DO YOU THINK YOU ARE TOO GOOD TO SHOP AT WALMART? INVESTIGATING THE INTERACTION BETWEEN BRAND NAMES AND INDICATIONS OF WEALTH

Michelle Herman, Grace Kim, Jessica Collier

PSYC 3006, Section 206

INTRODUCTION

People make purchase decisions based upon perceptions of wealth and success (Mandel et al., 2006)

Sodas with national brand names are chosen more often than bargain brand names (Breneiser & Allen, 2011; Bushman, 1993)

Past research has not addressed the effect of both status of brand name and indication of wealth on shopping preferences

HYPOTHESES The mean difference in favorability ratings

between the condition with the wealthier-looking family and average-looking family will be greater in the higher-status brand name (Macy’s) condition than the mean difference in favorability ratings between wealthier-looking family and average-looking family in the lower-status brand name (Wal-Mart) condition

We also predicted that there would be main effects for both brand name status and indication of wealth

PREDICTED INTERACTION

Macy's Wal-Mart0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Wealthy FamilyAverage-Looking Family

Store Brand

Favora

bilit

y

METHOD

Participants 36 participants 10 men, 25 women, and 1 non-response

Design/Materials 2 x 2 between-participants design Brand name and indication of wealth were manipulated Four conditions:

(1) higher-status brand / higher indication of wealth(2) higher-status brand / lesser indication of wealth(3) lower-status brand / higher indication of wealth(4) lower-status brand / lesser indication of wealth

METHOD Interpretation of shopping preferences were

measured using 3 items on a questionnaire 7-point Likert Scale 1 = Strongly Disagree and 7 = Strongly agree

Each of the items were averaged to make a composite score

Procedure Randomly assigned conditions by receiving a packet

with one of four conditions Each participant was instructed to carefully look at

the pictures and form an opinion Then asked to complete the questionnaire on the next

page

MATERIALS

Lower-status brand name/wealthier-looking family

Lower-status brand name/average-looking family

MATERIALS

Higher-status brand name/wealthier-looking family

Higher-status brand name/average-looking family

SAMPLE MATERIALS

Target Questions (1) I would be willing to buy items at this store. (2) I would enjoy shopping at this store. (3) I would recommend this store to friends and relatives.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Strongly Disagree

Disagree Slightly Disagree

Neutral Slightly Agree

Agree StronglyAgree

RESULTS

We conducted a 2 (Brand Name Status) x 2 (Indication of Wealth) between-participants ANOVA, alpha = .05

Correlations between each of the target questions on the questionnaire (r ≥ .50)

The scores were averaged to produce a composite DV score for each participant

No significant main effect of brand name, F (1, 32) = .02, p = .893

No significant main effect of indication of wealth, F(1, 32) = .10, p = .755

No significant interaction between brand name and indication of wealth, F(1, 32) = .59, p = .450

MEAN AND SDS

IV 1: Brand Status

IV 2: Indication of

WealthMean SD

Lower-brand status

Average-looking family 4.59 .62

Lower-brand status

Wealthier-looking family 4.78 1.63

Higher-brand status

Average-looking family 4.96 1.21

Higher-brand status

Wealthier-looking family 4.52 1.26

DISCUSSION

Presence of wealth and store brand status had no effect on shopping preferences

Findings do not support that people make purchase decisions based upon perceptions of wealth and success (Mandel et al., 2006)

Findings do not support that status of brand name impacts consumer choices (Breneiser & Allen, 2011; Bushman, 1993)

DISCUSSION Previous exposure to the brand name might

have affected participant’s attitudes towards these name brands

Stimuli might not have accurately portrayed the conditions

Experiment might not have been structured well enough to give participants enough time to develop a strong opinion about the stimuli

Future research should investigate whether pre-existing attitudes towards brand names affect shopping preferences

REFERENCES

Brenesier, J.E. & Allen, S. N. (2011). Taste preference for brand name versus store brand sodas. North American Journal of Psychology, 13(2), 281-290.

Bushman, B. J. (1993). What’s in a name? The moderating role of public self-consciousness on the relation between brand label and brand preference. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(5), 857-861.

Mandel, N., Petrova, P. & Cialdini (2006). Images of Success and the Preference for Luxury Brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(1), 57-69.