atmosphere in fashion stores - need to change

5/21/2018 Atmosphere in Fashion Stores - Need to Change

1/18

Atmosphere in fashion stores:do you need to change?

Andrew G. ParsonsAuckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand

Abstract

Purpose The aims of this paper are to establish: a typical womens apparel store environment as arealistic base for measuring the effects of changes; effective environmental stimuli levels; and the effectof repeated exposure on affect.Design/methodology/approach A schema of typical stimuli is developed through literature,observing 212 stores, and surveying 39 womens fashion retail GMs. An experiment (n 489)establishes the set of stimuli and effective levels for creating affect for a womens fashion store.Shoppers (n 62) were repeatedly exposed to combinations of the two sets (industry standard andideal) to examine whether decay in affect occurs, and whether changes can mitigate this.Findings Interactions between sensory stimuli have a significant effect on fashion shoppers affect

for a store. Fashion retailers are less differentiated in their use of sensory stimuli than they could be toachieve the responses they expect. Stagnation from repeated exposure can diminish affect for the storewhereas small changes in stimuli levels can revitalise and increase affect.Research limitations/implications A model of sensory stimuli-based relationships with shopperaffect should incorporate interactions. Empirically, different stimuli can easily be added or substitutedwithin a dimension to test its effect within a factorial design. A model of fashion store atmosphere islikely to require a mediating influence of repeated exposure.Practical implications It is worthwhile getting the correct package of stimuli for a fashionstores atmosphere. This does not necessarily require wholesale changes; rather small changes instimuli level can enhance a store.Originality/value The paper presents the only study to use a holistic approach to store atmosphereand base effectiveness measures against the fashion industry norm, and consider the effect of repeatedexposure.

Keywords Store atmosphere, Retail environment, Shopper response, Consumer behaviour,Marketing environment, Retail management

Paper type Research paper

1. IntroductionStore atmosphere, created by the layout and environment, is important in the fashionsector of retail (Birtwistle and Shearer, 2001; Newman and Patel, 2004), as it is crucialfor success and a key determinant of patronage (Newman and Patel, 2004). Scarpi(2006), for example, finds that in specialty apparel stores the environment can influencethe shopper orientation, resulting in different behaviours, while Moye and Giddings(2002) show that components of store atmospheres can have a direct influence onshopping behaviours in a variety of apparel stores. Paulins and Geistfeld (2003)suggest that womens apparel retailers must be prepared to implement changes todecor to remain competitive, but casual observation of stores suggest that manyapparel retailers rely heavily on only display fixtures to enhance the visualmerchandising without carefully considering the other elements of the store design,such as the walls, flooring, scents, music, temperature, etc. While there are thosefashion retailers that have adopted a conceptual direction such as a residential theme, aminimalistic concept, or a thematic approach (Diamond and Diamond, 1996) and havetherefore utilised their store environment as part of the selling strategy, many storeenvironments remain as functional and basic areas, with typically plain walls, flooring,

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1361-2026.htm

Received September 2010Revised September 2010Accepted May 2011

Journal of Fashion Marketing and

Management

Vol. 15 No. 4, 2011

pp. 428-445

r Emerald Group Publishing Limited

1361-2026

DOI 10.1108/13612021111169933

428

JFMM15,4


2/18

ceilings, lighting, etc. Fashion textbooks nevertheless regularly mention the backdrop,store environment, or atmospherics (e.g. Drakeet al., 1992; Oelkers, 2004; Solomon andRabolt, 2009), as tools that that can be used to help influence shopper behaviour andaffect (liking) for the store.

If there is a typical functional fashion store environment, does it achieve what couldbe done in terms of influencing shoppers behaviours and affect for the store, or arethere elements that could be changed to enhance the store effectiveness? And, if changedoes occur, as Paulins and Geistfeld (2003) suggest it needs to, how will shoppersrespond? In our study we compare the affect responses of shoppers exposedrepeatedly to an industry standard or typical store atmosphere to those exposed toan experimentally derived ideal atmosphere and identify the impact a change inatmospherics has on affect. To establish the typical industry atmosphere we use storeobservation based on a set of dimensions derived from the literature to then create asurvey measurement of retail managers. From the survey and observation we createa schema of typical industry stimuli. To establish the ideal levels we conduct anexperiment to identify the levels of stimuli that elicit the greatest affect for the store.

Following this a second experiment is conducted where shoppers were repeatedlyexposed to a typical store, the ideal store, or a combination changing from one to theother halfway through the repetitions.

Thus, the conceptual framework involves developing a construct called industrystandard, made up of items that are the typical levels of sensory stimuli found inthe marketplace. We also develop a construct called ideal standard, which are the levelsof sensory stimuli that are shown to result in the most positive affect for the store. Wethen take these constructs and test whether repeated exposure to them, or acombination of them, impacts upon the affect shoppers reveal for stores.

2. BackgroundStore atmospherics has generated widespread interest by academics and practitioners

since Kotler (1974), Baker (1986), and Bitner (1992) encapsulated the concept ofolfactory, aural, tactile, and visual dimensions creating an environment that affectsshoppers emotions and behaviour. The Donovan and Rossiter (1982) approach-avoidance model focused much of the ensuing attention on behavioural responses toindividual or limited interactions of stimuli with less attention paid to affect oremotional responses to the store environment. For example, Areni and Kim (1994)establish a link between the brightness of lighting and increased examination ofmerchandise, while Milliman (1982) shows that slower music encourages shoppers tospend more time in-store. Similarly, dAstous (2000) suggests that loud music resultsin less time spent in-store. The problem with these studies is that they treat thestimuli (and resultant response) as isolated events directed solely at behaviour,whereas the store environment provides an holistic cognitive experience.

Recent studies have begun to rectify this (e.g. Baker et al., 2002; Kottasz, 2006;Wirtz et al., 2007; Oakes and North, 2008a), but general frameworks persist inexamining single-period responses to stimuli (e.g. Fiore and Kim, 2007; Noad andRogers, 2008; Soars, 2009), continuing support for the single stimulus single-periodresponse approach (e.g. Eroglu et al., 2005; Michon et al., 2005; Ward et al., 2007;Oakes and North, 2008b). Babin and Attaway (2000) asked whether re-patronage isperhaps in part a function of affect created by store atmospherics, with others lookingat the enjoyment of the shopping experience (as created by the environment)influencing re-patronage (e.g. Ogle et al., 2004; Hart et al., 2007; Michon et al., 2008;

4

Atmospherfashion st


3/18

Joseph-Mathews et al., 2009; Seock, 2009). In this light, it is perhaps more appropriateto examine the effects of a store atmosphere or environment when the shopper ispresented with all the sensory stimuli, as the single stimulus approach lacks facevalidity for the shopper.

