Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271278

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jretconser

Effects of store loyalty on shopping mall loyalty

Fazlul K. Rabbanee a,n, B. Ramaseshan a, Chen Wu b, Amy Vinden c
a
School of Marketing, Curtin University, Australia
b
International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, The University of Western Australia, Australia
c
OmniSTAR Pty Ltd., Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o abstract

Available online 29 February 2012 The key purpose of this paper is to bridge a research gap in shopping mall literature by investigating the
Keywords: relationship between store loyalty and shopping mall loyalty. The paper also examines the effects of
Shopping mall loyalty perceived store value and store relationship commitment on store loyalty en-route to loyalty towards
Store loyalty the shopping mall hosting the stores. The study shows that store loyalty inuences shopping mall
Relationship commitment loyalty under certain conditions and that such an inuence is moderated by the geographic distance
Customer distance between the consumer and the shopping mall. Further, the study found that distance has a moderating
Perceived value effect on the relationship between perceived store value and store loyalty, but not on the association
between relationship commitment and store loyalty. The insights provided by this study offer
academics, retailers and shopping mall managers a richer understanding of the relationships between
store loyalty and its antecedents, customers distance from the mall, and shopping mall loyalty.
& 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Shopping mall developers are always keen to attract, entice
and retain the shoppers in the mall by creating exciting shopping
experiences. Attracting shoppers and obtaining their loyalty are
the key concerns of shopping mall developers and their manage-
ment authority (Babin and Attaway, 2000). Shoppers loyalty
enables the mall developers in gaining market share and attaining
sustainable competitive advantage (Wright and Sparks, 1999).
Subsequently, shopping mall loyalty has been receiving more
attention from the retail marketing literature over the last decade
(e.g. Chebat et al., 2009; Chebat and Morrin, 2007; Chebat et al.,
2006; Lehew et al., 2002; Pan and Zinkhan, 2006).
Existing literature on shopping mall focused more on factors
inuencing shopping mall loyalty. For example, Chebat et al.
(2009) proposed and tested a conceptual model of psychological
process of generating mall loyalty considering commitment to the
mall as the key antecedent of shopping mall loyalty. Lehew et al.
(2002) support the presence of both loyal vs. non-loyal mall
customers. Their study revealed that mall attributes inuence
mall loyalty. Wakeeld and Baker (1998) mentioned that store
variety, mall environment, and shopping involvement inuence
shoppers excitement and desire to stay in mall and thus affect
their patronage intentions. Therefore, some portion of shoppers
n
Correspondence to: Fazlul Rabbanee, School of Marketing, Curtin University,
GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.
E-mail addresses: fazlul.rabbanee@postgrad.curtin.edu.au (F.K. Rabbanee),
b.ramaseshan@curtin.edu.au (B. Ramaseshan), chen.wu@curtin.edu.au (C. Wu).
loyalty toward the mall could actually be store specic loyalty,
wherein loyalty is directed toward the specic stores of the mall.
This may also raise question whether shoppers are loyal to the
mall or to the store. Because shoppers may remain loyal to the
stores but may not necessarily be loyal to the malls. Surprisingly,
retail literature is largely silent whether store loyalty contributes
to the shopping mall loyalty.
In the light of these unexplored aspects of mall loyalty vs. store
loyalty, the primary purpose of this research is to examine whether
store loyalty has any inuence on shopping mall loyalty. Shoppers
often drive past weaker malls to reach desired malls that have the
best variety of stores and merchandises (Ashley, 1997). Besides, with
respect to rising competitive intensity among the shopping malls due
to increased number of malls (Kirkup and Raq, 1994; Raajpoot et al.,
2008) and similar stores carrying same merchandises (Ashley, 1997;
Templin, 1997), it is imperative for the shopping malls to decide an
optimum store mix as it affects the occupancy rate in shopping malls
(Kirkup and Raq, 1994). On the other hand, shoppers often tend to
patronise their nearest shopping malls more; hence, distance inu-
ences shopping mall attractiveness (Dennis et al., 2000). None of the
previous research relating to store/shopping mall loyalty has focused
on the moderating impact of distance either in the relationship
between store loyalty and mall loyalty or in relationship between
store loyalty and its antecedents. Chebat et al. (2009) found that mall
image positively inuences store image, however the reverse rela-
tionship whether store image and/or loyalty inuence/s mall image
and/or loyalty is largely unknown.
Therefore, this study contributes to the literature in three
ways: rst, it investigates the impact of store loyalty on shopping

