Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services Vol 3, No 2, pp.

73-80, 1996
Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd
Pergamon Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
0969-6989/96 $15.00 + 0.00
0969-6989(95)00048-8

Grocery shopping behavior

A comparison of involved and uninvolved
consumers

Mary F Smith
College of Business Administration, Georgia Southern University, Landrum Box 8154,
Statesboro, GA 30460-8154, USA

Mary L Carsky
Barney School of Business and Public Administration, The University of Hartford,
309 Auerbach Hall, West Hartford, CT 06117, USA

This study is designed to measure women's grocery shopping activity. An empirical

investigation was developed to determine their grocery shopping involvement, smart
shopping description, and grocery shopping characteristics. The sample comprised 173
women from Southern California who responded to a survey to examine these variables.
The results extend the research and provide support in the areas of involvement and
grocery shopping decision-making styles.
Keywords: grocery, shopping, behavior

Grocery shopping is an ongoing and essential activ-
ity and has been a favored topic of researchers for
several decades. However, little attention has been
given to the relationship between the shopper and
the activity, particularly to self-relevance or involve-
ment with grocery shopping activity. This lack of
attention to involvement with grocery shopping can
be attributed to two major factors. First, empirical
research on involvement has centered on products
and product choice. Individual grocery items are
generally perceived to be low-involvement goods.
The risks involved in trying a new brand are low.
The financial risk is low and the general relationship
of grocery products, as tangible goods, has little
relevance to self-image or to the expression of one's
status, particularly those grocery products that are
packaged and branded. Second, the measurement of
the involvement construct has not been extended
beyond products to activities such as grocery
shopping.
Slama and Taschian (1985) suggested that
individual differences make some people more
interested, concerned, or involved in the decision
process, and that consumers' involvement in
purchasing activity influences purchase behavior.
They posited that different consumers can be
identified on the basis of involvement. Purchase
involvement was conceptualized as a general
measure of the self-relevance of purchasing activity
to the individual, and it was suggested that purchas-
ing involvement was further related to personality
traits and to search activities such as clipping
coupons, opening and reading direct mail advertis-
ing, collecting and reading retail catalogs, and
shopping regularly in particular types of retail
outlets. An involvement scale was developed, and
an empirical test of the scale found certain
demographic variables to be associated with
purchasing involvement. Women with children, of
moderate incomes and higher educational levels,
were found to be more involved with purchasing.
Grocery shopping and the choice of products
within the grocery environment can be highly
involving. Recent studies have shown that many
shoppers enjoy grocery shopping (Prus, 1991:
Spring, 1993: Smith and Dickinson, 1994).
According to Kassarjian (1981), who defined
purchasing involvement as a general measure of the
self-relevance of purchasing activities to the individ-
ual, and to Slama and Taschian (1985), efficient
shoppers would be high on purchasing involvement.
Response to marketing stimuli would activate

