User s needs, desires and experiences: A comparative study of way-finding design in shopping malls

Transcription

1 61 User s needs, desires and experiences: A comparative study of way-finding design in shopping malls Goksenin Inalhan Istanbul Technical University inalhang@itu.edu.tr Marina Temel Istanbul Technical University marina_temel@hotmail.com Abstract Although access to goods and services is of vital importance to all members of a community, the recent trends indicate that mall patronage is declining. This is due to too many look-alike malls and the fact that shopping experience offered by such malls can often be unpleasant (unsatisfactory) for customers. Shoppers way-finding problems may also contribute to this sense of dissatisfaction. Even though way-finding has been shown to be one of the most irritating aspects of the shopping process, it remains under-researched. Therefore, this research addresses the influence of way-finding design on the shopping experience in shopping malls and seeks to obtain a better understanding of how way-finding design influences emotions and behavior so as to improve the knowledge on designing future shopping malls. The study is based on the comparative study of users behaviors in two shopping malls that were constructed within the same period of time in Kayseri. It seeks to establish the role played by way-finding design principles on behavioral settings and the shopping experience of its users and users preferences of these facilities. In this research the consumer behavioral setting is examined in two parts: the features and the motivations of the users and the features belonging to space (spatial organization). These variables and their influence on each other are tested in a comparative study. Both qualitative and quantitative research methods have been utilized in this study. The qualitative research data consist of interviews with consumers and behavioral/cognitive mappings at both shopping malls. The quantitative research data were gathered by means of questionnaires to users of both shopping malls. The use of such a method demonstrates our belief in the importance of cultivating an ability to recognize, listen, and respond to how people feel about their environment and their experiences within the built environment. The aim is that this study will contribute to the design of shopping malls and will assist in ensuring that the design is as inclusive and universally accessible as possible and addresses the requirements of a wide range of physical, sensory, and cognitive abilities and needs of their users. Understanding the experiences, space use, and needs of users may also contribute to user-centered facilities management, planning and design of spaces that function effectively, accommodate the wider user needs, and reduce the time and stress in accessing those environments. Keywords: shopping malls and centers, behavioral settings, consumer behavior, way-finding, comparative study

2 62 1. Introduction Retailers and shopping mall developers who often seek to learn how and why people shop are currently being challenged with a recent trend in retail industry. Although shopping malls were a popular destination for shopping and recreation in 80s and 90s (Kowinski, 1985, Wakefield and Baker, 1998), recent trends indicate that mall patronage is declining. Moreover, despite the decrease in mall sales, there is a concurrent growth in retail mall space (Ashley, 1997; Wakefield and Baker, 1998). Wakefield and Baker (1998) suggest three reasons for this decline in mall patronage: (1) There are too many malls that look alike, with too many stores offering too much of the same merchandise (Ashley, 1997; Templin, 1997; cited in Wakefield and Baker, 1998). (2) Busy consumers are making fewer trips to the mall. Because they are time-pressed, consumers seek to maximize their shopping time (Ashley, 1997; cited in Wakefield and Baker, 1998). (3) Fewer consumers are saying they go to the mall because they enjoy the experience (Berry, 1996; Chandler, 1995; cited in Wakefield and Baker, 1998). Tauber( 1972) stresses that if we assume that shopping trips are evaluated exclusively on the merit of any goods or services acquired, we fail to recognize numerous intangible and emotional costs and benefits that must be examined before we can understand this consumption activity fully (Tauber,1972, Holbrook 1986, Babin et al, 1994). Kotler (1973) was one of first to recognize diversity in the retail bundle, rather than the product alone, when he stated, One of the most significant features of the total product is the place where it is bought or consumed. In some cases, the place is more influential than the product itself in the purchase decision (Kotler, 1973; cited in Diep and Sweeney, 2008). From a retailing perspective, Harnett (1998) emphasizes that, When retailers satisfy peoplebased needs, they are delivering value, which puts them in a much stronger position in the long term (Harnett, 1998; cited in Diep and Sweeney, 2008). Place is important in the extent to which it satisfies and facilitates needs. Stokols and Shumaker (1981) suggest that the degree to which a particular setting satisfies the needs and goals of an individual determines his or her judgment of its value. This value judgment regulates the frequency of usage of the place. While psychological factors of people determine the cognitive process of attachment to place, the needs of people establish the emotional and symbolic content of the bonds (Inalhan, 2006). The recent move toward treating the retail environment as a setting for delivering memorable, relevant, and valued experiences is spreading globally (Diep and Sweeney, 2008). Mall developers, along with facility managers, are attempting to allure customers by creating an

