Gender As Moderator Of Temperamental Background
Of Impulse Buying Tendency
Agata Gąsiorowska1
Wroclaw University of Technology, Poland
Abstract
Impulse buying is a phenomenon that is understood and treated extremely different by
marketers and psychologists. Marketers usually focus on market influence on consumers, and
underline impulses development as a result of this influence. Behavioural approach to
consumer decision making concentrates on individual factors that influence one’s impulse
buying tendency, and states, that this tendency in certain circumstances leads to the act of
impulse buying. Previous studies on impulse buying (Dittmar, et.al, 1996; Gąsiorowska,
2003) suggest, that this tendency might have different background, depending on gender. In
case of females, it is associated stronger with sensation seeking than with impulsivity, and in
case of males, the relation is opposite. Thus, this paper focuses on different temperamental
background of impulse buying in women and men. The hypothesis that gender moderates the
impact of sensation seeking and temperamental dimensions according to Regulative Theory
of Temperament on impulse buying was tested with Structural Equation Modelling. In the
group of females, impulse buying tendency is positively related to need for sensation and
negatively to age. In the group of males, this tendency is related to formal features of
behaviour according to RTT, and is not related to age. These results confirm that women treat
impulse buying as a kind of risky game that is to provide high level of stimulation, needed by
some consumers. When men engage in impulse buying, it is rather connected with their
sensitivity to market stimuli, or low endurance in case of information overload.
1
Institute of Organisation and Management, Wroclaw University of Technology, ul. Smoluchowskiego 25,
50-372 Wrocław, Poland, [email protected]
1
In marketing literature, impulsive buying is traditionally defined as purchasing,
directed at specific products, which are characterised by the following features: low price,
mass distribution, marginal need for item, selling in self-service condition, intensive and mass
advertising, prominent store display, short product life, small size or light weight, and ease of
storage (Stern, 1962). Other researchers (Bellenger, Robertson, Hirschman, 1978) concluded
that, if conditions are adequate, consumers could purchase every single item in impulsive
manner. Thus, impulsive buying is dependent not only on marketing influences, but also on
various individual characteristics of consumers.
Impulsive buying
Earliest research on impulsive buying used the impulse buying and unplanned buying
interchangeably (Stern, 1962; Kollat, Willett 1967). The only criterion differentiating planned
from unplanned buying was the time and place of the buying decision – before entering the
store or inside the store (Bellenger, Robertson, Hirschman, 1978). This reasoning leads to
assumption, that consumers always have precise shopping list, but obviously it cannot be true.
In many cases it is not worth to prepare shopping lists, as it is waist of time since some
consumers make decisions while shopping. Also, consumers were not able to verbalize
his/her plans while taking part in survey. Therefore, in later research the assumption was
made that impulsive buying was a special form of unplanned buying, activated by visual
stimulus (usually the product) and executed in a very short time (Stern, 1962, Piron, 1991).
As it was mentioned by the 1970s, researchers had begun to question whether products
could be classified as impulse or non-impulse, and concluded that virtually all products could
be purchased impulsively. It is the consumer not the product, who experiences impulses
(Bellenger, Robertson, Hirschman, 1978; Rook, 1987, Rook, Hoch, 1985).
In the 1980s, the approach to impulsive buying definitely changed with important works
by Rook (1987) and Rook and Hoch (1985) who attempted to clarify the nature of impulse
2
buying.
Rook and Hoch (1985) focused on how consumer behave during shopping, and on
mental and emotional processes that might take place. They recognized “product orientation”
as inappropriate, and noted, that impulsive buying by no means cannot be equalled to
unplanned buying. This led to redefinition of impulsive buying. According to Rook (1987)
„impulse buying occurs when a consumer experiences a sudden, often powerful and persistent
urge to buy something immediately. The impulse to buy is hedonically complex and may
stimulate emotional conflict. Also, impulse buying is prone to occur with diminished regard
for its consequences” (p.191).
Impulsive consumer shops when the mood strikes, finds gratification in shopping
activities, and often buys more than planned (Rook, Hoch, 1985), and thus can be
characterized as a recreational shopper (Bellenger, Korgaonkar 1980). It is also important to
note, that people are impulsive consumers to various extent – first, because they have various
level of impulsive buying tendency, second, because they have less or more contacts with
indulging buying situations, and finally, because of the various level of their self-control.