73
M F Smith and M L Carsky
relevant goals and values, as suggested by Celsi and
Olson (1988), and felt involvement with the product
class would increase.
The present study is designed to measure women's
grocery shopping activity. An empirical investigation
was developed to determine their grocery shopping
involvement, smart shopping description, and
grocery shopping characteristics. The results
contribute to further development of the involve-
ment construct and demonstrate that Zaichkowsky's
(1985) involvement scale is reliable and valid for
measuring activities such as grocery shopping behav-
ior. These results will extend research in the area of
grocery shopping decision-making styles.
The involvement construct
Consumer involvement is recognized as an impor-
tant influence on the consumer decision process
(Assael, 1984), which drives consumer perceptions,
attitudes, and behaviors. Most empirical research
on the involvement construct within the past
decade has been conducted to measure product
involvement, to identify market segments, or to
examine response to marketing stimuli (Bloch,
1981; Zaichkowsky, 1985; Gotleib et al, 1992).
Several investigations have centered on efforts to
measure the construct's many dimensions (Slama
and Taschian, 1985; Kapferer and Laurent,
1985/1986; Richins and Bloch, 1986). While Slama
and Taschian (1985) measured purchasing involve-
ment, they were largely concerned with the
relationship between the construct and consumer
characteristics.
Zaichkowsky (1985) succinctly defined involve-
ment as a person's perceived relevance of the object
based on inherent needs, values, and interests.
Involvement is a complex construct evolving from
an interaction of the individual, the product charac-
teristics, and the situation. Early on Sherif and
Cantril (1947) suggested that involvement exists
wherever an issue or object is related to the cluster
of attitudes and values that constitute an individ-
ual's ego.
Houston and Rothschild (1978) identified three
types of involvement:
(1) Situational involvement is evoked by a particu-
lar purchase situation and is influenced by
product attributes as well as the situation. It
tends to be fleeting, associated with a product
only at one point in the decision process, such
as at the time of purchase, or at the time of
consumption.
(2) Enduring involvement is the ongoing concern
with a product that the individual brings to a
purchase situation. It is a function of past
experience and the strength of values to which
the product is relevant. Enduring involvement
is independent of the purchase situation and
74
motivated by the degree to which products
relate to the self and to hedonic pleasure
received from the product (Richins and Bloch,
1986).
(3) Response involvement, which represents the
complexity or extensiveness of consumer
decision making, refers to the consequences of
the inner state of being involved. It is a
function of enduring involvement or a need
derived from a value in the individual's hierar-
chy of needs. Response to marketing strategies
and communications is a consequence of the
level of involvement (Houston and Rothschild,
1978).
While grocery item purchases may generally be
perceived as low involvement, products may
assume situational importance when 'important
persons' will be present, such as during holidays
(Bloch and Richins, 1983). Cnder these conditions,
grocery shopping would assume more importance,
and thus the involvement would be situational.
Because of its ongoing and essential nature,
grocery shopping assumes some level of enduring
involvement, although the level of enduring
involvement would be expected to differ across
individuals. To the extent that food and meal
preparation are associated with an individual's role
within the household and self-concept, involve-
ment with grocery shopping will vary. Grocery
shopping behavior and the activities surrounding
this behavior, such as attention to newspaper
advertising, clipping of coupons, and planning of
grocery shopping trips, constitute response involve-
ment.
Richins and Bloch (1986) suggested that a risky
purchase is the most common source of involve-
ment. Risk, along with several other factors, has
been identified (Kapferer and Laurent, 1985/1986)
as an antecedent of involvement. A consumer may
perceive a financial risk when the purchase price is
high relative to disposable income. A psychologi-
cal risk would be eminent when a purchase
decision is particularly ego-involving. If the choice
of an item may reflect poorly on the decision
maker, or result in feelings of failure, a psycholog-
ical risk will ensue. Social risk, while more other-
directed, would be experienced when and if the
product/service is not perceived by 'significant
others' as being appropriate - if it reflects on the
decision maker as being an 'inefficient consumer'.
Finally, an individual may perceive a performance
risk, if the product/service does not live up to
expectations.
The relevance of a product/service to an individ-
ual, along with the rewarding nature of the product,
and the perceived ability of (brand) choice to
express one's status, one's personality or identity,
have been identified as antecedents of involvement
(Kapferer and Laurent, 1985/1986). Rothschild
