Proceedings of Annual Paris Business and Social Science Research Conference
7 - 8 August 2014, Hotel Crowne Plaza Republique, Paris, France, ISBN: 978-1-922069-57-3
Hedonic Behavior in Middle Income Society in Indonesia
Permata Wulandari1, Iin Mayasari2, Muthia Pramesti3 and Niken Iwani
Surya Putri4 *
Hedonic behavior is individual’s intensity to get his/her own happiness by
purchasing goods, not being utilized as the functional purpose (Dhar &
Wertenbroch, 2000). Chitturi (2003) argued that individual has choice to
purchase on functional as well as hedonic purpose. In general, functional
product will be purchased earlier than hedonic product due to its necessity,
compared to secondary and luxurious goods. When consumer purchases
goods with hedonic purpose, they will ignore functional purpose, and more
rely on emotional involvement. In another word, hedonic products have a
positive emotional attributes. Consumers tend to follow social community
among the materialistic society. The successful symbol was practically
measured by their belonging. Promotion, such as: big discount, are often
campaigned by retailers to increase its market demand. Most of them are
consumer goods. Consumption pattern is becoming a part of consumer
lifestyle. Active promotion, offering by various goods, might increase their
desire to consume as symbolic status. In consequence, consumers tend to
be a high consumerism on their lifestyle. Most of their spending is much on
secondary and luxurious goods.
The problem formulation of this paper is to analyze hedonic behavior in the
following aspects:
1) Does optimum stimulation aspect influence to the hedonic behavior?
2) Does materialism aspect influence to the hedonic behavior?
3) Does the need of uniqueness aspect influence to the hedonic behavior?
4) Does the seeking of experience aspect influence to the hedonic behavior
5) Does brand credibility aspect influence to the hedonic behavior
6) Does sales promotion aspect influence to the hedonic behavior
7) Does religiosity aspect influence to the hedonic behavior
Research model includes several constectual aspects. The picture of several
constectual aspects that involved in this research :
________________________________________________________
1
Department of Management, University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Email: permata.w@gmail.com
Department of Management, University of Paramadina, Jakarta, Email: muthia.pramesti@gmail.com
3
Department of Management, University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Email: iin.mayasari@paramadina.ac.id
4
Department of Management, University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Email: nikenputrinix@gmail.com
2
Proceedings of Annual Paris Business and Social Science Research Conference
7 - 8 August 2014, Hotel Crowne Plaza Republique, Paris, France, ISBN: 978-1-922069-57-3
Optimum
Stimulation
Materialism
Sales Promotion
Hedonic
Behaviour
Brand Credibility
Gaining Experience
Point
Distinguish yourself
Religiosity
The number of respondents in this study was 303 respondents around Jakarta,
Bogor, Depok, Tanggerang and Bekasi area (Indonesia). To begin the research, data
collection is conducted by distributing questionnaires toward workers as
respondents. Method used for gathering sample is purposive sampling, while it aims
to gain better understanding of consumer in a regular pattern. To do this nonprobability sampling, respondent must meet several criteria, such as: (1) has
frequently buying some secondary or luxurious goods at least once in 6 months (2)
Age is above 17 years old; (3) an individual with open and like to be different
among others. Sampling scale is between 1-4. S1 (Strongly Disagree); 2 (Disagree);
3 (Agree) and 4 (Strongly Agree). If respondent choose mostly on 3 and 4, so they
will categorized as individual who are opened to new things. It is aligned with
consumer’s tendency to act as hedonic behavior.
Table regression analysis shows that not all variables have significant
influences on hedonic behavior. Based on the regression analysis, only optimum
stimulation level, materialism, sales promotion and experience, have significance
with α 0.1. It means that the promotion has the important determinant for hedonic
behavior. This analysis shows that hedonic behavior is mostly influenced by optimum
stimulation level, materialism, sales promotion and experience.
Proceedings of Annual Paris Business and Social Science Research Conference
7 - 8 August 2014, Hotel Crowne Plaza Republique, Paris, France, ISBN: 978-1-922069-57-3
No
1
Table Regression Analysis
Variable
Beta
Coefficient t
Optimum Stimulation Level
0.084
1.928
2
Materialism
0.260
5.580
3
Sales promotion
0.253
5.143
4
Brand credibility
0.070
1.062
5
Experience
0.326
4.068
6
Need for uniqueness
0.105
1.594
7
Religiousity
-0.031
-0.500
Significance Hipothesis
Hypothesis 1
0.055
is supported
Hypothesis 2
0.000
is supported
Hypothesis 3
0.000
is supported
0.289
Hypothesis 4
is
not
supported
Hypothesis 5
0.000
is supported
0.112
Hypothesis 6
is
not
supported
0.617
Hypothesis 7
is
not
supported
Hedonic behavior attaches with a person who is more subjective in
purchasing than its utilitarian counterparts and results more from fun and playfulness
than from task completion (Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982; Hirschman & Holbrook,
1982 ). Thus, hedonic value reflects on shopping activities as an entertainment and
emotional worth (Bellenger, Steinberg and Stanton, 1976).