3 63 exciting shopping experience designed to attract and keep them at the mall (Cockerham, 1995; Wakefield and Baker, 1998). However, the development of new products and services should be based on a better understanding of customer needs and their shopping value within the context of behavioral setting (the shopping mall). Facility managers require this knowledge to develop strategies to differentiate from the competition. Wakefield and Barker (1998) say that consumer studies and marketing research have revealed that many consumers are apt to make a decision regarding where to shop on the basis of their attitude toward a mix of stores and the mall or shopping center environment (Finn and Louviere, 1990, 1996; Gentry and Burns, 1977). Yet, to date there have been limited empirical studies on way-finding and orientation in buildings, which are an important criteria for environmental behavior (Dogu and Erkip, 2000). Way-finding has been shown to be one of the most irritating aspects of the shopping process to the point that it negatively affects the people s general attitude towards the setting and likelihood of buying the items searched for (D Astous, 2000; Hackett et al., 1993). Shoppers way-finding is an increasingly important problem in the management of shopping malls (Chebat et al., 2005). It is an issue that is not considered sufficiently during the design process as well. O Neill and Jasper (1992) suggest that research carried out on consumer spatial cognition and way-finding can be better understood when it is analyzed in environment and behavior contexts. Therefore, this study addresses the factors that affect the way-finding behavior of individuals in a shopping mall and how people s behaviors are influenced by factors such as building configuration, spatial layout and architectural features of the shopping mall. This research differs with others in the sense that it is framed within the transactional paradigm of environmental psychology, which assumes the transactional unity of the bi-directional nature of environment and behavior relations. Within this study, environmental and behavioral relations are evaluated along four dimensions: (1) the degree to which research incorporates the notion of the physical environment, (2) the degree to which research addresses person-based (individual difference) variables, (3) the use of behavioral outcome measures, and (4) the relationship between those variables. The objectives of the study are: - to utilize the effect of the spatial layout and architectural features of the shopping malls on way-finding - to evaluate the specific characteristics of the way-finding processes and strategies followed by several types of shoppers (individual differences) -to evaluate consumer spatial behavior by understanding the way-finding experiences, space use, and needs of users and their relationship between patronage preferences of shopping malls.

4 64 This article includes the following sections: Following the introduction as the underlying basis of our study, the subsequent section details consumer behavior as demonstrated by previous studies, customer shopping values, and way-finding in shopping malls. Having examined the literature and identified the key areas of concern of our study, the next section introduces the comparative case study of the two shopping malls constructed within the same period of time in Kayseri, Turkey. The final section derives implications for research, design and managerial actions. 2. Literature review A review of consumer behavior research literature reflects its multifaceted nature (Babin et al., 1994). A number of theories of buying behavior have been postulated and considerable progress has been achieved in identifying the behavioral dimensions of buying. However, less is known about the determinants of consuming and shopping, which are also of substantial theoretical and managerial importance (Tauber, 1972). Having set the underlying basis of the study, this part addresses the previous studies on shopping setting (atmosphere), shopping motivations of shoppers, way-finding and consumer spatial behavior models, which are recognized as the determinants of shopping. 2.1 Shop atmospherics Consumers prefer to shop where they believe they will receive the most satisfaction and value from the store and the merchandise acquired (May, 1989). Kotler (1973) argues that, in their purchase decisions, people respond to more than just the tangible product or service and that elements of the store, such as store atmospherics, may be more influential than the product itself (Diep and Sweeney, 2008). Atmospherics, which involves the conscious design of an environment's space to influence shoppers (Kotler, 1973; Bitner, 1992), is typically conceptualized as a way to enhance shoppers' emotional responses, which are then expected to positively impact their attitudes, perceptions, and shopping behaviors (Bellizi and Hite, 1992; Chebat and Morrin, 2007) Substantial research in marketing has examined the impact of store atmospherics on retail store patronage (Baker et al.,2002; Turley and Chebat, 2002; Michona et al., 2005; Raajpoot et al.,2008). Previous research demonstrates how ambient conditions, including store layout, design and signage, and employee and customer appearance, evoke varying levels of emotions among patrons (Baker; Bitner and Darden, 1996), and that these emotions impact store shoppers' approach/avoidance behaviors (Donovan and Rossiter, 1982), willingness to buy (Baker et al.,1992); price perceptions (Grewal and Baker, 1994); perceived value (Babin et al., 1994); current period purchase behavior and customer satisfaction (Babin and Darden, 1996). Mall atmospherics can have significant effects on shoppers' perceptions, not only of their environment but also of the quality of products sold in the environment. Researchers recognize that the effect of

