ijcrb.webs.com
SEPTEMBER 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 4, NO 5
Post Purchase Cognitive Dissonance: Impact of Product Involvement, Impulse
Buying and Hedonic Consumption Tendencies
Muhammad Abid Saleem
Lecturer
NUML, Regional Campus Multan
Pakistan
PhD Scholar
International Islamic University, Islamabad
Pakistan
Rao Akmal Ali
Lecturer
NUML, Regional Campus Multan
Pakistan
Saeed Ahmad
Lecturer
NUML, Regional Campus Multan
Pakistan
ABSTRACT
This study proposed and empirically verified the impact of product involvement, hedonic consumption tendencies
and impulse buying tendencies on cognitive dissonance. Analyses of a sample of 422 students, drawn from different
universities of twin cities, revealed interesting findings. Hedonic consumption tendencies was found insignificant in
predicting cognitive dissonance but product involvement and impulse buying were significant in predicting
cognitive dissonance being former having inverse relation and latter having direct relation. Further to this, impact of
product involvement and hedonic consumption tendencies were found directly relational to impulse purchase.
Product category wise exploration of this model can add new dimensions and findings in future.
Keywords:
Impulse Purchase, Cognitive Dissonance, Product involvement, Hedonic Consumption Tendencies
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1051
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
SEPTEMBER 2012
VOL 4, NO 5
1. Introduction
In dynamic business environment, marketers have always been trying to not only acquire new customer base but
also retain the existing one by providing value, satisfying customers’ exchange expectations. It has been found that
customer retention is highly associated with customer satisfaction and customer satisfaction not only retains the
customer with the company but also affects revenue, earning per share and stock price (Williams and Naumann,
2011). Literature documents very strong association between customer satisfaction and service quality; service
quality having very important role in determining the level of satisfaction attained and further behavioral intentions
by the customer (Varela-Neira, et al., 2010). Among various other aspects of service quality, after sales service
holds very important role. After sales service reduces the negative feelings of the customers after having purchased a
product that doesn’t fit their exchange expectations. The gap between the expected performance of certain product,
against an exchange of certain amount of money, and its actual performance creates post purchase regret which
leads to customer dissatisfaction. Based on theory of Festinger (1957), cognitive dissonance is a kind of
uncomfortable feeling being ridden by an individual due to having conflicting beliefs. Cognitive dissonance is
reported to have an inverse relationship with service quality (Neill and Palmer, 2004).
Concept of cognitive dissonance was first coined by Leon Festinger where he discriminated between two opposing
beliefs being held by an individual to be cause of cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957). Festinger (1957) further
holds that the individual being captured by unpleasant cognitions is psychologically compelled to take remedial
measures to get rid of this dissonance and attain consonance. In shopping behavior, this negative state arises when
there is substantial difference between the expected performance of some product being purchased and its actual
performance. The negative dissonance that has been developed due to underperformance of certain product pushes
the customer to bring in attitudinal changes for future behavior in accordance to the notion of dissonance reduction
(Harmon-Jones et. al, 2009).
Intensity of cognitive dissonance highly depends on the individual traits being possessed by the customer and the
variables causing dissonance (Harmon-Jones et. al, 2009). Customer purchasing traits, personal fear of invalidity,
desire for structured life, negative state of mind and subjective-well being are a few to name, that have been tested
and found to have significant relation with cognitive dissonance (Thompson et. al, 1989; Beck et. al, 1979; Diener
et. al , 1985; Ryff and Keyes, 1995).
This research study is an attempt to identify relationship of cognitive dissonance with various shopping traits
possessed by customer. These are hedonic consumption tendencies, impulse buying tendencies and the product
involvement. Literature documents no research so far in which these all have been checked for their relationship
with cognitive dissonance.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Impulse Buying
Being researched over least 6 decades, impulse buying holds very important position in marketing decision making.
It has been explained as a tendency of making “spontaneous”, “unreflective”, “immediate”, “kinetic”, sudden and
unplanned purchases; buying without any need been recognized initially; an emotional experience and a behavior
related to “immaturity” (Rook and Fisher, 1995; Thompson et al., 1990; Engel and Blackwell, 1982; Rook, 1987).
