Marketing Intelligence & Planning

Shopping value and patronage: when satisfaction and crowding count

Tapas Ranjan Moharana, Debasis Pradhan,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

Tapas Ranjan Moharana, Debasis Pradhan, (2019) "Shopping value and patronage: when
satisfaction and crowding count", Marketing Intelligence & Planning, https://doi.org/10.1108/
MIP-07-2018-0264
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-07-2018-0264
Downloaded on: 26 June 2019, At: 00:42 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 42 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:267154 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-4503.htm

Shopping
Shopping value and patronage: value and
when satisfaction and patronage

crowding count
Tapas Ranjan Moharana and Debasis Pradhan
Department of Marketing, Xavier School of Management, XLRI, Jamshedpur, India
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

Received 11 April 2018

Revised 12 July 2018
Abstract 10 September 2018
23 November 2018
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to compare two competing models denoting two dimensions 13 February 2019
(hedonic and utilitarian) and three dimensions (hedonic, utilitarian and social) of the construct “value” and 10 April 2019
investigates their relative influence on satisfaction, future patronage intention (FPI) and word-of-mouth Accepted 14 May 2019
(WoM) in a hypermarket context. Additionally, the study examines if these relationships are contingent upon
gender and shoppers’ perception of retail crowding.
Design/methodology/approach – The proposed models and the hypotheses were tested using structural
equation modelling, across two cross-sectional studies (n1 ¼ 268, n2 ¼ 259). The multi-group analysis was
used to test moderated relationships.
Findings – The study demonstrates that satisfaction mediates the impact of shopping value on FPI and
WoM. The model that includes utilitarian, hedonic and social value explains higher variance in satisfaction
and WoM than that is evidenced in the alternate model comprising utilitarian and hedonic values. Shoppers’
gender and perceived retail crowding moderate the influence of shopping value on satisfaction.
Practical implications – Retail managers should understand that enjoyable and social shopping experience
of the consumers lead to satisfaction, which in turn plays a pivotal role in the formation of FPI and WoM.
Managers discern that a moderate level of crowding is better than the extremely low or high level of density.
Originality/value – Amidst a lack of unanimity on the dimensionality of shopping value, this is one of the first
studies to evaluate the two theoretical models of shopping value having two dimensions and three dimensions,
respectively. An understanding of gender and retail crowding perceptions is crucial in shopping value judgments.
Keywords Satisfaction, Hedonic value, Social value, Retail crowding, Dimensions of shopping value,
Future patronage intention
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
India, one of the emerging economies, has witnessed an evolution of its market and hence, an
unprecedented interest being generated among retail majors to understand it. While the
growth of the Indian retail industry has been rapid with the establishment of modern
formats, the behaviour of retail shoppers remains less understood. Extant research on
Indian retail industry has covered topics as diverse as a retail transformation in India
(Dholakia et al., 2017) and influence of store attributes on loyalty (Grosso et al., 2018).
However, this mostly remained skewed towards the utilitarian value aspects of the
consumer shopping experience, such as task-related and functional benefits, and hedonic
aspects, such as fun, fantasy and enjoyment (Atulkar and Kesari, 2017). In a collectivist
society, such as India, consumers consider shopping as an opportunity to socialise
(Smith et al., 2018). However, surprisingly, social aspects of shopping value such as
recognition, status and esteem (Rintamäki et al., 2006) have often been ignored.
In spite of the co-existence of two alternate theoretical models on shopping value – one
with two dimensions (utilitarian and hedonic) (Babin et al., 1994), and the other with three
dimensions (utilitarian, hedonic and shopping) (Rintamäki et al., 2006) – no study hitherto
has compared both the models in terms of their relevance and effectiveness. Furthermore,
the existing knowledge about the association of shopping value with satisfaction (Yoo and
Marketing Intelligence & Planning
The authors thank the Behavioural Research Centre of XLRI, Jamshedpur for providing necessary © Emerald Publishing Limited
0263-4503
supports in data collection and analysis. DOI 10.1108/MIP-07-2018-0264
 MIP Park, 2016), an internal response, would arguably be more meaningful if it is linked to the
external responses such as future patronage intention (FPI) and word-of-mouth (WoM)
(Kumar et al., 2017).
Gender has been used as an effective strategy for store designs, and different reactions
are reported from men and women (Yildirim et al., 2015). However, it is yet to be understood
how men and women differ in their shopping value judgments. Men tend to demonstrate
achievement orientations (Pradhan et al., 2017), and therefore, may prefer utilitarian
shopping motivation. Conversely, women presume shopping as a pleasurable activity
(Haj-Salem et al., 2016), and hence, might prefer hedonic value. This study examines whether
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

the impact of shopping value on satisfaction is contingent on the gender of the shopper.
The behavioural and strategic importance of perceived retail crowding have been discussed
theoretically (Mehta, 2013) and demonstrated empirically (Lucia-Palacios et al., 2018) in the past.
Nevertheless, the retail literature on shoppers’ value judgments in a crowded retail environment
is inadequate. Shoppers who perceive high retail crowding exert different levels of cognitive
(Mehta, 2013) and affective (Pons et al., 2006) capability to evaluate the shopping value than
those who perceive low crowding. Therefore, this paper investigates the moderation effects of
perceived retail crowding on the relationship between shopping value and satisfaction.
The study makes a modest attempt to contribute to the retailing literature. First, through
a two-study design, this research compares two alternate theoretical models on shopping
value for their relative effectiveness in explaining the variance in shopping outcomes.
Second, it investigates the additional impact of social value on satisfaction and shopping
outcomes, which is not adequately studied before. Third, this tests the relationships between
values, satisfaction, FPI and the WoM in Indian hypermarket context for further validation
while speculating on the mediating role of satisfaction. Fourth, the moderating effects of
gender and perceived retail crowding on the relationships between shopping value and
satisfaction are empirically examined.
The paper is organised as follows. It starts with the theoretical background of shopping
value. The next section deals with the development of hypotheses linking value, satisfaction
and shopping outcomes followed by methods, results and analysis for Study 1. The subsequent
section discusses the additional hypotheses followed by methods, results, and analysis
for Study 2. The penultimate section focuses on the discussion of results and implications for
managers followed by limitations of the current study and scope for future research.