More recent research in the scope of this approach focused mainly on distinguishing
between people who are and are not “impulsive buyers” (e.g. Rook and Fisher, 1995; Youn,
Faber 2000). Still, it is important to remember, that almost everyone engages in impulse
shopping from time to time and that even impulse buyers can and do control their impulses at
times (Vohs, Faber, 2003, Gąsiorowska, 2003, Baumeister, 2002).
Rook and Fisher (1995) distinguished acts of impulsive buying from impulsive buying
tendency interpreted as a trait. They noted that impulsivity in buying (trait) is a
unidimensional construct that embodies one’s tendencies to think and to behave in specific
ways, i.e. spontaneous, unreflective, and immediate buying. Highly impulsive buyers are
more likely to by unreflective in their decisions as they are more prone to experience stimuli
3
to buy and are more prompted to physical proximity to certain products (Rook, Fisher, 1995).
They are dominated by emotional attraction of products and immersed by the promise of
immediate gratification (Hoch, Loewenstein, 1991).
On the other hand, even if consumer has experienced an impulse, it is not obvious that
he/she would act on it. Even highly impulsive consumers do not respond to every impulse
they experience. There are many factors that might stop the transition from impulsive feeling
to impulsive action, for example access to financial resources, time pressure, level of selfcontrol, or normative evaluation of impulsive buying as irrational, lavish and wasteful
(Gąsiorowska, 2003; Rook, Fisher, 1995).
The understanding of impulsive buying presented by Rook (e.g. Rook, Hoch, 1985;
Rook, 1987; Rook, Fisher, 1995) is probably the most popular in behavioural approach to this
phenomenon. Hence, in this research, impulsive buying is defined as non-reflective,
unintended, spontaneous acts of buying, connected with sudden urge to buy certain product,
and appearing as a reaction to stimulus, usually a product itself. Consumers are stimulated by
the physical proximity of desired product, linked to low intellectual control (lack of
evaluation based on utility criteria, lack or reduces reasoning, lack or reduces evaluation of
consequences, immediate gratification valued more than delayed consequences) and with high
emotional activation (excitement and stimulation caused by product or by the
situation/process of buying) (Gąsiorowska, 2003).
Determinants of impulsive buying
Among factors stimulating impulsive buying three groups can be distinguished. First
group consists of individual traits influencing impulsive buying tendency, such as general
impulsivity, optimal level of stimulation, temporal orientation, materialism, money attitudes
or recreational shopping tendency. Second group, encompasses individual and situational
factors, that trigger impulses in certain situation while shopping. These include affect and
4
emotions felt during certain buying episode, individual attitude towards promotion,
atmospherics, in-store stimuli, comfort and easiness of buying. Third group consists of
moderators that either inhibit impulsive decision like self-control, or stimulate it, like direct
access to money, and – type of money used (cash, credit card), or normative evaluation of
impulsive buying (e.g. Gąsiorowska, 2003). This research concentrates on factors included in
the first group, that is on individual differences underlying impulsive buying tendency.
Precisely taken, the focal point of this investigation is the influence of temperament and
gender together with gender-based shopping style on impulsive buying.
Impulsiveness. Impulsive buying tendency is acknowledged as manifestation of the general
impulsiveness (Rook, Fisher, 1995; Kacen, Lee, 2002; Weun, Jones, Beatty, 1998; Youn,
Faber, 2000; Cobb, Hoyer, 1986). Trait impulsivity is a general term characterizing nonreflective decision making, without reasoning and evaluation of consequences (e.g. Eysenck,
Eysenck, 1978; Weun, Jones, Beatty, 1998). Impulsive behaviour is perceived as immature,
irrational, ineffective and risky. It is associated with errors that might be avoided by careful
and reasonable decision making process (Hausman, 2000). On the other hand, as
impulsiveness is one of the temperamental features, buying impulsiveness might also be
influences by deeper, formal characteristics of behaviour.
Optimum stimulation level. The concept of optimum stimulation level reflects individual
differences in the intensity of stimulation that is needed for maintaining positive emotional
state (Zuckerman, 1994). Individuals with high optimum stimulation level are chronically
lower in their arousal level which makes them more prone to engage in sensation seeking
activities in order to achieve their desired (optimum) stimulation level. Such persons prefer
new, risky and stimulating activities and situations, which fulfill hedonic needs, no matter if
they are socially accepted or not, or if they are perceived as normal or abnormal. They are
also opened to persistent changes, resistant to stress and also impulsive in decision making
5
(Tyszka, Zaleskiewicz, 2001, p.341). From consumers perspective, high optimal level of
stimulation is associated with detailed analysis of advertisements, searching for information
just out of own curiosity, variety seeking in consumption, risky decisions and innovative
behaviour (Steenkamp, Baumgartner, 1992). Boedeker (1995) also noted that high level of
need for stimulation is connected to recreational and hedonic shopping, so it also might be
connected with impulsive buying tendency.