What has also not been examined is whether repeated exposure to the sensorystimuli alters the affective response of shoppers. Is there perhaps a decay effect oris there a compound effect? The approach in the past has also been to vary levels ofstimuli to determine likely responses with little regard to industry norms for stimuliand expected responses. In an economic era necessitating caution with expenditure,and a shopper era demanding sustainability, it is pertinent to consider what effectthe investment in atmosphere may have over time, and whether changes arewarranted.

This study seeks to first establish what a typical environment is in a womensapparel store, to use as a realistic base for measuring the effects of any changes to theenvironment; this is done by determining the common levels of environmentalstimuli in the marketplace. Next, the study establishes the set of ideal (in terms of

retailer desired shopper responses) environmental stimuli levels. Finally the studyestablishes whether repeated exposure to the same levels of environmental stimuliaffects shopper responses, or whether change stimulates the shopper.

3. Typical levels of environmental stimuliLiterature-based set of stimuliA review of the store atmospherics literature established a set of individual sensorystimuli that had been previously studied, ranging from scents (e.g. Bone and Jantrania,1992; Gulas and Bloch, 1995; Mitchell et al., 1995; Spangenberget al., 1996; Bone andEllen, 1999; Morrin and Ratneshwar, 2000; Mattila and Wirtz, 2001; Parsons, 2009)through music (e.g. Grewal and Baker, 1994; Baker et al., 1995; Sharma and Stafford,2000), colour and lighting (e.g. Crowley, 1993; Babin et al., 2003), to temperatures and

surface coverings (e.g. Kerin et al., 1992; Machleit et al., 1994; Sharma and Stafford,2000; dAstous, 2000). This set was used as a field check for observation of stores(n 212) throughout New Zealand.

The literature-based sensory constructs were identified as aural stimuli (musicstyle, volume, tempo, familiarity, and other sounds); olfactory stimuli (scentpleasantness and congruence); tactile stimuli (temperature, flooring); and visualstimuli (lighting sources, level, colours, and fixtures/fitting). These were then overlaidwith observed levels of the items; for example, lighting source was observedto include natural light, exposed fluorescent, ceiling panel fluorescent, halogen,non-halogen spotlights, etc. Note that the normal fifth sense of taste is omitted, as it isin most atmospheric studies. This is because taste is almost invariably a functionalaspect that is product oriented, rather than a non-utilitarian element that is part of anatmosphere. In womens apparel stores there is no expectation of taste eitherfunctional or non-utilitarian being present.

Of major concern to any study examining the interactions that may occur betweenstimuli in creating an atmosphere and having an effect on affect is the possibility thatthere may be critical components of sensory stimuli that have not been identified bythe literature. Omission of these parts may adversely affect the impact the stimuli mayhave in the experiment leading to false results. Furthermore, in constructing theschema, by not having a clearer idea of what stimuli and stimuli components there arein store atmospheres, the study would open itself to either missing crucial information

430

JFMM15,4


4/18

because it was not asked for, or creating greater potential for error throughinterpretation of open-ended answers.

Refinement of stimuli set through field observation

Field observation was selected as a means of gaining insights and ideas about whatother sensory stimuli components may exist in creating store atmospheres. Boote andMathews (1999) suggest observation is an appropriate methodology when at least oneof four criteria is met:

(1) the phenomenon is easily observable;

(2) the phenomenon is a social process or a mass activity;

(3) the phenomenon occurs at a subconscious (sic) level; and

(4) the objects under investigation are either unable or unwilling to communicatedirectly with the researcher.

Sensory stimuli are by definition required to be able to be sensed. In this respect, they

are clearly observable (condition 1). Furthermore, observation allows the stimuli to bedirectly recorded, rather than relying on third-party recollection of what is present.Second, sensory stimuli can be classified into the five senses, and then into sub-groupsbased on the delivery of the stimuli. Thus, patterns of presence and level (of thephenomenon) are sought in the observation (condition 2). Whilst observation has beenregularly used in store atmosphere research because of the subconscious effects onconsumers (e.g. Milliman, 1982; Crowley, 1993; Areni and Kim, 1994; Herrington andCapella, 1996; Yalch and Spangenberg, 2000) the stimuli themselves are notsubconscious and are in fact directly observable/measurable. Thus condition 3 is notsatisfied. Finally, in this situation, the objects under investigation are not people, butsensory stimuli such as music, colours, construction materials, temperature, etc. andthus are unable to communicate directly with the researcher as to their presence(satisfying condition 4). Observation is clearly an appropriate methodology from atechnical view.

As Dodd et al. (1998) note, observation can be used as both a qualitative and aquantitative research methodology and where the research is exploratory in nature it islikely to be qualitative. However, unlike exploratory studies that use unstructuredobservation because of the early stage they occur at in the research process (Boote andMathews, 1999; Churchill, 1999), the observation in this study is able to be reasonablystructured because of the clear classifications that already exist for sensory stimulibased on the five senses and the work of Kotler (1974), Baker (1986), and Bitner (1992)that created typologies of stimuli. Effectively therefore the objective of the observationresearch is to identify gaps in the classes (e.g. are there sounds other than music thatcreate store atmosphere), and gaps in the measures of existing classes (e.g. does musicvary only on tempo, volume, and pitch, and what are the levels of tempo, volume, andpitch that are employed).

