Consumer Behaviour - Literature review Example

1.Introduction

Secondary research is a research method commonly associated with analysis of existing works of research by other researchers (Hunter & Leahey, 2008). Secondary research is used in most disciplines of academic study, including marketing. Given (2008) notes that secondary research is particularly important when the researcher is dealing with a set of variables for which it is difficult to personally gather or collect primary data. In order to succeed with a secondary research method, there are some requirements that a researcher ought to follow. One of these is the need to have the ability to critically review the selected sources or articles used in the secondary research (Green, Johnson & Adams, 2006). Meanwhile, Hart (2008) defines critical review to be the practice of summarising and evaluating a given text. Through such summary and evaluation of text, it is possible to make deductions from the sources as to areas of it that help to address issues or questions raised in a study of interest. With this in mind, the current paper is written as a critical review of an article selected in the area of consumer behaviour. The critical review focuses on all key aspects of the article including its abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, results and discussion, and conclusion. Under each of these sections, there are questions asked to solicit the quality levels of the paper, as well as how it helps to bring out key answers, data and facts pertaining to consumer behaviour as a whole and influence of product attributes and values on purchasing intentions to be specific.

2.Critical Review of selected journal article

2.1. Critical Review of the Abstract part of the Journal Article

The article clearly presents an abstract, which aims to summarise the intentions of the study and the findings that were derived from the data collection process. The data collection method used and conclusions drawn were also given in the abstract. The abstract opened with the research problem, which it identified as the fact that “majority of consumers support the idea of purchasing green products” but “this is often not translated into actual behaviour” (Schuitema & de Groot, 2015, p. 57). Within the abstract, the authors clearly indicate that the method used in exploring the research problem was two sets of experimental studies. One weakness with the abstract however had to do with the fact that there were no generalised details given as to how the experiments were carried out and the variables used in performing them. The sample sizes used in the two experiments were however given to be 100 and 107 participants respectively. Based on the research problem, the researchers outlined their academic assumption, based on which data was collected from the experiment to prove. Among other things, results showed that “if product attributes fulfil self-serving motives, green product attributes influence purchasing intentions more than when self-serving motives are not fulfilled”. The findings were basis to conclude that biospheric values determine how product attributes influence purchasing intentions better than egoistic values. No clear recommendations were drawn with basis in the conclusion but the abstract can be said to be generally informative and updated with required information to get summary of the study.

2.2. Critical Review of the Introduction part of the Journal Article

The introduction chapter of a typical peer review article is recommended to contain a clear background to the study, research problem, aim and objectives, as well as significance or rationale for the study (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2003). The work of Schuitema and de Groot (2015) can be seen to contain most of these areas even though not all. Specifically, the study clearly identifies a background, problem and aim. However, the rationale for the study is not clearly stated. Instead of the rationale, the researchers were seen to have presented their assumption and how they aimed to use the study to test this assumption. The rationale for formulating their assumption and the reason it was necessary to explore the assumption was however not given in the introduction.

The problem of the study was based on findings and gaps in existing literature. For example, reference was the works of Magnusson et al. (2001) and Hughner et al. (2007) who had argued that consumers purchase green products without considering its attributes. Rather, these earlier researchers noted that consumers focus on other attributes such as quality, taste and price. It was based on such assertion that the work of Schuitema and de Groot (2015) was conducted with the aim of proposing trade-off between the evaluations of product attributes which influence the buying decision of green product consumers. Right in the introduction part, the researchers made it clear that the product attributes they were going to deal with were egoistic and biospheric values. Defining these variables in the introduction part was a step in the right direction because it brought out the understanding of the research well.

2.3. Critical Review of the Literature Review part of the Journal Article

The literature review is one of the most important aspects of any type of research, be it primary or secondary. This is because the literature review helps researchers to put their works in context by the use of existing researches which are related and relevant to their own study (Dellinger & Leech, 2007). The literature review is also an avenue for drawing conceptual and theoretical basis for one’s study. It would be seen that these were factors considered in the article by Schuitema and de Groot (2015). This is because a detailed literature review that covers almost all aspects of the research were given. Even though no clear objectives or research questions were listed in the introduction, it was seen that the literature review was divided into clear themes, reflected in the aim of the study. It also had a theoretical framework, which gave the theoretical background to the study. Even though the study was trying to rely a lot on existing theories, it was found that sources used in the literature review were mostly older than a decade and can be classified as outdated. As consumer behaviour is generally a trendy concept, it was expected that more current literature that represent current trends with green consumerism would be used.