Shopping style by gender. The common opinion is that men do not like shopping, and are
not active in this field; it is hard to persuade them to be patient companions for women during
shopping. Women have greater affinity for shopping; they like walking slowly through stores,
examining shelves and hangers, comparing prices, products and values, interacting with staff
and other buyers, asking questions, trying clothes and finally purchasing. The majority of
shopping products is women’ domain., Women usually shop quite willingly, even for prosaic,
routine objects, which cannot bring special excitement, pleasure or sensation (Underhill,
2000). Shopping lets them to go out, might work as an antidote to loneliness or to boring
family life. Men typically move faster then women through shopping malls, spend less time
looking around, and in many cases it is hard to focus their attention on something they did not
intend to buy. On the other hand, they buy necessities much quicker than women, they do not
find pleasure in searching, choosing and trying, and also they are more suggestible to the
pleas of children and sales promotions (Underhill, 2000, p.101). Sulima (2000, p.177) noted
ironically that, “(...) during family shopping, men are used mainly for moving a shopping
trolley, and for authenticating with word or with gesture the consumptive ideas of their wives.
Checkout and door are their most desired places in shops. Women’ euphoria is usually
accompanied by men’ worry.”
Men usually do not engage in habitual shopping for necessities, but are quite skilled at
buying durable goods, like cars, tools, stereos or computers, while women traditionally care
6
about more temporary things, like cooking a dinner, decorating a cake, proper haircut or
makeup. For women, shopping is a kind of transforming experience, a method of becoming
better, more ideal version of person; it has emotional and psychological factors that hardly
exist for men (Underhill, 2000, p.116). Thus, women have higher tendency to shop in
emotional manner, and also – to shop impulsively (Verplanken, Herabadi, 2001; Bellenger,
Robertson, Hirschman, 1978; Dittmar, 1992, 1989; Dittmar, Beattie, 1998; Dittmar, Beattie,
Friese, 1995, 1996; Dittmar, Drury, 2000), while men are more impulsive and more prone to
act in impulsive way in general. These differences also suggest that there is yet another
mechanism of impulsive buying behaviour for men and women.
As previous research showed (Gąsiorowska, 2003) the structure of impulsive buying
tendency determinants differ among men and women. For women, this tendency is of
stimulative character, thus it is connected to emotions derived from the process of shopping or
from the possessing new goods. Impulsive buying tendency in this group is associated with
high level of desired stimulation and high level of materialism, and also with aspects of
money attitudes that are anchored both in present and future (Gąsiorowska, 2003).
For men, impulsive buying tendency is more of instrumental character. They want to
find what they need with a minimal level of engagement and finish it fast, so impulsive
buying for them means quick decision with not too much thinking, and also – the fastest
possible consumption of the purchased goods. In this group, impulsive buying tendency is
associated with present temporal orientation, demand for immediate gratification and focus on
utility that is derived from what they bought. Moreover, for men impulsive buying tendency
is more connected with aspects of money attitudes that are anchored in the present and are
connected with current actions (Gąsiorowska, 2003).
Based on previously presented research and discussion on impulsive buying the main
hypothesis for this study can be formulated as:
7
H1: Gender moderates the relation between temperamental features and impulsive buying
tendency.
Additionally, it is expected that, impulsive buying tendency has stimulative character
for women, and instrumental character for men. It leads to following detailed hypotheses:
H2: For women, impulsive buying tendency is related to sensation seeking stronger than to
formal attributes of behaviour
H3. For men, impulsive buying tendency is related to formal attributes of behaviour stronger
than to sensation seeking.
Method
Participants
Participants were mainly students of linguistics (especially in the group of women), but
also teachers, bookstore workers, physical workers and unemployed, living in Wroclaw,
Poland. Participants were informed that the collected data would be used for research, but also
had the opportunity to receive feedback concerning their results. Presented analysis was based
on 180 respondents (86 men, 94 women). The average age was 31.57 years (SD 12.806).
