The perceived value-loyalty-link: heterogeneity among car users

ABSTRACT
Automobiles have always been a special product category delivering multiple value facets to
their users. A car does not only provide significant functional and economical value, offering
the possibility to get from A to B at a certain price, it can also elicit significant social and
emotional value perceptions. For some consumers, their car is more than just a means of
transportation. It is more like a family member. On the other hand, with globally increasing
environmental concerns, car usage is also significantly associated with issues relate to the
natural environment and its protection. However, the effect of ecological value provided by
traditionally non-green products, such as automobiles, on their consumers post-consumption
behaviour, needs further clarification. The present study provides quantitative insights how
the ecological value facet of consumption integrates into the other value dimensions and how
it affects loyalty intentions. Results of a structural equation model and multi-group analysis
provide the opportunity to derive both theoretical and applied implications. Heterogeneous
consumer segments regarding the ecological value-loyalty-link could be identified.

Introduction
125 years ago, on 29 January 1886, Carl Benz changed the world when he filed a patent
application for his "gas engine-powered vehicle". This marked the birth of the automobile
(www.media.daimler.com). Since then, this special product category has shaped the world of
consumption like no other product category. It delivers significant functional value, as
mobility is one of the most important achievements of a modern society. However, motives
for car users are not only based on functionality but also on social and emotional factors
(Steg, 2005). A lot of consumers have really close, emotional ties with their cars. For those
consumer segments, their car is not only a means of transportation, it is are more like a family
member. In general, experts evaluate automobiles based on design and functionality, ordinary
drivers evaluate their cars based on their overall experience (Moon, Bergey, & Iacobucci,
2010). Moreover, consumption decisions related to automobiles are characterized by highinvolvement. This is due to the significant monetary and social risks involved. If the purchase
is not socially approved by others, negative phenomena such as cognitive dissonance are
likely to arise (Engel, 1963; Straits, 1964). On the other hand, patterns of car usage rank
particularly high within the environmental discussions generated by the climate crisis
(Ferguson & Branscombe, 2010). Topics such as CO2-emissions and power efficiency are
only two out of a multitude of controversial issues in this regard. As consumers become
increasingly aware of potential negative effects of consumption on the natural environment,
ecological value is likely to become another important factor in the consumption context of
automobiles. In contrast to organic products, the role of perceived ecological value derived
from the usage of traditionally non-green product categories like automobiles remains
unexplored. Ecological value may influence value perceptions in the other dimensions. This is
crucial from a marketing perspective because multiple value dimensions may have a varying
effect on loyalty perceptions (Pihlstrm & Brush, 2008). All major car brands are investing in
new technologies to make gasoline cars more environmentally friendly, such as the Blue
Motion from Volkswagen and the Efficient Dynamics line from BMW. Within the next
decade all major car manufacturers are also planning to launch models with alternative
engines like hybrids (gas-electric powertrain) or e-versions of their brands. There are
initiatives like the green car journal (www.greencar.com) providing consumers with stateof-the art information on ecological issues related to the consumption context of automobiles.
Despite the potential impact of this information, no study currently exists analysing the link
between perceived value and loyalty intentions towards a company from an ecological
perspective. This paper develops the idea of the existence of an ecological value phenomenon,
influencing loyalty towards the respective firm via impacting the other four value dimensions.
Building on these theoretical underpinnings, the aim of this paper is to advance existing
knowledge in the field along two dimensions. First, the role of ecological value perceptions in
relation to the other four value dimensions and loyalty intentions is assessed. Second, two
moderating variables are included accounting for heterogeneity in this value-loyalty-link.
Conceptual Framework and Hypotheses
Conceptual Model
Following a decline in environmentally related marketing research during the 1980s, recent
years have produced a strong resurgence (Kilbourne, Beckmann, & Thelen, 2002). Studies in
consumer psychology found status motives being fundamental drivers for purchasing green
products when shopping in public and when green products cost more than their non-green
counterparts (e.g., Griskevicius, Tybur, & Van den Bergh, 2010). These results suggest

environment-related thoughts having multilayer effects on consumer behaviour. Green