The above situation notwithstanding, the literature used and its content can be said to be generally relevant to the research.The researchers attempted providing a balanced view of the concept of green consumerism but there were instances where they were seen to be favouring literature that supported their assumption rather than contradicting opinions. For example there were more research findings reviewed on the two variables used by the researchers, which were egoistic and biospheric, than there were for other attributes put forth by Magnusson et al. (2001) and Hughner et al. (2007). Because of the lack of balance, the researchers were not able to use their literature review section to clearly identify the need for the research proposed. Indeed if there had been a fair balance between what the researchers assumed and what was contrary to their assumptions, then there would have been a clear need for the proposed study in helping to use empirical data to draw a distinction between the two sides of the argument.The fact that the researchers developed hypotheses based on their literature review was a step in the right direction in showing that the literature review contained enough information to help them pursue their own study without any gaps.

2.4. Critical Review of the Methodology part of the Journal Article

The study was conducted as a primary research involving the use of two different experiments. This method was clearly explained with a step-by-step explanation on what went into each of the processes involved in the methods. As part of the experiments, the researchers used the approach of questionnaire in collecting data from selected respondents. This means the study was quantitative in nature. As Robson (2012) explained, in quantitative research, the researcher performs a systematic empirical investigations into some observable phenomena with the use of statistical and other numerical indices. Through such quantitative approach, there are several benefits that researchers experience. For example, they are able to analyse their findings in ways that are easily testable by other people who have knowledge on the use of the statistical and mathematical approaches used in the analysis. Regrettably, the study by Schuitema and Groot (2015) failed to clearly outline the rationale and justification behind the use of the questionnaire and quantitative experiment in general. This notwithstanding, it was possible to experience some of the key benefits of quantitative research as part of the method and approach used by the researchers.

One of the weakest links with the study is that the researchers failed to give a step by step detail on how their approach was implemented. This was regardless of the fact that they clearly distinguished between the method used in the first experiment and what was used in the second experiment. In both experiments, the attention of the researchers was on explaining the purpose for the various experiments without giving very vivid information on the processes involved in the experiments. The effect of this on the study is that a reader will get a clear understanding of what the researchers did and why they did so but as to how they did it, this will be a mystery to unravel. Because two different experiments were used to test the two hypotheses set, the researchers were able to separate details regarding the data collection for each experiment. Remenyi et al. (2008) advised that in primary research of this nature, making ethical considerations is an important requirement. Unfortunately, the researchers failed to make their ethical considerations known. This situation has a negative effect on the overall quality of the research work because users may doubt if data was genuinely collected through the right means only (Sapsford & Jupp, 2012).

2.5. Critical Review of the Results and Discussions part of the Journal Article

As was done with the methods, the results and analysis of the findings was done under two different broad headings. This was a useful way of distinguishing between the outcomes of the study based on the two hypotheses that the researchers set. As a quantitative study, the researchers used various mathematical and statistical approaches in presenting the findings of the study. Examples of these were the use of graphs and tables. The graphs which were in the form of bar graphs were used to present responses gathered from respondents in the course of the questionnaire used in the data collection. After presenting the results in the form of graphs, the researchers went ahead to give a well elaborated meaning or interpretation of the findings. This was a way that ensured general clarity with the results. Because almost the same approach was used in the two hypotheses, it was possible ensure consistency with the presentation of results. An example of consistency is the fact that the same types of graphs and tables were used.

The results section can be said to be one of the high points with the study. This is because of the extent to which the researchers were able to identify gaps in literature and use the outcome of the study to reflect on gaps. The literature review was earlier criticised as taking the side of the researcher’s assumption alone. Even though this was a negative aspect of the study, the results section was used to balance out on all sides of the argument presenting data that represented the assumptions of researchers as well as those arguments they did not agree with in literature but their results found to be accurate. For example the results proved the researchers wrong that “Egoistic values generally do not seem to strengthen or weaken the influence of product attributes on purchasing behaviour” (Schuitema & de Groot, 2015, p. 62). Because discussion of the findings was separated from the results and added to the conclusion, they could not be as detailed as expected.