2. Theoretical background of shopping value

Both tangible and intangible costs and benefits linked to buying experience are significant
in comprehending the reason for shopping (Babin et al., 1994), and shoppers’ evaluation of
these costs and benefits are conceptualised as shopping value. Value creation and
delivery are essential to produce shoppers’ satisfaction (Kesari and Atulkar, 2016). Thus,
understanding shopping value is a precursor to devise competitive retail value propositions.
A review of the extant literature suggests shopping value as a multi-dimensional construct
(Huré et al., 2017). Babin et al. (1994) proposed an initial categorisation of shopping value as
utilitarian (rational, task completion and value for the money) and hedonic (recreational, self-
gratifying and emotional), which was then adopted in retailing literature. However, the
recent retailing literature advocates for a three-dimensional approach to shopping value and
suggests social value as a distinct dimension in addition to utilitarian and hedonic values
(Huré et al., 2017). This conceptualisation posits that shoppers gain social value from the
enhancement of their status and self-esteem that boost their self-identity (Rintamäki et al.,
2006), which lead to the formation of FPI and spread of WoM. However, there is no
unanimity over the dimensionality of shopping value. This study, to fill this void, conducts
two different studies to assess the relative impact of social value vis-a-vis utilitarian and
hedonic value on consumer shopping outcomes.
 3. Study 1 Shopping
3.1 Shopping value and satisfaction value and
The literature on “satisfaction in decisions” prominently discusses “performance-specific patronage
expectation” and “expectancy disconfirmation” models (Oliver, 1993). The former explains
satisfaction as a function of performance expectation while the latter indicates
disconfirmation of beliefs. Consumers evaluate their shopping experience with the
derived utilitarian and hedonic value vis-a-vis their initial expectations. Satisfaction is
obtained from the consumer’s assessment of the shopping experience ( Jones et al., 2006),
which comprises cognitive and affective elements (Mano and Oliver, 1993). Cognitive
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

elements explain the satisfaction resulting from functional benefits, whereas affective
elements explain the satisfaction resulting from fun, fantasy and enjoyment. Therefore, the
following hypotheses are posited:
H1. Utilitarian shopping value positively influences the satisfaction derived by
consumers from their shopping.
H2. Hedonic shopping value positively influences the satisfaction derived by consumers
from their shopping.

3.2 Satisfaction and shopping outcomes

A post-shopping evaluation compares costumers’ expectations with actual achievements
creating a state of satisfaction or dissatisfaction (Carpenter, 2008). Satisfaction may create a
propensity towards the product or experience and, in turn, create FPI. Additionally,
satisfaction obtained from the consumption of a product results in a positive feeling
towards the firm and a consequent spread of WoM (Kumar et al., 2017). Satisfied consumers
tend to share their feelings and experience with their families and friends (Carpenter, 2008),
which boosts their confidence and self-esteem. The current study based on an Indian
hypermarket context argues for a positive impact of satisfaction on FPI and WoM:
H3. Satisfaction derived by consumers positively influences their FPI.
H4. Satisfaction derived by consumers positively influences the spread of WoM.
There is sufficient evidence for the influence of utilitarian value and hedonic value on
satisfaction (Vukadin et al., 2018). Further, several researchers have confirmed the positive
effects of satisfaction on FPI (Atulkar and Kesari, 2017) and WoM (Rintamäki and Kirves,
2017). Therefore, this study argues that shopping value contributes to consumer
satisfaction, which in turn, results in positive shopping outcomes such as the formation of
FPI and spread of WoM. This can be reasoned through the stimulus-organism-response
model (Bagozzi, 1986), where satisfaction is an intervening internal response arising from
the perceptions of the consumer shopping value resulting in consumer responses such as
FPI and WoM:
H5. Satisfaction mediates the impact of utilitarian value on (a) FPI and (b) WoM.
H6. Satisfaction mediates the impact of hedonic value on (a) FPI and (b) WoM.

3.3 Shopper gender

Marketing literature (Kim et al., 2013; Haj-Salem et al., 2016) has deliberated upon gender as
an important demographic variable that could predict consumer behaviour. Some past
studies have tested the direct effects of gender on shopping outcomes (e.g. Kuruvilla et al.,
2009; Yildirim et al., 2015). A few others have examined the moderating effect of gender in
the context of shopping behaviour (e.g. Haj-Salem et al., 2016). However, the literature is
 MIP silent on the value judgments of men and women shoppers, and the difference in the impact
of their value judgments on satisfaction. Men and women tend to perceive shopping value
differently (Haj-Salem et al., 2016). Men have been motivated by achievement desires, while
affiliation desires drive women; men pursue instrumental goals while women follow
expressive and communal goals (Pradhan et al., 2017). Therefore, it is reasonable to argue
that men might prefer task completion shopping, whereas women might engage in shopping
as a recreational activity:
H7a. The impact of utilitarian shopping value on satisfaction will be stronger for male
shoppers than female shoppers.
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

H7b. The impact of hedonic shopping value on satisfaction will be stronger for female
shoppers than male shoppers.