0969-6989/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2012.02.001
272 F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271278
mall loyalty. In order to do this, we examine the impact of two
store-related factors: store relationship commitment and per-
ceived store value on store loyalty en-route to shoppers loyalty
towards the shopping mall that hosts the stores. Secondly, this
study examines whether distance moderates the relationship
between store loyalty and shopping mall loyalty. This objective
of the study is inuenced by Chebat et al. (2009), who tested the
moderating impact of gender in relationship between the ante-
cedents of mall loyalty and encouraged future research on
moderating impact of other variables on mall loyalty. Thirdly,
the study proposes an alternative explanation for shopping
behaviour by investigating the moderating effect of distance in
the relationships between the antecedents of store loyalty (store
relationship commitment and perceived value of the store) and
mall loyalty.
The paper is organised as follows. We begin by discussing two
distinct type of loyalty namely mall loyalty and store loyalty
followed by the antecedents of store loyalty used in this
studystore relationship commitment and perceived value of
store. Then we discuss the impact of distance on shopping
behaviour followed by our conceptual framework reecting the
hypothesised relationships among the key constructs of the study
(i.e. store relationship commitment, perceived value of the store,
store loyalty, and mall loyalty) under the moderating impact of
distance. The paper concludes by discussing the ndings and the
implications for managers with the key one being that store
loyalty positively inuences mall loyalty and distance moderates
the stated relationship among the constructs.
2. Theoretical background
Shopping mall is an important retail setting that contributes to
shoppers experience. A shopping mall is a planned retail devel-
opment comprising at least three shops, under one freehold,
managed and marketed as a unit (Guy, 1994). It includes a large
number of stores that often complement one another in terms of
quality, variety, and provides an appeal of one-stop shopping
experience (Haytko and Baker, 2004). Shopping mall plays a key
role in modern marketing distribution system. It dominates in the
distribution of fashion-oriented merchandises (Finn and Louviere,
1996). Shopping mall industry employs over three-quarters of a
million people in the USA (OXIRM, 1999; Davies et al., 1993),
which proves the rising trends of shopping malls in retailing over
recent decades (Teller, 2008). Research indicates that existing
shopping malls face increasing competitive pressures due to
increasing number of new and planned shopping malls (Kirkup
and Raq, 1994; Raajpoot et al., 2008). Consumers often enjoy
shopping experience by frequenting in shopping malls however,
some consider shopping time precious, and wish to minimise
trips to the malls. Store loyal customers are often time conscious
and like to shop locally (Reynolds et al., 19741975). This
preference poses great challenges to shopping malls, many of
which aim to provide exciting experiences in order to entice more
customers. This is one of the primary reasons why shopping mall
managers emphasise on optimal store mix (Kirkup and Raq,
1994) and thus try to ensure increased number of shoppers in
stores as well as in the malls hosting the stores.
2.1. Store loyalty
Store loyalty is perhaps the most important issue to consider for
retailers. Store loyalty can be dened as the commitment towards the
store and is inuenced by satisfaction and trust towards the store
(Bloemer and Odekerken-Schroder, 2002). Bloemer and Ruyter (1998)
dened store loyalty as biased behavioural response (i.e. revisit) of the
customers expressed over time with respect to one store out of a set
of stores, which is a function of psychological process (decision
making and evaluative) resulting in brand commitment. Therefore,
store loyalty is a deeply held commitment to repatronise a preferred
store, and can be determined by two key antecedents such as store
image and shopping mall loyalty (Sirgy and Samli, 1985).
Increased store loyalty has numerous positive effects including
positive word-of-mouth and increased customer retention that
result in reduced marketing costs. Such relationships also create
greater opportunities for cross-selling and the sales of additional
products (Lavayssie re and Mullen, 2007). Consumers are more
likely to become loyal to a store if they have relationship with
employees, as many of such stores encourage their employees to
become actively involved in the organisation sponsored loyalty
programs (Macintosh and Lockshin, 1997) and build relationship
with the consumers. Consumers receive value from these loyalty
programs and/or from the merchandises bought from these stores
and become loyal to the store. Loyal customers consider patron-
ising a store as one of their highest priorities when making any
shopping decision, regardless of any obstacles presented (Osman,
1993).
2.2. Perceived value
The denitions of perceived value are often couched in terms of
a trade-off between what an individual receives and what they
give in return (Zeithaml, 1988). The value obtained from this
trade-off extends past monetary considerations to encompass a
wide array of variables. Having its root in equity theory, perceived
value holds that customers are inclined to be treated equitably in
terms of the ratio of their outcome to inputs comparing to the
ratio of outcome to inputs received by the company (Oliver and
DeSarbo, 1988). Customers often measure a companys ratio of
outcome to inputs by making comparisons with its competitors
offerings (Yang and Peterson, 2004). Eggert and Ulaga (2002) also
mentioned that perceived value is relative to competition, i.e.
offering better value than competitors will help a company to
create sustainable competitive advantage. Again, consumers who
receive value for money tend to report higher levels of satisfac-
tion than those who did not (McDougall and Levesque, 2000). For
this study, we considered monetary aspect of perceived value
relative to the competitors.
Customer value is the fundamental basis for all marketing
strategy (Holbrook, 1994, p. 22) as high value is a primary
motivation for customer patronage (Yang and Peterson, 2004).
Previous research shows that perceived value is one of the key
determinants of customer loyalty (e.g. Bolton and Drew, 1991;
Zeithaml, 1988; Salegna and Goodwin, 2005). Parasuraman and
Grewal (2000) argued that one of the most effective means of
generating customer loyalty is to deliver superior value derived
from excellent services and quality products. Sirdeshmukh et al.
(2002) mentioned that customer value leads to their behavioural
intentions toward the service provider as long as such relational
exchanges provide superior value. Surprisingly, research focusing
on relationship between perceived value and customer loyalty in
the context of individual stores within shopping malls is inade-
quate, which is one of the key focusing areas of this paper.
2.3. Relationship commitment
Relationship commitment can be dened as an enduring
desire to maintain a valued relationship (Moorman et al., 1992).
Wilson (1995) mentioned that relationship commitment is a
pledge of rationalised continuation with a brand, product or store.
De Wulf et al. (2001) suggest that some consumers are more
likely to engage in relationships than others, hence relationship
 F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271278
commitment may vary across customers. For the purposes of this
research, a relationship commitment is dened as a belief of an
exchange partner that an ongoing relationship with his/her
partner is important and warrants maximum efforts to maintain
it. This means that the committed party believes the relationship
is worth working on to ensure that it endures indenitely
(Morgan and Hunt, 1994). Commitment is distinct from loyalty
as it is more related to psychological attachments that the
customer may have toward a store and/or a brand (Thomson
et al., 2005). Such attachments are fundamental appraisal
mechanisms through which customers determine whether and
why they are loyal to a particular store and/or a brand (Beatty and
Kahle, 1988). Hence relationship commitment is an antecedent to
loyalty (Fullerton, 2003; Evanschitzky et al., 2006). In addition,
previous research also shows that commitment has positive
impact on various loyalty dimensions (e.g. Garbarino and
Johnson, 1999; Gundlach et al., 1995). Evanschitzky et al. (2006)
found that commitment has positive impact on both attitudinal
and behavioural loyalty. Customers commitment i.e. their psy-
chological attachments towards a store and/or brand reect their
self-evaluation of the consumption context, which has impact on
their patronage of the same store or brand (Evanschitzky et al.,
2006).
2.4. Shopping mall loyalty
Shopping mall loyalty implies repeat patronage of a specic
retail property. It is dened as a shoppers attitudinal predis-
position consisting of intentions to continually patronise the mall
in terms of repeated shopping at the mall and willingness to
recommend the mall (Chebat et al., 2009). Often consumers view
shopping malls as a place not only for shopping, but also for other
activities such as entertainment (Bloch et al., 1994). Shopping
mall developers use loyalty strategy to increase sales of the malls
tenants, which ultimately contributes to the prot of the mall
owners since leases are typically based on percentage of sales
(Lehew et al., 2002). Therefore, shoppers loyalty is one of the key
factors in achieving competitive advantage for mall developers
(Wright and Sparks, 1999).
Previous shopping mall literature focused on infrastructure
and planning of the mall (Gambill, 2000), effect of the mall decor
(e.g. colour) on shoppers perception of the environment and the
merchandises sold in the mall (Chebat and Morrin, 2007), data-
base marketing efforts of retail stores and shopping malls
(Gattuso, 1994; Shermach, 1995), impact of shoppers demo-
graphics on mall patronage and underlying motives of patronising
specic shopping mall (Pan and Zinkhan, 2006; Roy, 1994).
Chebat et al. (2009) argued that mall loyalty is signicantly
inuenced by shoppers commitment towards the mall, which
again is inuenced by their positive awareness of the mall
characteristics and shoppers self-congruity. Wakeeld and
Baker (1998) emphasised that shoppers excitement levels inu-
ence their re-patronage intention towards the mall. Their con-
ceptual model revealed two key stimulus factorsmall
environment and tenant variety that signicantly inuence shop-
pers excitement.
Although previous research emphasised the importance of