 Grocery shopping behavior." a comparison of involved and uninvolved consumers
(1984) extended the definition of involvement to
include its consequences:
an unobservable state of motivation, arousal or
interest. It is evoked by a particular stimulus or
situation and has drive properties. Its consequences
are types of searching, information-processing and
decision making.
The context o f involvement
As cited in the section above, most empirical studies
on involvement have focused on a product, product
category, or service. Investigations have focused on
defining the construct vis-d-vis a product category,
the manner in which individuals attend to informa-
tion about products and services, the dimensions of
search, incentives to purchase or to switch suppliers,
and individual consumer motivations and actions as
they are mediated by involvement. Products that are
ego involving can be classified as high involvement,
and for these, consumer response to marketing
stimuli will be quite different than for those
products/services that are less important. The inves-
tigations have concluded that the consumer
decision-making process is influenced by interest in
the category and perceived risk (Kapferer and
Laurent, 1985/1986), and that the situation interacts
with and strongly influences the decision process to
mediate response to these stimuli (Slama and
Taschian, 1985).
The use of incentives to motivate consumer
response was found to vary by involvement levels.
Heslin and Johnson (1992) reported that individu-
als who are highly involved with a product category,
or with a high need for cognition, are more inter-
ested in acquiring information, and will do so
without incentives. Those who are not highly
involved will respond with incentives. This finding
is perhaps associated with those related to price.
Typically, low-involved consumers will respond to
price incentives, as they may see less difference
across brands or quality levels of the product
(Lichtenstein et al, 1988; Heslin and Johnson, 1992).
Gotleib et al (1992) posited that for low-involve-
ment products little time is spend afialyzing the
price message, and the processing of price informa-
tion is characterized by a decrease in the likelihood
that a message will be rejected or distorted and
counter-arguments will be fewer. A smaller price
change will be necessary to induce consumers to
switch brands.
The situation and elements related to the situa-
tion of the purchase decision can mediate involve-
ment between the consumer and the product. Celsi
and Olson (1988) suggested that situational sources,
for example sales promotions such as rebates,
coupons, and price reductions, create contingencies
that might activate important relevant goals and
values - such as safe money, being thrifty, and
being a shrewd consumer - and should increase
consumers' felt involvement with a product
purchase.
Gotleib et al (1992) found that for low-involve-
ment services, a modest price change may affect
behavioral intentions, but these results were
mediated by locational differences. In their study, a
large price reduction was required to motivate
people to change suppliers when there was
additional travel required. For a low-involvement
service, a price reduction of more than 38% was
required to travel to a site that was 30minutes
further than the current one.
Measuring involvement
Rothschild (1984) criticized empirical work on the
involvement construct, noting that it had often been
associated by its consequences such as the time
spent in product search, energy spent, number of
brands and advertising in the product category.
Prior studies on shopping-related activities have
used some behavioral measures in defining the
construct. For example, Tigert et al (1980) used
behavioral measures that reflected consequences of
involvement, such as readership of fashion
magazines, store choice, and price/quality prefer-
ences. Slama and Taschian (1985) developed a scale
that incorporated some value and attitude measures
to compute 'involvement', but other measures in the
scale were behavioral, such as 'I often take advan-
tage of coupons'.
Zaichkowsky (1985) developed a generally one-
dimensional factor involvement scale, which has
been validated by several researchers (Celsi and
Olson, 1988; Gotleib et al, 1992). The instrument
uses bipolar pairs of adjectives in a 20-item seman-
tic differential scale to ascertain involvement. For
this present study, an adaptation of the
Zaichkowsky (1985) scale is used to measure
women's grocery shopping involvement. Two
hedonic measures were added to Zaichkowsky's
scale to capture the pain/pleasure and recre-
ational/laborious aspects of an activity, rather than
of products.
Research objectives
The study is designed to examine women's grocery
shopping involvement, grocery-shopping-related
activities and habits, and self-relevance of a 'smart
shopping' description. The results will extend the
research in the areas of involvement measurement
and grocery shopping decision styles. Specific
objects of this study are:
(1) to examine women's grocery shopping involve-
ment;
(2) to examine the interaction of shopping involve-
ment with grocery shopping behavior:
75
M F Smith and M L Carsky