3.4 Methodology
3.4.1 Instrument design. The scales were adapted from the existing literature and suitably
reworded for the context of the current study. The scale used in measuring both dimensions
of shopping value (utilitarian and hedonic) was adapted from Babin et al. (1994), the
satisfaction scale from Carpenter (2008), the WoM scale from Harrison-Walker (2001), and
the FPI scale from Grewal et al. (2003). Two members of the marketing faculty and three
doctoral students were recruited to assess the representativeness and the redundancy of the
measures. Four items, one each from hedonic value, satisfaction, FPI and WoM, respectively
were deleted as at least four of the five judges rated the items as somewhat redundant.
The final questionnaire had three parts: first, questions related to shopping experiences;
second, measures of the constructs used in this study and, third, demographic profile
(e.g. gender, age and education). Respondents were entreated to indicate their degree of
agreement to each statement. All items of the constructs measured on a five-point Likert
scale, ranging from “1 ¼ strongly disagree” to “5 ¼ strongly agree”.
3.4.2 Sample selection and data collection. The population for this study was adult retail
shoppers of India. Data were collected using a store intercept, which was carried out in the
hypermarkets located at Bhubaneswar and Cuttack, two cities in India. Bhubaneswar, the
state capital, and Cuttack, the financial capital, of the state of Odisha represent the Indian
population because of its cultural and structural variations with cosmopolitan inhabitants.
The final sample was selected using a systematic sampling design wherein every fifth
consumer coming out of the mall was requested to be a respondent. Procedural remedies,
such as assuring respondent anonymity, spatial separation between predictor and criterion
variables, and evaluation apprehension reduction were adopted a priori (Hulland et al.,
2018), to reduce common method bias (CMB). Out of 500 questionnaires distributed, 268
(54 per cent) valid responses were received. Analysis revealed that 54 per cent of the
respondents were female, and 75 per cent of them were below the age of 36. Most of them
were educated (91 per cent had a graduation or higher degree) and had an equally
distributed income level.

3.5 Data analysis and results

3.5.1 Measurement model. Using structural equation modelling (SEM) approach, an initial
measurement model was assessed through confirmatory factor analysis. The initial fit indices
found were χ2/df ¼ 2.84, GFI ¼ 0.84, CFI ¼ 0.83 and RMSEA ¼ 0.08. Six items with loadings
below 0.60 were deleted from the model to improve the model. Acceptable fit indices for the
new model were χ2/df ¼ 1.79, GFI ¼ 0.92, TLI ¼ 0.93, CFI ¼ 0.95 and RMSEA ¼ 0.05.
The measurement model achieved reliability for each construct having Cronbach’s α
higher than the recommended value (W0.70), indicating internally consistent scale items.
 Table I shows that the standardised loadings for all items were significant with values higher Shopping
than 0.60. The average variance extracted (AVE) and construct reliability (CR) for all value and
constructs were greater than 0.50 and 0.70, respectively, presenting evidence of convergent patronage
validity (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). Furthermore, square root AVEs were higher than the
respective inter-construct correlations (Table II), indicating that discriminant validity was
established. Another measurement model analysis was conducted using an unmeasured
common latent construct (CLC) with connected paths to all the measurement items
(Hulland et al., 2018). An insignificant χ2 difference (Δχ2 ¼ 21.83, Δdf ¼ 18, p ¼ 0.24) between
the original measurement model and the CLC model revealed the absence of CMB.
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

3.5.2 Structural model. A structural Model 1 (M1; Figure 1, Panel A) was estimated to
test the hypothesised relationships. The model fit indices provided evidence of a satisfactory
fit with χ2/df ¼ 1.88, GFI ¼ 0.91, TLI ¼ 0.93, CFI ¼ 0.94 and RMSEA ¼ 0.05. Both hedonic
and utilitarian value significantly influenced customer satisfaction. Results indicated a
significant influence of customer satisfaction on FPI and WoM. A summary of the
hypotheses tested is presented in Table III. A mediation model, containing satisfaction as
the mediator, was examined using the bootstrapping bias-corrected confidence interval
procedure with 2,000 resamples (Preacher and Hayes, 2008). The indirect effects of
utilitarian value on FPI and WoM through satisfaction were significant; further, satisfaction

Standardized loadingsa
Study 1 Study 2
Constructs (measures) (n ¼ 268) (n ¼ 259)

Utilitarian shopping value α ¼ 0.76 α ¼ 0.82

I accomplished just what I wanted from this “store Xb” 0.67 0.86
I could not buy what I really needed (R) 0.83 0.66
While shopping at “store X”, I found just the item(s) I was looking for 0.65 0.82
Hedonic shopping value α ¼ 0.84 α ¼ 0.85
That shopping from “store X” was truly a joy 0.77 0.72
Compared to other things I could have done, the time spent in shopping was 0.75 0.80
truly enjoyable
I enjoyed the shopping from “store X” for its own sake, not just for the items I 0.65 0.68
have purchased
I had a good time because I was able to act on the “spur of the moment” 0.71 0.74
During the shopping from “store X”, I felt the excitement of the hunt 0.73 0.70
Satisfaction α ¼ 0.78 α ¼ 0.84
I am happy with the outcome of the shopping from “store X” 0.74 0.84
I am contented with the outcome of the shopping from “store X” 0.77 0.73
Overall, I am satisfied with the outcome of the shopping from “store X” 0.75 0.81
Word-of-mouth α ¼ 0.83 α ¼ 0.87
I mention “store X” to others quite frequently 0.62 0.72
I seldom miss an opportunity to tell others about “store X” 0.84 0.69
I am proud to tell others that I purchase from “store X” 0.74 0.85
When I tell others about “store X”, I tend to talk about the store in great detail 0.68 0.84
I have only good things to say about “store X” 0.64 0.66
Future patronage intention α ¼ 0.85 α ¼ 0.76
In future, the likelihood that I would shop in “store X” is very high 0.82 0.86
In future, I would be willing to buy merchandise at “store X” 0.89 0.71
Social shopping value – α ¼ 0.79
I feel that I belong to the customer segment of this store – 0.70
Going to this store would help me to feel acceptable – 0.83
Going to this store would make a good impression on other people – 0.73
Notes: aAll standardized loadings are significant at p o 0.001; b Name of the particular store in Study 1, and Table I.
in Study 2, the items were reworded as “the store” the respondents had their last purchase Measurement model
 MIP CR AVE (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