store variety in predicting mall loyalty, existing literature did
not examine whether store loyalty can be considered as an
antecedent of mall loyalty. Few researchers focused on the impact
of store related characteristics on mall preference. For example
Nevin and Houston (1980) mentioned that presence of the
preferred retailers attracts consumers to those shopping malls.
Finn and Louviere (1996) claimed that specic anchor stores and
other physical characteristics of the shopping centres have
positive impact on consumers perception of image and their
273
choice for that shopping centres. However, Nevin and Houston
(1980), and Finn and Louviere (1996) did not take the extra step
to examine whether store loyalty has impact on shopping mall
loyalty. This study also attempts to address this research gap.
2.5. Distance and shopping behaviour
Shoppers are more likely to shop in attractive shopping
centres, but the attractiveness decreases with distance (Dennis
et al., 2002). Farther the consumers are from a store, the greater
will be the number of intervening alternatives; hence the lower is
their likelihood to patronise a store (Loudon and Della Bitta,
1993). The farther the outlet from the shopper in terms of time
and effort to reach the outlet, or mileage to the outlet, the greater
the cost for shoppers. Hence, distance of a shopping mall is
related to travel time and cost which includes time, travel cost
and psychic cost (Lusch and Lusch, 1987; cf. Darley and Lim,
1999). Current geographic studies of shopping behaviour that
draw on the central place theory (Christaller, 1933; Christaller
and Baskin, 1966), also state that shoppers often patronise their
nearest retail shopping mall. For example, Dennis et al. (2000)
focused on the relationship between shopping mall attractiveness
and distance. The authors examined the inuence of location and
proximity and concluded that patronage of a shopping mall
declines with increasing distance (Dennis et al., 2002). More
recently, Dennis (2005) conrms that travel does play a strong
role in a shoppers choice of mall and found that customers
relative spending is disproportional to relative distance from
shopping malls.
On the other hand, some researchers challenge the central
place theory. Psychological factors such as need for uniqueness
may lead to non-rational out-shopping behaviour. Piron (2002)
pointed out that consumers engage in outshopping primarily for
economic reasons. Burns and Warren (1995) recognised an
individuals need for personal differentiation as one of the key
factors in shopping mall choice behaviour. In a similar study,
Marjanen (1995) examines the usage of different shopping areas
and changes in choice frequencies of different types of store
location. Marjanens (1995) study nds that parking facilities,
large size shopping area and availability of more diversied goods
inuence outshopping. In addition, customers multi-purpose
shopping behaviour often leads them engaging in out-of-town
shopping i.e. long distance shopping (e.g. OKelly, 1981; Hanson,
1980). Although distance of the shopping centre in terms of travel
time and cost is often considered as one of the key considering
factors (Runyon and Stewart, 1987), distance or travel time and
cost are less likely to inuence those shoppers who want to be
dazzled and expect excitement out of shopping (Singer and
Rosecky, 1995). Darley and Lim (1999) also mentioned that
distance does not have any signicant impact on shoppers
patronisation when they hold more favourable store specic
attitudes and favourable qualityavailability perception about
the store.
Therefore, it is evident that distance does have impact on
shopping mall patronage behaviour and existing research yields
inconsistent results in this regard. Previous studies did not
examine the moderating role of distance on shopping mall
loyalty, which is one of the key purposes of this study.
3. Conceptual framework and hypotheses
This research investigates the effects of store loyalty on shop-
ping mall loyalty and whether distance moderates the relationship
between these constructs. It also examines the moderating
role of distance in relationship between store loyalty and its two
274 F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271278
Store
H1b
Relationship H1d H 2a
Commitment H 2b
Store Loyalty Mall Loyalty
H 1a
H1c
Perceived
Value of Store
Distance
(Long vs. Short)
Fig. 1. Hypothesised model.
antecedentsperceived store value and store relationship commit-
ment. Fig. 1 presents the conceptual framework.
Store loyalty is a consequence of perceived store value and
store relationship commitment. Perceived value is an important
antecedent of customer loyalty (Parasuraman and Grewal, 2000).
Therefore, perceived value of a store has a positive inuence on
loyalty toward a particular store located within a shopping mall.
However, the strength of this relationship depends on customers
distance from the shopping mall. Dennis et al. (2002) mentioned
that although shoppers are more likely to shop in an attractive
shopping centre, the attractiveness decreases with distance.
Previous research also argued that driving time and distance to
stores have signicant impact on store patronage (Mackay and
Olshavsky, 1975; Runyon and Stewart, 1987). The closer the
consumers are to a store, the greater is the likelihood to buy
from that store (Loudon and Della Bitta, 1993).
According to Morgan and Hunt (1994) and De Wulf et al.
(2001), store relationship commitment has a positive inuence on
store loyalty. When customers reside within a relatively short
distance from a shopping mall, the inuence of store relationship
commitment on store loyalty is likely to be positive. On the other
hand, when customers reside over a relatively long distance from
the shopping mall, such inuence is likely to be reduced. For
customers who reside relatively far from the shopping mall/store,
it is somewhat more difcult to gain their store loyalty compared
to those who live close to the mall given the same level of store
relationship commitment. Based on the above discussion, we
hypothesise that
H1a: Under short distance, perceived store value has a positive
effect on store loyalty.
H1b: Under short distance, store relationship commitment has
a positive effect on store loyalty.
H1c: Under long distance, perceived store value has no effect
on store loyalty.
H1d: Under long distance, store relationship commitment has
no effect on store loyalty.
Wakeeld and Baker (1998) mentioned that consumers are
motivated to spend more time in a mall if the mall has store
variety. Sometimes shoppers visit a specic mall due to their
positive impression about one or many of the stores hosted by
that shopping mall. Therefore, store loyalty is highly likely to
contribute to shopping mall loyalty. Previous research also found
that attraction towards specic stores and store variety inuence
outshopping (e.g. Lumpkin et al., 1986; Samli et al., 1983).
However, the longitudinal study of Marjanen (1995) did not nd
any correlation between market share of a shopping centre and its
perceived distance. The study found that the market shares of
shopping centres increase in nearby areas as local shops are
usually visited for grocery items (Marjanen, 1995). However, this
can be explained more in terms of habitual buying than loyalty.
Therefore, store loyalty contributes to mall loyalty in the context
of long distance than short distance. Hence, we hypothesise that
H2a: Under short distance, store loyalty has no effect on
shopping mall loyalty.
H2b: Under long distance, store loyalty has a positive effect on
shopping mall loyalty.
4. Method
4.1. Data collection
In order to examine the hypothesised model, a survey was
conducted among the shoppers of one of the eight anchor stores
(selected at random) from a large shopping mall consisting of a total
of ninety-three stores. These stores range from fashion, household/
gifts, mobile phones, travel, health, pharmacies, etc. that create a
substantial cross-section of the shopping malls commercial offering.
Thus, the population of this study comprises of all individuals who
shop at these given stores within the shopping mall. The data was
collected at one point in time over a period of four weeks.
The questionnaire was pre-tested amongst numerous shop-
pers, spanning a wide cross-section of age, gender and education.
We approached a representative sample of 470 shoppers selected
at random within the shopping mall over a period of four weeks.
For sample selection, we followed the procedure dened in
Sudman (1980). Shoppers were intercepted when she/he was
about to enter any of the eight anchor stores selected for the
study. This is to avoid the biased situation, where people who
spend more time in the shopping mall or store would have a
higher probability of selection. A total of 230 responses were
received. Of this, 20 responses were discarded due to incomplete-
ness. This resulted in an effective response rate of 44.7%.
Customer distance data was extracted from the demographic
information provided in the survey. In particular, shoppers
provided names of their residential suburbs. Respondents sub-
urbs are considered as short distance if either (1) they reside in
the same suburb where the shopping mall is located, or (2) the
actual driving distance from that suburb to the exact location of
the shopping mall is within 4 km based on the Google Map
information. Suburbs are treated as over long distance if either
they are not directly bordered with the suburb where the
shopping mall is located or the actual driving distance is beyond
4 km. Based on this criterion, within these 210 usable surveys,
107 responses (51%) were within short distance and 103
responses (49%) were over long distance.
4.2. Measures
For each construct (latent variable) specied in the hypotheses, we
generated a list of items to measure the constructs based on existing
literature (see Appendix A). Original scales developed by Yang and
Peterson (2004) were used with minor adaptations to measure the
perceived store value. In particular, this scale encourages respondents
to compare their value perceptions of the retail store in comparison to
other similar retail stores. Whilst numerous scales measure relation-
ship commitment, the scale by Morgan and Hunt (1994) continues to
be one of the most widely used, and was hence used for this research.
The store loyalty and shopping mall loyalty were measured with
established scales adapted from Rosenbaum et al. (2005), which uses
both positively and negatively worded questions for a single con-
struct, causing the respondent to undergo a higher level of cognitive
thinking during response and reduces the possibility to inate or
 F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271278 275