(a) to measure patterns of grocery shopping, Table 1 Internal consistency: grocery shopping involvement
including the number of shopping trips per scale
week and the number of different stores
shopped; Item Mean s.d. Cronbach's
(b) to identify shopping-related activities such as alpha
use of newspaper advertisements and Important/Unimportant 2.67 1.59 0.9491
clipping coupons; Of no concern to me/
(c) to assess the importance of price and Of concern to mea 2.59 1.42
economy in acquiring grocery products for Irrelevant/Relevant a 2.49 1.35
M e a n s a lot to me/
the family consumption, including the readi- M e a n s nothing to me 3.39 1.61
ness to switch brands and/or stock up when Useful/Useless 2.23 1.28
items are on sale; Valuable/Worthless 2.66 1.46
(3) to ascertain the self-relevance of a smart Trivial/Fundamentala 2.43 1.49
Beneficial/Not beneficial 2.66 1.56
shopper description.
Matters to me/
D o e s n ' t matter to me 2.76 1.57
Uninterested/Interested a 3.10 1.66
Methodology Significant/Insignificant 2.94 1.61
Vital/Superfluous 2.66 1.49
A survey methodology formed the basis for the study. Boring/Interestinga 3.98 1.82
Self-reports of grocery shopping, shopping-related Unexciting/Exciting~ 4.53 1.62
activities, and involvement in shopping were received Appealing/Unappealing 4.10 1.65
Mundane/Fascinating 4.58 1.62
from 173 women in Southern California. The
Essential/Nonessential 1.96 1.24
Zaichkowsky (1985) Personal Involvement Inventory Undesirable/Desirable a 3.43 1.64
(PII) was used to measure involvement. A series of Wanted/Unwanted 3.44 1.67
items to examine shopping activities and a 'small Not n e e d e d / N e e d e d a 2.10 1.38
shopper description' were generated by the authors. Pleasant/Painful 3.50 1.54
Recreational/Laborious 4.36 1.62
A three-page questionnaire was mailed to 220
women who were members of a predominately Notes: Seven-point semantic differential scale, where a 1
women's professional organization. A self-addressed indicates the positive end of the scale and a 7 indicates the
stamped envelope was provided for return, and the negative end of the scale.
aReverse score.
organization received one dollar for each completed
survey. A total of 173 completed questionnaires
were used in the analysis. These women had a mean
age of 54 years, were college educated, and had a degree of stability and precision of the instrument.
mean household income of $40 000-49 999. Table 1 shows the item means, standard deviations
and internal consistency estimates. As shown in the
Instrumentation table, Cronbach's alpha was et = 0.9491. Nunnally
The 20-item Zaichkowsky PII (1985), made up of 20 (1978) recommends a minimum alpha cutoff of 0.80
bipolar adjectives, each measured on seven points, for measures not in early stages of development. To
was modified and used in the study. Two additional assess alpha stability, the sample was randomly split
sets of bipolar adjectives were included in the scale. into halves and scale alpha coefficients were
These two, painful~pleasant and recreational~labori- estimated for each subgroup separately. These alpha
ous, have been used in earlier research and found values were consistent with each other and with the
to be both reliable and valid measures of grocery total sample alpha. Therefore, the grocery shopping
shopping enjoyment (Smith and Dickinson, 1994). involvement scale was found to be internally consis-
In addition to the involvement scale, the question- tent.
naire included three demographic questions (age,
education, and income) and nine behavioral inten- Construct validity
tion questions related to grocery shopping activity, Construct validity of the modified PII used in this
measured ordinally. Finally, respondents were asked study was assessed by analysis of common factor
the self-relevance of a researcher-developed smart variance. Factor analysis is suggestive of construct
shopper description. The description was also validity (Kerlinger, 1973; Nunnally, 1978), and was
measured on a five-point ordinal scale. employed in this study to assess dimensionality of
the grocery shopping involvement scale. The expec-
tation was that the involvement scale would
Results: grocery shopping involvement comprise more than one dimension for grocery
shopping.
Reliability A factor analysis with varimax rotation was used
Internal consistency for the involvement scale was to assess dimensionality. Factors with eigenvalues
determined by Cronbach's alpha, indicated the greater than 1.00 were retained. Table 2 shows that

