JOURNAL OF CURRENT RESEARCH IN SCIENCE ISSN 2322-5009 CODEN (USA): JCRSDJ Available at www.jcrs010.com JCRS S (1), 2016: 305-311 The Impact of store atmosphere on hedonic and utilitarian shopping values, customer satisfaction and customer purchase intention Saeed Gholami*, Niousha Dehbini, Atefeh Shekari Department of Commercial Management, Yasooj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Yasooj, Iran *Corresponding Authors Eemail: 1.Gholami.mmu@gmail.com K E Y W O R D S: Store atmosphere, Hedonic shopping value, Utilitarian shopping value, Satisfaction, Purchase intention ABSTRACT: In order to create the best shopping experience, each center should offer unique things to the customer. This means that in today's competitive market, good location of shopping center, don't guarantee success. Some shopping centers to attract customers for coming to shopping center try to be different from the competitors. The purpose of this study is investigating the impact of store atmosphere on hedonic and utilitarian shopping values, customer satisfaction and customer purchase intention. Data analysis has been done by the SPSS 22 and LISREL 8.8 software. In this study, researchers have used non-probability random sampling, the selecting data tool of this research was the questionnaire. The participants were citizens of Shiraz who buy products from Hyper Star store. The results of this research revealed that store atmosphere has significant effect on hedonic and utilitarian shopping values, hedonic and utilitarian shopping values has significant effect on customer satisfaction and purchase intention. Introduction Consumer behavior refers to behaviors of consumers to search, purchase, use, evaluation and refuses the goods and services that they needed. Consumer behavior study how people decide to spend resources (Time, money, effort) in the related items of consumption (Schiffman and kanuk, 2014). Understanding consumers and consumption process, are included various sources. These benefits include the following. To help managers in their decision making, offering an available knowledge base to marketing researchers, to analyze consumers, help legislators and regulators to establish rules related to the purchase of goods and services and finally help consumers to make better decisions for their purchase. Moreover, studying consumers can help us to understand those social factors that affect human behavior (Mowen and Minor, 2014). Key factor for market developers is that guarantees any shopping center in their portfolios; they know that relation with customer is their original purpose. The developers of shopping centers and retailers know that support shopping centers by the customer, determined by shopping experience from the shopping center. Shopping value is a concept that reflects the general concepts that derived from the shopping experience and satisfaction (Jackson et al., 2011). In order to create the best shopping experience, each center should offer unique things to the customer. This means that in today's competitive market, good location of shopping center, don't guarantee success. Lack of differentiation in the minds of customers, already is a problem in this industry. Despite of known extensive information, shopping centers often offer the same goods and services. However, some of them, for attracting customers, note to the issue of differentiation from competitors by putting a shopping center on the other purpose (Allard et al., 2009). Many studies have been done in the area of customer shopping values. In Iran, most of the researches have been done to assess the impact of the shopping value on loyalty, customer satisfaction and purchase intention. According to opening of large shopping centers in Iran and shops that offer all the goods required by the client, the problem is that store atmosphere, hedonic and utilitarian shopping value due to the different tastes of buyers, how much can lead to customer satisfaction and purchase intention of shopping centers and a long-term relationship with the customer and store. Shiraz Hyper Star as the first store provider of different products has started its work from three years ago in Shiraz and during this time with a variety of products and offer different products and customer's requirements with cheaper prices could attract customer satisfaction. According to the research of Chebat and Colleagues (2014) that examined the impact of store atmosphere on the shopping value. In this study, we plan to investigate following items by conceptual model (1) the impact of the store atmosphere (Sort shelves, music, color etc.) on hedonic and utilitarian shopping values, separately (2) the impact of hedonic and utilitarian shopping values to customer satisfaction and (3) the impact of customer satisfaction on customer purchase intention in Shiraz. This research compared to the research of Chebat et al., (2014) that select 256 samples for before and after the correction and revision, in this research we select larger sample to reduce the sampling error.