Study 1
(1) Satisfaction 0.80 0.57 0.75
(2) Future patronage intention 0.85 0.74 0.36 0.86
(3) word-of-mouth 0.83 0.50 0.52 0.45 0.71
(4) Utilitarian value 0.77 0.53 0.25 0.09 0.17 0.73
(5) Hedonic value 0.85 0.52 0.61 0.31 0.37 0.17 0.72
Study 2
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

(1) Satisfaction 0.84 0.64 0.80

(2) Future patronage intention 0.76 0.62 0.66 0.79
(3) word-of-mouth 0.87 0.57 0.59 0.54 0.76
(4) Utilitarian value 0.83 0.62 0.43 0.40 0.33 0.79
(5) Hedonic value 0.85 0.53 0.52 0.35 0.70 0.30 0.73
(6) Social value 0.80 0.58 0.54 0.44 0.73 0.32 0.65 0.76
Table II. Note: The diagonal values are squared roots AVEs of the constructs, and the off-diagonal values are the
Discriminant validity correlation between the constructs

(a) (b) 1. Gender (H7a and H7b)

Gender (H7a and H7b) 2. Perceived Crowding 2
2
R = 0.29 R = 0.65
(H10a, H10b and H10c)

Utilitarian Utilitarian
Shopping Word-of-mouth Shopping Word-of-mouth
Value Value
H1: 0.13* 2
H1: 0.22** 2
R = 0.40 R =0.39 H4: 0.26**
H4: 0.61**
Hedonic
Satisfaction Shopping Satisfaction
Value
H3: 0.46** H2: 0.24** H3: 0.69**
2 2
R = 0.16 R = 0.48
Hedonic Social
Figure 1. Shopping
H2: 0.56** Future
Shopping H8: 0.30** Future
Structural Value
Patronage
Value
Patronage
Intention Intention
relationships with
path loadings
Notes: *p<0.05; **p<0.01

was found to significantly mediate the influence of hedonic value on FPI and WoM
(see Table III). All direct effects were found insignificant indicating indirect only mediation
(Zhao et al., 2010), thus, supporting H5 and H6.
3.5.3 Test of moderations. The sample was split into two, female (n ¼ 144) shoppers and
male shoppers. The multi-group measurement invariance test revealed configural and
metric invariance (Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1998) between gender groups, and thus
comparable. All factor loadings were constrained to examine full metric invariance. The fit
of the fully constrained model, compared to the unconstrained model, did not change
significantly (Δχ2 ¼ 9.94, Δdf ¼ 13, p ¼ 0.70). The χ2 difference test between full path-
constrained model and free model indicated significant support for moderation by gender
(Δχ2 ¼ 9.51, Δdf ¼ 4, p ¼ 0.04). Test for individual path constraint comparisons were
conducted. Results found that gender significantly moderated the impact of utilitarian value
(Δχ2 ¼ 5.21, p ¼ 0.02; t ¼ 2.3, p ¼ 0.02) on satisfaction, which was stronger for male (b ¼ 0.26)
than female (b ¼ 0.01), supporting H7a. Conversely, gender marginally moderated the
impact of hedonic value on satisfaction (Δχ2 ¼ 3.5, p ¼ 0.06; t ¼ 1.86, p ¼ 0.06), which was
stronger for female (b ¼ 0.75) than male (b ¼ 0.46) indicating weak support for H7b.
 Model 1 Model 2
Shopping
Study 1 Study 2 Study 2 value and
(n ¼ 268) (n ¼ 259) (n ¼ 259) patronage
Hypothesised direct paths Loadings p Loadings p Loadings p

H1: utilitarian value → satisfaction 0.13 0.02 0.26 0.00 0.22 0.00
H2: hedonic value → satisfaction 0.56 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.24 0.00
H3: satisfaction → future patronage intention 0.46 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.69 0.00
H4: satisfaction → word-of-mouth 0.61 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.26 0.00
H8: social value → satisfaction 0.30 0.00
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

Hypothesised mediated paths via satisfaction

H5a: utilitarian value → future patronage intention 0.06 0.05 0.19 0.00 0.15 0.00
H5b: utilitarian value → word-of-mouth 0.08 0.05 0.10 0.00 0.06 0.02
H6a: hedonic value → future patronage intention 0.26 0.03 0.30 0.00 0.16 0.03
H6b: hedonic value → word-of-mouth 0.34 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.06 0.03
H9a: social value → future patronage intention 0.20 0.02
H9b: social value → word-of-mouth 0.08 0.03
R2 satisfaction 0.40 0.34 0.39 Table III.
Future patronage intention 0.16 0.48 0.48 Results of hypothesis
Word-of-mouth 0.29 0.57 0.65 testing

4. Study 2
Study 2 was designed to compare two nested models depicted in Figure 1 to achieve two
objectives; first, to investigate the explanatory power of social value dimension on shoppers’
satisfaction and shopping outcomes; second, to examine the moderation effect of perceived
retail crowding on the relationship between shopping value and shoppers’ satisfaction.

4.1 Social shopping value

Consumers derive social or symbolic value from their shopping in addition to functional and
emotional/recreational value (Vukadin et al., 2018). Social value refers to the symbolic
benefits consumers derive from the shopping where their personal values are expressed
through the shopping activities (Rintamäki et al., 2006). Social value results from the act of
shopping to enhance the consumers’ social self (Sweeney and Soutar, 2001), i.e. consumers
perception of what others think about them. This explains shopper’s visit to a mall, which is
considered a community entertainment centre that boosts their social status and self-esteem
(Rintamäki et al., 2006). Consequently, they obtain positive feelings and beliefs that lead to
shopping satisfaction (Kesari and Atulkar, 2016). Therefore, shoppers like to visit
hypermarkets to experience the shopping as a “social act” (Rintamäki et al., 2006) that can
reflect a symbolic meaning or social code and enhance their social identity in a fun-filled and
satisfying shopping environment (Atulkar and Kesari, 2017). This social identification
contributes to the fulfilment of consumers’ status and self-esteem desires and enhances their
social capital. Thus, social value contributes to shopping satisfaction, which in turn, leads to
FPI and spread of WoM:
H8. Social shopping value positively influences the satisfaction derived by consumers
from their shopping.
H9. Satisfaction mediates the impact of social value on (a) FPI and (b) WoM.