76
 Grocery shopping behavior: a comparison of involved and uninvolved consumers

Table 2 Factor analysis: grocery shopping involvement scale Table 3 Key grocery shopping characteristics

Item Factor 1 Factor 2 h2 Shopping characteristic Mode Mean

Important 0.844 0.195 0.76 How frequently do you use newspaper ads
Of concern 0.774 0.159 0.72 for grocery shopping?, 5 3.86
Relevant 0.738 0.139 0.64 How frequently do you use coupons when
M e a n s a lot 0.748 0.337 0.71 you shop for groceries? b 4 3.32
Useful 0.668 0.165 0.63 How likely are you to switch brands when
Valuable 0,670 0.206 0.62 you find a substitute brand on sale?~ 2 2.77
Fundamental 0.630 0.265 0.64 How likely are you to shop at different
Beneficial 0.661 0.134 0.65 supermarkets for various categories of
Matters to me 0.706 0.316 0.65 grocery items (eg meat, produce, dell
Interested 0.460 0.602 0.71 items)?, 4 3.38
Significant 0.652 0.313 0.69 How likely are you to plan a trip to the
Vital 0.679 0.243 0.67 s u p e r m a r k e t based on what the ads reveal
Interesting 0,191 0.840 0.78 about prices of your most important
Exciting 0.166 0.870 0.80 grocery items? c 4 3.55
Appealing 0.294 0.830 0.77 How likely are you to pick out the lowest-
Fascinating 0.163 0.768 0.68 priced grocery items from grocery store
Essential (/.545 0,067 0.54 ads and shop at those s u p e r m a r k e t s to
Desirable 0.220 0.625 0.59 purchase the items needed? ~ 4 3.74
Wanted (I.424 0.402 0.63 How likely are you to substantially stock
Needed 0.576 0.012 0.60 up on a grocery item you regularly buy
Pleasant 0.211 0.638 0.67 when you find it on sale at a very low
Recreational 0.106 0.817 0.70 price?~ 2 2.16

Eigenvalue 10.75 3.11 Notes."

Explained variance 48.9% 14.2%
the scale rotated into two factors, which explained
63.1% of the variance. The first factor loads heavily
on the following aspects of grocery shopping
involvement: important; of concern to me; relevant;
means a lot to me; useful; valuable; fundamental;
beneficial; matters to me; significant; essential:,
wanted; needed. The second factor loads heavily on
the following aspects: interested; interesting; excit-
ing; appealing; fascinating; desirable; pleasant;
recreational.
Results: grocery shopping activities
Grocery shopping and shopping activities were
measured by a series of questions concerning
shopping patterns, shopping-related activities
including newspaper advertisements and the use of
coupons, and the importance of price and economy
in the selection of grocery items. Responses to
questions on each of the topical areas were
measured on five-point ordinal scales. Model
responses to the questions on shopping behavior
and activities are given in Table 3.
In general, respondents were not heavy users of
newspaper grocery advertisements, and were likely
to use coupons only when they thought about them.
These findings may be related to the fact that they
were older (mean = 54 years) and most likely did
not have young children at home. However, they
were price sensitive in that they were likely to
switch brands when they found substitutes on sale,
and to stock up on a regularly purchased item when
on sale at a very low price.
~,Five-point scale where 1 = All of the time, 2 = Very often, 3 -
Often, 4 = Sometimes, 5 = Hardly ever
bFive-point scale, where 1 = Every time I grocery shop, 2 =
Usually when I grocery shop, 3 = Only on major trips to the
grocery shop, 4 = Only when I think about it. 5 = I hardly ever
use coupons
~Five-point scale, where 1 = Very likely, 2 = Likely. 3 =
Undecided, 4 = Unlikely. 5 = Very unlikely
Shopping behavior
Three questions queried respondents on their grocery
shopping habits. They were asked how often they
shopped, the number of stores at which they shopped
weekly, and the extent to which they shopped at
different stores for different foods. The vast majority
(84.2%) of respondents shopped once or twice per
week. A little more than half (51.4%) shopped at
least one different supermarket per week.
Because involvement has been found to be
related to purchase activities (Slama and Taschian,
1985), analysis of variance was performed to study
the effects of involvement on grocery-related
shopping behaviors and activities. As shown in
Table 4, one-way ANOVA found no differences
between levels of shopping frequency (F = 0.852, p
= 0.358) and the number of different supermarkets
shopped at per week (F = 1.05, p = 0.306) and the
summated involvement scale. However, the level of
involvement was found to differ with likelihood of
shopping at separate stores for different categories
of goods. Those who were very likely or likely to
shop at separate stores had more positive summated
involvement mean scores (mean = 63.25) than those
who were unlikely to shop at separate stores (mean
= 72.12). It should be noted that lower mean scores
are toward the positive side of the scale of the
involvement scale.

