UNIVERSITY OF
ILLINOIS LIBRARY
AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN
BOOKSTACKS
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2012 with funding from
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
http://www.archive.org/details/tacticsofconflic271shet
Faculty Working Papers
TACTICS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN FAMILY BUYING BEHAVIOR
Jagdish N. Sheth and Stephen Cosmas
#271
College of Commerce and Business Administration
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
I
FACULTY WORKING PAPERS
College of Commerce and Business Administration
University of Illinois at Urb ana-Champaign
September 16, 1975
TACTICS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN FAMILY BUYING BEHAVIOR
Jagdish II. Sheth and Stephen Cosmas
#271
TACTICS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN FAMILY BUYING BEHAVIOR
Jagdish N» Sheth University of Illinois
&
Stephen Cosmas Needhara, Harper & Steers, Inc.
Significant research has recently emerged in the area of
family buyer behavior especially about the husband-wife joint
decision making process. See Foote (1961), Davis (1971) and
Hempel (1974) for reviews of empirical research and Sheth
(1974) for a review of theoretical research in this area. While
we have gained important insights about the various roles each
spouse plays in the joint decision making process, there is
relatively little research on the following aspects of joint
decision making process. First, what factors determine whether a
particular purchase decision is jointly decided by the two spouses
or left to one spouse's sole judgement? Second, are there any
systematic differences among households with varying socioeconomic'
demographic characteristics in regard to the incidence of joint
decision making? For example, is the joint decision making
process more prevalent in middle class, middle aged couples as has
been suggested in the literature? Third, what is the incidence of
conflict, disagreement or at least differences of opinion between
the spouses in buying behavior? As Sheth (1974) has pointed out,
2. both the necessary condition (felt need for deciding together) and the sufficient conditions (differences in goals or choice criteria and perceptions of alternatives) to generate conflict are obviously prevalent in many household purchase decisions such as buying of automobiles, furniture or a house. To that extent , the family buying behavior is quite comparable to organizational buying behavior, and, therefore, many of the complexiea of organisational buying behavior especially in regards to the tactics employed to resolve conflict, disagreement or difference of opinion may be directly relevant in understanding household decision-making process (Sheth 1973), Fourth, how is the conflict in buying behavior resolved between the spouses? What specific tactics such as persuasion or bargaining are employed by the spouses to resolve their conflict? Fifth, are there any systematic differences among households with varying socioeconomic-demographic characteristics in regard to the ways the spouses resolve their conflict? For example, is bargaining more prevalent among highly educated households or among younger households? Sixth, are there life style correlates of conflict resolution? For example, does a spouse who is primarily a homebody and believes in the traditional role of a woman in the family utilize persuasion more often than other tactics of conflict resolution?
The purpose of this paper accordingly is to investigate the prevalence of conflict in household decision making and the tactics employed by spouses to resolve their conflict. Such an
3. understanding is extremely relevant from a variety of perspectives. First, marketers need to know whether conflict exists in a particular product they are marketing as? well as to identify the basis for the conflict between the spouses* Such knowledge can then enable the marketer to direct his efforts toward resolving the conflict by proper communieacion. This is often done by the astute salesperson in retail buying and shopping situations but very little effort seems to be directed by the manufacturers of national brands and products toward an integrated approach of en- abling the spouses to resolve their conflicts in buying behavior. Second, prevalence of conflict and especially the tactics employed to resolve it may indeed be a better barometer of family structure and organization as well as the changing roles of the spouses in a marriage than many of ther interpersonal interaction measurements* Finally, relatively little is known about the impset of conflict in buying behavior on the propensity to divorce. While consider- able research is recently undertaken on assessing the causes of divorce , it has bean unfortunately directed toward only the fundamen- tal values and behavior such as sex, rocney, religion and raising children. It is our strong belief that research on conflict in purchase behavior may provide more subtle insights into the causes for divorce: it is often the little things which are marginally more critical in sustaining a marriage,
THEORY & STUDY DESIGN The theoretical underpinnings of this study are borrowed from
a theory of family buying decision® proposed fey Sheth (1974). According to him, it is important . o differentiate joint decisions from autonomous decisions in family buying behavior because inter- personal conflict is less likely to be manifested in autonomous decisions. The model specifies two types of determinants for the prevalence of joint vs* autonomous decisions across families and across product classes within a family* The first type of variables consisting of family life cycle, socioeconomic status and life styles are more relevant to measure interf&mily differences in the prevalence of joint decision making for a specific purchase decision* The second type of variables consisting of perceived risk, importance of purchase, time pressure and situational contingencies are more relevant to measure intra family differences in. the prevalence of joint decision making process across a variety of products.