Table 1 Table 2
Descriptive statistics of the indicators. The measurement model t.

Long distance (N 103) Short distance (N107) Indicator Factor loading Error t-Value

Mean Std. deviation Mean Std. deviation Construct: store perceived value
PVPRICE .77 .079 13.52
Perceived store value PVFAIR .79 .074 14.00
PVPRICE 4.215 1.246 4.75 1.246 PVFREE .60 .081 9.77
PVFAIR 4.385 1.063 4.96 1.167 PVPRESEN .95 .067 18.83
PVFREE 3.940 0.893 4.121 1.365 PVFUTURE .95 .066 18.80
PVPRESEN 4.430 1.176 5.141 1.125
PVFUTURE 4.477 1.191 5.234 1.063
Construct: store relationship commitment
Relationship commitment RCIMPORT .87 .074 12.21
RCIMPORT 2.923 1.373 4.174 1.552 RCMAINTA .82 .088 16.06
RCNSIGNI 4.553 1.569 3.565 1.712 RCFAMILY .88 .087 18.75
RCMAINTA 3.308 1.508 4.804 1.514 RCCARE .95 .076 21.74
RCFAMILY 2.630 1.431 3.891 1.738 RCEFFORT .83 .092 16.44
RCCARE 2.846 1.439 4.163 1.646 RCNSIGNI .72 .099 13.13
RCEFFORT 2.708 1.356 4.082 1.747

Store loyalty Construct: store loyalty

BLNSPEAK 5.754 1.415 5.619 1.897 BLEND .65 .09 7.82
BLEND 4.400 1.680 5.815 1.309 BLPAY .76 .14 9.35
BLNLOYAL 3.908 1.716 5.268 1.606 BLNLOYAL .66 .15 8.40
BLPAY 3.277 1.504 3.870 1.830 BLNSPEAK .21 .12 2.93
BLNCOMPE 2.523 1.125 3.060 1.423 BLNCOMPE .52 .11 6.82

