Culture and Consumption Motivation

Introduction

 One’s culture may determine purchasing decisions, as well as their needs and goals.  However, six factors of paternalism, gender roles, power distance, collectivism vs. individualism, consumption motivation, and uncertainty avoidance can play an important role in consumer purchasing behavior. 

Research Background on Motivation to Buy

 Darwin’s theory of evolution postulates that there are behavioral factors that already exist in humans and species, a basic need or instinct for survival.  Thus, those innate needs also dictate consumerism, and a consumer’s motivation to purchase, or “instinctual consumerism.”  A consumer is motivated by their needs, as ascribed in Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory, wherein, a clear formulation of what drives human behavior is postulated.  The needs that drive human (consumer) behavior stem from the most basic need fulfillment, physiological needs, which must be fulfilled first, before moving on to higher order of needs, such as safety and belonging, esteem, and finally the top tier need of self-actualization.  Thus, the inclination to satisfy these human needs is the motivator of consumer purchasing behavior.   

 The needs of consumers are the foundation of consumer buyer behavior, as it relates to motivational factors.  However, other factors branch out from this foundational standpoint to encompass more on consumer motivation.  One factor is consumer goals; these goals can steer the decision- making process of consumers, and the course of action they will take in, not only choice, but purchasing action.  Therefore, two motivators are need-oriented and goal-oriented.  The goal-oriented motivator is seen in marketing of durables and non-durables, services, and persons and ideas.  Durables such as purchasing a laptop for managing one’s finances; nondurable, such as buying a specific fabric softener because it is effective and gentle; services, such as purchasing a gym membership to lose weight and get healthy; and persons and ideas, such as voting for a political candidate because they promote a cause or understand a voter’s welfare.  All of these goals are based on results that consumption can actualize.  Moreover, need- oriented and goal-oriented work hand-in-hand, in consumer motivation for purchasing products/services. 

These specific orientations lead to a consumer purchasing process, factors that start at the motivation level, such as establishing, or recognizing a need or even goal purchasing.  Once the consumer establishes a need, then, they follow certain steps that ultimately lead to purchasing a product/service that fulfills the need or goal.  These steps include information search, both internal (consumer memory), and external (media and word of mouth, etc.), assessing value through evaluating alternatives, buying value through purchase decision, and post-purchase behavior assessment.  Furthermore, consumer motivation begins at the need or goal level, and once the need or goal is established, then the consumer follows more steps in the purchasing decision process, which leads to the post-purchase behavior assessment. 

Data Collection Process

          The research study data was collected from fifty respondents, twenty- five males, and twenty-five females, between the ages of eighteen and sixty years old, with an income level that ranges from middle class to upper class.  The respondents selected are employed at the retail store, Haverty’s Furniture Company, located in Atlanta, Georgia; they are based on a hierarchical pyramid, from sales staff, store managers, regional managers, to Chief Executive Officer (CEO).  The data was gathered from a survey, which was issued to the respondents via electronically, where they were asked to fill out the survey by highlighting the selected choice answer for the given question, and then send the survey back to the proctor electronically, respectively.   

          The reasons for selecting these demographical characteristics was to inquire pertinent information, not only from distinctive generations, and income level, but from a business hierarchical standpoint, which would allow for different views on the survey questions, primarily related to business practices and management.  Another reason for the selection was based on the last part of the survey, related to consumer purchasing, hence, an interesting viewpoint may occur when the business hierarchy has to choose answers constructed from either their retail expertise, or as a quotidian consumer.

      The research study utilized 25 female respondents (50%), and 25 male respondents (50%). The ages of the respondents ranges from eighteen to sixty years old.  Respondents between the ages of twenty-two and forty years old make up most of the population of respondents; with the twenty- two to thirty years old demographic making up eighteen percent of the population, and thirty-one to forty years old demographic comprising twenty percent of the population.  The respondents between eighteen to twenty-one years old construct three percent, forty one to fifty years old at five percent, and the fifty one to sixty years old demographic composing four percent of the total population.

Table #3: Factors

  

Descriptive Statistics
	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean		Std. Deviation	Variance
	Statistic	Statistic	Statistic	Statistic	Std. Error	Statistic	Statistic
Uncertainty Avoidance	50	2.60	5.00	4.2400	.07959	.56279	.317
Individualism v Collectivism	50	2.00	4.67	3.1967	.09508	.67233	.452
Power Distance	50	1.17	4.50	2.5900	.10714	.75758	.574
Paternalism	50	1.00	4.29	2.6371	.10870	.76861	.591
Gender Roles	50	1.00	4.80	2.4160	.14100	.99701	.994
Consumption Motivation	50	4.00	19.00	11.5000	.50729	3.58711	12.867
Valid N (listwise)	50

Description of table #3: factors.