Boote and Mathews (1999) list several widely used classifications for observationalresearch that operate in terms of dichotomies. Human vs machine observation(e.g. Hair et al., 2003; Zikmund, 2003) is the first of these. The observation in thisstudy makes use of both human and machine observation. The stores were digitallyvideotaped, including full audio recording. At the same time, the researcher observedany scent and the ambient temperature. The video was used because of thesubconscious effects detailed in Boote and Mathews (1999) third condition, and shown

4

Atmospherfashion st


5/18

to exist in store atmosphere studies (e.g. Milliman, 1982; Crowley, 1993; Areni and Kim,1994; Herrington and Capella, 1996; Yalch and Spangenberg, 2000). Video couldcapture stimuli that might otherwise not be noticed and recorded by a human observerin the environment, and checked for later by a researcher that is not distracted by

all the stimuli. However, video can only capture visual and aural stimuli, and recordinformation for the haptic sense. It is unable to record scent, nor temperature or relatedtactile stimuli. Thus, the researcher noted these stimuli. However, because senses areinherently subjective, store staff were also asked about the presence of scent, and theambient temperature. The second dichotomy of overt vs covert (e.g. Hair et al., 2003;Zikmund, 2003) was not relevant as the stimuli would not change in either case, andthere were no ethical issues involved with observing the stimuli (Boote and Mathews,1999). Similarly the third dichotomy of natural vs contrived (e.g. Hair et al., 2003;Zikmund, 2003) was not applicable as the observation had to be in the naturalenvironment. Finally, the dichotomy of participatory vs non-participatory observation(e.g. Hair et al., 2003; Zikmund, 2003) is only applicable in terms of the researcherusing their own senses to observe stimuli (the scent and ambient temperature) but store

staff corroborated these.Each store observed was selected on the basis of three criteria. The first criterion

was simply that it was an example of a womens apparel store. The second was anevolving criterion. Once examples of stores that exhibited the stimuli suggested inthe literature had been observed (thus confirming the existence of such stimuli), thecriterion changed to being examples of stores that exhibited either unusualcombinations of stimuli (in terms of the existing literature) or presented stimuli thathad not been suggested by the literature. This was initially determined throughstorefront examination (looking through the door/window, etc.) similar to Ward et al.s(1992) proto-typicality approach, followed by entry into the store and confirmationof the stimulus. The third of the criteria was that management would allow access forstimuli recording.

The store was observed by video and human sense confirmed by managementinterview. Video was taken of the entire store. Videoing the entire store was normallyby either walking through the store, or by centrally locating the camera and panningaround the store. The approach was determined by the layout and size of the store.Even if there was only a single stimulus that varied in the store from other storeexamples, the whole store was videoed to capture any potential interactions, byrecording the combinations of stimuli used. In some stores the layout requiredpositioning the camera in other spots such as part way up stairs, on balconies, andother raised areas in order to capture the entire store. During the visit, any scent wasrecorded on the observation form along with any information on ambient temperatureand any unstructured information on stimuli that may not be captured by the video.The store was often discussed with management and any further information gleanedalso noted on the store sheet. Subsequent to the visit, the video was viewed looking andlistening for the stimuli to be recorded in the structured section of the store sheet, alongwith any new stimuli identified noted in the unstructured section. Where doubt existedas to the nature of stimuli, a second viewer was asked to observe and suggest theirinterpretation. The original observer was the researcher who has a number of yearsexperience in this technique. If this did not resolve the issue, the store management wascontacted.

Stores were observed in four cities as coverage of retail in major centres that alsoincorporate the multicultural diversity of New Zealand; four towns as examples of

432

JFMM15,4


6/18

tourism-influenced retail centres; two small centres as examples of unusual periodor culturally influenced retail; and seven further towns as examples of smaller, rural-based retail centres. It was expected that the main centre stores would reflect theliterature as these retailers are more international in character, and that the other

centres may offer insight into other possible stimuli combinations as these have uniqueinfluences impacting on the retail environment.

Refinement of stimuli and discovery of desired outcomes through surveyTo establish marketplace practice the general managers of 39 New Zealand womensclothing retailers were surveyed using a set of fixed response questions derived fromthe observation. There were three types of measurement, all designed to providecharacteristics. One type consisted of presence questions respondents were askedto indicate whether they had such stimuli present in-store and were simple, pre-codedlists that were mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive, using descriptors thatdiscussions with retailers in the observation stage had suggested. These descriptorswere in laymens terms rather than precise measures (e.g. bright light rather than lux

level, with bright described as brighter than outside daylight), which potentiallyintroduces a degree of subjectivity to responses. This was pre-tested for consistency,however, and a sample was also drawn from the final responses and the relevant storesvisited to observe levels; responses were deemed to be consistent in measurementacross all the stimuli descriptors, so if there was any error, it was at least systematic.

A second type of measurement consisted of scales measuring levels of stimuli.These scales were linear numeric scales with full descriptors based on retailerdiscussions, designed to elicit distributions for each stimuli. The midpoints were themode from observations. The third types of measurement were expectationquestions, asking respondents to select from a list one or more expected responses totheir in-store stimuli. These were centred on the key stimuli dimension constructsidentified in the literature. Pre-tests of the sections, the whole and the revised

questionnaire were undertaken (Alreck and Settle, 1995; Churchill and Iacobucci, 2002).A schema, following the classic guidelines of Sokal and Sneath (1963), Frank and

Green (1968), Harvey (1969), and Hunt (1991), of the four sensory dimensions wasconstructed from the responses to the survey. This forms the typical industryenvironment set of stimuli (Table I), along with the expected responses to the stimuli(Table II).

4. The ideal store atmosphereWe designed a two-stage experiment to establish the ideal set of stimuli (cf. industrystandard). Treatments were presence, and levels of stimuli, with measurement taken ofaffective responses. Subjects (n 489) were randomly assigned to treatment groups, ora control group, with a GLM used for analysis. A digital movie was made of a clothingstore with segments lasting approximately 90-120 seconds (depending on the stimuliincorporated). This approach has proven effective for environmental representation ofvisual and aural aspects (Chebat et al., 1993; Voss et al., 1998; Machleit and Mantel,2001; Baker et al., 2002), providing a high degree of ecological validity (Bateson andHui, 1992), where a specific environmental setting is required (Sweeney and Wyber,2002). Parsons (2009) demonstrates the ability of a digital representation to capture anaudiences affective and cognitive flow for sensory stimuli with visual and auralstimuli portrayed electronically, and tactile and olfactory stimuli physically present. Ameasure used by Voss et al. (1998) was employed asking a sub-sample (n 12) if the

4

Atmospherfashion st


7/18

videotaped scenario was realistic (on a seven-point scale anchored by veryunrealistic [1] and very realistic [7]: mean 6.4), to assess ecological validity, whichwas considered acceptable. The video was also pre-tested to ensure a reasonable levelof proto-typicality (Wardet al., 1992). A manipulation check was conducted with a sub-sample (n 10), identifying the occurrence of temperature, lighting, music, and scentdifferences correctly.

