

Male 45 37

Female 45 37

Total 90 74

Research Instrument

The instrument which was evaluate and measure the level of difference between

buying behaviour among male and female is survey questionnaires. Because these popular

research methods offer a fast, efficient, and inexpensive means of gathering large amounts

of information from size sample volumes. The tools effective for measuring subject

behavior, preferences, intentions, attitudes, and opinions.

The questionnaire focuses on the factors that affecting the Extent of buying

behaviour in terms of Social, Personal, Psychological Factor,10 items per factors that is
affecting the buying behavior among male and female College students. The questionnaire

focuses on the buying behavior of Male and Female college students, the 4-point scale

ranging from 1-never to 4-always.

Mean Range Verbal interpretation

4- Always

3- Often

2- Sometimes

1- Never

Reliability and validity of the instruments

The reliability of the survey questionnaire with 4-point Likert scaling was computed and

analyzed using the Cronbach’s alpha. Cronbach’s alpha is a measure of internal consistency, that is,

how closely related a set of items are as a group. The higher a coefficient, the more the items have

shared covariance and probably measure the same underlying concept which means that there is

consistency among survey items. The computed alpha, a, coefficient of each part of the survey

questionnaire is shown in the table below (DeVellis, R. F. (2016)

Table 1

Reliability of the Questionnaire

Variable Cronbach’s Alpha Verbal Interpretation

Independent variable 0.782456 Acceptable
(social, personal,
psychological)

The results shows that Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is 0.782456 indicating that the
questionnaire measure the buying behavior of male and female has good internal
consistency which means that the questionnaire is reliable.
Data Gathering Procedure
After permission was sought, and after the reliability was tested, the researcher
administered the survey questionnaire to the seventy-four respondents. Directions were
clearly explained. No time limit was given to answer the survey questionnaire.

Statistical Treatment of Data

Data gathered were tabulated, tallied, and analyzed. Analysis of data was guided by
numerical computations in descriptive statistics such as percentages and weighted mean.

The Likert scaling method of scaling technique assigned a scale value to each of the
options and was used to describe the level of buying behavior in terms of social, person,
psychological.

In determining the degree of difference between the Level of buying behavior in

terms of social, person, psychological, multiple regression analysis was used. The Mega Stat
and Data Analysis Add-ins in the Microsoft Excel in which the formula for the T-test
independent. This analysis is used to compare 2sets of data from 1set of respondents.

The following are the statistical tool formulas used in the study:

Were.

x̄1 = Observed Mean of 1st Sample

x̄2 = Observed Mean of 2nd Sample

s1 = Standard Deviation of 1st Sample

s2= Standard Deviation of 2nd Sample

n1 = Size of 1st Sample

n2 = Size of 2nd Sample

 Chapter 4
Results and Discussion

This chapter presents the analysis and interpretation of data gathered. Each group of

data was analyzed and interpreted based on the problem raised in the problem, with the

corresponding tables presented sequentially to give clarity on the day presentation analysis.

Table 2

Level of Buying behavior among male College students

1.What is the level of Buying behavior among male college students in terms of?

Variable Mean Interpretation

Social Factor 2.73 Often/moderate
Personal Factor 3.03 Always /high
Psychological Factor 2.96 Always /high
Overall 2.91 Often /moderate

Table 1 shows the level of buying behavior among male’s college students in terms

of social, personal, and psychological factors with the overall mean of 2.91 interpreted as

“often”. This means that the male college students exhibit a moderate frequency level of

buying behavior. In terms of social factors, they are not influenced or affected by what they

see, and in terms of personal and psychological factors they don’t care about their body,

what they wear and the color of their skin (Belk R.,2013).

Table 3

Level of Buying behavior of female college students

2.What is the level of Buying behavior among female college students in terms of?

Variable Mean Interpretation

Social Factor 2.91 Often /moderate
Personal Factor 3.19 Always /high
Psychological Factor 3.11 Always /high
Overall Mean 3.07 Always /high
 Table 2 shows the level of buying behavior among female’s college students in terms
of social, personal, and psychological factors with the overall mean of 3.07 interpreted as
“always”. This means that female college students consistently exhibit a high level of buying
behavior. In terms of social factors, the female college students is sociable, in terms of
personal factors female college have a lot of self-interest, and in terms of psychological
factors they want to enhance or to improve more themselves. (Bonoma & Sirgy, 1985).
Table 4

Significant difference between the buying behavior among male and female college

students

3.Is there significant difference between the level of buying behavior of male and female

college students?

Variable Alpha df P- Critical Computed Interpretation

value t t
Level of buying behavior among 5% 88 0.0901 2.0017 -1.7236 No significant
male and female college difference
students

The table showed the comparison between the level of buying behavior of male and female college

students.