4.2 Perceived retail crowding

Perceived retail crowding is conceived as a psycho-affective state derived from the
evaluation of the store atmosphere triggered by population or spatial density
 MIP (Eroglu et al., 2005). Machleit et al. (1994) suggested perceived retail crowding as a
two-dimensional construct: human and spatial. Human crowding refers to the actual
number of shoppers in a given retail space as well as the extent of social interaction among
them; and spatial crowding refers to the amount of space per shopper based on
merchandise, fixtures, displays and configuration within the store (Mehta, 2013). This
study, drawing on previous literature, conceptualises perceived retail crowding as the
shoppers’ subjective assessment of the number of co-shoppers, the accessible space, and
the organisation of the retail space.
Retail crowding, primarily, has been described as a negative psychological reaction
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

(such as restricted, stuffy and cramped) to retail environments (Baker and Wakefield,
2012). Shoppers’ subjective evaluation of perceived crowding causes negative judgment of
shopping value (Eroglu et al., 2005), which reduces shopping satisfaction through negative
affect evaluations (Lucia-Palacios et al., 2018). Studies in environmental psychology
demonstrate that crowding diminishes task performance (Bell et al., 1990). Therefore,
shoppers’ satisfaction derived from the accomplishment of product-acquisition tasks
could be considerably reduced by a crowded retail environment (Eroglu et al., 2005).
Further, higher perceived crowding results in stimulus overload and negative responses
(Baker and Wakefield, 2012) leading to stress and discomfort. Shoppers seeking an
enjoyable and fun-filled shopping might not appreciate a crowded retail environment
(Eroglu et al., 2005) that could result in a reduced level of satisfaction. Similarly, based on
from the control model (Sherrod, 1974), crowded feeling leads to loss of perceived control
because of excessive undesirable interactions among shoppers and lack of behavioural
freedom (Mehta, 2013). Moreover, social intrusion perspective (Altman, 1975) proposes
higher perceived crowding results in an unwarranted invasion of privacy, whereas a
decreased crowding perception favours the shoppers who seek social interaction
(Baker and Wakefield, 2012):
H10. The impact of (a) utilitarian, (b) hedonic and (c) social shopping value on
satisfaction will be weaker for shoppers perceiving higher retail crowding.

4.3 Methodology
4.3.1 Instrument design. The purified scale items from Study 1 were used in Study 2. This
second study used two additional constructs, social value and perceived crowding. A pool of
nine items measuring social value was adopted from past literature (Rintamäki et al., 2006;
Sweeney and Soutar, 2001) and reworded for appropriateness to the current study context.
Final five items were retained after the initial face validity through a similar procedure as
detailed in Study 1. Perceived crowding was measured through a five item, seven point bi-
polar scale adopted from Baker and Wakefield (2012).
4.3.2 Sample selection and data collection. In Study 2, a sample of 280 executives, enroled
for an MBA programme, participated in the survey. These executive participants were from
across India representing a general population of hypermarket shoppers. Course credit was
awarded to complete the assignment, which ensured a 100 per cent response rate. Exclusive
instructions reminding their previous shopping trip to a hypermarket were provided, and
they were asked to name the hypermarket store. Spatial separation between predictor
and criterion variables was maintained, inter-participant referral was strictly controlled and
respondents were kept unaware of the research objective during data collection. These
procedural remedies were adopted a priori (Hulland et al., 2018) to reduce CMB. Respondents
(n ¼ 21) who expressed their inability to remember a hypermarket were disqualified. A final
sample of 259 respondents (female ¼ 40.2 per cent, mean age ¼ 27.97 years) was considered
for data analysis.
 4.4 Data analysis and results Shopping
4.4.1 Measurement model. A measurement model was estimated using SEM to revalidate value and
the scales with data collected from Study 2. Two items of social value with loadings below patronage
0.60 were deleted from the initial model. Acceptable fit indices for the final model were
χ2/df ¼ 1.98, GFI ¼ 0.89, TLI ¼ 0.92, CFI ¼ 0.94 and RMSEA ¼ 0.06. The standardised
loadings for all items were significant with values greater than 0.6. Cronbach’s α, AVE
and CR for all the constructs were found higher than 0.70, 0.50 and 0.70, respectively,
suggesting convergent validity (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). Square roots of AVEs were greater
than the respective inter-construct correlation (Table II), indicating discriminant validity.
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