In this study, we are more interested in inter family decision making process and hence have limited it to only two products, name- ly automobile and furniture* Both products are relatively more expensive and durable | both have some manifestation of conspicuous consumption due to social imagery they tend to reflect of one*s selfj both have become necessity of life so that every household buys themj and both are typically used by ail numbers of the family* At the same time, there is growing evidence that the husband is generally more involved in the purchase of the automobile and the wife is more involved in the purchase of furniture even when they decide together,, In fact, in some households it is not uncommon to expect a division
5. of lat.or and responsibilities in regard to purchase of these two products between the spouses* These considerations led us to narrow our study to furnitur d automobile* It should be pointed out however* that we need to large spectrum of products
end services to understand intr&family differences in eheir tendency to decide together,
A second theoretical aspect borrowed from the Sheth model of family buying decisions relates to determinants of conflict and the specific tactics employed in resolving the conflict* Conflict arises when there is a felt need to decide jointly and there are differences in goals or perceptions between the spouses* Depending ' upon whether the two spouses have a disagreement about goals or perceptions j the model specifies four distinct types of conflict resolution* They are problem- solving., persuasion s bargaining and politiking*
Problem-solving approach to c aflict resolution arises when there is disagreement about specific alternatives under consideration or on any of their attributes* It is to differences
in perceptions rasher than differences in goals between the spouses » Problem-solving appros pic&ily entails search for new alterna- tives or new information an existing alternatives &® suggested by March and Siiaon (1950),
Persuasion as an approach to conflict resolution arises when there is disagreement between the spouses about specific subgoals in a purchase situation although there is agreement at a more
6,
fundamental level* Pergasaion tactic is manifested when one spouse is trying to convince, the other h. * the specific sufc ;oal and the alternatives which satisfy it are incompatible with the overall family goals in a purchase situation*
Bargaining as a tactic of conflict resolution arises when there is agreement betw? - ouses that they cannot agree on buying goals or choice criteria and when the purchase decision is more important to one of the spouses* This tactic as the name implies results in some reciprocity agreement between the spouses i 1 will let you do what you want in this situation if you will let me do what X want in some other situation* The typical outcome of the bargaining tactic is the reduction of the joint decision to a unilateral choice in exchange for some favor,
The final strategy of conflict resolution is called polit iking. It is manifested when the two spouses have a fundamental difference in their value &f&-. it impinges upon a specific buying situa-
tion. The tactic is commonly aaniiested by way of soliciting- support from other osembers of thM sven from friends and
relatives, and thereby to exercise pressure on the other spouse to' change his or her deliberations, T& ,e of informal coalitions in the family a often a good indicator of
utilisation of this type of tactic in conflict resolution.
Based on the Sheth model, the study was designed to gain in- sights into the following questions;
1, What is the extent of joint decision making between spouses
7. fcr purchase lativel> expensive products such as furni-
. tore ..ad automobiles! 2S What are some of the re< i e to decide either
jointly or unilaterally in buying furniture and automobiles? 3* To what extent does the 1 i int decision making vary across households? Are there some household correlates such as life cycle and socioeconomic status which covary with the incidence of joint-dacieion ra&ki 4* What are the specific tactics of conflict resolution utilis ed by husbands or wives when they have s. disagreement in buy- ing of furniture and automobile?
5» Are there some household correlates which covary with specific tactics employed by spouses? In other words s do respondents who utilise bargaining as a tactic of conflict resolution differ significantly from those who utilise problem solving as a tactic oi Let resolution a for example?
6« Is the incidence of coi - buying behavior related to any specific household charac i?er example, do more
educated respondents tend Co manifest greater conflict is general?