Shopping mall loyalty

FFBLNSPE 5.000 2.008 5.076 2.012 Construct: shopping mall loyalty
FFBLEND 4.908 1.506 5.674 1.407 FFBLEND .57 .16 4.82
FFBLNLOY 4.477 1.719 5.261 1.676 FFBLPAY .67 .18 6.26
FFBLPAY 3.000 1.579 3.700 1.642 FFBLNSPE .30 .13 3.52
FFBLNCOM 2.538 1.229 3.054 1.401 FFBLNLOY .66 .20 6.23
FFBLNCOM .46 .14 5.02

deate estimates of the correlation between the constructs. A seven-

Short Distance
point Likert scale (7strongly agree, 6agree, 5slightly agree,
4neither agree nor disagree, 3slightly disagree, 2disagree,
1strongly disagree) was used to measure each of the constructs. Store
General demographic information: gender, age, postcode, level of Relationship 0.64 (4.67)**
education and personal income was also collected for each respon- Commitment
0.31 (1.25)
dent. Table 1 includes the descriptive statistics of the indicators. To Store Loyalty Mall Loyalty
minimise common method bias, the items of the questionnaire were 0.47 (4.07)**
randomized completely so that respondents are less likely to correlate Perceived
questions or biased based on any prior belief or knowledge. Thus the Value of Store
validity of the constructs of this study is ensured.