A CLC method revealed an insignificant χ2 difference (Δχ2 ¼ 26.51, Δdf ¼ 21, p ¼ 0.19)
between the original and the CLC model, which indicated the absence of potential CMB
(Hulland et al., 2018).
4.4.2 Structural model. The results showed evidence of a satisfactory fit for the
structural Model 2 (M2; Figure 1, Panel B). The model fit indices found were χ2/df ¼ 2.01,
GFI ¼ 0.89, TLI ¼ 0.92, CFI ¼ 0.94 and RMSEA ¼ 0.06. The hedonic, utilitarian and social
value had a significant positive influence on customer satisfaction. Results found a positive
influence on customer satisfaction on FPI and WoM. The mediation model was tested using
the bootstrap bias-corrected confidence interval procedure with 2,000 resamples (Preacher
and Hayes, 2008). Satisfaction was found to significantly mediate the influence of utilitarian
value, hedonic value, and social value on FPI. Also, the influences of utilitarian value,
hedonic value and social value on WoM through satisfaction were significant (see Table III).
Direct effects of hedonic and social value on WoM were found significant, indicating a
complementary mediation (Zhao et al., 2010) whereas all other indirect effects represented
indirect only mediations. The above results corroborated H5 and H6 as well as supported
H9. Additionally, M1 was estimated using the data obtained in Study 2. The findings
(see Table III) confirmed the results of Study 1.
4.4.3 Model comparison. Structural models of both M1 and M2 were estimated from the
data in Study 2 for model comparison. The χ2 difference test (Δχ2 ¼ 95.03, Δdf ¼ 49,
p ¼ 0.00) and comparison of other fit indices (ΔGFI ¼ 0.01, ΔCFI ¼ 0.007, ΔRMSEA ¼ 0)
indicated a significantly better fit for M2. Further, pairwise nested ANOVA tests were used
to investigate whether the increase in variance explained (R2) from M1 to M2 was
statistically significant. The results indicated improved R2 value in M2 over M1 that was
significant for WoM (R2M 1 ¼ 0.57, R2M 2 ¼ 0.65; F ¼ 9.11, p ¼ 0.00) and marginally significant
for satisfaction (R2M 1 ¼ 0.34, R2M 2 ¼ 0.39; F ¼ 3.71, p ¼ 0.06). The above findings can be
attributed to the contribution of social value to shoppers’ satisfaction and spread of WoM,
apart from the other two dimensions such as utilitarian value and hedonic value. However,
surprisingly, the R2 value of FPI was found to be equal (0.48) for both the models.
4.4.4 Test of moderations. The multi-group SEM (female ¼ 104) was used to test the
mean and covariance structures across gender groups, which indicated acceptable
configural and metric invariance (Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1998), and thus
comparable (Δχ2 ¼ 10.55, Δdf ¼ 15, p ¼ 0.78). Using χ2 difference test between full
path-constrained model and free model indicated significant support for moderation by
gender (Δχ2 ¼ 24.74, Δdf ¼ 10, p ¼ 0.00). The impact of utilitarian value on satisfaction
was significantly stronger (Δχ2 ¼ 8.32, p ¼ 0.00; t ¼ 2.81, p ¼ 0.00) for male shoppers
(b ¼ 0.23) than female shoppers (b ¼ −0.18). Conversely, the impact of hedonic value on
satisfaction was stronger (Δχ2 ¼ 5.22, p ¼ 0.02; t ¼ 2.17, p ¼ 0.01) for female shoppers
(b ¼ 0.73) than male shoppers (b ¼ 0.14). Hence, the moderation effects of gender
corroborated the results of Study 1. Similarly, the impact of social value on satisfaction
was significantly stronger (Δχ2 ¼ 4.45, p ¼ 0.03; t ¼ 2.13, p ¼ 0.02) for female shoppers
(b ¼ 0.63) than male shoppers (b ¼ 0.17).
 MIP Perceived crowding was measured through a five item, seven point bi-polar scale
(α ¼ 0.71). The full sample was divided into two samples using a median split method, high
perceived crowding (n ¼ 126) and low perceived crowding. Using multi-group SEM, the test
of measurement invariance across the groups revealed acceptable configural and metric
invariance, and thus comparable (Δχ2 ¼ 12.38, Δdf ¼ 15, p ¼ 0.65). The χ2 comparison
between fully path-constrained model and free model revealed significant support for
moderation by perceived crowding (Δχ2 ¼ 45.58, Δdf ¼ 10, p ¼ 0.00). Surprisingly,
the results revealed positive moderation effects of perceived retail crowding, as
opposed to the proposed H10a and H10b, on utilitarian value → satisfaction and
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

hedonic value → satisfaction path. Individual path constraint and path estimate
comparisons indicated that the impact of utilitarian value (Δχ2 ¼ 21.82, p ¼ 0.00; t ¼ 4.29,
p ¼ 0.00) and hedonic value (Δχ2 ¼ 6.28, p ¼ 0.01; t ¼ 2.50, p ¼ 0.01) on satisfaction was
significantly greater for shoppers having high perceived crowding (butilitarian ¼ 0.69,
bhedonic ¼ 0.48) than shoppers having low perceived crowding (butilitarian ¼ 0.06,
bhedonic ¼ 0.01). Conversely, the impact of social value on satisfaction was significantly
enhanced (Δχ2 ¼ 24.59, p ¼ 0.00; t ¼ 4.73, p ¼ 0.00) for shoppers perceiving low crowding
(b ¼ 0.71) than shoppers perceiving high crowding (b ¼ −0.22), thus, supporting H10c.

5. Discussion and implications

Customers’ shopping value judgments drive their behaviour, and understanding what they
value is a precondition to formulating a successful competitive strategy (Rintamäki and
Kirves, 2017). This paper endeavours to understand the dimensionality and
conceptualisation of shopping value, over which there is little consensus. It provides
insights into the dimensionality of shopping value with implications for value judgments of
Indian shoppers. Across two cross-sectional studies, this paper empirically demonstrates
and theoretically explains the superiority of the three-dimensional model of shopping value
that comprises hedonic value, utilitarian value and social value, in explaining shoppers’
satisfaction and spread of WoM. Study 1 confirms that Indian shoppers attach importance
to both hedonic and utilitarian value dimensions, resonating with Kesari and Atulkar (2016).
Study 2 of the paper, corroborating these findings, demonstrates the contribution of social
value, in additions to the influence of utilitarian and hedonic value, on shoppers’ satisfaction
and WoM. However, social value explained no additional variability in FPI. To further
explain this, the impact of shopping value on FPI was tested in a model removing the
controls for satisfaction. The results revealed an increase in R2 from 0.24 in the
two-dimension value model to 0.28 in the three-dimension value model. Furthermore, social
value, along with hedonic and utilitarian value leads to customer satisfaction that, in turn,
results in shopping outcomes. The study also demonstrates that satisfaction mediates the
relationship between shopping values and shopping outcomes. The shopping value realised
by consumers due to confirmation of expectations result in satisfaction, which in turn,
affects FPI and WoM. This indicates that being satisfied is a necessary condition for the
formation of favourable FPI and WOM.
Further, this study underpins the argument that male and female consumers display
significantly different shopping behaviours, in unison with past findings (Wang et al., 2018).
This paper shows that fun-filled shopping enhances satisfaction among female shoppers
more than male shoppers do; conversely, utilitarian shopping makes male shoppers more
satisfied than female shoppers. Further, results demonstrate that female shoppers are better
satisfied than male shoppers are when the hypermarkets meet their status and self-esteem
needs. Overall, this study provides a theoretical rationale for gender-based differences in
shopping environments across the studies and offers new insights into specific shopping
value judgments.
 Finally, this paper demonstrates that Indian shoppers’ perception of retail crowding Shopping
regulates their shopping value judgments and subsequent satisfaction with the value and
hypermarket. Study 2 finds that shoppers’ perception of retail crowding moderates patronage
the impact of shopping value on satisfaction. Most prior studies have observed the negative
effects of perceived retail crowding on consumer evaluations (Lucia-Palacios et al., 2018).
This paper, however, reports positive moderating effects of perceived crowding on
utilitarian value → satisfaction and hedonic value → satisfaction link. While it seems to be
counterintuitive at first, these results appear to be plausible because an adequately crowded
store might signal other shoppers that it has been delivering functional and hedonic benefits
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