Since the absolute computed t-value |-1.7236| is less than the absolute critical t-value |

2.0017| and the p-value 0.0901 is greater than the level of significance of 0.05 with 88 degrees of

freedom, the null hypothesis failed to be rejected. Therefore, there is no significant difference in the

level of buying behavior among male and female college students. This means that most of the time,

they based on their need as college students.

 Chapter 5
Summary, Conclusion, and Recommendation

Summary of Findings

1. Personal and Psychological factors is in high and Social Factors is moderate, overall is moderate

frequency or interpreted as “often.”

2.Personal and psychological factors are high and social factors are moderate, overall is high. This

means that female college students consistently exhibit high level of buying behavior.

3. Significant difference between the buying behavior of male and female college student. This study

suggests that there is not statistically significant though may evidently be a difference in mean.

Conclusion

1.Male interpreted as moderate. This means that they are not influenced or affected by what they

see, and they don’t care about their body, what they wear and the color of their skin.

2.Female is in high level of buying behavior. This means that they are sociable, have a lot of self-

interest, and they want to enhance or to improve themselves more.

3.No difference, as college students they have no significant difference in buying behavior

referring to their needs as students.

Recommendations

1. Business owners can recommend clothing, personal care, gadgets, sports and tools

equipment that male college students may like to buy

2. To maintain the high level of buying behavior among female college students business

owners might focus on female college needs, and provide excellent customer experienced,

and building meaningful connections, businesses can foster long-term loyalty and

engagement.
3.Maintaining the buying behavior of male and female college students requires a deep

understanding of their needs, preferences, and the ability to adapt to their changing

expectations. By implementing these strategies, business owners can foster brand loyalty

and long-term engagement with both male and female college students.
 References

Agyeman, C. M. (2014). Consumers’ buying behavior towards green products: An

exploratory study. International journal of management research and business strategy,
3(1), 188-197.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.

Belk, R. W. (2014). Extended self in a digital world. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3),
477-500.

Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological
Review, 88(4), 354-364.

Dellaert, B.G.C., Donkers, B., & van Soest, A. (1998). Complexity effects in consumer choice
behavior: A parametric approach. Journal of Marketing Research, 35(1), 79-93.

Gibler, K., & Nelson, S. (2003). Consumer behavior applications to real estate education.
Journal of Real Estate Practice and Education, 6(1), 63-83.

Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online

Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1).

Hogg, M., Askegaard, S., Bamossy, G., & Solomon, M. (2006). Consumer behaviour.

Huddleston, P. (2011). Consumer behavior: women and shopping. Business Expert Press.

Keller, K. L., & Kotler, P. (2015). Holistic marketing: a broad, integrated perspective to
marketing management. In Does Marketing Need Reform? Fresh Perspectives on the Future
(pp. 308-313). Routledge.

Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Kotler, P., Burton, S., Deans, K., Brown, L., & Armstrong, G. (2015). Marketing. Pearson
Higher Education AU.

Lamb, C. W., Hair, J. F., & McDaniel, C. (2012). Marketing. Cengage Learning.
Laroche, M., Teng, L., Lee, S., & Li, Y. (2001). The influence of culture and gender on
consumer responses to marketing stimuli: A cross-cultural study of white and Asian
Canadian consumers. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 14(2), 5-30.

Markus, H., & Oyserman, D. (1989). Gender and thought: The role of the self-concept.
Gender and thought: Psychological perspectives, 100-127.

Puccinelli, N. M., Goodstein, R. C., Grewal, D., Price, R., Raghubir, P., & Stewart, D. (2009).
Customer experience management in retailing: Understanding the buying process. Journal
of Retailing, 85(1), 15-30.

Rook, D. W., & Fisher, R. J. (1995). Normative influences impulsive buying behavior. Journal
of consumer research, 22(3), 305-313.

Schiffman, L. G., Kanuk, L. L., & Kumar, S. R. (1951). Consumer. Marketing.

Sharma, S., Shimp, T. A., & Shin, J. (2012). The influence of gender on consumer
socialization: A social learning theory perspective. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 29(2),
118-129.

Solomon, M. R., & Behavior, C. (1994). Buying, having and being. London: Prenticle Hall.

Solomon, M. R., Russell-Bennett, R., & Previte, J. (2012). Consumer behavior. Frenchs Forest,
NSW: Pearson Australia.

Solomon, M.R. (2019). Consumer behavior: Buying, having, and being. Pearson Education.

Schiffman, L.G. & Kanuk, L.L. (2010). Consumer behavior. Pearson Education.