Impulse buying has got cognitive and affective parts, former related with planning and latter with situational factors
stimulating impulse spur causing impulse purchases (Verplanken and Herabadi, 2001). In most of purchases,
impulse buying has been proved to be a significant method of choosing product as it provides hedonic reinforcement
and reduces overload of selection (Hauseman, 2000). Research in impulse buying exploring relation of impulse
buying with individual traits reveals the fact that cognitive component of impulse buying is negatively associated
with subjective well being, a , where as affective component is linked to negative affect and customer susceptibility
to interpersonal influence, a measure of social influence (Silvera et al., 2008). Earlier research, however, also prove
empirically that impulse purchase is not merely function of personal traits, or what we say impulse buying tendency,
rather the type of product also has significant impact on this phenomenon.
Gender differences in impulse buying behavior and impulse buying tendency, in purchase of various product
categories, have also been found significant in earlier researches (Coley and Burgess, 2003).
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1052
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
SEPTEMBER 2012
VOL 4, NO 5
Impulse buying tendency has been found to have very interesting relation with cognitive dissonance in literature.
According to George and Yaoyuneyong (2010), impulse buying tendency is a coping strategy to reduce discomfort
and bring consistency in conflicting beliefs. Impulse buying tendency in this way is inversely related to cognitive
dissonance.
With the help of literature following hypothesis is drawn,
H1.
Impulse buying tendencies are inversely related to cognitive dissonance
2.2. Product Involvement
Product involvement refers to ““the general level of interest in the object, or the centrality of the object to the
person’s ego-structure” (Day, 1970, p. 45)”. Product involvement simply refers to the attributes linked to certain
product relative to customer such as its importance, meanings, value, strength of relationship between customer and
product and level of psychological and affective relationship between product and customer (Howard and Sheth,
1969; Laurent and Kapferer, 1985; Bowen and Chaffee, 1974).
Product involvement in traditional store shopping set up, is positively associated with impulse buying tendencies
when it comes to apparel purchase whereas, the same is absent in online setup of apparel product shopping (Chen,
2008 ). On the other hand, product involvement, in purchase of computers, is associated positively with impulse
buying behavior in on line purchase set up (Chen, 2008). These findings point towards another facet of product
involvement that the characteristics of the product associated with hedonic and sensual feelings compel its impulse
purchase, if the product is available for direct appraisal of these characteristics.
H2.
Product involvement is directly related to impulse purchase tendencies.
Research on cognitive dissonance shows that cognitive dissonance is in fact a state of mind ore a kind of guilt that
arises once the purchased product fails to fulfill the expected performance (Festinger, 1957). Products with low
involvement have been reported to cause greater post consumption cognitive dissonance than those with high
involvement (Gbadamosi, 2009).
H2a.
Product involvement is inversely related to cognitive dissonance.
2.3. Hedonic Consumption Tendencies
Hedonism has been defined as “``the doctrine that pleasure is the highest good; the pursuit of pleasure; a life-style
devoted to pleasure-seeking'' (The Chambers Dictionary, 1993)”. Hedonic consumption tendency in general may
refer to as traits of individual to engage in activities resulting in pleasure and relief in tension. Bentham (1789) holds
that pain or pleasure is a main drive to direct the actions of the human being. Delight, joy, elation, ecstasy and
enjoyment are a few declared dimensions of hedonism (Andrew, 2008).
Literature documents very strong relationship between shopping experience and hedonic tendencies. Hedonic
experience is related with pleasure, arousal, fantasies, feelings and fun (Campbell, 1987; Hirschman and Holbrook,
1982). Pursuit of pleasure is related to sensual products having hedonic attributes; hence gain attention of the
customers with higher hedonic tendencies (Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982).
Action-Based model of dissonance states that individuals try to neutralize aversive state and attain consonance to
bring equilibrium between conflicting beliefs (Harmon-Jones 1999). This may give rise to certain actions, that
otherwise are not rational, and may result in to certain hedonic consumptions. Individuals with hedonic consumption
tendencies, hence, may end up with low cognitive dissonance than those with utilitarian tendencies. We may then
hypothesize that,
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1053
ijcrb.webs.com
SEPTEMBER 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 4, NO 5
H3. Hedonic consumption tendencies are inversely related to cognitive dissonance.