Stimuli dimension Retailer reported level of stimuli

Music style Easy listening (40.0%); popular (top 40) (28.6%)Music volume Average (2.94: 0.072)Music tempo Average (3.03: 0.079)Music familiar andpreferred by customers

Yes (91.2%)

Other sounds No other sounds (80%)Scent present No (76.5%)Scent pleasant Pleasant (2.13: 0.350)Scent congruence Somewhat congruent (2.00: 0.267)Temperature controlled Yes (85.3%)Temperature 18-251C (75.8%); 10-171C (18.2%)Flooring Carpet (73.0%); wood (32.4%); concrete (21.6%); vinyl (16.2%);

tiles (13.5%)Lighting source Halogen (55.3%); natural light (50.0%); exposed fluorescent (42.1%);

ceiling panel fluorescent (36.8%); non-halogen spotlights (23.7%)

Lighting level Bright (2.08: 0.095)Wall colour White (34.3%); cream (25.7%)Ceiling colour W hite (74.3%); cream (14.3%)Floor colour Grey (21.2%); brown (12.1%); blue (12.1%); natural wood (12.1%)Lighting colour Translucent (86.0%); white (14.0%)

Notes: Proportion stating presence of this level shown in parentheses, or if five-point scale used, meanand standard deviation shown in parentheses; multiple levels permitted; only levels that were listed by10 per cent or more are given

Table I.Schema of sensory stimuli

Stimuli dimension Retailer expectation of shopper response

Music Stay longer (41.2%); take time to examine merchandise (32.4%);increase sales (23.5%); examine the merchandise more (14.7%);slow down shoppers move through store (14.7%); no change (14.7%);spend less time in store (14.7%)

Scent Evaluate store more positively (38.9%); like store (33.3%); take time toexamine merchandise (27.8%); no change (27.8%); increase sales(22.2%); stay longer (22.2%); slow down shoppers move through store(22.2%); examine the merchandise more (16.7%)

Temperature Stay longer (72.7%); like store (51.5%)Lighting/colour Examine the merchandise more (64.3%)

Notes: Proportion stating this expectation shown in parentheses; multiple expectations permitted

Table II.Shopper responses tostimuli, expected byretailers

434

JFMM15,4


8/18

Subjects entered a room that was fully blacked out with theatre-quality curtains.A single light was on illuminating a black, adjustable leather chair. The subject wasseated and told they were about to see a 90-120 second video clip of a store. They weregiven a set of wireless headphones, and were told that at the same time as the video

starting, some music would be heard. The video projector was rear of the subject out ofsight. The projection filled the wall in front of the subject (approximately 4 m 3m).During the video, a scent level was present and the temperature in the room wascontrolled. Immediately upon termination of the video, the subject was presented withthe measurement instrument.

The levels of each stimulus were applied as follows: music: slow tempo; mid-tempo;fast tempo; temperature: extremes (hot/cold); mid level (comfortable); lighting: bright;dull (neutral/dull); scent: congruent; incongruent, based on the schema, forming a3 2 2 2 design. The music was classical/popular mixes, with tempo pre-tested tobe slow, mid, and fast tempo. Heating/cold air units, monitored using a thermostat,controlled temperature. The two levels were the 18-25 degree level (mid) and 10-17(low). Lighting was adjusted in the video by altering the contrast and brightness levels

in the digitisation. Again, lighting was pre-tested to ensure subjects saw the contrastsas reflective of the industry descriptors. Finally, scent was perfume (congruentassociated Parsons, 2009) and coffee (incongruent) presented through a spray.

The sample was approximately one-third general population and two-thirdsstudents. As the store was a type likely to be shopped at by both groups the inclusionof a student sample for convenience was not seen as a potential problem; howeverthe split sample responses were compared, with no significant difference found. Asdiscussed by Sternthalet al. (1994), the need for a sample that is truly representativeof the population of interest arises only for research aimed at generalisations. For thetheoretical explanation this paper seeks, a more homogenous sample is appropriateas it lessens the possibility of diversity undermining the chances of findingtheoretically predicted outcomes.

To examine the responses to stimuli, a measure of affect was developed based onscales originally developed by Fisher (1974) for measuring affect in terms of perceivedenvironmental state. The 13 relevant items from Fishers (1974) environmental qualityscale that have been used in similar environmental marketing studies (e.g. Crowley,1993; Spangenberg et al., 1996; Parsons, 2009) were employed. The mean of the 13 itemsis taken for each subject to give a score for affect. Each item uses a seven-point scale.Cronbachs a for the store 0.7795, an acceptable level (with the common thresholdheld as 0.7000 Hair et al., 1995). It is conceivable that normal experience with thestore type may have an effect upon responses to stimuli, particularly in light ofMitchell et al.s (1995) discussion of expected stimuli having different effects fromunexpected. On this principle, subjects treated with a store that, according to theschema developed, was typical and expected, are likely to have less positive affectresponses than those for whom the store was typical, but because of inexperience,unexpected. Three items were used to measure subjects levels of normal exposureto the store type; typical frequency of visits to the store type, typical expenditure atsuch a store, and typical length of time spent in such a store and used as a check ofpotential difference in affect; no significant difference was found.

MANOVA was employed to analyse the dependence relationship represented as thedifferences in a set of dependent measures (affect and four behavioural measures thatare not discussed in this paper) across a series of groups formed by the four categoricalindependent measures (the sensory stimuli). Hair et al.s (1995) requirements for

4

Atmospherfashion st


9/18

MANOVA are met as follows: the sample in each cell exceeds the number of dependentvariables; the interactions are ordinal; the use of covariates to account for systematicbias has been taken care of by the random assignment of respondents to treatments;the three assumptions of MANOVA, independence (among observations), equality of

variance-covariance matrices, and normality (of the dependent measures) are allconsidered met. There is no discernible time-order amongst respondents, treatmentswere randomly shuffled throughout each day, and respondents were randomlyassigned to experiment treatments, and there does not appear to be any pattern ofdependence amongst respondents. The equality of the matrices is tested by the box testand there are no significant differences (F 0.951, significance 0.735). Group sizes areapproximately equal so even if the assumption were violated, there would be minimalimpact (Hairet al., 1995). While there is no test for multivariate normality, univariatenormality across the measures suggests that any departure from multivariatenormality would be inconsequential[1]. Outliers were not a problem as we confineddata to limited scales. Pillais criterion was used; it is the most robust of the testsavailable when sample sizes are not large (as in this case). Effect size and the power of

the test were examined and considered acceptable. We interpret the results in light ofobserved causality based on three common criteria (e.g. Churchill and Iacobucci, 2002);our estimated marginal means support concomitant variation, time order of occurrenceis integral to the after-only experimental design, and the elimination of other possiblecausal factors is obtained by the random assignment of subjects and the controlledlaboratory setting. The result of the multivariate test is shown in Table III.