2.6. Critical Review of the Conclusion part of the Journal Article

The best part of the conclusion of the study is that the section was clearly divided or structured for each of the hypotheses that were set for the study. The impact of this was that it helped in making the results support the conclusions. That is, each conclusion was drawn with specific reference or basis in the results. What was surprising however was that regardless of dividing the conclusion according to the hypotheses, there were still areas the researchers were not emphatic as to whether or not particular hypotheses had been accepted or rejected. For example in terms of hypothesis 1, they stated that “hypothesis 1 is partly confirmed” (Schuitema & de Groot, 2015, p. 62). Such a claim creates confusion in the mind of the reader as to the extent of confirmation as ‘partly’ is subjective.

With regards to hypothesis 2 however, the researchers were more emphatic with their conclusion as they stated that “there is overall support that green product attributes are important determinants for purchasing intentions of shampoo” (p. 65). Rather than drawing implications directly from the conclusions, the researchers had a different section for general discussion and conclusion. It was from this section that the implications of the conclusions were drawn. Even though this may not be a very usual approach, it went a long way to help the reader in understanding the implication of the study to the broader world of literature and marketing practice. Limitations of the study were clearly given and these concentrated on the design, strategy and methodology. For example, it was noted that the design used was complicated and partly affected understanding of the research variables. Even though there were about three limitations given, these were not properly linked to any recommendations or suggestion for further studies.

3.Conclusions

The critical review has become an important premise for learning how to conduct a secondary research. Even though this involved only one article, the criteria used in assessing the article will be translated into future secondary researches. When there are more articles than desired for a particular study, the criteria will be useful in determining which articles are of top quality and thus worth selecting ahead of others.As far as the article in question is concerned, it would be said that it was generally a good piece of research, which was reported well to fit the purpose for which the study was done. This conclusion is drawn against the backdrop that in all major areas, most aspects of criteria used were well covered. But as revealed in aspects of the critical review, there are areas of the paper that could be made better. Typical example of this is the need for the researchers to have used more up-to-date sources in their literature review. They could have also used a less complicated design than they did. Even though the study ended with the aim of the researchers achieved, simplicity with the design would have ensured that readers have a better understanding of the variables in the study and how they were justified with the data collection exercise employed. Going into the future, there would be a personal impact of the review when embarking on research work as a business manager or entrepreneur. That is,how green products can be introduced unto the market and how they will attract consumer response have been learned.

Reference List

Dellinger, A. B. & Leech, N. L. (2007). "Toward a Unified Validation Framework in Mixed Methods Research". Journal of Mixed Methods Research; Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 309–332.

Given, L. M. (2008). The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. Los Angeles, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). "Writing Narrative Literature Reviews for Peer-Reviewed Journals: Secrets of the Trade". Journal of Chiropractic Medicine vol. 5 no. 3, pp. 101–114.

Hart, C. (2008). Literature Reviewing and Argumentation. United Kingdom. London: Sage

Hughner RS, McDonagh P, Prothero A, Shultz CJ & Stanton J. (2007). Who are organic food consumers? A compilation and review of why people purchase organic food. Journal of Consumer Behaviour vol. 6 no. 2, pp. 94–110

Hunter, L. &Leahey, E. (2008). "Collaborative Research in Sociology: Trends and Contributing Factors". The American Sociologist vol. 39 no. 4, p. 290.

Magnusson MK, Arvola A, Hursti UKK, Aberg L &Sjödén PO. (2001). Attitudes towards organic foods among Swedish consumers. British Food Journal vol. 103 no. 3, pp. 209–227

Remenyi, D., Williams, B., Money, A. & Swartz, E. (2008). Doing Research in Business and Management: An Introduction to Process and Method. London: Sage

Robson, C. (2012). Real World Research. Oxford: Blackwell.

Sapsford, R. &Jupp, V. (2012). Data Collection and Analysis. London: Sage

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. &Thornhill, A. (2003). Research Methods for Business Students. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Schuitema, G. & Groot, J. I. M. (2015). Green consumerism: The influence of product attributes and values on purchasing intentions. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 14, pp. 57-69