H3a. Hedonic consumption tendencies are directly related to impulse purchase tendencies.
Following conceptual framework is identified in the light of various relationships among different variables
established earlier,
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework
Hedonic Consumption Tendencies
Cognitive dissonance
Impulse Buying Tendencies
Product Involvement
3. Methodology
450 students from different universities of twin cities were approached directly, during various sessions, to get data.
Other than impulse buying tendency scale, for rest of questions, students were given a scenario to recall back their
last purchase undertaken impulsively and answer the questions pertaining to cognitive dissonance, hedonic
consumption tendency and product involvement.
3.1. Sample Characteristics
Out of 450 students taken as a sample, 422 useful responses were chosen for analysis. 28 questionnaires were
rejected due to missing values and non-serious response. Mean age of the respondents appeared out to be 22 years.
Out of 422 respondents 131 were females that constitutes 31% of the sample and 291 were males that constitute
69% of sample. Again the criticism on the student sample raised by Wells, 1993 and well addressed by George and
Yaoyuneyong (2010), does also apply to this study as the segment chosen to study the underlying research question
is substantial and constitutes major impulse purchase in the society.
3.2. Measurement Instrument
Self administered questionnaire was used to collect data and the scale for operationalization of the variables, used in
the study, was adopted from various researches done in past.
Impulse buying tendency scale (IBTS) was adopted from Verplaken and Herabadi (2001), cognitive dissonance
from Sweeney et al. (2000), product involvement from Mcquarrie and Munson (1992) and hedonic consumption
tendency scale was adopted from Hausman (2000).
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1054
ijcrb.webs.com
SEPTEMBER 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 4, NO 5
Table 1
Reliability of Scale
The reliability of scale for various variables and dimensions, used in this study, is shown in Table1.
Over all internal reliability of the instrument remained satisfactory with alpha value of 0.905. Individual analysis of
reliability for various variables also showed satisfactory results having Impulse buying tendency scale 0.808,
emotional dimension of cognitive dissonance 0.848, wisdom 0.738, and concern over deal 0.768, product
Variable / Scale
Dimension
Cronbach Alpha (α)
Over all Reliability of Instrument
-
0.905
Impulse Buying / Impulse Buying Tendency Scale (IBTS)
Impulse Buying
0.808
Emotional
0.848
Wisdom
0.738
Concern over deal
0.768
Product Involvement
-
0.793
Hedonic Consumption Tendency
-
0.722
Cognitive Dissonance
involvement 0.793 and hedonic consumption tendency 0.722.
4. Data Analysis and Discussion
In this section, the results obtained from the analysis of data are presented and findings along with its possible
implications are discussed.
4.1 IBTS, Product Involvement and Hedonic Consumption Tendency – CD relationship
Multiple Regression was carried out having impulse buying tendency, product involvement and hedonic
consumption tendencies as independent variables and cognitive dissonance as dependent variable. The results are
summarized in Tables 2, 2a and 2b.
Model summary divulges that impulse buying, product involvement and hedonic consumption tendencies predict
37% variation in cognitive dissonance. ANOVA table implies that prediction is statistically significant at p < 0 .05.
However, table 2b shows that product involvement and impulse buying tendency are significant in predicting
cognitive dissonance having t –values -5.750 and 10.286 respectively at p < 0 .05 whereas, hedonic consumption
tendency is insignificant in prediction having t-value 0.262 at p > 0 .05 i.e. 0.793. Beta coefficients presented in
table 2b show that product involvement has inverse whereas impulse buying tendencies have direct relation ship
with cognitive dissonance with β values -0.280 and 0.439 respectively.
Statistical results presented in Table 2b approve hypothesis H2a but disapprove hypotheses H3 and H1.
Rejection of Hypothesis H1 contradicts with theoretical assumptions built in earlier parts of this study and results of
earlier research done by George and Yaoyuneyong (2010), but a different line of reasoning and literature can bring
sense of it. Various studies hold that high involvement in purchase process leads to high control on post purchase
conflicting cognitions; even if the exchange expectations are not met, but in impulse purchase there is low
involvement in purchase process hence, in case of impulse purchase the level of post purchase regret may rise (Rook
and Fisher; 1995, Mittal, 1989; Venkatraman 2006; Zaichkowsky, 1985), which is in accordance to the results of
present study.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1055
ijcrb.webs.com
SEPTEMBER 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 4, NO 5
4.2 Product Involvement and Hedonic Consumption Tendency – IBTS relationship
Multiple Regressions was again run to describe impact of product involvement and hedonic consumption tendency
on impulse buying tendency. The results are summarized in Tables 3, 3a and 3b.