The increased
stimulation, involvement, perceived freedom, fantasy and escapism all may indicate
a hedonically valuable shopping experience (Bloch and Bruce 1984). Hedonic
behavior scale is expressed by enjoyment, excitement, captivation, escapism and
spontaneity as the important aspects. (Babin, Darden and Griffin, 1994)
Thus, optimum stimulation is the individual’s perspective of being reluctant to
utilize old products, and tend to choose the newest one. The second element of
psychological perspective is consumer’s need for uniqueness. It tends to form
consumption behavior to be more hedonic due to the establishment of personal
status
(Mc.Alister, 1982). It belongs to interpersonal aspect that improves
individual’s personal unique image and attractiveness. The need for uniqueness is
the need of an individual to express his/her uniqueness from other individuals to be
“different”. The third element of psychological perspective is consumer’s materialistic
value. Individuals with materialistic value enjoy possessing stuff and continuously
collect bulk of their personal asset (Richins & Dawson, 1992). This action considered
to be a symbol of gaining success.
Marketing strategy also influences hedonic behavior. It is explained by sales
promotion. Based on The American Marketing Association (AMA), sales promotion is
defined as a marketing pressure created through non-media and media activities to
augment consumer demand for limited and pre-determined time period. Different
techniques of sales promotion are viewed in literature as: cash rebates, cash
reimbursement or refund. Most of the time, it is seen that consumers get fascinated
by the sales promotion and buy product although they do not want to buy (Mubbsher,
2011). Experiential perspective focuses on individual’s enjoyment to select various
choices of product. Experiential perspective explains non-rationality aspect along
Proceedings of Annual Paris Business and Social Science Research Conference
7 - 8 August 2014, Hotel Crowne Plaza Republique, Paris, France, ISBN: 978-1-922069-57-3
with hedonic behavior (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Non-rationality aspects are being
gathered when individual’s primary need has been fulfilled. Inconsequence,
secondary and luxurious necessity will continue to arise while it becomes individual’s
life style. Consumer considers that necessity to be an enjoying activity for relaxation.
Consumer is motivated to buy based on the delighted experience while it is pushed
them be hedonic on their purchasing behavior. Related to brand credibility, this
variable does not influence hedonic behavior. Consumers tend to choose any brand
and they do not choose famous brands. All brands are perceived equal.
However, apart of those perspectives above, this paper also put religiosity
perspective on hedonic behavior. It is expected that the higher degree of religiosity
will result the lower degree of hedonic behavior. The result showed that the religiosity
does not influence hedonic behavior.
References
Aaker, J.L. 1997. Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research,
347-356.
Assael, H. 1998. Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action. Ohio: South-Western
College Publishing
Babin, B.J., Darden W.R., and Griffin.1994. M. Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic
and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research 20: 644-656.
Baker, T.L., Hunt, J.B., & Scribner, L.L. 2002. The effect of introducing a new brand
on consumer perceptions of current brand similarity: The roles of product
knowledge and involvement. Journal of Marketing, 45-57.
Bacharah, S.B. 1989. Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy
of Management Review, 14: 496-515.
Belk, R.W. 2001. Moral orientation: Its relation to product involvement and
consumption. Advances in Consumer Research, 28: 431-436.
Belk, R.W., Ger,G. & Askegaard, S. 2003. The fire of desire: A multisited inquiry into
consumer passion. Journal of Consumer Research 30: 326-351.
Burroughs, J.E. & Rindfleisch, A. 2002. Materialism and well-being: A conflicting
values perspective. Journal Of Consumer Research 29: 348-370.
Chitturi, R. 2003. Design for affect: Emotional and behavioral consequences of the
tradeoffs between hedonic and utilitarian attributes. Unpublished
dissertation, Universtiy of Texas, Austin.
Cooper, D.R., & Schindler, P.S. 2003. Business Research Methods. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Dhar, R., & Wertenbroch, K. 2000. Consumer choice between hedonic and utilitarian
goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 37: 60-71.
Dittmar, H. 2005. Compulsive buying-a growing concern? An examination of gender,
age, and endorsement of materialistic values as predictors. British Journal of
Psychology, 96: 467-491.
Faber, R.J., Christenson, G.A., De Zwaan, M., & Mitchell, J. 1995. Two forms of
compulsive consumption: Comorbidity of compulsive buying and binge
eating. Journal of Consumer Research, 22: 296-303.
Hair, Jr., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., & Black, W.C. 1998. Multivariate Data
Analysis. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall International, Inc.
Proceedings of Annual Paris Business and Social Science Research Conference
7 - 8 August 2014, Hotel Crowne Plaza Republique, Paris, France, ISBN: 978-1-922069-57-3
Hill, A.B., & Perkins, R.E. 1985. Towards a model of boredom. British Journal of
Psychology, 76: 235-240.
Hirschman E.C. & Holbrook, M.B. 1982. Hedonic consumption: Emerging concepts,
methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing 46: 92-101.
Holbrook, M.B. and Hirschman, E.C. 1982. The experiential aspects of consumption:
Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research 9: 132–
140.