Examination of the marginal means (the population estimates rather than thesample means) allows us to see the directions of the relationships established. Thesemeans are shown in Table IV. The main effects are all positive with the exception oftemperature. Brighter lighting results in greater affect, as does faster music. These arefindings new to the literature on apparel stores. Congruent scent increases affect,

Effect Pillais trace Affect (liking)

Intercept 0.000a 0.000a

Main effectsLighting 0.000

a

0.000a

Temperature 0.000a 0.000a

Music 0.033a 0.001a

Scent 0.000a 0.000a

InteractionsLighting temperature 0.000a 0.001a

Lightingmusic 0.246 0.062Temperaturemusic 0.000a 0.000a

Lighting temperaturemusic 0.005a 0.000a

Lighting scent 0.855 0.390Temperature scent 0.000a 0.000a

Lighting temperature scent 0.164 0.021a

Music scent 0.000a 0.000a

Lightingmusic scent 0.741 0.355Temperaturemusic scent 0.000a 0.000a

Lighting temperaturemusic scent 0.435 0.270

Notes:Pillais trace criterion used; asignificant at the 0.05 level

Table III.Multivariate test p-valuefor main effects andinteractions; Pillais traceand between subjectseffect

436

JFMM15,4


10/1

strengthening the general findings of Spangenberget al. (1996), Mitchell et al. (1995),Mattila and Wirtz (2001), and Parsons (2009). Temperature increases affect when it ismid-level rather than the extreme, which is supported by the general retail findings ofMachleit et al. (1994) and dAstous (2000).

5. Repeated exposureThe significant main effects and interactions were used to run the second stageof the experiment with repeated measures over a four-day period (n 62 subjects;sampled from the same population as the previous experiment). The same procedureswere followed as before, except that subjects were exposed to the typical industry

standard or the ideal set of main effects and interactions (derived from the earlierexperiments results), or a combination of both over the period (changeoveroccurring period three). The ideal levels were bright lighting, fast music, mid-leveltemperature, and presence of a congruent scent. The industry norm is bright lighting,mid-tempo music, mid-temperature, and no scent. A repeated measures GLM wasused to examine the within-subjects effects of repeated exposure to stimuli. The idealatmosphere group was exposed to the same ideal stimuli in each of the fourperiods. The industry atmosphere group was exposed to the same industry stimuli ineach of the four periods. The industry/ideal group was exposed to two periodsof industry atmosphere followed by two periods of ideal atmosphere, while the ideal/industry group had the reverse. Mauchlys test of sphericity suggests that for theindustry, industry/ideal, and ideal/industry groups, sphericity can be assumed forthe analysis, but for the ideal group, the e correction needs to be applied, so theGreenhouse-Geisser e corrected and Huynh-Feldt e corrected significance levelsare used. The ideal group had no significant effect for affect over time (F 1.848,Greenhouse-Geisser significance 0.172; Huynh-Feldt significance 0.165), and neitherdid the ideal/industry group (F 2.291, significance 0.095), but the other two did industry group (F 5.910, significance 0.002); industry/ideal group (F 5.977,significance 0.002).

If we go with the premise that there is likely to be a decay effect from repeatedexposure to the same stimuli, the directions of the repeated exposure trends in

Stimuli Affect EMM

LightingBright 4.67 (0.03)Dull 4.43 (0.04)TemperatureExtreme 4.10 (0.04)Mid level 4.99 (0.04)

MusicSlow 4.47 (0.04)Mid 4.49 (0.04)Fast 4.67 (0.04)ScentCongruent 5.10 (0.04)Incongruent 3.99 (0.04)

Note:Means are shown followed by the standard error enclosed in parentheses)

TabEstimated ma

means significant

4

Atmospherfashion st


11/1

Figures 1-4 suggest that if the store atmosphere is less than ideal there is a significantdecline in affect for the store. If the atmosphere is ideal (in terms of retailer desiredresponses) the negative effects of repeated exposure could be mitigated. Furthermore,if the atmosphere is changed positively i.e. the stimuli levels become ideal or closer to

ideal there can be significant increase in the affect for the store.

7

6

5

4

3

2Meanaffect

1

Period

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4

Figure 2.Industry atmospherebright lighting, mid-tempomusic, mid-leveltemperature, no scent

7

6

5

4

3

2Meanaffect

1

Period


Figure 1.Ideal atmosphere brightlighting, fast music,mid-level temperature,presence of a congruentscent

76

5

4

3

2Meanaffect

1

Period


Figure 3.Industry/ideal atmosphereindustry atmosphere fortwo periods followed byideal atmosphere for twoperiods

7

6

5

4

3

2Meanaffect

1

Period


Figure 4.Ideal/industry atmosphereideal atmosphere for twoperiods followed byindustry atmosphere fortwo periods

438

JFMM15,4


12/1

6. Conclusions and implications for managers and researchersThe first of the conclusions drawn is that interactions between sensory stimulibelonging to different dimensions (Kotler, 1974; Baker, 1986; Bitner, 1992) do occur anddo have significant effects on shopper affect. On this basis, the literature-based and

dimensions-based conceptualisations of research-to-date that have concentrated onmain effects only are rejected as accurate representations of the influence of in-store,non-utilitarian sensory stimuli on shopper affect. The conceptualisation provided inthe interactions-based approach provides a better guide for the operationalisation ofthe store atmosphere as a package as encapsulated by the construct approach (e.g.Baker, 1986; Bitner, 1990, 1992; Kerin et al., 1992; Wardet al., 1992; Grewal and Baker,1994; Bakeret al., 1995; Spies et al., 1997; Babin and Attaway, 2000).