77
M F Smith and M L Carsky

Table 4 One-way ANOVA results for involvement and shopping habits

Factors Effect df Mean square F-value Probability

Times per week they shop Times 1 488.17 0.852 0.358

Error 148 573.19
Number of stores Number 1 609.63 1.050 0.306
Error 145 577.18
Different types of stores Different 1 2769.30 4.976 0.027*
Error 149 593.31

*p < 0.05

Table 5 One-way ANOVA results for involvement and shopping-related activities

Factors Effect df Mean square F-value Probability

Use of newspaper ads Ads 1 2082.11 4.038 0.046*

Error 148 515.37
Plan shopping on ads Plan 1 3114.70 5.620 0.019"
Error 149 554.19
Use of coupons Coupons 1 351.83 0.667 0.415
Error 148 527.26

*p < 0.05

Table 6 One-way ANOVA results for involvement and economy/efficiency

Factors Effect df Mean square F-value Probability

Switch brands for price Switch l 165.29 0.288 0.592

Error 149 573.99
Buy lowest price Price 1 1999.85 3.549 0.062*
Error 145 563.47
Stock up on low price Stock up 1 5299.26 9.725 0.002**
Error 147 593.31

*p < 0.10
**p < 0.01

Shopping activities Economy and efficiency of grocery shopping

T h r e e shopping-related activities were examined:
the use of newspaper advertisements, the likelihood
of planning trips to the grocery store around adver-
tised specials, and the use of coupons. One-way
A N O V A tests found differences in responses to the
question, 'How frequently do you use newspaper
ads for grocery shopping?', as presented in Table 5.
An examination of the mean involvement scores on
this question shows that those who frequently used
newspaper ads were more involved (mean = 62.48)
than those who sometimes or hardly ever used
newspaper ads for grocery shopping (mean = 70.66).
Moreover, those who were more likely to plan
grocery shopping trips based on what ads reveal
about prices of 'your most important grocery items'
had more positive involvement scores (mean -- 62.74
versus 72.22) than those who were unlikely to plan
such trips (F = 5.620, p = 0.019). However, the use
of coupons did not differ according to level of
involvement of shoppers (F = 0.667, p = 0.415).
Three questions addressed the importance of low
price in grocery purchases. Two questions focused
on the likelihood of buying the lowest-priced items,
and the third asked about the likelihood of 'stock-
ing up' on a regularly purchased item when it is
available at a very low price. Correlations between
buying low-priced advertised specials and switching
(r = 0.1901, p < 0.1) as well as stocking up were
positively correlated (r = 0.1939, p < 0.01).
As shown in Table 6, one-way A N O V A found no
differences in the involvement scale means between
those who were likely and those who were unlikely
to switch to a substitute brand on sale at a low price
(F = 0.288, p = 0.592). However, differences
between those who would and those who would not
shop at the grocery store advertising the lowest-
priced items were significant. The more involved
shoppers (mean = 62.95) would be likely to select
a supermarket for the lowest prices on needed
items than those less involved (mean = 71.03).