Model summary reveals that product involvement and hedonic consumption tendencies estimate 17 % variation in
Impulse Buying Tendency. ANOVA table empirically verifies that prediction is statistically significant at p < 0 .05.
Table 3b shows that product involvement and hedonic consumption tendency are significant in predicting impulse
buying having t –values 4.594 and 4.164 respectively at p < 0 .05. Beta coefficients presented in table 3b show that
product involvement and hedonic consumption tendency have direct relation ship with impulse buying tendency
with β values 0.249 and 0.226 respectively.
Statistical results presented in Table 3b approve hypothesis H2 and H3a.
In the light of statistical results Figure 2 gives an estimated model of this study.
Table 2
Regression Analysis Model Summary
Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
.611a
1
Adjusted R Square
.373
Std. Error of the Estimate
.369
.49603
a. Predictors: (Constant), hedonic consumption tendencies, IBTS, product involvement
Table 2a
ANOVA Analysis
ANOVAb
Model
1
Sum of Squares
Regression
df
Mean Square
61.264
3
20.421
Residual
102.847
418
.246
Total
164.112
421
F
82.998
Sig.
.000a
a. Predictors: (Constant), hedonic consumption tendencies, IBTS, product involvement
b. Dependent Variable: cognitive dissonance
Table 2b
Coefficients in Regression Analysis
N
Independent Variables
Standardized Coefficients
t
Sig.
Beta
422
IBTS
.439
10.286
.000
Product Involvement
-.280
-5.750
.000
Hedonic Consumption Tendencies
.013
.262
.793
Dependent Variable: Cognitive Dissonance
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1056
ijcrb.webs.com
SEPTEMBER 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 4, NO 5
Table 3
Regression Analysis Model Summary
Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
.423a
1
Adjusted R Square
.179
Std. Error of the Estimate
.175
.50540
a. Predictors: (Constant), hedonic consumption tendencies, product involvement
Table 3a
ANOVA Analysis
ANOVAb
Model
1
Sum of Squares
Regression
df
Mean Square
23.270
2
11.635
Residual
107.023
419
.255
Total
130.293
421
a.
Predictors: (Constant), hedonic consumption tendencies, product involvement
b.
Dependent Variable: IBTS
F
45.550
Sig.
.000a
Table 3b
Coefficients in Regression Analysis
Standardized Coefficients
t
Sig.
Beta
N
422
Independent Variables
Product Involvement
0.249
4.594
.000
Hedonic Consumption Tendencies
0.226
4.164
.000
Dependent Variable: Impulse Buying
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1057
ijcrb.webs.com
SEPTEMBER 2012
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
VOL 4, NO 5
Figure 2: Estimated Model
0.226
Cognitive dissonance
0.439
Hedonic Consumption
Tendencies
Impulse Buying
Tendencies
-0.280
0.249
Product Involvement
5. Limitations of the Study and Directions for Future Research
Although choice of student sample constitutes very important portion of target population and revealed interesting
information in this study, still the verification of model on different sample category remain an interesting avenue to
be explored.
When it comes to product involvement and impulse purchase, the importance of product category rise many fold.
Exploring implication of the suggested model on specific product categories may unveil novel dimensions.
Level of cognitions may vary with variations in demographic profiles of the customers. Post purchase cognitive
dissonance may also vary with reference to Gender, age groups and on available disposable income. Exploring these
dimensions may also bring out interesting implications in future research.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1058
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
SEPTEMBER 2012
VOL 4, NO 5
References
Beck, A. T., Rush, A. J., Shaw, B. F., & Emery, G., 1979. Cognitive therapy of depression. New York: Guilford
Press.
Bowen, L. and Chaffee, S.H., 1974. Product involvement and pertinent advertising appeals, Journalism Quarterly,
Vol. 51, pp. 613-21
Chen Tsai. 2008, Online Impulse Buying and Product Involvement, Communications of the IBIMA, Volume 5, pp.