Long Distance
5. Analysis and results

Store
5.1. The measurement model 0.68 (4.40)**
Relationship
Commitment 0.53 (3.03)*
In this research, the total disaggregation model for measure- Store Loyalty Mall Loyalty
ment was used in which an underlying latent construct is
0.15 (1.26)
measured through a number of true single-item measures
(Anderson and Gerbing, 1984; Baumgartner and Homburg, Perceived
Value of Store
1996). This is because this method allows the most explicit tests
of the quality of construct measurement (Baumgartner and
Homburg, 1996). The measurement validity was assessed by
Fig. 2. The standardised structural model. Note: npo 0.005. nn
p o0.0001.
conrmatory factor analysis (CFA). The CFA result reveals that
the measures achieved convergent validity.
Table 2 shows that the indicators well support most constructs For each hypothesis validation, in addition to the coefcient, the
with satisfactory statistics through coefcient, error, and t-value. t-value, and R2 are examined. A t-value above 1.96 and an R2 value
The resulting total disaggregation analysis shows that the data t above 0.2 indicate the validity of the model. Fig. 2 presents the
the measurement model reasonably well. key results.
In the short distance condition, the overall model showed a
5.2. The structural model reasonable t: Chi-Square (166) 288.74 (p0.00), the Goodness-
of-Fit Index (GFI) 0.81, the Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index
Structural equation analysis was performed via LISREL to (AGFI)0.78, the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) 0.94, the Normed
validate the structural model. We tested the hypothesis (H1a,c, Fit Index (NFI)0.88, and the Root Mean Square Residual
H1b,d, and H2a,b) under both short and long distance conditions. (RMR)0.087. The overall GFIs for the long distance condition
276 F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271278
Table 3
Short distance: standardized path coefcients.
Short distance
Hypothesised path Coefcient (t-value) Hypothesis
Store RC-store loyalty (H1b) .64 (4.67)nn Supported
Perceived value-store loyalty (H1a) .47 (4.07)nn Supported
Store loyalty-shopping mall loyalty (H2a) .31 (1.25) Supported
nn
p o0.0001.
Table 4
Long distance: standardized path coefcients.
Long distance
Hypothesised path Coefcient Hypothesis
(t-value)
Store RC-store loyalty (H1d) .68 (4.40)nn Not supported
Perceived value-store loyalty (H1c) .15 (1.26) Supported
Store loyalty-shopping mall loyalty (H2b) .53 (3.03)n Supported
n
p o 0.005.
nn
p o0.0001.
were as follows: Chi-Square (166)382.59 (p 0.00), GFI 0.73,
AGFI0.66, CFI 0.93, NFI 0.88, and RMR0.11. None of the
gamma or beta modication indices exceeds 5.0, indicating no
path changes will signicantly improve the model. Taken
together, the ndings indicate a reasonably well t between the
proposed model and the data (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988).
Tables 3 and 4 show the structural model and the result.
Model estimates are largely consistent with the hypotheses
suggested in the proposed structural model (Fig. 1) except that
H1d was not supported. For the short distance condition, the path
coefcients and t-values are listed in Table 3.
The rst two path values (.64 (4.67) and .47 (4.07)) are both
very signicant. Thus both H1a and H1b are supported. Note that
H2a posits that under short distance condition store loyalty has no
effect on shopping mall loyalty. Given the insignicant coefcient
with t-value (o1.96), this hypothesis is supported.
Table 4 lists the path coefcients for the long distance condi-
tion. The last path value (.53 (3.03)) is very signicant, thus H2b is
supported. The coefcient and t-value in the path (Perceived
value-store loyalty) indicates insignicant result, which sup-
ports the Hypothesis H1c. For the hypothesis H1d, the result shows
that, under long distance, store relationship commitment still
exerts a signicantly positive inuence on store loyalty. There-
fore, the result does not support H1d. (Under long distance, store
relationship commitment has no effect on store loyalty.) The
resultant model suggests that relationship commitment has an
effect on store loyalty regardless of distance. This corresponds
with previous research (Garbarino and Johnson, 1999), in which
the authors suggested that customer relationship proneness could
have a mediating effect on customer loyalty, indicating that some
consumers are more likely to engage in relationships than others.
6. Discussions and managerial implications
Previous research on shopping mall appears to have focused
on attributes of shopping malls per se and neglected the relation-
ships between individual stores and the shopping mall hosting
the stores. This study lls the research gap by investigating
relationships among perceived value of store, store loyalty, store
relationship commitment, distance and shopping mall loyalty.
The study shows a positive relationship between store loyalty and
shopping mall loyalty. This is important considering that shop-
ping mall tenants are crucial to the success of a shopping mall
establishment. The ndings reveal that store loyalty has positive
effect on shopping mall loyalty under long distance but not under
short distance.
This study further shows that distance has a moderating effect
on the relationship between perceived store value and store
loyalty. Previous research suggests that perceived value is an
antecedent of loyalty (McDougall and Levesque, 2000; Yang and
Peterson, 2004). This study extended previous research concluding
that impact of perceived value on loyalty varies on the basis of
distance travelled i.e. distance moderates the relationship between
perceived value and store loyalty. This study also shows that
distance does moderate the impact of relationship commitment
on store loyalty. As shown in the previous section, store relation-
ship commitment signicantly inuences store loyalty regardless
of distance. The results of this study suggest that customers
commitment towards the relationship with a store is an important
antecedent of store loyalty. This nding supports Hocutt (1998)
that the level of commitment directly determines the strength of
the relationship and the likelihood of maintaining it. Although long
distance may be an undesirable aspect of this relationship, com-
mitment implies that customers are willing to tolerate such
undesirable attributes, leading to store loyalty.
The nding that store loyalty has a signicant positive effect
on shopping mall loyalty has considerable managerial implica-
tions to shopping mall managers. Shopping mall managers need
to understand the antecedents of shopping mall loyalty in order
to create an enjoyable shopping mall experience. Findings of this
study show that managers can enhance consumer shopping mall
loyalty by improving store loyalty in addition to improvements to
the mall per se. Shopping mall managers should not limit their
marketing efforts to the mall itself. They should provide adequate
support to the stores within the mall in order to enable them to
enhance store loyalty which will ultimately contribute to mall
loyalty. This strategy will be particularly useful for outshoppers.
For example, shopping mall managers may wish to carry out
outshopper customer segmentation based on their loyalty to
different stores, and work together with stores that reside in the
mall to formulate long-term business strategies to retain custo-
mer loyalty to the shopping mall.
Based on our nding that under long distance, perceived store
value has no effect on store loyalty, it is clear that providing
adequate value does not automatically lead to store loyalty for
outshoppers who need to bear extra travelling time to patronise
the store. Given the rapid development of modern transportation
infrastructure and urbanisation, the number of these outshoppers
is increasing as they constantly travel beyond their communities
for shopping. When more customers become outshoppers, store
managers must come up with differentiated strategies that can
gain loyalty from the growing number of outshoppers, thereby
retaining these increasingly important customers in future. In
other words, store managers must devise innovative ways of
gaining loyalty from customers coming from long distances
instead of merely relying on traditional methods of value related
to their products and services. For customers who live nearby,