consumption seems to be triggered by a complex pattern of both cognitive and affective
elements. In recent research, there has been more evidence that the relevance of emotional,
hedonic, and social aspects need not be underestimated. Whereas functional and economical
elements of perceived value are majorly related to the product or service, emotional, hedonic,
or social facets are tightly connected to the individuals self-perception. To a certain extent,
the latter value dimensions are also a means of conveying symbolic information to an
individuals social environment. Facing this fact as well as taking the results from the above
mentioned studies in consumer psychology on status motives (Griskevicius, et al., 2010) into
account, the ecological value dimension is not only assumed to refer to the value delivered by
consuming environmentally friendly products or services. It rather may offer another
possibility for the consumer to convey expressions about his or her self concept to the public
audience. By purchasing a hybrid car, a person can signal to others that he or she is a prosocial rather than a pro-self individual. This phenomenon is based on costly signaling theory
and research on competitive altruism (Griskevicius, et al., 2010). According to a 2007 report
in the New York Times, owners of the hybrid Toyota Prius cited social signaling, such as how
their automobile choice reveals a personal statement, as the highest ranking reason for their
purchase (it makes a statement about me). Higher fuel economy and lower emissions are
not the predominant factors in consumer selection (Maynard, 2007). Based on these
theoretical underpinnings, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H1a: Ecological value is assumed to positively influence perceived functional value.
H1b: Ecological value is assumed to positively impact perceived economical value.
H1c: Ecological value is assumed to positively influence perceived emotional value.
H1d: Ecological value is assumed to significantly enhance perceived social value.
Previous research provides ample of evidence for the existence of the value-loyalty-link in
general (Cengiz & Yayla, 2007; Lin, Sher, & Shih, 2005). However, in the context of
automobiles, consumers rarely act purely rational (e.g., acting environmentally friendly as a
rational underpinning of behaviour). Emotions play a predominant role. Based on this fact,
ecological value is assumed to only indirectly impact on loyalty intentions via the other value
dimensions:
H2a: Functional, economical, emotional and social value directly impact loyalty
intentions towards the manufacturer.
H2b: Ecological value impacts loyalty intentions towards the manufacturer via
functional, economical, emotional and social value.
Moderating Variables - Heterogeneity
Accounting for the assumed heterogeneity in these relationships, two moderating variables
(gender and the general attitude towards environment protection) are tested for. Although
previous findings about the impact of demographic characteristics on consumers
environmentally conscious behaviour are contradictory, there is consensus that they exert a
significant influence (Laroche, Bergeron, & Barbaro-Forleo, 2001). Moreover, the
consumption context of automobiles is prone to different dynamics regarding males and
females (Polk, 2004). Therefore the following hypothesis is proposed:
H3a: Gender moderates the relation between ecological value and loyalty via
functional, economical, emotional and social value.
A radical green consumer refuses to buy anything that is not absolutely necessary. Accounting
for an increasingly convenience and consumption-oriented society, green consumerism in
reality merely reflects consumption behaviour characterized by carefully choosing products