       The research study consisted of six factors; these include Uncertainty Avoidance, Individualism vs. Collectivism, Power Distance, Paternalism, Gender Roles, and Consumption Motivation.  Considering the mean, Consumption Motivation is the most important variable that influences consumer purchasing. 

Hypothesis Test #1

Null and alternate hypotheses.

  H1:   Males are not the same as females with regard to consumption motivation.

HO:   Males are the same as females with regard to consumption motivation.

The test.

Group Statistics
	Gender	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
Consumption Motivation	Male	25	11.2400	3.34515	.66903
	Female	25	11.7600	3.86523	.77305

Independent Samples Test
		Levene's Test for Equality of Variances		t-test for Equality of Means
		F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	Std. Error Difference	95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
									Lower	Upper
Consumption Motivation	Equal variances assumed	.573	.453	-.509	48	.613	-.52000	1.02235	-2.57557	1.53557
	Equal variances not assumed			-.509	47.031	.613	-.52000	1.02235	-2.57667	1.53667

ANOVA
Consumption Motivation
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between Groups	3.380	1	3.380	.259	.613
Within Groups	627.120	48	13.065
Total	630.500	49

The decision rule.

Given that the sig. (.613) is greater than the alpha (.05), the NULL cannot be rejected therefore there is no support for the HYPO that males are not the same as females with regard to consumption motivation.

Hypothesis Test #2

Null and alternate hypotheses.

           H2:  Males are not the same as females with regard to low paternalism.

           H0:  Males are the same as females with regard to low paternalism.

The test.

Group Statistics
	Gender	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
Paternalism	Male	25	2.4629	.63925	.12785
	Female	25	2.8114	.85687	.17137

Independent Samples Test
		Levene's Test for Equality of Variances		t-test for Equality of Means
		F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	Std. Error Difference	95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
									Lower	Upper
Paternalism	Equal variances assumed	2.599	.113	-1.630	48	.110	-.34857	.21381	-.77846	.08132
	Equal variances not assumed			-1.630	44.397	.110	-.34857	.21381	-.77937	.08222

ANOVA
Paternalism
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between Groups	1.519	1	1.519	2.658	.110
Within Groups	27.429	48	.571
Total	28.947	49

The decision rule.

Given that the sig. (.110) is greater than the alpha (.05), the NULL cannot be rejected therefore there is no support for the HYPO that males are not the same as females with regard to low paternalism.

Hypothesis Test #3

Null and alternate hypotheses.

  H3: Males are not the same as females with regard to power distance.

        HO: Males are the same as females with regard to power distance.

The test.

Group Statistics
	Gender	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
Power Distance	Male	25	2.6133	.81752	.16350
	Female	25	2.5667	.70874	.14175

Independent Samples Test
		Levene's Test for Equality of Variances		t-test for Equality of Means
		F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	Std. Error Difference	95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
									Lower	Upper
Power Distance	Equal variances assumed	.261	.612	.216	48	.830	.04667	.21639	-.38842	.48175
	Equal variances not assumed			.216	47.054	.830	.04667	.21639	-.38865	.48198

ANOVA
Power Distance
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between Groups	.027	1	.027	.047	.830
Within Groups	28.096	48	.585
Total	28.123	49

The decision rule.

      Given that the sig. (.830) is greater than the alpha (.05), the NULL cannot be rejected therefore there is no support for the HYPO that males are not the same as females with regard to power distance.

Hypothesis Test #4 – Regression

            H4:    This is a relationship between (correlation) uncertainty avoidance and gender.

           HO:   This is no relationship (correlation) between uncertainty avoidance and gender.

The test.

Correlations
		Uncertainty Avoidance	Gender
Uncertainty Avoidance	Pearson Correlation	1	.086
	Sig. (2-tailed)		.552
	N	50	50
Gender	Pearson Correlation	.086	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.552
	N	50	50

Variables Entered/Removeda
Model	Variables Entered	Variables Removed	Method
1	Uncertainty Avoidanceb	.	Enter
a. Dependent Variable: Gender
b. All requested variables entered.

Model Summary
Model	R	R Square	Adjusted R Square	Std. Error of the Estimate
1	.086a	.007	-.013	.508
a. Predictors: (Constant), Uncertainty Avoidance

ANOVAa
Model		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	.093	1	.093	.359	.552b
	Residual	12.407	48	.258
	Total	12.500	49
a. Dependent Variable: Gender
b. Predictors: (Constant), Uncertainty Avoidance

Coefficientsa
Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	1.172	.552		2.124	.039
	Uncertainty Avoidance	.077	.129	.086	.599	.552
a. Dependent Variable: Gender

The decision rule.