store managers should keep them informed of the good features/
values of their products/services as perceived value is crucial for
the store to retain them.
The strong effect of relationship commitment on store loyalty
regardless of distance suggests that it is possible to gain loyalty
from customers coming from longer distances by establishing and
maintaining smooth relationships. Store managers should have
different relationship formation and further maintenance strate-
gies for customers located in both short and long distances.
 F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271278
For long distance customers, store managers should try to build
up a long-term personal relationship (i.e., between individual
staffs and customers). Because efforts in increasing the perceived
store value in terms of product and service only may not be
sufcient enough to retain the current customers in future.
7. Limitations and future research directions
The study has some limitations. First, shopper perception of
different store attributes such as store quality of stores, its image,
cleanliness, etc. determine the perceived attractiveness of the
store (see McGoldrick and Thompson, 1992; Dennis et al., 2002)
hence inuence store loyalty. This study does not consider the
effects of different store attributes on store loyalty and shopping
mall loyalty. Second, although a shopping mall comprises both
anchor stores as well as non-anchor stores, this study only
considers the impact of anchor stores loyalty on shopping mall
loyalty. It is beyond the scope of this study to consider the impact
of non-anchor stores loyalty on shopping mall loyalty. Hence,
future research could investigate the impact of loyalty towards
non-anchor stores on shopping mall loyalty. Thirdly, this study
primarily considers perceived value in terms of monetary aspect
only. Further research could focus on examining the impact of
perceived value in terms of other attributes such as availability of
merchandises on store loyalty en-route to shopping mall loyalty.
Last but not the least, shoppers might receive relational benets
such as social benets and condence benets from a particular
Table A1
Construct measurement.
Construct
Perceived store value
PVPRICE Compared to alternative stores, Company X offers attractive
prices for their products/services
PVFAIR Compared to alternative stores, Company X charges me fairly for
similar products/services
PVFREE Compared to alternative stores, Company X provides more free
services
PVPRESEN Comparing what I paid at Company X to what I might get from
competitive stores, I believe that so far Company X has provided
me with good value
PVFUTURE Comparing what I will pay at Company X to what I might get
from competitive stores, I believe Company X will provide me
with good value in the future
Relationship commitment
RCIMPORT y is very important to me
RCNSIGNI y is of little signicance to me (Reverse Coded)
RCMAINTA y is something that I intend to maintain indenitely
RCFAMILY y is very much like being family
RCCARE y is something that I really care about
RCEFFORT y deserves my maximum effort to maintain
Store loyalty
BLNSPEAK I speak unfavorably about Company X to others (Reverse Coded)
BLEND I cant see me ending my relationship with Company X
BLNLOYAL I do not consider myself loyal to Company X
BLPAY I would pay more for products or services in order to buy them
from Company X compared with prices at other stores
BLNCOMPE I would be willing to try products or services from a competitors
store
Shopping mall loyalty
FFBLNSPE I speak unfavorably about Shopping mall X to others (Reverse
Coded)
FFBLEND I cant see me ending my relationship with Shopping mall X
FFBLNLOY I do not consider myself loyal to Shopping mall X
FFBLPAY I would pay more for products or services in order to buy them
from Shopping mall X compared with prices at other stores
FFBLNCOM I would be willing to try products or services from a competitive
shopping mall (Reverse Coded)
277
store of a shopping mall (e.g. Gwinner et al., 1998), which may
inuence their loyalty towards the store as well as to the
shopping mall. This study does not consider the impact of such
relational benets. Hence future research could focus on this
aspect.
Appendix A
See Table A1.
References
Anderson, J.C., Gerbing, D.W., 1984. The effects of sampling error on convergence,
impropoer soutions and goodness-of-t indices for maximum likelihood
conrmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika 49, 155173.
Ashley, B., 1997. Are malls in Americas future? Arthur Andersen Retailing Issues
Letter 9 (6). (Texas A & M University Center for Retailing Studies).
Babin, B.J., Attaway, J.S., 2000. Atmospheric affect as a tool for creating value and
gaining share of customer. Journal of Business Research 49 (2), 9199.
Bagozzi, R., Yi, Y., 1988. On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science 16, 7494.
Baumgartner, H., Homburg, C., 1996. Applications of structural equation modeling
in marketing and consumer research: a review. International Journal of
Research in Marketing 13 (2), 139161.
Beatty, S.E., Kahle, L.R., 1988. Alternative hierarchies of the attitudebehaviour
relationship: the impact of brand commitment and habit. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Sciences 16, 110.
Bloch, P.H., Ridgway, N.M., Dawson, S.A., 1994. The shopping mall as consumer
habitat. Journal of Retailing 70 (1), 2342.
Bloemer, J., Odekerken-Schroder, G., 2002. Store satisfaction and store loyalty
explained by customer and store-related factors. Journal of Consumer Satis-
faction, Disstatisfaction and Complaining Behavior 15, 6880.
Bloemer, J., Ruyter, K.D., 1998. On the relationship between store image, store
satisfaction and store loyalty. European Journal of Marketing 32 (5/6),
499513.
Bolton, R.N., Drew, J.H., 1991. A longitudinal analysis of the impact of services
changes on customer attitudes. Journal of Marketing 55, 19.
Burns, D., Warren, H., 1995. Need for uniqueness: shopping mall preference and
choice activity. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
23 (12), 412.
Chebat, J.C., Hedhli, K.E., Sirgy, M.J., 2009. How does shopper-based mall equity
generate mall loyalty? A conceptual model and empirical evidence. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services 16, 5060.
Chebat, J.C., Morrin, M., 2007. Colors and cultures: exploring the effects of mall
decor on consumer perceptions. Journal of Business Research 60, 189196.
Chebat, J.C., Sirgy, M.J., St-James, V., 2006. Upscale image transfer from malls to
stores: a self-image congruence explanation. Journal of Business Research
59, 12881296.
Christaller, W., 1933. Central Places in Southern Germany (translated by CW
Baskin, 1966). Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Christaller, W., Baskin, C., 1966. Central Places in Southern Germany. Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Darley, W.K., Lim, J.S., 1999. Effects of store image and attitude toward second
hand stores on shopping frequency and distance traveled. International
Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 27 (8), 311318.
Davies, R.L., Howard, E., Reynolds, J., 1993. The Shopping Industry 1993: Thirty
Years of Growth. Oxford Institute of Retail Management/British Council for
Shopping Centres, Oxford.
De Wulf, K., Odekerken-Schroder, G., Iacobucci, D., 2001. Investments in consumer
relationships: a cross-country and cross-industry exploration. Journal of
Marketing 65, 3350.
Dennis, C., 2005. Objects of Desire: Consumer Behavior in Shopping Centre
Choices. Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Dennis, C., Murphy, J., Marsland, D., Cockett, T., Patel, T., 2002. Measuring image:
shopping centre case studies. The International Review of Retail, Distribution
and Consumer Research 12, 355373.
Dennis, C.E., Marsland, D., Cockett, W.A., 2000. Objects of desire: attraction and
distance in shopping centre choice. International Journal of New Product
Development and Innovation Management 2, 4360.
Dennis, C.E., Marsland, D., Cockett, W.A., 2002. Central place practice: shopping
centre attractiveness measures, hinterland boundaries and the UK retail
hierarchy. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 9, 185199.
Eggert, A., Ulaga, W., 2002. Customer perceived value: a substitute for satisfaction
in business markets? Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing 17 (2/3),