Questionnaire
Impulse buying tendency. To measure impulsive buying tendency, two scales were used.
First of them, SKI Multidimensional Scale (Gąsiorowska, 2003), is original Polish scale,
consisting on the 23 items, grouped in five dimensions (shopping emotions, feeling of
pressure, post-purchasing regret, shopping pleasure, lack of deliberation). In this research,
only general indicator of impulse buying tendency was taken into consideration. SKI scale
has good reliability (Cronbach’s alfa from 0.8 to 0.9) and measurement stability (test-retest
Pearson correlation r=0.83, p<0.001) (Gąsiorowska, 2003).
8
Second impulse buying scale, taken from SZN Scale (Macik, Macik, 2005) is based on
Hausman IBT scale (2000) and consists on 10 items. For both scales, responses were recorded
on a 7-point Likert-type scale with ‘‘definitely agree’’ and ‘‘definitely disagree’’ as end
points. The instruction was to rate the extent to which each statement was an accurate
description of common behaviour and opinion on the part of the respondent.
Optimum stimulation level. Participants completed Sensation Seeking Scale Form V
(Zuckerman, 1994). This is a 40-item, forced-choice questionnaire that consists on four
subscales:
1) Thrill and Adventure Seeking (TAS): desire to engage in risky physical activities or
sports providing unusual sensations
2) Experience Seeking (ES): desire to seek new experience through the mind and senses
and through an unconventional life-style and travel,
3) Disinhibition (Dis): seeking of sensation through other people or partying, social
drinking, and sex
4) Boredom Susceptibility (BS) aversion for unchanging or unstimulating environments
or persons
Formal Characteristics of Behaviour. Participants completed The Formal Characteristics of
Behaviour-Temperament Inventory (FCB-TI). This questionnaire measures the dimensions of
temperament as postulated by the Regulative Theory of Temperament (RTT), and is based on
the assumption that temperament refers to formal attributes of behaviour expressed in
energetic and temporal characteristics. This is a 120-item questionnaire, with “yes” and “no”
as answers, that consists on six following subscales (Strelau, Zawadzki, 1993, p. 327):
1) Briskness (BR): Tendency to react quickly, to keep in high tempo in performing
activities, and to shift easily in response to changes in the surroundings from one
behavior (reaction) to another.
9
2) Perseveration (PE):Tendency to continue and to repeat behavior or experience
emotions after cessation of stimuli (situations) evoking this behavior or emotions.
3) Sensory sensitivity (SS): Ability to react to sensory stimuli of low stimulative value.
4) Emotional reactivity (ER): Tendency to react intensively to emotion-generating
stimuli, expressed in high emotional sensitivity and in low emotional endurance.
5) Endurance (EN): Ability to react adequately in situations demanding long-lasting or
high stimulative activity and under intense external stimulation.
6) Activity (AC): Tendency to undertake behaviours of high stimulation value or to
supply by means of behaviour strong stimulation from the surroundings.
Results
Table 1 presents correlations between temperamental factors and the impulse buying
scales separately by gender. We also provide z-difference tests between the correlations for
men and women using the Fisher r-to-z conversion. The z differences essentially represent
interactions where a different association is found between temperament and impulse buying
for women compared to men.
In case of women, there were four significant correlations between sensation seeking
and impulse buying when this construct was measured with SZN scale, and three significant
correlations when it was measured with SKI scale. Only one dimension from formal
characteristics of behaviour, activity, correlates significantly with both measures of impulse
buying in this group. For men, significant and negative correlation was found between
sensory sensitivity, briskness and both measures of impulse buying tendency, while other
correlations were insignificant.
Two z-difference tests between correlations for men and women were significant for
both impulse buying scales. Higher level of disinhibition was significantly associated with
10
higher level of impulsive buying for women and unrelated for men, and higher level of
sensory sensitivity was significantly associated with fewer tendencies for impulsive buying
for men and unrelated for women. Further differences in correlation structure were found only
for SZN scale. These results suggest that gender moderates the influence of temperament on
impulse buying tendency and confirms hypothesis H1.