and services that are the least destructive to the natural environment without significantly
compromising ones way of life (Moisander, 2007). Considering personal values that
individually vary in importance and that serve as guiding principles in peoples lives may
serve to produce a clearer understanding of the motivational determinants behind peoples
desire to behave environmentally friendly (Laroche, et al., 2001). De Groot and Steg (2010)
argue that practitioners should promote pro-environmental preferences and intentions by
making biospheric and altruistic values more salient in their intervention. Albeit values are
relatively stable and enduring over time, stimulating peoples biospheric values might change
their attitudes towards a more pro-environmental orientation (de Groot & Steg, 2010):
H3b: General attitude towards environment protection moderates the relation between
ecological value and loyalty via functional, economical, emotional and social value.
The conceptual framework guiding the present study is depicted in Figure 1 (see appendix).
Empirical Study
Sample
In total, data from 228 paper and pencil interviews were collected based on a quota sample.
The sample is characterized by 48% female and 52% male respondents with an average age of
38 years. Persons with an urban background are represented and 75% live and work in urban
agglomerations, whereas 25% live in rural areas. Sixty-five percent of all customers believe
that automobile manufacturers are responsible for the environmental protection. Interestingly,
32% see the biggest responsibility in their own hands and only 1% in the hands of the
respective car dealer. Thirty-five percent of respondents have only gone to one care dealer,
and 27% have only changed dealers once or twice. More than 30% of respondents have never
changed their car brand and about 80% bought a maximum of three different car brands.
These results indicate that loyalty is an important issue in the automotive industry.
Measures
The conceptualisation of the value dimensions is based on Sheth et al. (1991) and Sweeney
and Soutar (2001). An extended four-dimensional conceptualisation of customer value
(functional, economical, social and emotional) is adopted from (Sweeney & Soutar, 2001;
Wang, Lo, Chi, & Yang, 2004; Zeithaml, 1988) to the present application of automobiles.
Moreover, ecological value is introduced to the conceptual model. Ecological value represents
the amount of perceived value generated by consuming environmentally friendly products or
at least products available that are at less destructive to the natural environment. The items
measuring ecological value were generated based on the literature review and the focus group
discussion. Additionally, five think-aloud interviews were conducted to recheck face validity
and wording of items. A confirmatory factor analysis was calculated to assess the scale
properties of the measurement model. Results show excellent global fit indices (2 = 237; df =
137; CFI = .942; TLI = .928; RMSEA = .057; SRMR = .052) as well as highly satisfactorily
measurement properties of the scales (Marsh, Hau, & Wen, 2004; Sharma, Mukherjee,
Kumar, & Dillon, 2005). Specifically, all factor loadings were highly significant (p<.001) and
exceeded the suggested threshold of 0.5 demonstrating a high level of convergent validity in
the measurement model (Dunn, Seaker, & Waller, 1994). Composite reliability (CR), average
variance extracted (AVE), and Cronbach alpha scores (CA) suggest a high level of internal
consistency (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988) and discriminant validity (Fornell & Larcker, 1981) (see
Table 1 in the appendix).

Results
Structural Model
To examine the hypothesized relationships as predicted in the original hypotheses, a structural
model was computed using Mplus 6. The overall fit of the model was satisfactory with indices
of 2 (df) = 313 (144); CFI = .903; RMSEA = .072; SRMR = .099. All relationships except
the link between economical value and loyalty are substantial and significant at the 0.05 level.
Whereas ecological value has the highest impact on economical value, the functional aspect
has the largest coefficient on customer loyalty. Overall, 43 percent of loyalty is explained by
value supporting the importance of the construct of perceived customer value as an antecedent
of customer loyalty. In terms of hypotheses, empirical results support H1abcd. Ecological
value significantly enhances perceptions along the four other value dimensions. H2a is only
supported regarding the direct effect of functional, emotional and social value on loyalty
intentions (see Table 2 in the appendix). The indirect effects of ecological value on loyalty are
significant for three out of four value dimensions (functional, emotional and social). Hence,
H2b is partially supported by the data. The mediated effect via functional value is highest and
significantly larger than the remaining indirect effects. On the other hand, the sum of
significant effects of affective value facets (emotional and social value) is almost as large as
the significant effect of the cognitive facet (functional value) (see Table 3 in the appendix).
Moderating Variables
In the case of ecological value, it is assumed that there is heterogeneity in the data. In order to
test the effect of selected moderators, a series of multi-group analyses were conducted.
Similar to the main hypotheses, the findings of the moderator analyses are split into direct and
indirect effects (see Table 4 in the appendix ). First, the multi-group analyses for gender
revealed a significant difference regarding the importance of multiple value dimensions as
antecedents to customer loyalty. The functional facet of value is important for both female
and male car drivers. Whereas the economical facet is more important for female car drivers,
the loyalty of male customers is more influenced by emotional aspects of customer value.
Additionally, the mediating effects of ecological value via emotional and economical value
differ significantly. However, these differences are based on the aforementioned direct effects
of emotional and economical value on customer loyalty between men and women. Therefore,
and in a strong sense, hypothesis H3a has to be rejected. Second, general attitude towards
environment protection moderates the relation between ecological value on loyalty via the
functional, economical, emotional, and social value. Again, proposition H3b is partially
supported by the data. The direct effect of ecological value on all remaining value aspects is
substantially and significantly higher for people scoring higher regarding the attitude towards
environment protection. Interestingly, the highest difference was measured for the effect on
emotional value. In terms of indirect effects, the mediating effect via functional value is
significantly different and more important for the high attitude group.
Discussion and Further Research
Perceived ecological value turned out to have high explanatory power for post-consumption
behaviour. Although it has no direct effect, ecological value is important for traditionally nongreen product categories as well. It indirectly impacts on loyalty via functional, emotional and
social value. However, there is heterogeneity among consumers. Whereas gender
discriminates regarding the impact of economical and emotional value on loyalty, no