5 65 atmospheric on consumers perceptions is driven largely by cognitive rather than, or in addition to, affective mediational routes (Chebat and Morrin, 2007) 2.2 Shopping Values Baker et al. (2002) suggest that the most important role of a store is its ability to facilitate consumer shopping. Yet the goals of all shoppers are not the same. For some convenience shoppers, getting in and out of the store quickly and ease of finding the merchandise they seek may be very important, while for the more serious shoppers, information and demonstrations may be more critical (Raajpoot et al., 2008). Previous research supports the concept that shopping trips provide both hedonic and utilitarian value (e.g., Babin et al., 1994; Jones et al., 2006). While utilitarian shoppers focus mainly on completing a task of finding items in a rational and efficient way, hedonist shoppers primarily enjoy the very process of shopping. Utilitarian shoppers strategies are geared at solving problems efficiently, based on landmarks and/or other persons. Hedonist shoppers strategies are meant to enhance enjoyment through experiencing the shopping space and sensorial excitement. In this regard, the layout of the mall can act as a design cue that influences consumers' expectations of efficient movement through a store (Titus and Everett, 1995). 2.3 Way-finding Way-finding is defined by Passini (1977, 1984, 1995, 1996) as a multifaceted spatial problemsolving that is composed of three different processes: (1) Cognitive mapping is the process of acquiring, forming, and maintaining spatial information and spatial knowledge. This process leads to forming cognitive maps (2) Decision-making is the stage at which individuals make choices among the possible courses of action.(3) Decision-execution is the ultimate stage at which individuals transform their decision into actions. Since Passini s (1977, 1984, 1995, 1996) seminal studies, there have been number of studies examining the factors affecting way-finding. These factors have included the use of maps (Gerber and Kwan, 1994), subjects navigational aptitude (Holscher et al., 2007; Kato and Takeuchi, 2003), familiarity with the environment (Chebat et al., 2005; Holscher et al., 2007), the layout of the environment (Holscher et al., 2007) and way-finding in the context of shopping (Chebat et al., 2005; Dogu and Erkip, 2000; Titus and Everett, 1996). Findings from these studies have agreed with Passini s (1981, 1984) model, and have helped to identify the use of a number of additional way finding strategies (Gerber and Kwan, 1994; Holscher et al., 2007; Kato and Takeuchi, 2003; cited in Spiers and Maguire, 2008) Only a few of the consumer studies have explored the cognitive processes followed by shoppers in shopping environments (such as stores or shopping malls). Of particular importance are the

6 66 two studies by Titus and Everett (1996), which aim at understanding navigation processes in a supermarket, and Dogu and Erkip's (2000) study that focuses on the way-finding processes in a Turkish shopping mall. Titus and Everett (1995) make a series of theoretical propositions and suggest that way-finding processes could reflect shopping values, as defined by Babin et al. (1994). For Titus and Everett (1995), utilitarian shoppers use way-finding strategies differently from those of hedonist shoppers. The utilitarian shoppers are hypothesized by Titus and Everett (1995) to have specific behaviors, such as moving rapidly, not changing their way, not stopping, and limiting their contact with the environment to persons and things essential to their problem solving. On the other hand, hedonist shoppers are hypothesized to move more slowly, to stop frequently, and to change their routes. It may be argued that hedonist shoppers enjoy browsing through the stores, which enhances their experiential pleasure of shopping. Quite the opposite, the legibility of the environment affects the utilitarian shoppers strategies more than those of hedonist shoppers. This study proposes that individual differences, familiarity, and shopping values impact wayfinding processes and strategies. The preference of shoppers to shop is influenced by their wayfinding strategies. The methodology employed in the study aims at understanding this underresearched question, that of how shoppers find their way in malls and how way-finding contributes to the preferences of shopping malls. 2.4 E-B Models for predicting consumer behavior In the field of environmental psychology, environment and behavior models have a number of qualities that make them uniquely suited to conducting this research. Environmental psychology is an area of psychology that studies the transactions and interrelationships between experiences and actions of people with their socio-physical surroundings. This field studies how people perceive and interact with their environment, as well as examines the ways in which people can develop more compatible relationships with the environment (Russell and Snodgrass, 1987; Stokols and Altman, 1987; Cassidy, 1997; Bell, Fisher, Baum and Greene, 1990). Environmental psychology deals with environment at two different levels. On the one hand, environmental psychology is concerned with environments as the context of behavior. Our moods and behaviors are meaningful only if they can be understood in terms of their context. In this sense, the environmental features (affordances) are possibilities provided by an environment are strong determinants of behavior, such as you cannot sit unless there is a chair (Cassidy, 1997). At a second level, environmental psychology is also concerned with the consequences of behavior on the environment. Environmental psychology incorporates both of these levels of