7S What are the life style correlates of tactics of conflict resolution? Can we assess any systematic life style .profiles of bargainers, persuaders or problem-solvers, fcr example? The sample for this study consisted of a convenience sample
<m from three Northern suburbs of Chicago. Since this was only
8. an exploratory study, the normal sampling procedures were not followed i .< seeking cooperation e-k ept to ensure that the sa?irapie will comprise of a cross-section of respondents with respect to their socioeconomic status and life cycle* & total of one hundred couples were contacted who \ ill out a selC-sdrainistered*
structured questionnaire,. Each couple was instructed to fill out the questionnaire without consultation with the spouse* The com» pleted questionnaires were collected after a few days, the coop- eration rate was 75 percent of those households contacted. How- ever, in many instances, the husband did not fill out the questionn- aire due to lack of interest, travel schedules and other commitments* Also, the complexity of the questionnaire had some adverse effect on the response rate. Finally, due to extreme time constraints, we could not remind or persist in our efforts to get better coopera- tion. Since there was a secondary interst in matching husband-wife perceptions about the same parch- lor, oh .?se couples were retained in the final sample wfe - the hu and the wife Imd cooperated, Ln ut the qu«
resulted in eliminating Ids where, only one spouse had
cooperatedj usuall • The ii ample was reduced to 50
couples* However, in this study each res lent is treated as a separate observation unit resulting in a total sample of one hundred respondents. After eliminating some respondents based on reliability checks, the final sample consisted of 93 respondents. Each respondent was asked to recall and describe the most
9. recent purchase of automobile and furniture* He wag also asked to state whether the deals- 3 unilateral fcy o->e spouse or joint between the spouses, 1 ; unilateral or joint
decision behavior. The respondent was asked to recall if there were any areas of dls&gn »©s in the buying
of furniture ©net automobile, f;aet respondent was also given a list of salient criteria for each, of the product classes and asked to recall disagreement on any of them* Finally s for each salient criterion such as style, price, dealer, color, delivery, etc* the respondeat was given a standard description of the four tactics of conflict resolution and asked to check only one of them in case he recalled setae disagreement between the spouses on that specific criterion 9
A typica;- 1 related to the four tactics of conflict resolu- tion is reproduced belowj
We disagree tow much to spend for the car*
Yes ■... i
Our dlsag - it was bys &„ Shopping around until we found another car we liked in our
price range a b. One of us convincing the ether that a particular car pur- chase would fit out budget, c„ One of us buying the car he/she wanted even though it was not within our budget but only in return for the other one being allowed to buy something else he/she wanted.
10.
d« One of us seeking support from other family members or £ lends to override; the o ..her persos
e„ Other
(specify)
The questionnaire also obtained the standard soioeconomic- demographie information* However, life cycle and socio- economic status were directly measured by asking the respondent to check a specific category from among those listed instead of deriving them by indexing variables such as income;, education and occupation in the case of socioeconomic status and age* marital status j number of children and age distribution of children in the case of life cycle index. Finally, a battery of life style state- ments were administered following the tradition of life styles and psychographics research in marketing (Wells 1974} » The life style statements were administered to see if certain individualistic life styles correlated with specific tactics of conflict resolution.
MgdMl_&J"XSCOS$ior .
The data were analyzed in many different ways. However, only certain analytical procedures and results are reported, here due to space and time limitations. The results presented here pretty much parallel the specific research questions pointed out in the earlier section.
Table 1 summarizes the incidence of autonomous and joint decision making in the purchase of furniture and automobile as well as reasons cited by the respondents for such decisions. Almost
f able 1 Autonomous Versus Joint Beeision Making Process
A « He as oss Jor^^mGmas_Liieis ions (Total Sample = 93)
^gniture , Automobile
|
21 |
27 |
|
13 |
&*X. |
|
f ft |
2U |
|
2^ |
9 |
|
21 |
9 |
|
9 |
15 |
1. Ob© partner sore competent & knowledgeable about product k%f» 5*»$
8* LiKe to divide responsibilities in managing the household 27 18
3* More important decision to one partner only
^4 . CosEon in our age group to leave the decision to one person. 13
§, Family life style encourages individual rather- than joint- decisions
6, Too busy to decide together
7* Hot itsport&nt enough to require joint-decisions
8, Avoids unnecessary arguments
9* Hate t© shop together 6 12
10 . Head of household decides alone en all major par chases 6 9
11* One spouse vas away at the time « 6
12. Osesaon among our friends to leave decision to one partner
in this casa * 6
B# Reasons for deciding, together*
Furniture Automobile
1. Better to decide together on those products which
everybody 60% %f$>
2. Our- fa®i.V style requires that we decide together on
thif? product 58 kB
3. Two heada are better than one U8 39 k, Economically and socially it was an important reason U5 36 §» Too big a decision to decide alone kO 35
6. Customary among our friends that spouses decide together
on this product 26 19
7. Other reasons 12 15
^The percantageT'excsedHilul^^
frora the checklist provided in the questionnaire.
12* spouse in the purchase of furniture sad automobile* Among the most frequently mentioned reasons for the decisions were
these: nature of product requiring joi "isumption, perceived risk involved in the purchase decision, importance of the pro- duct class to the family , and family life style which encourages joint decision tasking process s . these reasons are the same as those hypothesized in the Sheth model of family buying decisions.