Table 1. Correlations between sensation seeking, formal characteristics of behaviour
and impulse buying tendency
Temperamental variable
women
men
Z-differences
Impulse buying tendency - SKI scale
Sensation seeking
Thrill and Adventure Seeking 0,045
Experience Seeking
0,228
Disinhibition
0,416
Boredom Susceptibility
0,253
Formal characteristics of behavior
Activity
0,244
Endurance
0,099
Emotional reactivity
0,055
Sensory sensitivity
-0,027
Briskness
-0,126
Perseveration
0,048
*
**
*
*
-0,066
0,086
0,158
0,178
0,774
1,016
1,974 *
0,548
0,026
-0,141
0,151
-0,387 **
-0,349 **
0,073
1,553
1,680
0,676
2,655 **
1,655
0,175
Impulse buying tendency - SZN scale
Sensation seeking
Thrill and Adventure Seeking 0,261
Experience Seeking
0,411
Disinhibition
0,484
Boredom Susceptibility
0,367
Formal characteristics of behavior
Activity
0,314
Endurance
0,103
Emotional reactivity
-0,021
Sensory sensitivity
-0,128
Briskness
-0,150
Perseveration
-0,031
*p< 0,05 **p< 0,01
*
**
**
**
-0,102
0,101
0,086
0,113
2,574 *
2,336 *
3,078 **
1,891
**
0,028
-0,180
0,110
-0,399 **
-0,291 **
0,074
2,068 *
1,987 *
0,915
2,046 *
1,034
0,732
Furthermore, data were analyzed with structural equitation modelling, using SPSS
Amos 7.0 package. Four models were constructed, separately for men and women, with
11
sensation seeking dimensions or formal characteristics of behaviour as independent variables,
and two measures of impulse buying tendency as dependent variables. These models are
presented on figures 1-4. All covariances between independent variables were omitted.
All models were evaluated using four criteria. Model was accepted if the ratio of chisquare to degrees of freedom is less than two, the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) and Tucker
Lewis Index (TLI) are greater than 0.90, and the root-mean-square error of approximation
(RMSEA) is lower than 0.08. According to these criteria, all models are good fitted.
First model (Figure 1) represents the influence of formal attributes of behaviour on impulse
buying tendency for women. The only significant path is from activity to impulse buying
tendency measured with SKI and with SZN. When a woman is active, which means that she
is prone to undertake high stimulating behaviours or to search strong stimulation from the
environment, she likes engaging in shopping, and also in impulse shopping. Nevertheless,
activity explains rather small amount of dependent variables variance, respectively 6% and
10%.
Figure 1. Formal characteristic of behaviour and impulsive buying tendency – women
(n=94)
12
Figure 2. Sensation seeking and impulsive buying tendency – women (n=94)
Figure 2 presents structural model of relation between sensation seeking and
impulsive buying tendency among women. High level of experience seeking and disinhibition
leads to high tendency to buy impulsively, no matter how the impulsive buying tendency is
measured. The amount of explained variance is higher than in case of formal attributes of
behaviour as independent variables, and amounts to 19% for SKI scale and 29% for SZN
Scale.
These results, together with correlation coefficients, confirm hypothesis H2.
Figure 3. Formal characteristic of behaviour and impulsive buying tendency – men
(n=86)
13
Figure 4 Sensation seeking and impulsive buying tendency – men (n=86)
For men, the structure of relations between formal attributes of behaviour and
impulsive buying is quite different than for women (Figure 3). Low level of sensory
sensitivity and low level of briskness leads to higher level of impulsive buying tendency.
Dimensions of temperament explain higher amount of impulse buying variables variance than
in case of analogical model for women, respectively 26% for SKI scale and 23% for SZN
scale. Additionally, sensation seeking is unrelated with impulsive buying for this group.
These results, together with correlation coefficients, confirm hypothesis H3.
Discussion
The most important conclusion from this research is that gender moderates the relation
between individual differences variables and impulsive buying tendency, thus impulse buying
has definitely different background for female and men, and further investigation should be
performed separately for these two groups.
References
Baumeister, R.F. (2002). Yielding to temptation: self control failure, impulsive purchasing,
and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(4), 670-676
14
Bellenger, D.N., Korgaonkar, P.K. (1980) Profiling the recreational shopper, Journal of
Retailing, 56, 77-92
Bellenger, D.N., Robertson, D.H., Hirschman, E.C. (1978) A pragmatic concept of impulse
purchasing to guide in-store promotion, Journal of Advertising Research, 18, 15-18
Boedeker, M. (1995) Optimum stimulation level and recreational shopping tendency,
European Advances in Consumer Research, 2. 372-380
Cobb, C.J., Hoyer, W.D. (1986). Planned versus impulse purchase behavior. Journal of
Retailing, 62, 384-410.