Literature review Many studies for definition of "value" have been done by researchers. Review the previous studies, define its multifaceted nature (Babin et al., 1994). Zeithamel (1988), Knows the value, price. It also defines the relationship between cost and profit. Dodds and Monroe (1985) and Dodds et al., (1991), define the value as customer understands of quality, dedication and knows the product nature. Schechter (1984), knows value as all factors including quantitative and qualitative, subjective and objective that creates the perfect shopping experience. So, the value defines "perfect shopping experience", not only the profits of products (Babin et al., 1994). The type of consumer experience of purchasing is a twoway spectral that one side is "Buy as a duty and obligation" and the other side is "Shopping as fun". This represents a significant difference in the experience of consumers based on the "utilitarian" and "hedonic" (Babin et al., 1994). The difference between the two hedonic and utilitarian values is as follows: "The distinction is between the two actions" get something "versus" love it ". As well as other behaviors, the two values are also useful in defining a fantastic shopping. Utilitarian value reflects shopping with a mental conflict. Hedonic shopping values have been less studied. This value is more subjective and more recreation and entertainment (Holbrook and Hirschmann, 1982). Babin et al., (1994), Knows the utilitarian behavior as task-oriented and intellectual behavior. They believe that people, who have utilitarian shopping values, usually know buying the product as a task and activity which should be done in the best way and the most output for them. Langrehr (1991) defines Hedonic values as "buying items that may be totally by chance, People buy so they can shop, NOT shop so they can buy". Hedonic value compared to utilitarian is more personal and it concerns the features and characteristics of each person. People who have hedonic shopping value further that they pay attention to efficiency and profitability of buying, they care about its fun and enjoyable and look at it as a game or entertainment (Babin et al., 1994). Hedonic behavior compared to utilitarian behavior is studied less. Oliver in 1980, applied this theory to the study of consumer satisfaction by arguing that expectations about product performance can be seen as an adaptation level. He suggested that expectations create a frame of reference for comparative judgments. This model claims that the attitude about a shopping experience, such as products and services, creates from expectations in the minds of consumers. Consumers after purchasing or using Products and Services, evaluate them compared to their initial expectations. The result of this assessment is satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Satisfaction leads to positive attitude from the shopping experience of products or services and can have a positive impact on the customer's next purchase intention and dissatisfaction leads to negative attitudes and can affect future customer's purchase intention (Carpenter, 2008). Many researches emphasized on the relationship between the value of purchase and satisfaction. Some studies have shown that both the utilitarian and hedonic shopping values, effect on customer satisfaction (Chebat et al., 2014). Ryu et al. (2010) and Nejati (2013) in their research showed both the utilitarian and hedonic shopping values, effect on customer satisfaction and also have a direct impact on the customer's purchase intention. Also they showed that the impact of utilitarian value compared to hedonic value is more affective on consumer purchase intention. Carpenter (2008) showed the relationship between hedonic and utilitarian values with satisfaction and loyalty. Chang and Fang (2012) showed that in stores, hedonic values have more effect on customer satisfaction than utilitarian values. Babin et al. (2007), concluded that utilitarian values in buy gifts stores have greater impact on customer satisfaction than hedonic values. Chebat et al. (2014), showed that the shopping value have an indirectly effect on store atmosphere and customer satisfaction. According to the above, hypothesis can be suggested that hedonic and utilitarian shopping values have significant impact on customer satisfaction. Various theories have been proposed in the field of environmental psychology that has claimed behavioral effects from the environmental stimuli caused (Fisher, 1972; Stokols, 1972). Environmental psychology theory was proposed in 1974 by Mehrabian and Russell, said that store atmosphere, effect on mood of buyers and their behavioral goals. The theory that based on emotional change shows behavior in two opposite forms: 1. Approach 2. Avoidance. Attitude, tend to stay longer and explore the places