There is also a clear conclusion that arises from the schema developed. Kotler (1974)and subsequent researchers view atmospherics as the conscious designing of space tocreate certain effects in buyers specifically emotional effects that enhance theirpurchase probability. Increasingly, however, researchers are seeing stimuli being usedas a means of differentiating the retail environment from competitors, and enhancing

the shopping experience by creating exciting surroundings (e.g. Wakefield and Baker,1998; Parsons, 2003, 2009), or at the very least, ambient congruity (e.g. Grewal andBaker, 1994; Spies et al., 1997). Yet the marketplace shows, through the schema ofstimuli used and the expected responses established a surprising degree of uniformitywithin the fashion sector. This is particularly surprising in light of Ward et al.s (1992)showing that consumers perceptions of proto-typicality and their attitude towardsstores is strongly influenced by environmental cues. Whether this is a lack of designon the part of retailers in New Zealand, a cost issue (e.g. white paint is cheaper thancoloured; fluorescent lighting is cheaper than halogen, etc.), or a false perceptionamongst retailers that the stimuli packages they are using are the best combination,the empirical results indicate that retailers could do better in achieving desiredaffective responses. The conclusion drawn therefore is that retailers are far less

differentiated in their use of sensory stimuli than they could be to achieve theresponses they expect. As Parsons (2003) discusses in the shopping mall context, thereis a greater need for retailers to differentiate themselves in an environment ofdisaffected shoppers bored by the sameness of offerings, yet the observation andsurvey of retailers in this research shows a general consensus of sensory stimuli usagewithin the fashion sector, at odds with a context of shoppers seeking not onlyutilitarian succour but hedonic gratification as well (Babin et al., 1994).

The third conclusion concerns repeated exposure to stimuli. After spendingsometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars, a retailer is faced with a shopper quicklybecoming bored or disaffected with the sensory stimuli and the benefits of positiveaffect are diminished or lost altogether. Ward et al.s (1992) perceptions of proto-typicality requires the environmental cues to suggest a matching of the shoppersself-concept and the store image as portrayed (in part) by store atmosphere, but asSirgy et al. (2000) suggests, the person may develop or the store may develop (orstagnate) and the match may become less appealing. If having the same stimuli is seenas stagnation, and is considered a negative event (in terms of the shoppingenvironment), Stoltmanet al.(1999) suggest such an event could lead to switching. Theresults of the experiment on repeated exposures effect on affect suggest thatstagnation with repeated exposure can diminish affect for the store. The resultsalso suggest that change in stimuli, particularly positive change in terms of movingto levels that are more likely to induce positive affect, can revitalise the shopper affect.

4

Atmospherfashion st


13/1

Thus, the conclusion is that repeated exposure to the same stimuli can result inreduced affect, whereas a change in stimuli can revitalise and even increase affect.

The change does not have to be wholesale nor dramatic. The differences betweenthe industry standard set of influential stimuli and the ideal set is a matter of level.

By altering the level of the stimuli retailers can achieve a meaningful affective responseat a fraction of the cost of a full refit. The retail manager must appreciate that smallchanges can have large effects. The findings show that a change from mid tempo musicto faster tempo music can significantly enhance shopper affect in a clothing store. Thedilemma a manager faces when designing the atmosphere of their store is that havinginvested considerable budget into creating the ambience that appeals to the shopperthe shopper can then become bored and disaffected, as the findings about repeatedexposure revealed. However, a simple change of music played, a dimming of the lightstemporarily, the introduction of an alternative scent all these changes in stimuli aresimple and small, but can have significant positive effects on responses. Thus, aretailer who has invested in a store design expected to last five or six years, is not facedwith a redundant design after the first visits by shoppers. By constantly manipulating

the sensory stimuli levels and even presence, the retailer can instil a revitalisation ofthe store. Whilst not examined in this research, the logical interval between changeswould be tied to the normal interval between visits for typical shoppers.

Empirically this is the first study to take a stimuli from each of the dimensions orfactors conceptually described by Kotler (1974), Baker (1986), and Bitner (1992) andtest them in a full factorial design, creating a representation of a holistic storeatmosphere, rather than simply single or multiple stimuli. By doing so the researchshows that it is possible to empirically test combinations of stimuli and/or levels. Theimplication therefore for researchers is that different stimuli could easily be addedor substituted within a dimension to test its effect within a factorial design, rather thanrelying on main effect results only.

Conceptually the first implication for researchers is that in any model of sensory

stimuli-based store atmosphere relationships with shopper affect and/or behaviourshould incorporate interactions. By omitting interactions researchers may be missingpotentially influential stimuli that individually may not have significant effects, but incombination with other stimuli may greatly influence shopper affect. This also meansthat it may be necessary to revisit studies that have contradictory results concerningmain effects, such as the debate over whether scent should be congruent (e.g. Bone and

Jantrania, 1992; Mitchellet al., 1995; Bone and Ellen, 1999; Fiore et al., 2000), or evenpresent (Bone and Ellen, 1999; Gulas and Bloch, 1995; Mattila and Wirtz, 2001) togenerate responses, or whether music tempo influences behaviour (e.g. Herrington andCapella, 1996; Milliman, 1982). It may be that the music, scent, or whatever stimuli hasbeen studied is interacting with other stimuli or is not interacting with other stimuliwhen it should be, to provide what has been observed as a main effect.

The second conceptual implication is that a model of store atmosphere is likely torequire a mediating influence in the form of repeated exposure. Clearly this is onlyrelevant in studies concerning patronage, but it would be rare for a researcher to beinvestigating a retail situation where a single visit is common. The findings fromthis study are not comprehensive in their determination of a need for the mediatingvariable, but there is a clear indication that such a variable is likely to have a partto play in any model of store atmosphere. Conceptually this then raises the questionof whether other mediating, or moderating variables may exist that should alsobe included.

440

JFMM15,4


14/1

Methodologically the strength of the findings in this research shows two things.First, the combination of field observation and sample survey research, based on anextensive literature analysis, to produce a schema of industry norms, allows for theconstruction of a valid and reliable set of experiments to empirically test the conceptual

model and related propositions. Such an approach (the use of a schema) is unusualin marketing research, but this study shows how effective such an application can be.Second, the use of a controlled setting can be applied in environmental studies ofmarketing, achieving ecological validity but allowing the researcher to control externalinfluences. The use of digitally enhanced displays of visual and aural stimuli incombination with physical manifestations of olfactory and tactile stimuli allow theresearcher to conduct studies of store and other market environments withoutthe expense of constructing artificial sets, or the trade-off of placing the study in afield setting.

Finally, with the ability to measure components of store atmosphere directly, but aspart of a package, it may be that a conceptualisation like Bitners (1990, 1992) can beginto be tested, integrating store atmospherics with other store environment factors, or

with other determinants of patronage (e.g. Kerin et al., 1992; Sirgy et al., 2000).

Note

1. Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests give the following univariate results: affect: Z 2.236; time:Z 3.440; money: Z 3.259; frequency: Z 2.968; likely: Z 3.243. In all cases theasymptotic significance was 0.000.