The other one-third of the respondents claimed that the purchase of furniture or automobile was c unilateral decision by one of the spouses . They most frequently mentioned that greater competence of one partner, preference for dividing responsibilities in household management, greater importance; of the decision to one of the spouses, too busy to decide together, and the peer group norms ware primarily responsible for the autonomous decision making in regard to buying of furniture and automobile.
Among those who decided unilaterally, the automobile was primarily the responsibility of She husband and furniture was primarily the responsibility of the wife. Therefore, it is interest- ing to probe a little further some of the differences in percentages between furniture and automobile unilateral decisions. It would appear that the wife allows the husband to decide on automobile alone due to his greater competence, to avoid unnecessary arguments and disagreements, reluctance to shop together and greater involve- ment in automobile on the part of the husband. On the other hand,
13.
the husband allows the wife to decide alone about furniture buying due to his lack or interest, too busy to spend time* and dividing household responsibilities*
What type of households prefer joint decision making? Table 2 provides some insights into the demographic correlates of joint vs, autonomous decision making process* It would appear from the results that households characterized as with teenage or young children in the upper middle or working class, with wife in middle age group working in some white collar occupation or simply a home- maker, and with moderate level of education tend to be dominated by the joint-decision making process. On the other hand, households with either no children or grown-up children, in low or middle socioeconomic class and with the wife in eome blue collar occupa- tion as veil as among older women , the decisions tend to be more autonomous. This picture is quite consistent with several of the curvilinear hypotheses stated in the Sheth model* The only surprising element is relatively -. r proportion of autonomous decisions in the middle class which is contrary to the hypotheses* It is also interesting to note that among those households who pre- fer autonomous decisic he incidence is generally greater and more clear cut for the automobile purchase.
What type of households tend to experience conflict in buying behavior between the two spouses? Table 3 provides insights into the demographic differences between households experiencing conflict and those not having any conflict. It would appear that conflict
14s
Table 2
tomographic Correlates of Autonomous vs. Joint Pec is ions
Family Life Cycle"'"
No children
Small children
Teenege children
Grownup children
Senior citizens Socioeconomic Status
Lev*%r class
Working class
Middle class
Upper Middle class
Other Wl^lB_Egncation
Less than High School
High School or Trade School.
Sosse College
College Gradu;
Wife's Occupation
kite collar
Blue collar
Other (Homemater, retired, etc, Wife 'a Age
Less than ko yre,
Between UO-50 yrs.
More than 50 yra.
Furniture
Auto- nomous Joint (33)
ko
2k
**3
IOC 20 $5 19
SO
ko
3a
80 15
36 U
Uo
64^ | 60
76
I ICO
1
81
50 67 66
60
68 S$
69 60
Automobile
Auto- nomous Joint (33) (60)
55* } &51 I
40 I 60
10 90
0 100
100
ko J 60
3-6 I 6U
26 i 74
20 ! 80
|
5C |
50 |
|
Uo |
60 |
|
- |
86 |
|
35 |
|
|
1*0 |
60 |
|
35 |
15 |
|
15 |
83 |
|
38 |
62 |
|
23 |
77 |
|
*5 |
55 |
is.
Table 3 Eetaographie Correlates of Conflict iv . -se Behavior
Fura
Automobile
n-
FaiSily Life Cycle
No children
Young children
Teenage child!
Grownup children
Senior citizens Socioeconomic Status
Lower class
Working 'class
Middle class
Upper Middle class
Other Wife's Education
Less than High School
High School or trade , school
Suase college
College graduate Wife ' s Occupation
White collar
Blue collar
Other Wife^Age
Below Ho yrs.
Between ^0-50 yrs.
More than 50 yrs.
(26)
15 25
k2
• 15
uo
50
uo
50 25.