and avoid just opposite point of attitude. Chbat and Michon (2003) and Spangenberg et al. (1996) showed that the store atmosphere has a direct impact on individual perceptions. Theory of cognitive emotions, including interior and exteriour signs, Lazarus (1991) said that, it should be evaluated by personal experience and goals. Also Bitner (1992) Said that people first understand the community environment and then by inferencing and understanding more, respond to the biological reactions. Fiore and Ogle (2000) argued that the quality and store symbol and its environment, in both cognitive aesthetic and functional values in both aesthetic and functional value, give different message to the consumers. Buyer's perception of the store environment can affect their behavior and shopping experience and cause a long-term relationship between customer and store (Stoel et al. 2004). Stores atmosphere is the base of customer's evaluation of store production (Baker et al., 1994). Research shows that environmental cues include physical aspects, such as lighting, color, music and... and social bookmarking, including employee s intimacy and store crowded typically affect customer behavior and purchase intention also in consumer perceptions and understanding of the retail environment, affect the quality of products (Michon et al., 2008). According to the above, it can be hypothesized that a variety of factors such as environmental conditions and understanding and purpose in and of itself will cause predictable behavior. Also physical condition of the store, the only a necessary condition for predicting perception and response to environmental stimuli and is not sufficient (Fisher, 1974). According to the above, it can be hypothesized that the store atmosphere has a significant impact on hedonic and utilitarian values. 306
Rintamäki et al. (2006), in their model, devide the buyer values into 3 categories, hedonic, utilitarian and socially and concluded that social values during the days of the week is different such that on Saturdays compared to other days, the stores more crowded and there is no significant difference between hedonic and utilitarian values. Kang and Poaps (2010), said that innovation in fashion, has significant effect on hedonic and utilitarian shopping motivations and also leader opinion's in fashion has significant relationship with utilitarian shopping motivations. Jones et al. (2006) in their results, they reached wider approach of relationship between hedonic and utilitarian shopping values. They achieved to the complex interaction between the retailer's satisfaction, hedonic and utilitarian values and their consequences on the retail. Both hedonic and utilitarian values have a key role on retailers. These two values are as the mediator between satisfaction and outcomes retailer. Nguyen et al. (2007) showed that hedonic and utilitarian shopping values have positive impact on customer loyalty and also these values are different among young and middle aged but there is no significant difference between men and women. Jackson et al. (2011) in their study concluded that the difference between hedonic and utilitarian values don't exist in different generations. But there is no significant difference between cleanliness and environmental factors, and store entertainment and women in their shopping decide based on hedonic values and women pay more attention to cleanliness, environmental factors and store entertainment than men. Heidarzadeh and Khonsari (2011) in their research showed that in fast-food restaurants hedonic and utilitarian shopping values are equally affect customer satisfaction and purchase intention. The purpose of the study of Anderson et al. (2014) was that measure the impact of hedonic and utilitarian shopping values on customer loyalty and purchase intention. They showed that these values influence on customer purchase intention. According to the above, it can be hypothesized that customer satisfaction has a significant impact on purchase intention. According to the literature review conceptual model presents. Hedonic shopping Store atmosphere Satisfaction Purchase intention Utilitarian shopping Figure 1.Conceptual Model Methodology Research purpose is an important thing, which should be considered. The main objective of the most researches in social sciences is to investigate a field study that can be said that the aim of this research is in the area of applied researches. Considering that in this research used field study, such as questionnaires, it can be said that the present study, based on the nature and methods of data collection is a descriptive study. Zone territory of this study is Shiraz city and time territory is June and July 2015. Population and Sample: Population of this study is people who have gone to the hyper star market in Shiraz. Because