7 67 environmental influence and in studying how people interact with specific concerns determines how environments influence people and how people influence environments (Cassidy, 1997). In an environment-behavior model, a relationship between objective features of the physical environment, the person (individual differences, perceived attributes of the environment, cognitive processes), and the outcome behaviors are specified (Figure 1) (O Neill and Jasper, 1992). Figure 1: Elements of the Environment-Behavior Model (taken from O Neill and Jasper, 1992) In their overview of models of consumer spatial behavior in the context of environmentbehavior paradigm, O Neill and Jasper (1992) point out that there is a lack of a larger framework (model) in which to understand the relationships between the variables (individual, environmental and psychological) on spatial cognition and way-finding. Specifically, a cognitive representation model that employs the notion of cognitive maps as a predictor of spatial behavior can be useful in examining mall selection (preference) and patronage as the outcome variable. The physical variables of shopping environment such as layout, gates, store atmospherics etc. are then determined and related to people s cognitive structure (cognitive maps) (Figure 2) Figure 2: The Cognitive Representation Model (taken from O Neill and Jasper, 1992)

8 68 Despite its problems, consumer spatial models have the potential of enhancing research on spatial cognition and way-finding. It has been suggested by O Neill and Jasper (1992) that spatial cognitive behavior models could be extended if additional explanatory variables taken from the consumer literature are incorporated. Therefore, this research addresses the influence of way-finding design on the shopping experience in shopping malls by broadening the model of spatial cognition and way-finding (the cognitive representation model) through the addition of variables (individual differencesuser shopping values) used in consumer research. It explicates the relationships between environmental, personal and behavioral variables acting on way-finding design. A better understanding of how way-finding design influences emotions and behavior may improve the knowledge on designing future shopping malls. In the next part, the research strategy and the methodology adopted for the research is explained and the field study is presented. 3. Research Design This study seeks to establish the role played by way-finding design principles on behavioral settings, the shopping experience of its users in shopping malls and users preferences of these facilities. A field study method was chosen in order to gain information directly from individuals within the retail shopping setting. As such, customers perceptions and feelings about the shopping environment (i.e., ambience, layout, & design), tenant variety (Dawson et al., 1990), shopping values (Babin et al., 1994) and their way finding strategies (Passini, 1977, 1996) were the focal points of the study. An opportunity arose to study two shopping malls that were constructed within the same period of time (in 2006) within the same neighborhood (same proximity) in Kayseri, Turkey. Although these two shopping malls have similar layout design and square footage, prior observations and chats with local people indicated that only one of them is considered favorably, leaving the other less visited. The comparative research study method can provide the opportunity for a field experiment, lead to fresh, exciting insights and a deeper understanding of issues that are of central concern in two different shopping malls frequency of usage and patronage. Therefore, these two shopping malls were chosen for a comparative research study in order to seek explanations for similarities and differences and assess diversity of users behaviors. The aim of such a comparative study was to identify and illuminate similarities and differences, not only in the observed characteristics of the selected shopping malls, but also in the search for possible explanations in terms of likeness and unlikeness and how these affect shoppers preference of shopping. The comparative research approach combines methods such as surveys, secondary analysis of data, and also personal observation and an interpretation of the findings in relation to their wider social contexts (Hantrais, 1995). In this research the consumer behavioral setting was examined in two parts: the features and the motivations of the users and the features belonging to space (spatial organization). These variables and their influence on each other were tested in a comparative study. Both quantitative and qualitative research methods were utilized in this