      Given that the sig. (.552) is greater than the alpha (.05), the NULL cannot be rejected therefore there is no support for the HYPO that this is a relationship between (correlation) uncertainty avoidance and gender.

Application of Findings

         The analysis of the research findings has produced significant viability in marketing.  For example, Hypothesis I has found that consumption motivation is the same among male and female consumers.  Therefore, male and female consumers are equal in the importance that they place on pre-purchase analysis, or opinion seeking.  The viability of the finding supports current marketing schemes, such as, “Dr. Recommended,” or “Like” on Facebook, these two opinion-oriented marketing schematics caters to both male and female consumers, who are seeking opinions of products/services before purchasing.  Furthermore, the finding is viable in “opinion-based” marketing schematics. 

          The Hypothesis II finding of males and females are the same, or equal, concerning paternalism.  Both males and females want the freedom of choice.  In today’s market place, consumers are consumed with a myriad of product choices.  This study concludes that paternalistic views are the same or equal amongst male and female demographics, and that freedom of choice is of importance in both the male and female demographic.   This concept could be viable in “marketing without consumer restrictions” realm.  Which is marketing based on consumer choice and preference.

          The Hypothesis III results concluded that males and females are the same, or equal, concerning power distance.  In other words, the concept of power distance is equally as important to both male and female demographic, both wanting equality (low power distance) environments.  This concept is viable in cross-cultural advertising.

           The Hypothesis IV finding of uncertainty avoidance and gender is correlated.  The relationship of uncertainty avoidance depends on the person, as well as their particular culture.  There are those who are comfortable with ambiguity, and those who want formal rules.  Culture determines the level of uncertainty avoidance, such as the case of Japan, a culture that shuns ambiguity.  Japan has a total Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) score of 89, where zero indicates risk taker, and one-hundred is risk avoiders, and the United States’ UAI score is 46.  Thus, Americans take more risks than Japan.  To put these two scores in perspective, the average world UAI score is 64. The concept of uncertainty avoidance is viable in cross- cultural launches of new products/services.

Marketing Implications

           The result of Hypothesis I could be used in the marketing realm as a way to make a consumer, both male and female, feel comfortable in purchasing a product/service.  Just like the “Like” button by Facebook, or the, “Dr. Recommended” slogan, are great ways to allow a consumer to formulate a purchasing decision based on one’s opinion, hence, a marketer could market products/services geared more as an opinion, or a recommendation, also known as opinion-based targeting. 

               The implications that Hypothesis II has on marketing can be summed, as consumers (male and female) want more advertisements that trust their choice of products.  As well as product-comparisons are now considered archaic, and that product/service advertisements should appeal to a consumer’s ability to respond and make decisions that has no restrictions on a consumer’s decision-making process.  In addition, marketers must figure out a way to relay their messages in a non-paternalistic viewpoint.  This could even mean reexamining emotion-driven adverts that sway a consumer’s decision for purchasing, after all, is this not a form of paternalism? 

             The result of Hypothesis III has implications in more cross-cultural references, such as in Western society people usually want low power distance environments, or it is more evident in this culture, however, in Eastern culture, high power distance is more prominent; but what impact does this have on marketing?  The impact could be viewed in a cross-cultural relation.  For instance, one culture could have a low power distance, and another culture could have a high power distance, thus, marketers should always keep this in mind when advertising a product or service in different cultures.  For, certain advertisements or marketing campaigns may be culturally accepted in one culture, such as equality in advertisements, but in another culture, with high power distance, using the same type of advertisement could be viewed as culturally inordinate.

The implications of hypothesis IV can relate to uncertainty of a new product launch, this is always the case in releasing a new product.  There is always going to be a level of uncertainty, but that is where risk evaluation comes into play.  However, what if a company wants to release a product in a culture, such as Japan, where uncertainty avoidance ranks high.  How does a marketer infiltrate a culture with high UAI scores, with new products?  To determine this one may need to formulate a new hypothesis and analyses that incorporates cultural factors.  Moreover, a marketer needs to assess the levels of uncertainty avoidance based on cultural context.  In other words, minimize the risks, and maximize product/service output, especially since there is a correlation between uncertainty avoidance among male/female consumer demographics.

Conclusion

           A marketer needs to understand not only female and male demographic as it relates to consumer consumption motivation, but also other factors such as uncertainty avoidance, power distance, collectivism vs. individualism, paternalism, and gender roles, as well as how these six factors relate to cross-cultural relationships, in order to assess the marketplace successfully.