of population size is unknown, the sample size was calculated from the formula Cochran and we got 384 from formula. As expected, some questionnaires not return to the researcher, 420 questionnaires were distributed. The method of sampling of this study is random. Collecting data method: Methods of data collection were field study. In this study, after reviewing similar models, conceptual models based on Chebat et al (2014) model, presented. Based on research model and variables, a questionnaire was distributed among the participants. From 420 questionnaires that distributed, 414 questionnaires were returned to the researcher that 410 questionnaires were valid. The questionnaire included 5 questions about personal information of respondents and 18 main questions. Questions were closed questions based on 5 Likert scales that each spectrum includes strongly agree, agree, no idea, disagree and strongly disagree. Table 1.Questionnaire info Variables Index no. Source Scales 1 Store atmosphere 6 Fisher, 1974 5 Likert scales 2 Hedonic values 4 Babin et al., 1994 5 Likert scales 3 Utilitarian values 3 Babin et al., 1994 5 Likert scales 4 Satisfaction 3 Maxhum et al., 2002 5 Likert scales 5 Purchase intention 2 Kim et al., 2008 5 Likert scales 307
Reliability implies that the measuring instrument in the same conditions gives the same results (khaki, 2003). Cronbach's alpha was used to assess the reliability of the questionnaire. Cronbach's alpha for 410 questionnaires was 0.842, and for all factors were greater than 0.8, which shows the reliability of the questionnaire. To evaluate the validity, we used content validity. Data analysis In this research for data analysis, descriptive and inferential statistics to test the hypothesis we used Spss 22 and Lisrel 8.8. Descriptive statistics include frequency tables and for inferential level used structural equation modeling like confirmatory factor analysis and path analysis. Descriptive statistics for demographic variables showed that women more than men come to the store to buy and mostly in the age of 25 to 34 years. The highest frequency is allocated to the secondary school level. Married people more than single people come to buy in the store and the majority of people are employed. Structural equation modeling is a comprehensive statistical approach to test hypotheses about the relationship between observed and latent variables. Through this approach, we can test the acceptability of theoretical models. In this study, for testing data analysis and hypothesis, the structural equation modeling was used. Structural equation modeling can be divided to two-phase measurement model (confirmatory factor analysis) and structural model (path analysis). In the measurement, questions of questionnaire will be studied. And in the structure section, factor relation with each other to test the hypothesis, considered (Nakhaei and Kheiry, 2012). Cronbach's alpha values calculated for questions related to store atmosphere 0.814, hedonic values 0.796, utilitarian values 0.758, satisfaction 0.885 and purchase intention 0.776. The results show the reliability of questionnaire's questions. Factor loading is a value between zero and one. If the factor loading is less than 0.3, relation is poor and canceled. Factor loading between 0.3 to 0.6 is acceptable and if it is greater than 0.6 is very desirable. Results showed that factor loadings of all indexes were greater than 0.3, and it suggests the relationship is acceptable. The questionnaire, factor loading analysis and Cronbach's alpha of each variable are given in Table 2. Cronbach's alpha Atmosphere Not lively - lively Dull - bright Drab - colorful 0.814 Depressing - cheerful Uninteresting - interesting Boring - Stimulating Hedonic values This shopping trip was truly a joy. I enjoyed being immersed in exciting new products. This shopping trip truly felt like an 0.796 escape. Compared with other things I could have done, the time spent shopping was truly enjoyable. Utilitarian values I accomplished just what I wanted to on this shopping trip. While shopping I found just the item (s) I 0.758 was looking for. I couldn't buy what I really needed. Satisfaction I am satisfied with this mall. This mall is a good place to shop. 0.885 I would recommend this mall to my friends. Intention to buy I suggest buying from this store to others. 0.776 I will come to this store future. Factor loading 0.60 0.42 0.52 0.68 0.76 0.61 0.70 0.68 0.60 0.49 0.32 0.37 0.53 0.58 0.71 0.74 0.58 0.65 From of fitness indexes used for determining the suitability of the model. The results of the testing with RMSEA = 0.086, CFI = 0.91 and GFI = 0.91 showed that the pattern used is in good condition and correspond to the conceptual model. 308