9 69 study. Quantitative research data were gathered by means of questionnaires to users of both shopping malls. We felt that it was important to cultivate an ability to recognize, listen, and respond to how the people feel about their environment and their experiences within the built environment; therefore, we used qualitative research data consisting of interviews with consumers, while behavioral mappings at both shopping malls were also introduced to the study Field Setting-Sample-Questionnaire In order to test the hypothesis, the shoppers were surveyed in two enclosed shopping mall (i.e., each containing three branch department stores with reduced square footage, a major discount store, and 20 smaller stores serving an immediate area of about 20,000 residents). These two malls represent the primary source of clothing, shoes and electronics within a 2-3 mile radius of the community. Data were collected from mall patrons during peak hours (11:30am -9:00pm weekdays; 10am- 6pm weekends) over the course of two weeks by a survey administrator located near the mall entrances. The survey administrator identified herself with the mall management. Overall, 100 surveys were collected and all of the items were completed and were therefore useable for the analysis. A three-part questionnaire was administered to the shoppers. The first part of the questionnaire consists of questions related to shoppers age, gender, educational level, and familiarity with the mall (frequency of their visits). The second part utilizes the shopping values scale developed by Babin et al. (1994), and adapted by Chebat et al., (2005). This scale is made up of ten attitudinal statements that reflect and measure the values that the shoppers of this study attribute to shopping in general, not specifically to the shopping trip involved in this study. In the third part a synthesis of attitudinal questions and behavioral questions are in the form of five-point scales labeled either strongly agrees to strongly disagrees. These aim of these questions is to measure attitudes towards specific way-finding issues (Passini, 1977, 1996) in the two shopping malls. 3.2 Observations-Behavioral Mapping-Cognitive Mapping The most frequently used methods in way-finding design are behavioral maps and cognitive maps. In the initial stage of the study, the observational data from behavioral maps are used for the purpose of description of settings, activities, people, and the meanings of what is observed from the perspective of the participants. It is important to acknowledge that observation is more than just recording of data from the environment; it also involves the interpretation of that sense data (Zeisel, 1981; 2006). However, as this study aims at understanding an underresearched question, that of how shoppers find their way in malls and what strategies they develop while navigating the mall, behavioral maps would be insufficient, since consumers would have difficulties expressing their behaviors and the consequences of their behavior

10 70 would thus go unnoticed. Therefore, shoppers were asked to produce their cognitive maps to us. Specifically, the shoppers were instructed to find a store predetermined by the researchers. They were further asked to describe their own behavior while finding that store within the mall. They were asked to express their actions and their thoughts at the very moment when they came to their mind. They were followed by the researcher throughout the process. More precisely, shoppers were asked: (1) to say what they are doing (e.g., I turn left ). (2) to say why they are doing what they decided to do (e.g., I made a mistake, I have to come back ). This approach focuses not on the observation of what shoppers do, but on all the thoughts that lead them to act as they do. For instance, simple observations cannot tell why shoppers decide to turn back, or what information they ask a passer-by. This method is also different than a selfreport after the fact, i.e., shoppers describe what they have done and thought to find their way once the whole way-finding process is over. These self-reports imply some problems, such as rationalization after the fact and loss of memory of certain steps in the process followed by shoppers (Chebat et al., 2005). 4. Conclusions The most important role of a store is its ability to facilitate consumer shopping (Baker et al., 2002). In order to generate the best shopping experience, every mall should provide something unique (Allard et al., 2009). Facility managers must seek ways to not only meet the consumer s objective and functional needs but also to enhance the purchasing experience by making the store a more enjoyable place to be. Way-finding and orientation in buildings can serve as tools for triggering the desired environmental behavior in shopping malls. Though the study is in its initial stages of data analysis, it is possible to draw some tentative, but potentially important, conclusions from this research. Way-finding is an important issue in the management of shopping malls. It deserves more attention from the shopping mall managers, since it directly affects the non-monetary costs of shopping (Chebat et al., 2005). The results of the study can offer facility managers of shopping malls a greater understanding of consumers perceived values in terms of products, stores, and the shopping experience and thus suggest new ways to make an overall shopping experience more experiential and exciting for customers by means of way-finding design. Thus understanding the experiences, space use, and needs of users may contribute to the user-centered facilities management, planning and design of spaces that function effectively, accommodate the wider user needs, reduce the time and stress in accessing those environments.