U2
17 21
No Conf: (60)
Conflict
(38)
No Conflict
|
8o$ 1 |
36£ |
&% |
|
:■:* |
||
|
1 |
62 • ! |
SB |
|
1 85 |
so |
80 |
|
Ts |
25 |
75 |
|
IOC |
||
|
\ 10G |
20 |
80 |
|
58 85 |
ki . |
5U |
|
6© |
ko |
6o |
|
100 |
||
|
76 |
:.;. |
56 |
|
5 |
55 |
U5 |
|
8o |
25 |
75 |
|
f 6o |
30 |
70 |
|
to |
6o |
|
|
uo |
60 |
|
|
5S |
^2 |
|
|
83 |
50 |
50 |
|
79 |
26 |
7U |
16,
is generally more prevalent among those households with young and teenage children, in the niddle class, with moderately educated wife in the fatally, and among younger woroen in the family* However, conflict is not as widespread as was hypothesized. Only about 30 percent: of the respondents stated there was any conflict in furni- ture buying and nearly 40 percent of the respondents stated the • same in the automobile buying behavior. Once again, the presence of conflict, ia more clear cut in the buying of automobile than in furniture buying. It is also interesting to note the strong presence of conflict in those households with teenagers especially in regard to automobile purchase.
Based on the information provided by the respondents about the specific tactics employed for each area of disagreement between the spouses, they were classified into three categories: those who primarily followed problem solving, persuasion or bargaining tactics in resolving conflicts, whe number of respondents who stated politiking as .a tactic of conflict resolution was very small and found only with regard to automobile purchase decision. They were lump ad together with the bargaining group to facilitate analysis of the data, Table 4 summarises the results on the employ- ment of specific tactics of conflict resolution. It is ovbious that while persuasion seemed to be the dominant strategy of conflict resolution, there was also a dominance of problem-solving in furni- ture buying and a dominance of bargaining in automobile buying.
With regard to the demographic correlates, it is interrfs'£it!g*to
17.
xa
^^P^^PMf:, Jl,?H^A^s, %C J^ffMfiLffX,, Conf •*• *-c" ReS°3 nt ion
Furniture
Automobile
Fatally Life Cycle
Ko children
Small shildren
Teenage children
Grcwaup children
Senior citizens Socioeconomic. Status
Lower class
Working class
Middle class
Upper middle class
Other Wife [s Occupation
White collar
Blue collar
Otncr ^i^jj£_^^catiO£
Less than High School
High School & Trade School
Some College
College Graduate Wife's, Age
Below kO yra.
Between ^0-^0 yrs«
More than 50 yra.
| Problem Persu- Bar- Problem Persu- Bar- \ Solving asion Raining Solving asion gaining a- (9) * (lk) ' (5) " (7) (16) (1U)_
"(pi:
16 50
25
100
1*2
20
30
.30
100 38 27
25
26
•6o
25
centages7 100
50
75
100
(n«a.)
32
80 100
1*0
100 55
62
53 50
h7 ko
75
—
kl
30
■O
20
50
27
(Pej cent age 8
11
28
50 50 15 18
25
ko L3
25 L9
(M.A.)
15 23 25
39
100
50
i*5
^5
60 U7
56 31
ko
(N.A.)
k5 38 50
67
33
100
l{0
36
100
30
1»0
19
50
60
(N.A.)
ko
38
18* note that households with teenage or sbii &ldren in the middle and upper middle class among white collar and h: Vacated working wives and araoag relatively - e women, tend to resort to bargainin:v the dominant mode of conflict resolu-
tion* Oft the ether hand. | sssios* seeas to be mite manifested by those households with either no children ot grownup children, among blue collar and ?;iss educated litres as well as among older worsen*
Finally, an attempt tma made to correlate tactics of conflict resolution with individuals life etyie profiles. The life style profile consisted of nearly 56 items considered salient to measur- ing similarities and differences between spouses in the way they feel about personal values and goals* Table 5 is a suramary of thof;e life syle statements on which there were significant differ* ences when cross- tabulated with the three categories of tactics of conflict resolution,
A close e and reflection of the values in Table 5
leads, us to make < t&teroahts* People who are self-
confident, optimistic about pretest and future life ambitions, liberal in their v;al ie$ as well ?s opinion leaders and adventurous tend to be problem soli n the other hand, people who are not self-confident, pesslraistic about present or future life, highly traditional or homebodies, secure and contented who live a sedate life and ceek advice from others generally tend to be users of persuasion tactic in conflict resolution,. The bargainers tend to have less self-respect and self confidence, frustrated with their present life,
19,
Table 5
Lift " Correlates of Tactics of Conflict Resolution
Life Style Statements ure i Automobile^ ni
: Problem Pereu- Bar- !. Problem Persu- Bar- __^ ..,.,., Solving as ion, gaining: Solving as Ion gaining
1. I have more self -confidence A 31$ ?Uf, 1% 33$ 39$ 2Z%
thsn most of my friends 5 ! 21 5 M3 47
2, Ky opinions on things do ,30 f40 8 25 6? count very much P 18 ?6 6 ; 22 52 26
3* 1 1: a ash for 33 6? ■ 28 ■ 44 28
everything !b 8 50 42 10 43 48
4, All sen should be clean [A 11 7** 16 23 47 30 shaven every day lis 50 25 25 ' — 3s* 66
i
5, X m a homebody 'A 22 72 6 19 50 31
D 22 33 44 j 15 31 54
6, I like to be considered a A 2*4- 4? 29 i 27 32 41 leader !» 20 80 6 59 37
7» I vish I could leave
present life and do some- <A 22 50 28 j 6 31 63
thing entirely different 'p 22 78 26 52 22
t
8. There are day people and
there are night people- I A 19 8l 2k 48 28
am a day person D 27 2? 45 7 36 57
9« Women don't need more than
a minimum amount of Ij A 27 25 60
insurance 2> 19 50 31 11 26 63
10, Bvc- ging too' .A 2? 33 18 32 50
fast today ' 15 17 83 18 59 23
.11- Genera!