Figure 2. Research fitted model The results of testing hypotheses Hypothesis H1 Atmosphere Hedonic values H2 Atmosphere Utilitarian values H3 Utilitarian values Satisfaction H4 Hedonic values Satisfaction H5 Satisfaction Intention to buy Table 3 β 0.64 0.36 2.28-0.24 0.86 t-value 8.52 4.40 4.12-3.04 7.76 H1: Store atmosphere has a significant impact on the hedonic values. Effect of store atmosphere on hedonic values is 0.64 and the value of t for this hypothesis is 8.52. Since the value of t is larger than 1.96, the null hypothesis is rejected, opposite hypothesis is accepted. The store atmosphere has significant and direct impact on hedonic values. Therefore, whatever the store atmosphere is more attractive in terms of customers, their hedonic values, has the highest influence. H2: Store atmosphere has a significant impact on the utilitarian value. Effect of store atmosphere on utilitarian values is 0.36 and the value of t for this hypothesis is 4.4. Since the value of t is larger than 1.96, the null hypothesis is rejected, opposite hypothesis is accepted. The store atmosphere has significant and direct impact on utilitarian values. Therefore, whatever the store atmosphere is more attractive in terms of customers, their utilitarian values, has the highest influence. H3: Utilitarian values have a significant impact on customer satisfaction. Effect of utilitarian values on customer satisfaction is 2.28 and the value of t for this hypothesis is 4.12. Since the value of t is larger than 1.96, the null hypothesis is rejected, opposite hypothesis is accepted. The utilitarian values have significant and direct impact on customer satisfaction. Therefore, whatever the utilitarian values is more attractive in terms of customers, their satisfaction, has the highest influence. H4: Hedonic values have a significant impact on customer satisfaction. Effect of hedonic values on customer satisfaction is -0.28 and the value of t for this hypothesis is -3.04. Since the value of t is larger than 1.96, the null hypothesis is rejected, opposite hypothesis is accepted. The hedonic values have significant and indirect impact on customer satisfaction. Therefore, whatever the hedonic values is more attractive in terms of customers, their hedonic value, has the lowest influence. 309
H5: Customer satisfaction has a significant impact on customer purchase intention. Effect of customer satisfaction on customer purchase intention is 0.86 and the value of t for this hypothesis is 7.76. Since the value of t is larger than 1.96, the null hypothesis is rejected, opposite hypothesis is accepted. The customer satisfaction has significant and direct impact on customer purchase intention. Therefore, whatever the customer satisfaction is more attractive in terms of customers, their customer purchase intention, has the highest influence. Conclusion Due to the expansion of shopping centers in Iran, that often have coffee shops, fast food, restaurant and amusement park, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of the store atmosphere on utilitarian and hedonic shopping values, customer satisfaction and purchase intention. The results are consistent with research Chebat et al. (2014), Ryu et al. (2009), Nejati and Parakhodi Moghaddam (2013), Babin et al. (2007) and Carpenter (2008) showed that the utilitarian values have significant and direct impact on customer satisfaction. Contrary to research Chang and Fang (2012), which concluded in stores hedonic values have more impact on customer satisfaction, the results of this research showed that the hedonic value has significant and indirect impact on customer satisfaction. Also this research reached to the same result to the study of Chebat et al. (2014) and Michon et al. (2008) and showed that the store atmosphere has significant impact on customer perception and hedonic shopping value and utilitarian value. Result of the research of Nguyen and Barrett (2006), Heidarzadeh and Khonsary (2011) showed that utilitarian values and hedonic values have significant impact on purchase intention. Limitations and Recommendations Noncooperation by some respondents to answer the questionnaire, is a limitation in most marketing research and in future research could be important for researchers. So to increase tend rates to respond and participate respondents in the process of research, we can offer incentives such as offering discounts and free product samples. According to time constraints, selected sample of 410 people, including people who are shopping in Hyper Star store. It is expected that in future research larger population, including customers shopping other, is selected. And also research can be carried out simultaneously in several shopping centers and compared their results. According to the relationship between culture and marketing, also role of hedonic and utilitarian shopping values can be done in culture like that indicated in Ryu et