11 Limitations and directions for future research An essential part of way-finding is the development and use of a cognitive map. A cognitive map is a mental representation of an environment. It has been called a picture in the head although there is significant evidence that it is not purely based on imagery but rather has a symbolic quality (Darken and Peterson, 2001). Future studies can address this symbolic quality. The literature on way-finding is dominated by a cognitive problem-solving process, though it also involves an emotional relation with the environment. Some cues of the environment could be charged emotionally and affect the navigation process. The emotions triggered by wayfinding experience should also be taken into account. The sample size in this study precludes any generalization. Future studies could be undertaken in shopping malls with bigger samples where age and diversity of people (such as old and handicapped people) could be also varied. The experimental procedure used in the study imposes a limitation. The very fact of asking respondents to find a specific store puts them in a utilitarian attitude toward the trip to the mall. Future studies could develop a methodology that encompasses this bias. References Allard T, Babin B J and Chebat J C (2009) When income matters: Customers evaluation of shopping malls' hedonic and utilitarian orientations, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, (16): Ashley B (1997). "Are Malls in America's Future?" Arthur Andersen Retailing Issues Letter, 9 (6), Texas A&M University Center for Retailing Studies. Babin B J and Darden W R (1996) "Good and Bad Shopping Vibes: Spending and Patronage Satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, (35): Babin B J, Darden W R, and Griffin M (1994) "Work and/or Fun: Measuring Hedonic and Utilitarian Shopping Value," Journal of Consumer Research, (March): Baker J, Grewal D, and Levy M (1992). "An Experimental Approach to Making Retail Store Environmental Decisions," Journal of Retailing, 68 (Winter): Baker J, Parasuraman A, Grewal D and Voss G B (2002) The influence of multiple store environment cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions, Journal of Marketing; 66: Bell P, Fisher J, Baum A and Greene T. (1990), Environmental psychology, Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. Bellizi JA and Hite RE (1992) Environmental color, consumer feelings and purchase likelihood, Psychology of Marketing 9(5):

12 72 Bitner M J (1992) "Servicescapes: The Impact of Physical Surroundings on Customers and Employees," Journal of Marketing, 58 (April): Cassidy T (1997), Environmental Psychology, Taylor and Francis: Hove. Chandler S (1995) "Where Sears Wants America to Shop Now," Business Week,(June 12): 39. Chebat J C, Gelinas-Chebat C and Therrien K (2005) Lost in the mall, the effects of gender, familiarity with shopping mall and the shopping values on shoppers way finding processes, Journal of Business Research 58, Chebat J C, Morrin M, (2007) Colors and cultures: Exploring the effects of mall décor on consumer perceptions, Journal of Business Research (60): Cockerham P W (1995) "Homart Revives Virginia Mall with Renovation and Remarketing," Stores, (October): D Astous A (2000) Irritating aspects of the shopping environment, Journal of Business Research; 49: Darken R P and Peterson B. (2001). Spatial Orientation, Wayfinding, and Representation in Ed. Stanney, K. Handbook of Virtual Environment Technology. Dawson S, Bloch P H and Ridgway N M, (1990) Shopping Motives, Emotional States and Retail Outcomes. Journal of Retailing 22 Winter: Diep V C S, Sweeney J C (2008) Shopping trip value: Do stores and products matter? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services (15): Dogu U and Erkip F (2000) Spatial factors affecting wayfinding and orientation: a case study in a shopping mall. Environ Behav; 32(6): Donovan R J and Rossiter J R (1982) Store atmosphere: an environmental psychology approach. Journal of Retailing 58: Finn A and Louviere J (1990) "Shopping Center Patronage Models: Fashioning a Consideration Set Segmentation Solution," Journal of Business Research, 21 (November): Finn A and Louviere J (1996) "Shopping Center Image, Consideration, and Choice: Anchor Store Contribution," Journal of Business Research, 35 (March): Gentry J W and Burns A C ( ). "How 'Important' are Evaluative Criteria in Shopping Center Patronage?" Journal of Retailing, 53 (Winter): 73-86, 94. Gerber R and Kwan T (1994) A phenomenographical approach to the study of pre-adolescents use of maps in a wayfinding exercise in a suburban environment, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14, Grewal D and Baker J (1994) Do Retail Store Environmental Factors Affect Consumers' Price Acceptability? An Empirical Examination, International Journal of Research in Marketing,11.

