Results and Data Analysis

Effects of social factors on consumers buying behavior

By

SAAD MAHMOOD

Thesis submitted to the Lahore School of Economics In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the de ree of Bachelors in Business Administration !"#$

Super%ised by& Ms' (ehra)a*a

Cronbach Alphas& Reliability Statistics Dependent variable

Independent variable

Cronbachs alpha

+onsumer Buyin Beha%iour

Brand consciousness Materialism Social comparison ,urchase intent

'-./

Individual Chronbachs Alphas Variables Materialism Chronbachs Alpha "'0-1

A 12point Li3ert scale item from 4stron ly disa re5 to 4stron ly a ree5 6as used in the questionnaire' +ronbach alpha reliability test 6as run on a sample si*e of ##$ respondents' The +ronbach alpha %alue for all %ariables collecti%ely is "'-./' This means that the scale used is reliable 7more than interpretation benchmar3 of "'08' The +ronbach alpha %alue amon st indi%idual %ariables 6as the hi hest in Materialsim9 "'0-1' This %alue is more than "'0 hence: it5s reliable'

Regression Analysis: In order to find out the relationship bet6een the %ariables and to find out ho6 the independent %ariables are related to the dependent %ariables' The multiple re ressionsare run'

Model Summary Model R R Square Adjusted R Square 1 .642a .412 .390 Std. Error of the Estimate .64483

The ) Square %alue sho6s the number of %ariability sho6n by the independent %ariables in the dependent %ariables' The ) Square %alue should be more that 1";: 6hich means that the model e<plains the %ariability of response data around its mean' The ) Square %alue in my data analysis is $#'!;: 6hich means that there are limitations to my study because of the %ariability in the correspondence of topics related to social sciences: especially consumer buyin beha%ior patterns' The Ad=usted ) Square %alue is />;'

ANOVAa Model Sum of Squares Re!ression 1 Residual %otal 31.188 44.491 "#.6"9 4 10" 111 df Mean Square "."9" .416 18."#2 .000$ Si!.

Dependent %ariable& +BB

The ,2%alue of the model is "'""" 6hich is a stron e%idence of the entire model5s si nificance in re ard to hypothesis testin ' The ,2%alue should be more than "'"1'

Coefficientsa Model &nstandardi'ed (oeffi)ients Standardi'e d (oeffi)ients * +(onstant, $rand)ons 1 materialism so)ial)om-ur)haseint .296 .2#8 .#43 ..023 .1## Std. Error .36" .109 .113 .088 .069 .20" .4"0 ..024 .1"1 *eta .80" 2.3"0 4."86 ..266 2.26# .421 .020 .000 ."91 .026 t Si!.

a. /e-endent 0aria$le1 $u2in!$eha3ior

E uation: +onsumer Buyin Beha%ior? '!>. @ '!1-brandconciousness @ "'1$/materialism2 "'"!/socialcomparison @ "'#11 purchase intent
The si ns in the equation sho6 that there is a positi%e relationship bet6een +onsumer buyin beha%ior and brand consciousness: materialism and purchase intent and a ne ati%e relationship bet6een social comparisons' Ao6 due to the positi%e and ne ati%e relationships: apart from social comparison all the other independent %ariables 6ill be accepted' The pre%ious study of these %ariables aimed at 6hat impact do these %ariables ha%e on buyin beha%ior' It 6as found in that there 6as some 3ind of relationship bet6een all these: but in my study the results are a bit different' They are more focused on the brand consciousness: materialism and purchase intent'

The coefficients sho6 that& #; increase in brand consciousness results in !1'-; increase in consumer buyin beha%ior #; increase in materialism 1$'/; increase in consumer buyin beha%ior #; increase in social comparison results in !'/; decrease in consumer buyin beha%ior #; increase in purchase intent results in #1'1; increase in consumer buyin beha%ior

!ypothesis testing:

!"& There is a si nificant relationship bet6een brand consciousness and +onsumer Buyin Beha%ior H# 6ill not be re=ected because the p2%alue is si nificant 7"'!"' These authors conducted their study in America: an indi%idualistic and hi hly ethnocentric country: so brand consciousness from the consumer5s perspecti%e is clear and si nificant durin the purchase decisions' Brand consciousness holds much si nificance in my study' Small %ariations bet6een data responses for brand consciousness questions ma3e this hypothesis si nificant' !#& There is a si nificant relationship bet6een materialism and +onsumer Buyin Beha%ior H! 6ill be accepted because the p2%ale is si nificant 7"'"""8' Materialism has a reat influence on the buyin beha%ior of households' ,eople especially in ,a3istan can be %ery materialistic in nature and many of their acti%ities do reflect that they buy ma=ority of the thin s =ust so that they can be sho6ed off' Apart from that materialism its self is a %ery real concept in the 6orld at the moment' Althou h many people 6on5t accept that but it is true' !$& There is a si nificant relationship bet6een social comparison and +onsumer Buyin Beha%ior H/ 6ill be re=ected because the p2%alue is insi nificant 7"'0>#8' social comparison 6as by far the 6ea3est %ariable to affect consumer buyin beha%ior in my study' Studies by Han 7!""#8 pro%e that social comparison has increased the buyin of homo enous products' ,eople loo3 at 6hat the other is buyin and try to et somethin %ery similar' This causes them to buy the same 3ind

of poroducts' Ma=ority of the respondents belie%e that increased social comparison has brou ht do6n the le%el of inno%ation'

!%: There is a si nificant relationship bet6een ,urchase intent and +onsumer Buyin Beha%ior H$ 6ill not be re=ected because the p2%alue is si nificant 7"'"!.8' This conceptof purchase intent tells us that people in pa3istan and around the 6orld ha%e been affected by the purchase intent' ,eople do oand practice impulse buyin at some moments' Only the short term ur e to buy a product leads to them buyin it' ,urchase intent une<pectedly has a si nificant impact on the buyin beha%ior' It has chan ed the 6ay I 6as oin about the study'

Conclusion:

The purpose of this study 6as to identify the si nificance of %ariables li3e brand consciousness: materialism: social comparison and purchase intent on consumer buyin beha%ior in terms of local and forei n products' Structured questionnaires 6ere distributed amon st a sample si*e of ##$: se mented on the basis of income le%els' After the collection of date responses it has been identified throu h this study that materialism: and brand consciousness has the ma=or impact on buyin beha%ior' Althou h it also says that social comparison leads to homo eneity in the buyin of products' ,eople tend to try products that their fa%orite celebrities: close friends and family use' S,SS and Amos statistical soft6are 6ere used to analy*e the data: 6ith the help of tables and charts' )eliability of the scale of questionnaire 6as tested first: and then multiple re ression models 6ere run on the response data to quantify the results' Limitations of this study are the hi h ran e of %ariability in the responses of sample si*e because the topic of this research is of the social sciences field: so responses remain qualitati%e and sub=ecti%e in nature' Bhen these responses are quantified throu h statistical tools: reliability reduces' In my case it 6as .$'!; 7) square %alue8' ,urchase intent is a topic 6hich 6as bein undermined in the be innin : althou h the questionnaire results sho6ed that purchase intent has a si nificant role in chan in the consumers buyin beha%ior' ,eople sometimes do buy products that they don5t need but =ust because it appeals them at a particular time' In ,a3istan 6e ha%e also seen throu h the questionnaire that materialism is a bi part of our daily li%es' ,eople i%e material possessions a lot of importance: and =ud e other people on 6hat they o6n and buy' This leads to them ettin more buyin thin s =ust to impress people rather than ha%in the need for it'