References

Alreck, P.L. and Settle, R.B. (1995), The Survey Research Handbook, 2nd ed., Richard D. Irwin,Boston, MA.

Areni, C.S. and Kim, D. (1994), The influence of in-store lighting on consumers examinationof merchandise in a wine store, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 11

No. 2, pp. 117-25.Babin, B.J. and Attaway, J.S. (2000), Atmospheric affect as a tool for creating value and gaining

share of customer, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 91-9.

Babin, B.J., Darden, W.R. and Griffin, M. (1994), Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic andutilitarian shopping value, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 644-56.

Babin, B.J., Hardesty, D.M. and Suter, T.A. (2003), Color and shopping intentions: the interveningeffect of price fairness and perceived affect, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 56No. 7, pp. 541-51.

Baker, J. (1986), The role of the environment in marketing services: the consumer perspective,in Czepiel, J.A., Congram, C.A. and Shanahan, J. (Eds), The Services Challenge: Integrating

for Competitive Advantage, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 79-84.

Baker, J., Grewal, D. and Parasuraman, A. (1995), The effect of store atmosphere on customerquality perceptions and store image,Stores, Vol. 77 No. 7, p. RR5.

Baker, J., Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D. and Voss, G.B. (2002), The influence of multiple storeenvironment cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions, Journal of

Marketing, Vol. 66 (April), pp. 120-41.

Bateson, J.E.G. and Hui, M.K. (1992), The ecological validity of photographic slides andvideotapes in simulating the service setting, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 19 No. 2,pp. 271-81.

Birtwistle, G. and Shearer, L. (2001), Consumer perception of five UK fashion retailers, Journalof Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 9-18.

4

Atmospherfashion st


15/1

Bitner, M.J. (1990), Evaluating service encounters: the effects of physical surroundings andemployee responses, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 (April), pp. 69-82.

Bitner, M.J. (1992), Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on customers andemployees,Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 No. 2, pp. 57-71.

Bone, P.F. and Ellen, P.S. (1999), Scents in the marketplace: explaining a fraction of olfaction,Journal of Retailing, Vol. 75 No. 2, pp. 243-62.

Bone, P.F. and Jantrania, S. (1992), Olfaction as a cue for product quality, Marketing Letters,Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 289-96.

Boote, J. and Mathews, A. (1999), Saying is one thing; doing is another: the role of observation inmarketing research,Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1,pp. 15-21.

Chebat, J.-C., Gelinas-Chebat, C. and Filiatrault, P. (1993), Interactive effects of musical andvisual cues on time perception: an application to waiting lines in banks, Perceptual and

Motor Skills, Vol. 77 No. 3, pp. 995-1021.

Churchill Jr, G.A. (1999),Marketing Research: Methodological Foundations, 7th ed., The DrydenPress, Fort Worth, TX.

Churchill Jr , G.A. and Iacobucci, D. (2002),Marketing Research, Methodological Foundations, 8thed., Harcourt College Publishers, Fort Worth, TX.

Crowley, A.E. (1993), The two-dimensional impact of colour on shopping, Marketing Letters,Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 59-69.

dAstous, A. (2000), Irritating aspects of the shopping environment, Journal of BusinessResearch, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 149-56.

Diamond, J. and Diamond, E. (1996), Fashion Advertising and Promotion, Delmar Publishers,New York, NY.

Dodd, C.A., Clarke, I. and Kirkup, M.H. (1998), Camera observations of customer behaviour infashion retailing: methodological propositions, International Journal of Retail and

Distribution Management, Vol. 26 No. 8, pp. 311-17.

Donovan, R.J. and Rossiter, J.R. (1982), Store atmosphere: an environmental psychologyapproach, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 34-57.

Drake, M.F., Spoone, J.H. and Greenwald, H. (1992), Retail Fashion Promotion and Advertising,Macmillan Publishing Co., New York, NY.

Eroglu, S.A., Machleit, K.A. and Chebat, J.-C. (2005), The interaction of retail density and musictempo: effects on shopper responses, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 7,pp. 577-89.

Fisher, J.D. (1974), Situation-specific variables as determinants of perceived environmentalaesthetic quality and perceived crowdedness, Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 8(August), pp. 177-88.

Fiore, A.M. and Kim, J. (2007), An integrative framework capturing experiential and utilitarianshopping experience, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management,Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 421-42.

Fiore, A.M., Yah, X. and Yoh, E. (2000), Effects of a product display and environmentalfragrancing on approach responses and pleasurable experiences, Psychology and

Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 27-54.

Frank, R.E. and Green, P. (1968), Numerical taxonomy in marketing analysis: a review article,Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 83-94.

Grewal, D. and Baker, J. (1994), Do retail store environmental factors affect consumers priceacceptability? An empirical examination, International Journal of Research in Marketing,Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 107-15.

442

JFMM15,4


16/1

Gulas, C.S. and Bloch, P.H. (1995), Right under our noses: ambient scent and consumerresponses, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 87-98.

Hair Jr, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1995), Multivariate Data Analysis,4th ed., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Hair Jr, J.F., Bush, R.P. and Ortinau, D.J. (2003), Marketing Research: Within a ChangingInformation Environment, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York, NY.

Harvey, D. (1969), Explanation in Geography, St Martins Press, New York, NY.

Hart, C., Farrell, A.M., Stachow, G., Reed, G. and Cadogan, J.W. (2007), Enjoyment of theshopping experience: impact on customers re-patronage intentions and gender influence,The Services Industries Journal, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 583-604.

Herrington, J.D. and Capella, L.M. (1996), Effects of music in service environments: a fieldstudy,Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 26-41.

Hunt, S.D. (1991), Modern Marketing Theory: Critical Issues in the Philosophy of MarketingScience, South-Western Publishing Co., Cincinnati, OH.

Joseph-Mathews, S., Bonn, M.A. and Snepenger, D. (2009), Atmospherics and consumers

symbolic interpretations of hedonic services,International Journal of Culture, Tourism,and Hospitality Research, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 193-210.

Kerin, R.A., Howard, D.J. and Jain, A. (1992), Store shopping experience and consumerprice-quality-value perceptions, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 68 No. 4, pp. 376-97.

Kotler, P. (1973/1974), Atmospherics as a marketing tool, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 48-64.