substantial gender differences were found regarding the impact of ecological value. Gender
does not discriminate regarding the importance of perceived ecological value of non-green
products such as automobiles. The general attitude towards environmental protection revealed
substantial and significant differences. Ecological value affected all remaining value
dimensions more strongly in the group scoring high regarding a positive attitude towards
environment protection. The impact of ecological value on the other four value dimensions is
more pronounced for consumers having a higher attitude towards the protection of the natural
environment (green consumers). For consumers having a low level of attitude towards
environment protection (non-green consumers), ecological value only significantly impacts
the perception of economical value. Nonetheless, the results emphasize that for
environmentally conscious individuals not only cognitive aspects but especially affective
aspects are of major relevance. For this consumer segment, the figures of the four customer
value dimensions are equally high. These results also underline the general importance of the
emotional facet in green consumption. If green consumption behaviour is important to
consumers, the presence of ecological value in cars also leads to better feelings and mood
states. In contrast, for individuals who are not environmentally conscious, ecological value is
only vital regarding its impact on economical (i.e., cognitive) value aspects. Given these
results, ecological value can be the trigger to benefit segmentation. Based on the findings of
the present study, companies in the automotive industry are advised to place more managerial
efforts in value creation. Providing sufficient functional, economical, emotional and social
value is a core element regarding successful customer retention. Moreover, manufacturers of
traditionally non-green products may also consider the importance of ecological value. Facets
of ecological value derived from their products are likely to interplay with the value
perceptions regarding the other four core dimensions. Being aware of the power of ecological
value may provide a strategic advantage and allow re-positioning. As ecological value turned
out to be associated with both cognitive (functional and economical) as well as affective
(emotional and social) value components, communication strategies should foster the
interplay between those value dimensions. Hence, firms should target the group of green
consumers by highlighting the emotional and also altruistic benefits of the market offering,
while the non-green consumers might be approached with arguments based on the priceperformance ratio provided by more environmentally friendly cars. Aside from the new and
substantive learning derived from this study, there are also some limitations indicating
directions worthy of further research. Future research should also account for moderators like
personal traits or self-relation phenomena. As ecological value turned out to be closely related
to social value, the degree of individual persuasibility in consumption situations (Bearden,
Netemeyer, & Teel, 1989) might play another crucial role regarding individual value
perceptions. Hence, the level of self-confidence (Bearden, Hardesty, & Rose, 2001) and selfconcept-clarity (Campbell, et al., 1996) is likely to moderate the interplay of ecological value
and social and emotional value dimensions. In Western societies, pro-environmental
behaviour is generally viewed as pro-social. As this may not be the case for other cultures
(Griskevicius, et al., 2010), the present study should be replicated in a cross-cultural context.

Appendix

Figure 1. Conceptual Model

1
2
3
4
5
6

Ecological Value
Functional Value
Economical value
Emotional Value
Social value
Loyalty
Note:

CR
.85
.75
.81
.78
.82
.82

AVE
.66
.50
.59
.54
.61
.54

1
.812
.274
.420
.272
.277
.268

.709
.115
.074
.076
.580

.769
.114
.116
.116

.737
.075
.257

.781
.281

.733

Square roots of AVEs are presented on the diagonal. Construct correlations are below the diagonal.

Table 1. Construct Correlations & Fit Indices

Path
Ecological Value Functional Value
Ecological Value Economical Value
Ecological Value Emotional Value
Ecological Value Social Value

Unstand.
.146
.293
.258
.336

T-Values
3.181**
5.054**
3.154**
3.359**

Stand.
.274
.420
.271
.277

T-Values
3.528**
6.152**
3.354**
3.805**

.862
.006
.177
.157

5.706**
.066
2.278**
2.931**

.548
.005
.199
.224

7.685**
.066
2.302**
2.980**

Unstand.
.127
.002
.046
.053

T-Values
2.972**
.066
1.889*
2.294**

Functional Value Loyalty

Economical Value Loyalty
Emotional Value Loyalty
Social Value Loyalty
Note: * p .1; ** .05