Dittmar, H. (1989) Gender identity-related meaning of personal possessions, British Journal
of Social Psychology, 28, 159-171
Dittmar, H. (1992) Perceived material wealth and first impression, British Journal of Social
Psychology, 31, 379-391
Dittmar, H., Beattie J. (1998) Impulsive and Excessive Buying Behaviour, [w:] Choice and
Public Policy. The Limits to Welfare Markets, red. Peter Taylor-Gooby; Londyn: Macmillan
Press Ltd., 123-144
Dittmar, H., Beattie J., Friese S. (1995) Gender Identity and Material Symbols: Objects and
Decision considerations in Impulse Purchases, Journal of Economic Psychology, 16, 491-511
Dittmar, H., Beattie J., Friese S. (1996). Objects, decision considerations and self-image in
men’s and women’s impulse purchases, Acta Psychologica, 93, 187-206.
Dittmar, H., Drury, J. (2000). Self-image - is it in the bag? A qualitative comparison between
ordinary and excessive consumers, Journal of Economic Psychology, 21(2), 109-142 .
Eysenck, S.B., Eysenck, H.J. (1978). Impulsiveness and venturesomeness: their position in a
dimensional system of personality description. Psychological Reports, 43, 1247-1255.
15
Gąsiorowska, A. (2003). Model struktury, deteminant i behawioralnych konsekwencji
zakupów impulsywnych [The model of structure, determinant and behavioural consequences
of impulsive buying]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wroclaw: Wroclaw University of
Technology
Hausman, A. (2000). A multi-method investigation of consumer motivations in impulse
buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17, 403-419.
Hoch, S.J., Loewenstein, G.F. (1991). Time-inconsistent preferences and consumer selfcontrol. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 1-16.
Kacen, J.J., Lee, J.A. (2002). The Influence of Culture on Consumer Impulsive Buying
Behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(2), 163-179.
Kollat, D.T., Willet, R.P. (1967). Customer Impulse Purchasing Behavior, Journal of
Marketing Research, 4, 21-31.
Piron, F. (1991). Defining impulse purchasing, Advances in Consumer Research, 18, 509514.
Rook, D.W. (1987). The buying impulse, Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 189-199.
Rook, D.W., Fisher, R.J. (1995). Normative Influences on Impulsive Buying Behavior, Journal
of Consumer Research, 22, 305-313.
Rook, D.W., Hoch, S.J. (1985). Consuming Impulses, Advances in Consumer Research, 12,
23-27.
Sharma, P., Sivakumaran, B., Marshall, R. (2006). Investigating Impulse Buying and Variety
Seeking: Towards a General Theory of Hedonic Purchase Behaviors. Advances in Consumer
Research, 33(1), 388-389.
16
Steenkamp, J-B. E. M., Baumgartner, H. (1992). The role of optimum stimulation level in
exploratory consumer behavior, Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 434-448.
Stern, H. (1962). The significance of impulse buying today, Journal of Marketing, 26, 59-62.
Strelau, J., Zawadzki, B. (1993). The Formal Characteristics of Behaviour-Temperament
Inventory (FCB-TI): theoretical assumptions and scale construction. European Journal of
Personality, 7 (5), 313-336.
Sulima, R. (2000). Antropologia codzienności, Krakow: Jagiellonian University Print.
Tyszka, T., Zaleśkiewicz, T. (2001). Racjonalność decyzji, Warsaw: PWE.
Underhill, P. (2000). Why we buy. The science of shopping, London: TEXTERE Publishing
Ltd.
Verplanken, B., Herabadi, A. (2001). Individual Differences in Impulse Buying Tendency:
Feeling and no Thinking, European Journal of Personality, 15, 71-83.
Vohs,K. D., Faber, R. (2007). Spent Resources: Self-Regulatory Resource Availability
Affects Impulse Buying. Journal of Consumer Research, 33, 537-547.
Weun S., Jones, M.A., Beatty S.E. (1998). Development and validation of the Impulse
Buying Tendency Scale. Psychological Reports, 82(3), 1123-1133.
Youn, S., Faber, R.J. (2000). Impulse buying: its relation to personality traits and cues,
Advances in Consumer Research, 27, 179-185.
Zuckerman, M. (1994). Behavioral expressions and biosocial bases of sensation seeking.
New York, Cambridge University Press
17