Kottasz, R. (2006), Understanding the influences of atmospheric cues on the emotional responsesand behaviours of museum visitors, Journal of Non-Profit and Public Sector Marketing,Vol. 16 Nos 1/2, pp. 95-119.

Machleit, K.A. and Mantel, S.P. (2001), Emotional response and shopping satisfaction:moderating effects of shopper attributions, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 54No. 2, pp. 97-106.

Machleit, K.A., Kellaris, J.J. and Eroglu, S.A. (1994), Human versus spatial dimensions of

crowding perceptions in retail environments: a note on their measurement and effect onshopper satisfaction, Marketing Letters, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 183-94.

Mattila, A.S. and Wirtz, J. (2001), Congruency of scent and music as a driver of in-storeevaluations and behaviour, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77 No. 2, pp. 273-89.

Michon, R., Chebat, J.-C. and Turley, L.W. (2005), Mall atmospherics: the interaction effectsof the mall environment on shopping behaviour, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58No. 5, pp. 576-83.

Michon, R., Yu, H., Smith, D. and Chebat, J.-C. (2008), The influence of mall environment onfemale fashion shoppers value and behaviour, Journal of Fashion Marketing and

Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 456-68.

Mitchell, D.J., Kahn, B.E. and Knasko, S.C. (1995), Theres something in the air: effects ofcongruent or incongruent ambient odor on consumer decision making, Journal ofConsumer Research, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 229-38.

Milliman, R.E. (1982), Using background music to affect the behaviour of supermarketshoppers, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 86-91.

Morrin, M. and Ratneshwar, S. (2000), The impact of ambient scent on evaluation, attention, andmemory for familiar and unfamiliar brands, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 49 No. 2,pp. 157-65.

Moye, L.N. and Giddings, V.L. (2002), An examination of the retail approach-avoidancebehaviour of older apparel consumers, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management,Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 259-76.

4

Atmospherfashion st


17/1

Newman, A.J. and Patel, D. (2004), The marketing directions of two fashion retailers, EuropeanJournal of Marketing, Vol. 38 No. 7, pp. 770-89.

Noad, J. and Rogers, B. (2008), The importance of retail atmospherics in B2B retailing: the caseof BOC, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 36 No. 12,

pp. 1002-14.Oakes, S. and North, A.C. (2008a), Using music to influence cognitive and affective responses in

queues of low and high crowd density,Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 24 Nos 5-6,pp. 589-602.

Oakes, S. and North, A.C. (2008b), Reviewing congruity effects in the service environmentmusicscape, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 63-82.

Oelkers, D.B. (2004), Fashion Marketing, Thomson South-Western, Mason, OH.

Ogle, J.P., Hyllegard, K.H. and Dunbar, B.H. (2004), Predicting patronage behaviours in asustainable retail environment, Environment and Behaviour, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 717-41.

Parsons, A.G. (2003), Assessing the effectiveness of shopping mall promotions, InternationalJournal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 74-9.

Parsons, A.G. (2009), Use of scent in naturally odourless stores,International Journal of Retail& Distribution Management., Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 440-52.

Paulins, V.A. and Geistfeld, L.V. (2003), The effect of consumer perceptions of store attributes onapparel store preference, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 7 No. 4,pp. 371-85.

Scarpi, D. (2006), Fashion stores between fun and usefulness, Journal of Fashion Marketing andManagement, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 7-24.

Seock, Y.-K. (2009), Influence of retail store environment cues on consumer patronage behaviouracross different retail store formats: an empirical analysis of US Hispanic consumers,

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 329-39.

Sharma, A. and Stafford, T.F. (2000), The effect of retail atmospherics on customers perceptionsof salespeople and customer persuasion: an empirical investigation,Journal of Business

Research, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 183-91.Sirgy, M.J., Grewal, D. and Mangleburg, T. (2000), Retail environment, self-congruity, and retail

patronage: an integrative model and a research agenda, Journal of Business Research,Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 127-38.

Soars, B. (2009), Driving sales through shoppers sense of sound, sight, smell, and touch,International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 286-98.

Sokal, R.R. and Sneath, P. (1963), Principles of Numerical Taxonomy, W. H. Freeman and Co.,San Francisco, CA.

Solomon, M.R. and Rabolt, N.J. (2009), Consumer Behavior in Fashion, 2nd ed., PearsonEducation, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Spangenberg, E.R., Crowley, A.E. and Henderson, P.W. (1996), Improving the store environment:do olfactory cues affect evaluations and behaviours?, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 No. 2,pp. 67-80.

Spies, K., Hesse, F. and Loesch, K. (1997), Store atmosphere, mood and purchasing behaviour,International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 1-17.

Sternthal, B., Tybout, A.M. and Calder, B.J. (1994), Experimental design: generalisation andtheoretical explanation, in Bagozzi, R.P. (Ed.), Principles of Marketing Research, BasilBlackwell, Oxford, pp. 195-223.

Stoltman, J.J., Morgan, F.W. and Anglin, L.K. (1999), An investigation of retail shoppingsituations, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 27 No. 4,pp. 145-53.

444

JFMM15,4


18/18

Sweeney, J.C. and Wyber, F. (2002), The role of cognitions and emotions in the music-approach-avoidance behaviour relationship,Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 51-69.

Voss, G.B., Parasuraman, A. and Grewal, D. (1998), The roles of price, performance, andexpectations in determining satisfaction in service exchanges, Journal of Marketing,

Vol. 62 No. 4, pp. 46-61.Wakefield, K.L. and Baker, J. (1998), Excitement at the mall: determinants and effects on

shopping response, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 74 No. 4, pp. 515-39.

Ward, J.C., Barnes, J. and Bitner, M.J. (1992), Measuring the prototypicality and meaning of retailenvironments, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 68 No. 2, pp. 194-220.

Ward, P., Daves, B.J. and Kooijman, D. (2007), Olfaction and the retail environment: examiningthe influence of ambient scent, Service Business, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 295-316.

Wirtz, J., Mattila, A.S. and Tan, R.L.P. (2007), The role of arousal congruency in influencingconsumers satisfaction evaluations and in-store behaviours, International Journal ofService Industry Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 6-24.

Yalch, R.F. and Spangenberg, E.R. (2000), The effects of music in a retail setting on real andperceived shopping times,Journal of Business Research, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 139-47.

Zikmund, W.G. (2003), Business Research Methods, 7th ed., South Western, Cincinnati, OH.

Corresponding authorAndrew G. Parsons can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

4

Atmospherfashion st

atmosphere in fashion stores - need to change

Documents