13 73 Hackett P M W, Foxall G R and Van Raaij W F (1993) Consumer in retail environments, Environonment and Behavior; 27: Hantrais L (1995) Comparative Research Methods, in Social Research Update, Issue 13. Harnett M (1998) Shopper needs must be priority. Discount Store News 37 (May), Holbrook M B (1986) Emotion in the consumption experience: toward a new model of the human consumer. In: Peterson Robert A, Hoyer Wayne D, Wilson William R, editors. The role of affect in consumer behavior: emerging theories and applications, Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath. Holscher C, Meilinger T, Vrachliotis G, Brosamle M, and Knauff M (2007) Up the down staircase: Wayfinding strategies in multi-level buildings, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26(4): Inalhan G (2006) The role of place attachment on employees resistance to change in workplace accommodation projects, unpublished PhD thesis, Reading University, Reading. Jones M A, Reynolds K E and Arnold M J (2006) Hedonic and utilitarian shopping value: investigating differential effects on retail outcomes, Journal of Business Research 59: Kato Y and Takeuchi Y (2003) Individual differences in wayfinding strategies, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23: Kotler P (1973) Atmospherics as a marketing tool, Journal of Retailing, 49: Kowinski W S (1985) The Mailing of America. New York: William Morrow and Company Inc. May E G (1989) A retail odyssey, Journal of Retailing 65 (3): Michon R, Chebat J C, Turley L W (2005) Mall atmospherics: the interaction effects of the mall environment on shopping behavior, Journal of Business Research 58: O Neill M J and Jasper C R (1992) An evaluation of models of consumer spatial behavior using the environment-behavior paradigm, Environment and Behavior, 24, Passini R E (1977) Wayfinding: a study of spatial problem solving with implications for physical design, unpublished PhD thesis, The Pennsylvania State University, Environmental Science, USA. Passini R (1984). Wayfinding in architecture. New York: Van Nostrand Rienhold. Passini R (1995). Spatial representations: A wayfinding perspective. In T. Garling (Ed.), Urban Cognition (pp ). London: Academic Press. Passini R (1996) Wayfinding design: Logic, application and some thoughts on universality, Design Studies, 17, Raajpoot N A, Sharma A, Chebat J C (2008) The role of gender and work status in shopping center patronage, Journal of Business Research (61)

14 74 Russell J A and Snodgrass J (1987), Emotion and the environment, In D. Stokols and I. Altman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology, Toronto: John Wiley and Sons. Spiers H J and Maguire E A (2008) The dynamic nature of cognition during wayfinding, Journal of Environmental Psychology 28: Stokols D and Altman I (Eds.) (1987), Handbook of environmental psychology,volume 1 and 2. New York: Wiley (Reprinted by Krieger Publishing Company: Malabar, FL, 1991). Stokols D and Shumaker S A (1981), People In Places: A Transactional View of Settings, In J. Harvey (Ed.), Cognition, Social Behaviour And Environment, Hillsdale,Nj:Erlbaum. Tauber E M (1972) Why do people shop? Journal of Marketing 36: Templin N (1997) "Mall Designer is Master of (Ersatz) Regional Flavor," The Wall Street Journal, (December 31): B1. Titus P A and Everett P B (1995) "The Consumer Retail Search Process: A Conceptual Model and Research Agenda," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23 (2): Titus P A and Everett P B (1996) Consumer wayfinding tasks, strategies, and errors: an exploratory field study, Psychology of Marketing, 13(3): Turley L W and Chebat J C (2002) Linking retail strategy, atmospheric design and shopping behaviour. Journal of Marketing Management189 (1/2): Wakefield K L and Baker J (1998) Excitement at the mall: determinants and effects on shopping response, Journal of Retailing, 74 (4). Zeisel J (1981) Inquiry by design, Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Zeisel J (2006) Inquiry by design, revised edition, W. W. Norton and Company Inc, New York.