Table 2. Path Coefficients and T-Values

Ecological Value Functional Value Loyalty
Ecological Value Economical Value Loyalty
Ecological Value Emotional Value Loyalty
Ecological Value Social Value Loyalty
Note: * p .1; ** .05

Table 3. Indirect Effects of Ecological Value on Loyalty

Stand.
.150
.002
.054
.062

T-Values
3.172**
.0172
1.893*
2.353**

Unstand.
Ecological Value Functional Value
Ecological Value Economical Value
Ecological Value Emotional Value
Ecological Value Social Value
Functional Value Loyalty
Economical Value Loyalty
Emotional Value Loyalty
Social Value Loyalty

T-Values

Female
Stand.

Male
TStand.
T-Values
Values
.089
1.493
.180
1.540
.301
3.775**
.407
4.379**
.243
2.241**
.259
2.303**
.271
2.091**
.222
2.166**
.913
4.311**
.542
5.118**
-.131
-1.233
-.116
-1.250
.441
3.553**
.496
4.171**
.111
1.423
.162
1.404
High Attitude towards Environm. Protection
Unstand.
TStand.
T-Values
Values
.298
4.581**
.535
5.929**
.515
6.226**
.663
9.127**
.514
4.441**
.525
5.519**
.487
3.489**
.365
3.802**

T-Values

Unstand.

.215
.250
.309
.350
.921
.222
-.136
.227

3.250
.373
3.730**
3.433
.403
3.905**
2.693
.331
2.929**
.2493
.277
2.625**
5.020**
.612
7.293**
1.593
.158
1.595*
-1.351
-.146
-1.426
3.479**
.330
3.765**
Low Attitude towards Environm. Protection
Unstand.
T-Values
Stand.
T-Values

Ecological Value Functional Value

Ecological Value Economical Value
Ecological Value Emotional Value
Ecological Value Social Value

.027
.129
.072
.188

.455
1.749*
.674
1.522

.053
.195
.076
.167

Functional Value Loyalty

Economical Value Loyalty
Emotional Value Loyalty
Social Value Loyalty

.980
.133
.249
.213

4.739**
1.082
2.400
2.729

.590
.104
.276
.284

Unstand.
Ecological Value Functional Value Loyalty
Ecological Value Economical Value Loyalty
Ecological Value Emotional Value Loyalty
Ecological Value Social Value Loyalty

Ecological Value Functional Value Loyalty

Ecological Value Economical Value Loyalty
Ecological Value Emotional Value Loyalty
Ecological Value Social Value Loyalty

.198
.055
-.042
.080

.457
1.803*
.677
1.549

5.961**
1.083
2.431**
2.783**
Female
T-Values
Stand.

.764
-.007
.068
.128
T-Values

Unstand.

2.979**
1.486
-1.177
2.072**

3.317**
1.496
-1.222
2.183**

.081
-.039
.107
.030

.228
.064
-.048
.092

3.687**
-.056
.594
1.849*

.516
-.007
.080
.207

4.515**
-.056
.590
1.885**

Male
T-Values
Stand.
1.395
-1.197
1.869*
1.176

.098
-.047
.129
.036

T-Values
1.427
-1.206
1.928*
1.164

Low Attitude towards Environm. Protection

High Attitude towards Environm. Protection

Unstand.
.026
.017
.018
.040

Unstand.
.228
-.004
.035
.062

T-Values
.453
.920
.651
1.332

Stand.
.031
.020
.021
.047

Note: * p .1; ** .05

Table 4. Results from Multi-Group Analyses (Direct and Indirect Effect)

T-Values
.454
.926
.651
.035

T-Values
3.098**
-.056
.591
1.647*

Stand.
.276
-.004
.042
.076

T-Values
3.460**
-.056
.588
1.697*

WaldStatistic
2.155
.245
.188
.174
.001
4.022**
12.262**
1.345
WaldStatistic
10.444**
12.569**
9.129**
2.943*
.714
.636
1.296
.673
WaldStatistic
1.789
3.618**
4.691**
1.171
WaldStatistic
4.621**
.089
.084
.242