78
 Grocery shopping behavior: a comparison of involved and uninvolved consumers
Furthermore, the more involved shoppers (mean =
65.68) were more likely to substantially stock up on
a grocery item they regularly buy when they find it
on sale at a low price than those less involved
shoppers (mean = 79.74).
Smart shopper description
Respondents were asked to respond to whether the
following smart shopper description fitted them:
I carefully plan my grocery shopping. I like to get
the most value for the money. I realize that super-
markets vary their prices over time, so when I see
ridiculously low prices on products I want, I stock
up on these brands. I also pay attention to grocery
store ads and clip coupons for the products I want.
This description fits me: (1) perfectly; (2) somewhat;
(3) uncertain; (4) only slightly; (5) not at all.
More than half (54.7%) of the shoppers indicated
that the description was at least somewhat self-
relevant. Use of the shopper description enabled the
segmentation of respondents to examine their
responses to marketing stimuli. The description was
significantly correlated (p < 0.0l) with use of
newspaper advertisements (r = 0.415), coupons (r =
0.334), switching (r = 0.237), shopping for price
specials (r = 0.263), planning trips based on adver-
tisements (r = 0.437), selecting low-priced items
from advertisements (r = 0.408), and stocking up on
low-priced items (r = 0.407). The results of the one-
way ANOVA (F-- 21.357, p = 0.0005) revealed that
those who found the description to be self-relevant
were more involved with grocery shopping (mean =
61.11 versus 78.12).
Discussion
The involvement scale
The Zaichkowsky involvement scale has been
validated through multiple trials. It has been applied
to involvement with products and services
(Zaichkowsky, 1985; Celsi and Olson, 1988; Gotleib
et al, 1992). The reliability and validity of the scale
have been ascertained through previous studies
including other data sets in which the scale has been
applied to shopping behavior. In the present study
the scale was found to be reliable and valid for activ-
ities such as grocery shopping. Moreover, the two
hedonic measures that captured the pain/pleasure
and recreational/laborious aspects of an activity
extended the development of Zaichkowsky's scale
to activity-based shopping behaviors. The involve-
ment scale was found to contain two dimensions: the
importance and enjoyment aspects of grocery
shopping.
Shopping behavior and activities
The involvement scale was not significantly corre-
lated with the number of times or number of differ-
ent stores shopped per week nor with the use of
coupons. However, those who were more involved
with grocery shopping were more likely to shop at
different supermarkets for various categories of
grocery items (for example, meats, produce, deli
items), used newspaper grocery advertisements
more frequently for grocery shopping, and were
more likely to plan a trip to supermarkets based on
what grocery advertisements reveal about prices of
their most important grocery items than those who
were less involved. These types of purchasing strate-
gies and tactics for grocery shopping enhance the
ability of consumers to maximize their purchasing
power.
Economy and efficiency
More involved grocery shoppers would be likely to
select a supermarket for the lowest prices on needed
items. Furthermore, they would substantially stock
up on an item they regularly buy when they find it
at a sale price. However, respondents in general
would not be likely to engage in switching brands to
a substitute brand on sale at a low price. In today's
market, price is often a dominant factor guiding
choice. Many families are seeking value for the
dollar (Rice, 1992). These shoppers appear to be
brand loyal but still look for value among the brands
they regularly buy.
Smart shopper description
The smart shopper responds to marketing stimuli,
for example newspaper advertising and couponing,
and engages in shopping activities, such as shopping
for price specials and stocking up. Based on Sherif's
social judgment theory, Assael (1984) suggested that
price would be less important for highly involved
consumers, and that other product attributes, such
as quality differences, would be more important.
Highly involved consumers would also be more
knowledgeable about products and evaluate them
on a larger number of attributes (Houston and
Rothschild, 1978). By contrast, Celsi and Olson
(1988) suggested that incentives, such as retailer
promotions and coupons, would enhance certain
values and goals such as 'smart shopping', thereby
increasing felt involvement. Both felt involvement
and response involvement (Houston and
Rothschild, 1978) would appear to be associated
with the smart shopper description in this study, but
perhaps not with enduring involvement. The PII
might be measuring enduring involvement, and the