(Eroglu et al., 2005). Rather, it might elucidate shoppers’ manifestation of a conformist

attitude through their preference for majority-endorsed behaviour. Furthermore, the paper
reasonably explains why most of the Indian shoppers visit the hypermarkets in weekends, a
considerably crowded period. The paper, corroborating the findings of Pons et al. (2006),
demonstrates that in a hedonic service setting, such as amusement parks, concerts, a bigger
crowd enhances the service experience. However, the results reveal that social shoppers
differ from task-oriented shoppers and shoppers seeking enjoyment. This study reasons
that Indian shoppers tend to avoid the unwarranted invasion of privacy, in line with social
intrusion perspective (Altman, 1975), and hence, are better satisfied when they perceive
lower crowding. While a lower crowding entails a higher impact of social value on
satisfaction, the impact diminishes for utilitarian and hedonic value and vice versa. These
results support the findings of Mehta (2013) and Song and Noone (2017), which argue for an
inverted-U-shaped effect of crowding perceptions.

5.1 Managerial implications

The paper offers several implications for hypermarkets. First, to satisfy the customers and
retain them, retailers need to understand the shopping value in totality. To generate higher
customer patronage, retailers need to formulate differentiation strategies based on all three
shopping values. Second, managers discern from the study that shoppers treat large retail
stores as destinations of social outings, and not only for buying and fun. Furthermore, this
study helps the store managers understand the collectivistic emerging markets, such as
India, which value group belongingness and social identification (Smith et al., 2018).
Therefore, Indian hypermarkets should work on satisfying the status and self-esteem needs
of their consumers. Third, store managers should appeal to both genders differently with
separate communication programmes. Finally, this study demonstrates that a moderate
level of crowding is better than extremely low or high level of crowding. Store managers
should better manage the level of crowding during peak hours as optimum crowding
enhances positive shopping outcomes. Retail managers should have the flexibility of
increasing the number of billing, exit counters when needed, and adjust sales promotion
timings to shift the crowd from peak to non-peak periods.

6. Limitations and directions for future research

The context of the study is limited to the hypermarkets of India, and hence need further
investigations for generalisation. The validity of the model can be examined across other
physical retail formats and online channels in the future. Future studies could distinguish
between different product categories while testing the model. Although the benefit of
moderate retail crowding is discussed, perception of both the genders about moderate
crowding is not, which can be researched in future. Furthermore, the moderating effects of
consumer demographics (age, income), time spent inside the store and distance travelled
by the consumers are some of the interesting areas of investigation. Finally, this paper
does not include conditional and epistemic value (Sheth et al., 1991), which future
researchers can explore.
 MIP References
Altman, I. (1975), The Environment and Social Behaviour: Privacy, Personal Space, Territory and
Crowding, Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA.
Atulkar, S. and Kesari, B. (2017), “Satisfaction, loyalty and re-patronage intention: role of hedonic
shopping values”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 39, June, pp. 23-34.
Babin, B.J., Darden, W.R. and Griffin, M. (1994), “Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian
shopping value”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 644-656.
Bagozzi, R.P. (1986), Principles of Marketing Management, Science Research Associates Inc., Chicago, IL.
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of structural equation models”, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 74-94.
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.
Bell, P.A., Fisher, J.D., Baum, A. and Greene, T.C. (1990), Environmental Psychology, Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, Fort Worth, TX.
Carpenter, J.M. (2008), “Consumer shopping value, satisfaction and loyalty in discount retailing”,
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 358-363.
Dholakia, R.R., Dholakia, N. and Chattopadhyay, A. (2017), “Indigenous marketing practices and
theories in emerging economies: consumer behavior and retail transformations in India”, Journal
of Business Research, Vol. 86, May, pp. 406-415.
Eroglu, S.A., Machleit, K. and Barr, T.F. (2005), “Perceived retail crowding and shopping satisfaction:
the role of shopping values”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58 No. 8, pp. 1146-1153.
Grewal, D., Baker, J., Levy, M. and Voss, G.B. (2003), “The effects of wait expectations and store
atmosphere evaluations on patronage intention in service-intensive retail stores”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 79 No. 4, pp. 259-268.
Grosso, M., Castaldo, S. and Grewal, A. (2018), “How store attributes impact shoppers’ loyalty in
emerging countries: an investigation in the Indian retail sector”, Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 117-124.
Haj-Salem, N., Chebat, J.C., Michon, R. and Oliveira, S. (2016), “Why male and female shoppers do not
see mall loyalty through the same lens? The mediating role of self-congruity”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 3, pp. 1219-1227.
Harrison-Walker, L.J. (2001), “The measurement of word-of-mouth communication and an investigation
of service quality and customer commitment as potential antecedents”, Journal of Service
Research, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 60-75.
Hulland, J., Baumgartner, H. and Smith, K.M. (2018), “Marketing survey research best practices:
evidence and recommendations from a review of JAMS articles”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 92-108.
Huré, E., Picot-Coupey, K. and Ackermann, C.L. (2017), “Understanding omni-channel shopping
value: a mixed-method study”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 39, August,
pp. 314-330.
Jones, M.A., Reynolds, K.E. and Arnold, M.J. (2006), “Hedonic and utilitarian shopping value:
investigating differential effects on retail outcomes”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 59 No. 9,
pp. 974-981.
Kesari, B. and Atulkar, S. (2016), “Satisfaction of mall shoppers: a study on perceived utilitarian and
hedonic shopping values”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 31, July, pp. 22-31.
Kim, J., Han, W., Kim, D. and Paramita, W. (2013), “Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Gender and
beauty in the cosmetics sector: a comparative study of Indonesia and Korea”, Marketing
Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 127-140.
Kumar, V., Anand, A. and Song, H. (2017), “Future of retailer profitability: an organizing framework”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 93 No. 1, pp. 96-119.
 Kuruvilla, S.J., Joshi, N. and Shah, N. (2009), “Do men and women really shop differently? An Shopping
exploration of gender differences in mall shopping in India”, International Journal of Consumer value and
Studies, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 715-723.
patronage
Lucia-Palacios, L., Pérez-López, R. and Polo-Redondo, Y. (2018), “Can social support alleviate stress
while shopping in crowded retail environments?”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 90, May,
pp. 141-150.
Machleit, K.A., Kellaris, J.J. and Eroglu, S.A. (1994), “Human versus spatial dimensions of crowding
perceptions in retail environments: a note on their measurement and effect on shopper
satisfaction”, Marketing Letters, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 183-194.
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