References
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94.
Bearden, W. O., Hardesty, D. M., & Rose, R. L. (2001). Consumer Self-Confidence:
Refinements in Conzeptualization and Measurement. Journal of Consumer Research,
28(June), 121-134.
Bearden, W. O., Netemeyer, R. G., & Teel, J. E. (1989). Measurement of Consumer
Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(March),
473-481.
Campbell, J. D., Trapnell, P. D., Heine, S. J., Katz, I. M., Lavalle, L. F., & Lehman, D. R.
(1996). Self-Concept Clarity: Measurement, Personality Correlates, and Cultural
Boundaries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(1), 141-156.
Cengiz, E., & Yayla, H. (2007). The Effect of Marketing Mix on Positive Word of Mouth
Communication: Evidence from Accounting Offices in Turkey. Innovative Marketing,
3(4), 73.
de Groot, J. I. M., & Steg, L. (2010). Relationships between value orientations, selfdetermined motivational types and pro-environmental behavioural intentions. Journal
of Environmental Psychology, in press.
Dunn, S. C., Seaker, R. F., & Waller, M. A. (1994). Latent variables in business logistics
research: Scale development and validation. Journal of Business Logistics, 15(2), 145172.
Engel, J. F. (1963). Are Automobile Purchasers Dissonant Consumers? Journal of Marketing,
27(2), 55-58.
Ferguson, M. A., & Branscombe, N. R. (2010). Collective guilt mediates the effect of beliefs
about global warming on willingness to engage in mitigation behavior. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 30, 135-142.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural Equation Models with Unobservable
Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going Green to Be Seen: Status,
Reputation, and Conspicuous Conservation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 98(3), 392-404.
Kilbourne, W. E., Beckmann, S. C., & Thelen, E. (2002). The role of the dominant social
paradigm in environmental attitudes. A multinational examination. Journal of
Business Research, 55(3), 193-204.
Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., & Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001). Targeting consumers who are
willing to pay more for environemntally friendly products. The Journal of Consumer
Marketing, 18(6), 503-520.
Lin, C.-H., Sher, P. J., & Shih, H.-Y. (2005). Past progress and future directions in
conceptualizing customer perceived value. International Journal of Service Industry
Management, 16(4), 318-336.
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In Search of Golden Rules: Comment on
Hypothesis-Testing Approaches to Setting Cutoff Values for Fit Indexes and Dangers
in Overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler's (1999) Findings. Structural Equation Modeling,
11(3), 320-341.
Maynard, M. (2007). Say 'Hybrid' and Many People Will Hear 'Prius'. The New York Times,
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/business/04hybrid.html, , accessed August 23,
2010.
Moisander, J. (2007). Motivational complexity of green consumerism. International Journal
of Consumer Studies, 31, 404-409.

Moon, S., Bergey, P. K., & Iacobucci, D. (2010). Dynamic Effects Among Movie Ratings,
Movie Revenues, and Viewer Satisfaction. Journal of Marketing, 74(January), 108121.
Pihlstrm, M., & Brush, G. J. (2008). Comparing the Perceived Value of Information and
Entertainment Mobile Services. Psychology & Marketing, 25(8), 732-755.
Polk, M. (2004). The influence of gender on daily car use and on willingness to reduce car use
in Sweden. Journal of Transport Geography, 12, 185-195.
Sharma, S., Mukherjee, S., Kumar, A., & Dillon, W. R. (2005). A simulation study to
investigate the use of cutoff values for assessing model fit in covariance structure
models. Journal of Business Research, 58(7), 935-943.
Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Why We Buy What We Buy: A Theory of
Consumption Values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159-170.
Steg, L. (2005). Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car
use. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 39(2-3), 147-162.
Straits, B. C. (1964). The Pursuit of the Dissonant Consumer. Journal of Marketing, 28(July),
62-66.
Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N. (2001). Consumer Perceived Value: The Development of a
Multiple Item Scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 203-220.
Wang, Y., Lo, H. P., Chi, R., & Yang, Y. (2004). An Integrated Framework for Customer
Value and Customer-Relationship-Management Performance: A Customer-Based
Perspective from China. Managing Service Quality, 14(2/3), 169-182.
www.media.daimler.com, accessed 27 January 2011
www.greencar.com, accessed 27 January 2011
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End
Model and Synthesis of Evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52, 2-22.