manifestations of this could be different from the
economy/efficiency emphasis of the smart shopper.
This study validates the use of the involvement
construct for tapping into grocery shopping involve-
ment. It also relates grocery shopping to behavioral
measures, such as grocery shopping activities. Our
sample consisted of college-educated women with
moderate incomes. We lend support to Slama and
79
M F Smith and M L Carsky
Taschian (1988), finding that women with moderate
incomes and higher education may be more
involved with purchasing. The smart grocery
shopper description's correlation with economy and
efficiency behaviors lends support to Kassarjian's
(1981) and Slama and Taschian's (1985) assertion
that efficient shoppers may be high on purchasing
involvement. Further, we lend support to Celsi and
Olson (1988) that more involved shoppers respond
to marketing stimuli.
This study enhances the research for grocery
shopping decision-making styles. More than half of
these women described themselves as carefully
planning their grocery trips to get the most value for
their money. The vast majority are likely to stock up
on a grocery item they regularly buy when it is on
sale at a low price, thus conserving time and money.
The involved grocery shopper is likely to respond to
marketing strategies and tactics.
References
Assael, H (1984) Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action Kent
Publishing Company, Boston, MA
Bloch, P H (1981) 'An exploration into the scaling of consumers'
involvement with a product class' in Monroe, K. (ed) Advances
in Consumer Research Association of Consumer Research,
Ann Arbor, MI, pp 61455
Bloch, P H and Richins, M I (1983) 'A theoretical model for the
study of product important perceptions' Journal of Marketing
47 (Summer) 69-81
Celsi, R L and Olson, J (1988) 'The role of involvement in atten-
tion and comprehension processes' Journal of Consumer
Research 15 (Summer) 210-224
Gotleib, J B, Schlacter, J L and St Louis, R D (1992) 'Consumer
decision making: a model of the effects of involvement, source
credibility, and location on the size of the price difference
required to induce consumers to change suppliers' Psychology
& Marketing 9 (May/June) 191-208
Heslin, R and Johnson, B T (1992) 'Prior involvement and incen-
tives to pay attention to information' Psychology & Marketing
9 (May/June) 209-219
Houston, M R and Rothschild, M (1978) 'Conceptual and
80
methodological perspectives on involvement' in Jain, S C (ed)
American Marketing Association Educators' Proceedings
American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp 184-187
Kapferer, J and Laurent, G (1985/1986) 'Consumer involvement
profiles: a new practical approach to consumer involvement'
Journal of Advertising Research 25 (December/January) 48-56
Kassarjian, H H (1981) 'Low involvement: a second look' in
Gardiner, D M (ed) Advances in Consumer Research
Association for Consumer Research, Maryland, pp 31-34
Kerlinger, F N (1973) Foundations of Behavioral Research Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, New York
Lichtenstein, D R, Bloch, P H and Black, W C (1988) 'Correlates
of price acceptability' Journal of Consumer Research 15
(September) 243-252
Nunnally, J C, Jr (1978) Psychometric Theory McGraw-Hill, New
York
Prus, R (1991) 'Just browsing, thanks: focused and diffused
shopping practices' in Childers, T et al (eds) Proceedings of the
American Marketing Winter Educators' Conference American
Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp 296-302
Rice, F (1992) 'What intelligent consumers want' Fortune (28
December) 56-60
Richins, M 1 and Bloch, P H (1986) 'After the new wears off: the
temporal context of product involvement' Journal of Consumer
Research 13 (September) 280-285
Rothschild, M L (1984) 'Perspectives on involvement: current
problems and future directions' in Kinnear, T (ed) Advances
in Consumer Research Association for Consumer Research,
Provo, UT, pp 216-217
Sherif, M and Cantril, H (1947) The psychology of ego-involve-
ment Wiley, New York
Slama, M E and Taschian, A (1985) 'Selected socio-economic and
demographic characteristics associated with purchasing
involvement' Journal of Marketing 49 72-82
Smith, M F and Dickinson, R A (1994) 'An empirical investiga-
tion of changing and sustaining shopping enjoyment' Working
Paper, Department of Marketing, California State University,
San Bernardino, CA
Spring, J (1993) 'Seven days of play' American Demographics
(March) 50-52
Tigert, D W, King, C W and Ring, L (1980) 'Fashion involve-
ment: a cross cultural comparative analysis' in Olson, J (ed)
Advances in Consumer Research Association for Consumer
Research, Ann Arbor, MI pp 17-21
Traylor, M B (1981) 'Product involvement and brand commit-
ment' Journal of Advertising Research 21 (December) 51-56
Zaichkowsky, J L (1985) 'Measuring the involvement construct'
Journal of Consumer Research 12 (December) 341-352