Mano, H. and Oliver, R. (1993), “Assessing the dimensionality of the consumption experience:
evaluation, feeling and satisfaction”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 451-466.
Mehta, R. (2013), “Understanding perceived retail crowding: a critical review and research agenda”,
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 642-649.
Oliver, R.L. (1993), “Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction response”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 418-430.
Pons, F., Laroche, M. and Mourali, M. (2006), “Consumer reactions to crowded retail settings: cross-
cultural differences between North America and the Middle East”, Psychology & Marketing,
Vol. 23 No. 7, pp. 555-572.
Pradhan, D., Kapoor, V. and Moharana, T.R. (2017), “One step deeper: gender and congruity in celebrity
endorsement”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 774-788.
Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2008), “Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and
comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models”, Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 40
No. 3, pp. 879-891.
Rintamäki, T. and Kirves, K. (2017), “From perceptions to propositions: profiling customer value across
retail contexts”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 37, July, pp. 159-167.
Rintamäki, T., Kanto, A., Kuusela, H. and Spence, M.T. (2006), “Decomposing the value of department
store shopping into utilitarian, hedonic and social dimensions: evidence from Finland”,
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 6-24.
Sherrod, D.R. (1974), “Crowding, perceived control, and behavioral after effects”, Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 171-186.
Sheth, J.N., Newman, B.I. and Gross, B.L. (1991), “Why we buy what we buy: a theory of consumption
values”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 159-170.
Smith, B., Rippé, C.B. and Dubinsky, A.J. (2018), “India’s lonely and isolated consumers shopping for an
in-store social experience”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 36 No. 7, pp. 722-736.
Song, M. and Noone, B.M. (2017), “The moderating effect of perceived spatial crowding on the
relationship between perceived service encounter pace and customer satisfaction”, International
Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 65, August, pp. 37-46.
Steenkamp, J.B.E. and Baumgartner, H. (1998), “Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national
consumer research”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 78-90.
Sweeney, J.C. and Soutar, G.N. (2001), “Consumer perceived value: the development of a multiple item
scale”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77 No. 2, pp. 203-220.
Vukadin, A., Wongkitrungrueng, A. and Assarut, N. (2018), “When art meets mall: impact on shopper
responses”, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 277-293.
Wang, J., Wang, S., Xue, H., Wang, Y. and Li, J. (2018), “Green image and consumers’ word-of-mouth
intention in the green hotel industry: the moderating effect of Millennials”, Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 181, April, pp. 426-436.
Yildirim, K., Cagatay, K. and Hidayetoğlu, M.L. (2015), “The effect of age, gender and education level on
customer evaluations of retail furniture store atmospheric attributes”, International Journal of
Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 43 No. 8, pp. 712-726.
 MIP Yoo, J. and Park, M. (2016), “The effects of e-mass customization on consumer perceived value,
satisfaction, and loyalty toward luxury brands”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 12,
pp. 5775-5784.
Zhao, X., Lynch, J.G. Jr and Chen, Q. (2010), “Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about
mediation analysis”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 197-206.

About the authors

Tapas Ranjan Moharana is pursuing his PhD in Marketing from Xavier School of Management, XLRI,
Jamshedpur. He holds an MBA Degree in Marketing and Bachelor’s Degree in Physics. His papers have
been published in Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Journal of Management Research, among
Downloaded by XLRI Jamshedpur School of Business & Human Resources At 00:42 26 June 2019 (PT)

others. He has more than 10 years of experience in industry and academia. His research interests
include retail patronage behaviour of shoppers, celebrity worship, parasocial relationship in
endorsements and engagement in travel research.
Debasis Pradhan is currently Associate Professor of Marketing at Xavier School of Management,
XLRI, Jamshedpur, India. His academic interests include congruence research in celebrity endorsement,
value in retail setting, retail brand equity measurement, anti-consumption research and impulse
buying. His papers have been published in Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Journal of Marketing
Communications, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Asian Case Research Journal,
International Journal of Rural Management, South Asian Journal of Management, among others. Two
of his award-winning business cases have been published by London Business School. He has
authored an Asia-centric Casebook published by Cengage Learning Pvt Ltd. He has also presented
papers at various INFORMS Marketing Science Conferences, AMA Conferences and annual ANZMAC
conference. Debasis Pradhan is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: debasis@xlri.ac.in

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