74-81
Coley A.; Burgess B., 2003. Gender differences in cognitive and affective impulse buying, Journal of Fashion
Marketing and Management, Volume 7, Number 3, , pp. 282-295
Concepción Varela-Neira, Rodolfo Vázquez-Casielles, Víctor Iglesias., 2010. Explaining customer satisfaction with
complaint handling. International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 28, Iss: 2, pp.88 – 112
Day George S., 1970. Buyer Attitudes and Brand Choice, New York: Free Press.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S., 1985. The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.
Engel, J.F., & Blackwell, R.D., 1982. Consumer Behavior. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden Press
Festinger Leon, 1957. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press, Stanford, C.A
Fisher, R., & Rook, D., 1995. Normative influences on impulsive buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Research.
22, 305-314.
Gbadamosi, A., 2009. Cognitive dissonance: The implicit explication in low-income consumers’ shopping
behaviour for ‘low-involvement’ grocery products, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management,
vol. 37, No.12, pp. 1077-1095
George Babu P. and Yaoyuneyong Gallayanee, 2010. Impulse buying and cognitive dissonance: a study conducted
among the spring break student shoppers, Young Consumers, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 291-306
Harmon-Jones Eddie, David M. Amodio, and Cindy Harmon-Jones, 2009. Action-Based Model of Dissonance: A
Review, Integration, and Expansion of Conceptions of cognitive Conflict. Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, Vol. 41, Burlington: Academic Press, pp. 119-166.
Hausman, A. 2000. A multi-method investigation of consumer motivations in impulse buying behavior, Journal of
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 403-19.
Harmon-Jones, E., & Mills, J., 1999. Cognitive Dissonance: Progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1059
ijcrb.webs.com
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS
SEPTEMBER 2012
VOL 4, NO 5
Hirschman, E.C and Holbrook, M.B., 1982. Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46, Summer, pp. 92-101.
Howard, J.A., Sheth, J.N., 1969. The Theory of Buyer Behavior, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Laurent, G. Kapferer, J., 1985. Measuring consumer involvement profiles, JMR, Journal of marketing research,
22(1), 41 - 53.
Martin O'Neill, Adrian Palmer, 2004. Cognitive dissonance and the stability of service quality perceptions. Journal
of Services Marketing, Vol. 18, Iss: 6, pp.433 – 449
McQuarrie, E.F.and Munson, J.M., 1992. Revised product involvement inventory: Improved usability and validity,
Advances in Consumer Research, No. 19, pp. 108-115
Mittal, B., 1989. A theoretical analysis of two recent measures of involvement, in Srull, T.K. (Ed.), Advances in
Consumer Research, Vol. 16, ACR, Provo, UT, pp. 697-702.
Paul Williams, Earl Naumann., 2011. Customer satisfaction and business performance: a firm-level analysis. Journal
of Services Marketing, Vol. 25, Iss: 1, pp.20 – 32
Rook, D.W., 1987. The buying impulse, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14.
Campbell, C., 1987, The Romantic Ethic and the Spirit of Modern Capitalism. Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, L. M., 1995. The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 69, 719–727.
Silvera D. H., Anne M. Lavack, Fredric Kropp, 2008. Impulse purchase: the role of affect, social influence, and
subjective wellbeing, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 25 Iss: 1, pp.23 – 33
Sweeney, J.C., Hausknecht, D. and Soutar, G.N., 2000. Measuring cognitive dissonance: a multi-dimensional scale,
Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 369-85.
Thompson, M. M., Naccarato, M. E., & Parker, K. E., 1989. Assessing cognitive need: The development of the
Personal Need for Structure and Personal Fear of Invalidity Scales. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Canadian Psychological Association Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Venkatraman, M.P., 2006, Involvement and risk, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 229-47.
Verplanken, B., & Herabadi, A., 2001. Individual differences in impulse buying tendency: Feeling and no Thinking.
European Journal of personality, 15, S71-S83.
Zaichkowsky, J.L., 1985. Measuring the involvement concept, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 12, December,
pp. 341-52.
COPY RIGHT © 2012 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research
1060