al. (2009) study. Due to increasing number of questions, other factors that could affect the shopping values, customer satisfaction and purchase intention impact, could not be reviewed. For this reason, it is recommended that in future studies the impact of other factors such as brand equity, price, quality, advertising, demographic variables and on the shopping values is processed to obtain a more complete results. Due to time limitation on this study, it is suggested in future studies, study the impact of shopping values in other stores and shopping malls. Managerial Implications According to the first and second hypothesis that store atmosphere has a significant effect on hedonic and utilitarian shopping values, following suggestions are offered: Since the hedonic values customer focus more on emotions and motivation, it is recommended that in stores, store environments be attractive, use cheerful colors and light music that can influence customer perceptions of store and shopping values. Also in stores, in addition to the impact on consumer emotions and motivation, it is better offer products that have highest efficiency for the customers and managers can create the appropriate atmosphere and interesting for customers that could involve all tastes and prompt customer's excitement and emotions so that customers enjoy their shopping in the store. According to the third and fourth hypothesis that hedonic and utilitarian shopping values have significant impact on customer satisfaction, the following suggestions are offered: Shops should attempt, in addition of offering products that affect customer emotions, offer efficient products that cause highest customer satisfaction to make a positive impact on both shopping values that ultimately leads to customer satisfaction. However, managers should note that shopping values are not the only factor that affecting customer satisfaction and they beside to taking these two values must consider other factors that affect direct and indirect impact on both shopping values factors that influence satisfaction. Also according to the fifth hypothesis that satisfaction has a significant influence on customer purchase intention, the following suggestions are offered: Stores with providing service quality to customers can make a long-term relationship and satisfy customers in all their shopping experience. This loyalty will cause people visit to purchase from this store in their next shopping and even offer to others. Satisfy customer will lead to store success. Administrators can provide promotional activities, such as sales promotion, formal and informal discounts, discount coupons and applying appropriate pricing strategies that can bring the customer for repurchase to the store. The conceptual model and its theories can be examined in future research in different populations. The results of the hypotheses could be avenue for managers in the areas of marketing, consumer behavior, industrial marketing and etc. References Abdolvand MA, Jani M. 2012. Investigation the Effects of Consumer Shopping Value on Satisfaction,Loyalty, Word of Mouth and Share of Purchase. Journal of Management, No. 27. Allard Th, Babin BJ, Chebat J. 2009. When income matters: customer s evaluation of shopping malls' hedonic and utilitarian orientations. Journal of retailing & consumer services, No. 16, pp 40-49. 310
Anderson K, Knight DK, Pookulangara S, Josiam B. 2014. Influence of hedonic and utilitarian motivations on retailer loyalty and purchase intention:a facebook perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, pp 773 779. Babin BJ, Darden WR, Griffin M. 1994. Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research, No. 20, pp 644-656. Babin BJ, Gonzalez C, Watts C. 2007. Does Santa have a great job? Gift shopping value and satisfaction. Psychology and Marketing, pp 895 917. Baker J, Grewal D, Parasuraman A. 1994. The influence of store environment on quality inferences and store image. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22, pp. 328-39. Bitner MJ.1992. Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, pp. 57-71. Carpenter JM. 2008. Consumer shopping value, satisfaction and loyalty in discount retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, No. 15, pp 358 363. Chang HH, Fang W.2012. The effects of shopping value on retail outcomes: a comparison between department stores and hypermarkets. The Service Industries Journal, Vol 32, Issue 14, pp 2249-2263. Chebat J, Michon R, Haj-Salem N, Oliviera S.2014. The effects of mall renovation on shopping values,satisfaction and spending behaviour. Journal of retailing and consumer services, No. 21, pp 610-618. Chebat JC, Michon R. 2003. Impact of Ambient Odors on Mall Shoppers' Emotions, Cognition and Spending: A Test of Competitive Causal Theories. Journal of Business Research, pp 529-539. Dodds WB, Monroe KB, Grewal D.1991. Effect of Price, Brand, and Store Information on Buyers' Product Evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, pp 307-319. Dodds WB, Monroe KB. 1985. The Effect of Brand and Price Information on Subjective Product Evaluations. in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol.12. Fiore AM, Ogle JP. 2000. Facilitating the integration of textiles and clothing subject matter by students. Part I: dimensions of model and taxonomy. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 31-45. Fisher JD.1974. Situation-Specific Variables as Determinants of Perceived Environmental Aesthetic Quality and Perceived Crowdedness. Journal Of Research In Personality, Pp 177-188. Fisher S. 1972. A distraction effect of noise brusts, perception. pp 233-236. Heidarzadeh Hanzaee K, Khonsari Y.2011A Review Of The Role Of Hedonic And Utilitarian Values On Customer s Satisfaction And Behavioral Intentions (A case study; customers of Fasham restaurants). Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business,Vol 1, pp 34-45. Holbrook M, Hirschmann EC. 1982. The experiental aspects of consumption: consumer fantasies, feeling and fun. Journal of consumer research, No. 2, pp 132-140. Jackson V, Stoel L, Brantley A. 2011. Mall, attributes and shopping value: differences by gender and generational cohort. Journal of retailing and consumer services, No. 18, pp 1-9. Jones MA, Reynolds KE, Arnold MJ. (2006. Hedonic and utilitarian shopping value: Investigating differential effects on retail outcomes. Journal of Business Research, No 59, 974 981. Kang J, Poaps HP. 2010. Hedonic and utilitarian shopping motivations of fashion leadership. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 14, pp 312-328. Khaki Gh. 2003. Research Methods With the approach of the dissertation. Tehran, Baztab pub. Kim Dan J, Ferriin Donald L, Rao H. Raghav. 2008. A trust-based consumer decision making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust and perceived risk, and their antecedents. Journal of decision support system, pp 544-564. Langrehr FW.1991. Retail Shopping Mall Semiotics and Hedonic Consumption. in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 18. Lazarus RS. 1991. Emotion and adaptation. Oxford,UK: Oxford University Press. Maxham III JG, Netemeyer RG. 2002. A longitudinal study of complaining customers' evaluations of multiple service failures and recovery efforts. Journal of Marketing 66 (4), 57-71. Mehrabian A, Russell JA. 1974. An approach to environmental psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Michon R, Yu H, Smith D, Chebat JC.2008. The influence of mall environment on female fashion shoppers' value and behaviour. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 12 Iss 4 pp. 456 468. Mowen J, Minor M. 2014. Consumer behavior: a framework. Translated By Heidarzade, K., Mehraban Pub. Nakhaei A, Kheiry B.2012. Investigating the Impact of Selected Factors on Consumer Green Purchase Intention. Journal of Marketing management, No 15. Nejati M, Parakhodi Moghaddam P. 2013. The effect of hedonic and utilitarian values on satisfaction and behavioural intentions for dining in fast-casual restaurants in Iran. British Food Journal, Vol. 115, pp. 1583 1596. Nguyen TTM, Nguyen Th D, Barrett NJ.2007. Hedonic shopping motivations, supermarket attributes, and shopper loyalty in transitional markets. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, No. 3, pp 227-239. Oliver RL. 1980. A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, No 17, 460 469. Rintamäki T, Kanto A, Kuusela H, Spence MT. 2006. Decomposing the value of department store shopping into utilitarian, hedonic and social dimensions. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 34, Iss 1, pp 6 24. Ryu K, Han H, Jang S. 2010. Relationships among hedonic and utilitarian values, satisfaction and behavioral intentions in the fast-casual restaurant industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, No. 3, pp 416-432. Schechter L. 1984. A Normative Conception of Value. Progressive Grocer, executive report, pp 12-14. Schiffman LG, kanuk LL.2014. Consumer Behavior. Translated by Karami, M. And Pourian, Sh., Mehraban Pub. Spangenberg ER, Crowley SE, Henderson PW. 1996. Improving the store environment: do olfactory cues affect evaluations and behavior? Journal of Marketing, pp 67 80. Stoel L, Wickliffe V, Lee KH.2004. Attribute beliefs and spending as antecedents to shopping value. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 57, pp. 1067-1073. Stokols D. 1972. On the distinction between density and crowding: Some implications for future research. Psychological Review, pp 275-277. Triandis HC.1977. Interpersonal Behaviour. Monterey, C.A: Brook/Cole. Zeithamel V. 1988. Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, No 3, pp 2-22. 311