Horton, R.L. 1984. Buyer Behavior: A Decision Making Approach. Ohio: Bell and
Howell Company.
Kahn, B.E., and T.A. Louie. 1990. Effects of retraction of price promotion on brand
choice behavior for variety seeking and last purchase loyal consumers.
Journal of Consumer Research 27 (August): 279-289
Kivetz, R., & Simonson, I. 2002. Self-control for the righteous: Toward a theory of
precommitment to indulgence. Journal of Consumer Research, 29: 199-217.
Lin, C., Wuh, W.Y., & Wang, Z.F. 2000. A study of market structure: Brand loyalty
and brand switching behaviors for durable household appliances. International
Journal of Market Research, 42: 277-300.
Mayasari, I. 2007. Pengaruh Aspek Internal Konsumen Pada Perilaku Pencarian
Variasi Merek Dan Imbasnya Pada Loyalitas Kesikapan. Disertasi, Publikasi
Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta.
Mayasari, I. & Naomi, P. 2007. Psychology perspective, consumer socialization, and
demography toward compulsive buying. Publikasi Universitas Paramadina.
Mayasari, I. 2013. Perilaku Hedonis. Belum Dipublikasi.
McAlister, L. 1982. A dynamic attribute satiation model of variety seeking behavior.
Journal of Consumer Research, 9: 141-150.
Mitchell, V.W., & Walsh, G. 2000. Gender differences in German consumer decisionmaking styles. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 3: 331-346.
Moore, R. L & Stephens, L. F. 1975. Some communication and demographic
determinants of adolescent consumer learning. Journal of Consumer
Research, 2, 80-92.
Moschis, G. P & Moore, R, L. 1978. Decision making among the young: A
socialization perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 6, 101-112.
Moschis, G.P., & Smith, R.B. 1985. Consumer socialization: Origins, trends and
directions for future research. Advances in Consumer Research, 275-281.
Novak,T.P. & Hoffman, D.L. 2003. The influence of goal directed and experiential
activities on online flow experiences. Journal of Consumer Psychology 13:
3-16.
Perkins, R.E., & Hill, A.B. 1985. Cognitive and affective aspects of boredom. British
Journal of Psychology, 76: 221-234.
Ping, R.A. 2004. On assuring valid measures for theoretical models using survey
data. Journal of Business Research, 57: 125-141.
Raju, P.S. 1980. Optimum stimulation level: Its relationship to personality,
demographics, and exploratory behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 7:
272-282.
Ratner, R.K., & Kahn, B.E. 2002. The impact of private versus public consumption
on variety seeking. Journal of Consumer Research, 29: 246-257.
Richins, M.L. 2004. The material values scale: Measurement properties and
development of a short form. Journal of Consumer Research 31: 217-218.
Proceedings of Annual Paris Business and Social Science Research Conference
7 - 8 August 2014, Hotel Crowne Plaza Republique, Paris, France, ISBN: 978-1-922069-57-3
Richins, M.L. 1994. Special possessions and the expressions of material value.
Journal of Consumer Research, 522-533.
Richin, M.L., & Dawson, S. 1992. A consumer values orientation for materialism and
its measurement: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer
Research, 9: 303-316.
Roberts, J.A., & Jones, E. 2001. Money attitudes, credit card use, and compulsive
buying among American college students. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 15:
213-240.
Roberts, J.H., & Lattin, J.M. 1997. Consideration: Review of research and prospect
for future insights. Journal of Marketing Research, 34: 406-410.
Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. 2001. On happiness and human potentials: A review of
research on hedonic and eudaimonic well being. Annual Review
Psychology, 52: 141-166.
Schiffman, L.G. & Kanuk, L.L. 2007Consumer Behavior. Upper Saddle River New
Jersey: Pearson.
Schultz, S. K & Baker, S.M. 2004. An integrative review of material possession
attachment. Academy of Marketing Science Review.
Simonson, I., &
Nowlis, S.M. 2000. The role of explanations and need for
uniqueness in consumer decision making: Unconventional choices based on
reasons. Journal of Consumer Research, 27:49-68.
Sirgy, M.J. 1981. Product familiarity: Critical comments on selected studies and
theoretical extensions. Advances in Consumer Research, 8: 156-160.
Sivakumaran, B., & Kannan, P.K. 2002. Consideration sets under variety seeking
conditions: An experimental investigation. Advances in Consumer Research,
29: 209.
Tepper, K., Bearden, W.O., & Hunter, G.L. 2001. Consumers’ need for uniqueness:
Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 28: 5065.
Van Trijp, H.C.M., Hoyer, W.D., & Inman, J. 1996. Why switch? Product categorylevel explanations for true variety seeking. Journal of Marketing Research,
33: 281-292.
Venkatraman, M.P., & MacInnis, D.J. 1985. The epistemic and sensory behaviors
of hedonic and cognitive consumers. Advances in Consumer Research,
12:102-112.
Wilkie, W.J. 1990. Consumer Behavior. New York: John Wiley and Sons.