107118.
Evanschitzky, H., Iyer, G.R., Plassmann, H., Niessing, J., Meffert, H., 2006. The
relative strength of affective commitment in securing loyalty in service
relationships. Journal of Business Research 59, 12071213.
Finn, A., Louviere, J.J., 1996. Shopping centre image, consideration and choice:
anchor store contribution. Journal of Business Research 35, 241251.
278 F.K. Rabbanee et al. / Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 19 (2012) 271278
Fullerton, G., 2003. When does commitment lead to loyalty? Journal of Service
Research 5 (4), 333344.
Gambill, M.G., 2000. Shopping centre branding does it make sense. Real Estate
Issues 25, 1327.
Garbarino, E., Johnson, M.S., 1999. The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and
commitment in customer relationships. Journal of Marketing 63, 7087.
Gattuso, G., 1994. Kiosks build mall loyalty and database. Direct Marketing 57 (6),
2627.
Gundlach, G.T., Archol, R.S., Mentzer, J.T., 1995. The structure of commitment in
exchange. Journal of Marketing 59, 7892.
Guy, C.M., 1994. The Retail Development Process: Location, Property and Planning.
Routledge, London.
Gwinner, K.P., Gremler, D.D., Bitner, M.J., 1998. Relational benets in service
industries: the customers perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science 26 (2), 101114.
Hanson, S., 1980. Spatial diversication and multipurpose travel: implications for
choice theory. Geographical Analysis 12, 245257.
Haytko, D., Baker, J., 2004. Its all at the mall: exploring adolescent girls
experiences. Journal of Retailing 80, 6783.
Hocutt, M.A., 1998. Relationship dissolution model: antecedents of relationship
commitment and the likelihood of dissolving a relationship. International
Journal of Service Industry Management 9, 189200.
Holbrook, M.B., 1994. The nature of customers value: an axiology of service in
consumption experience. In: Rust, R.T., Oliver, R.L. (Eds.), Service Quality: New
Directions in Theory and Practice. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA,
pp. 2171.
Kirkup, M., Raq, M., 1994. Managing tenant mix in new shopping centres.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 22, 2937.
Lavayssie re, B., Mullen, J., 2007. Customer satisfaction does not always guarantee
loyalty. LIMRAs MarketFacts Quarterly 26 (1), 814.
Lehew, M.L.A., Burgess, B., Wesley, S., 2002. Expanding the loyalty concept to
include preference for a shopping mall. International Review of Retail,
Distribution and Consumer Research 12 (3), 225236.
Loudon, D.L., Della Bitta, A.J., 1993. Consumer Behaviour: Concepts and Applica-
tions. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Lumpkin, J.R., Hawes, J.M., Darden, W.R., 1986. Shopping patterns of the rural
consumer: exploring the relationship between shopping orientations and out
shopping. Journal of Business Research 14, 6381.
Lusch, R.F., Lusch, V.N., 1987. Principles of Marketing. Kent Publishing Company,
Boston, MA.
Macintosh, G., Lockshin, L.S., 1997. Retail relationships and store loyalty: a
multilevel perspective. International Journal of Research in Marketing 14,
487497.
Mackay, D.B., Olshavsky, R.W., 1975. Cognitive maps of retail locations: an
investigation of some basic issues. Journal of Consumer Research 2, 197205.
Marjanen, H., 1995. Longitudinal study on consumer spatial shopping behavior
with special reference to out-of-town shopping experiences from Turku,
Finland. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 2, 163174.
McDougall, G.H.G., Levesque, T., 2000. Customer satisfaction with services: putting
perceived value into the equation. Journal of Services Marketing 14, 392410.
McGoldrick, P.J., Thompson, M.G., 1992. The role of image in the attraction of the
out of town centre. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and
Consumer Research 2 (1), 8198.
Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., Deshpande, R., 1992. Relationships between providers
and users of market research: The dynamics of trust within and between
organizations. Journal of Marketing Research XXIX, 314328.
Morgan, R.M., Hunt, S.D., 1994. The commitmenttrust theory of relationship
marketing. Journal of Marketing 58, 2038.
Nevin, J., Houston, M., 1980. Image as a component of attraction to intra-urban
shopping areas. Journal of Retailing 56, 7793.
OKelly, M., 1981. A model of the demand for retail facilities, incorporating
multistop, multipurpose trips. Geographical Analysis 13, 134148.
Oliver, R.L., DeSarbo, W.S., 1988. Response determinants in satisfaction judgments.
Journal of Consumer Research 14, 495508.
Osman, M.Z., 1993. A conceptual model of retail image inuences on loyalty
patronage behavior. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and
Consumer Research 31, 149166.
OXIRM, 1999. The Shopping Centre Industry: Its Importance to the UK Economy.
Oxford Institute of Retail Management, Oxford, MCB.
Pan, Y., Zinkhan, G., 2006. Determinants of retail patronage: a meta-analytical
perspective. Journal of Retailing 82, 229243.
Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D., 2000. The impact of technology on the quality-value-
loyalty chain: a research agenda. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
28 (1), 168174.
Piron, Francis, 2002. International out shopping and ethnocentrism. European
Journal of Marketing 36 (1/2), 189210.
Raajpoot, N.A., Sharma, A., Chebat, J.C., 2008. The role of gender and work status in
shopping center patronage. Journal of Business Research 61, 825833.
Reynolds, E.D., Darden, W.B., Martin, W.S., 19741975. Developing an image of
store-loyal customer. Journal of Retailing 50 (4), 7384.
Rosenbaum, M.S., Ostrom, A.L., Kuntze, R., 2005. Loyalty programs and a sense of
community. Journal of Services Marketing 19, 222233.
Roy, A., 1994. Correlates of mall visit frequency. Journal of Retailing 70 (2),
139161.
Runyon, K.E., Stewart, D.W., 1987. Consumer Behaviour and the Practice of
Marketing. Merrill Publishing Company, Columbus, OH.
Salegna, G.J., Goodwin, S.A., 2005. Consumer loyalty to service providers: an
integrated conceptual model. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction
and Complaining Behavior 18, 5167.
Samli, A., Riecken, C.G., Yavas, U., 1983. Inter-market shopping behaviour and the
small community: problems and prospects of a widespread phenomenon.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 11, 114.
Shermach, K., 1995. Shopping Malls Becoming Pretty Sophisticated. Marketing
News.
Singer, D.D., Rosecky, R., 1995. Reshaping the community shopping center. Journal
of Property Management 60, 3640.
Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J., Sabol, B., 2002. Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in
relational exchanges. The Journal of Marketing 66, 1537.
Sirgy, M.J., Samli, A.C., 1985. A path analytic model of store loyalty involving self-
concept, store image, geographic loyalty, and socioeconomic status. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Sciences 13 (3), 265291.
Sudman, S., 1980. Improving the quality of shopping center sampling. Journal of
Marketing Research XVII, 423431.
Teller, C., 2008. Shopping streets versus shopping mallsdeterminants of agglom-
eration format attractiveness from the consumers point of view. The Inter-
national Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 18, 381403.
Templin, Neal, 1997. Mall designer is master of (Ersatz) regional avour. The Wall
Street Journal, B1.
Thomson, M., MacInnis, D.J., Park, C.W., 2005. The ties that bind: measuring the
strength of consumers emotional attachments to brands. Journal of Consumer
Psychology 15 (1), 7791.
Wakeeld, K.L., Baker, J., 1998. Excitement at the mall: determinants and effects
on shopping response. Journal of Retailing 74 (4), 515539.
Wilson, D.T., 1995. An integrated model of buyerseller relationships. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science 23 (4), 335345.
Wright, C., Sparks, L., 1999. Loyalty saturation in retailing: exploring the end of
retail loyalty cards? International Journal of Retail Distribution Management
27, 429440.
Yang, Z., Peterson, R.T., 2004. Customer perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty:
the role of switching costs. Psychology & Marketing 21 (10), 799822.
Zeithaml, V.A., 1988. Consumer perceptions of price, quality and value: a means-
end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing 52, 222.