18 53 10 32 58
paper they arc printed on • E 30 70 25 55 20
12. ■ ret obi-, !
2? 33 22 33 44
children D 83 14 52 33
13. I like to buy new and 27 21 4? 32 different fchia D 42 15 1*0 45
14. I p«s usual:: bhe first' A 23 §0 28 15 30 55 to try new products D 22 ?8 21 58 21
15* 1 often seek the advice of j
my friends regarding brands -A 10 90 0 33 58 8
and produces D 29 29 : 11 37
; D *»5 53 -• , 18 55
•w
36. X like scoria cars :A26 53 21' 18 M 4
t.
17. I usually have wine with ; A — 11 7 73 20 dinner |D 45 36 18 25 25
18. I aw in. favor of very atrict'Al? p3 39 39 21 enforcement of all laws JB27 kQ 3?* .0 48 52
19. I dread the future A 1? 83
D 23 58 22*
Table 5 (continued)
20,
Life Style? State
Furniture
Automobile
I
t
■ Solving asion oainiaa i Solving asion gaining
Problem Persu- Bar-
?roblem Fersu- Bar-
20. 1 cons-alt C< Reports or similar publications before making i „se
21. When snaking important family! decisions, cons Loa of !
26. My friends and neighbors
often eese to es for a&v ice j D
i 2?. A cabin by a quiet lake is : a great place to spend the >A syasaer . £
28. X enjoy loo-king through the A
fashion magazines £
.
29* Police should use wha? ver
force is necessary to aaia- :A
tain 1-.- ier
30 . Our hose is ed for- eomfort. not stj
31. The father should be the boss in the house
A
78
9A
|
children should come first |
A 28 11 f |
Irft 89 |
28 |
|
|
22. |
If I had w Ufa to live over 5 I would sure do things differently |
; A 25 , S SO |
33 60 |
1*2 |
|
2-^« |
When buying appliances, I ess more concerned with dependability than price |
[A 27 1 S 20 |
kk 80 |
28 |
|
s**. |
1 don't like to take chances |
:A 2€ i |
63 50 |
10 3? |
|
25. |
X never knot-? bow orach to tip |
A 30 is 33 |
?0 . *»3 |
A |
32
21
2?
U 17
39 ^0
U8
17
27
33 30
50
31
83
Ms
5*3 33
25
60
2lo
and lack security of They seek no outside advice and tend to be nooconfirmist ax it attitudes toward law and
ordere Also they tend to be nJ -eople rather than day peoples
Despite some c one felt in I £t® about joint versus autonomous decisions c;s »el ; actios of conflict resolution practiced la household buying behavior, several satnpl limitations as well as small senile problems make this study at best tentative and exploratory in nature. We hope to replicate it with a larger and too re representative sample.
RSPSRSMCES Davis, H. !»•, M; aent ©i In consumer
purchase decisions.. Joum . 5. August 1971 s
305-12*
Foote? NB N. ed* Household Declalc , Hew York University Press, 1961,
Eetspai, B# Jei Family buying decisions?. A aross-cultural perspectiva. Journal of Marketing Re search 11, August 1974. 295-302,
March s J# A* and Simon, E* A« * Organizations , Wiley, 1958 Sheth, J« H*s A model of industrial buyer behavior Journal of IS£^2£lES» October 1973,
Sheth, J, N., A theory of family buying decisions, in J* N, Sheth (ed.) Models of. Buyer Behavior Harper & Row, 1974 * Wells, We D* » Life Styles & Psychographies, American M&rkating Association, 19/4,.
tw