Content uploaded by Melissa Bishop
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Melissa Bishop on Jan 08, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Emerald Article: Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and
willingness to pay
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop, Raymond Goodman Jr
Article information:
To cite this document:
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop, Raymond Goodman Jr, (2012),"Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and
willingness to pay", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 29 Iss: 4 pp. 280 - 292
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363761211237353
Downloaded on: 25-06-2012
References: This document contains references to 62 other documents
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by Emerald Author Access
For Authors:
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service.
Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in
business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as
well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is
a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation. *Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase
intention and willingness to pay
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Department of Hospitality Management, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire, USA
Abstract
Purpose – Marketing managers routinely use purchase intentions data to make strategic decisions concerning both new and existing products and the
marketing programs that support them. Yet, the indication from empirical investigations regarding the link between respondents’ stated intentions and
their actual behavior is not as clear. Predicting which consumer will purchase an environmentally friendly product, the research remains split,
particularly when it comes to perceived “trade-offs” between the environmental benefits, quality, and cost. In this regard, previous research has fallen
short in examining consumers’ actual purchase behavior versus self-reported purchase intentions. This paper seeks to address these issues.
Design/methodology/approach – This study measured consumer psychographics and expressed purchase intention to predict actual purchase
behavior using an online survey and the Vickrey auction method.
Findings – The results show that respondents expressing a high intention to purchase environmentally friendly wines also reported strong attitudes
and values toward the environment. However, the gap between stated willingness to pay and the actual price paid was wide.
Research limitations/implications – The study was restricted to the investigation of one type of product. The model should be tested with a number
of products that are purchased on a regular basis.
Practical implications – Given the wide disparity between stated willingness to pay and actual price paid for those expressing high purchase
intentions, marketing should use caution when assessing this targeted group for new product launches and potential price changes.
Originality/value – This study assessed the same cohort using a survey and auction experiment to relate consumer values and purchase intentions
with actual behavior.
Keywords Purchase intention, Willingness to pay, Sustainable, Psychographics, Market segmentation, Consumer behaviour
Paper type Research paper
An executive summary for managers and executive
readers can be found at the end of this article.
Introduction
Competition has been increasing over the past decades for
varying consumer goods, as manufacturers look for ways to
increase profits in markets with fixed size. Attention has
shifted to more in- depth studies of markets and consumers so
that manufacturers can effectively plan and evaluate their
pricing, advertising, and promotional activities. Presently,
environmental concerns of industry are being identified as
critical issues companies must consider (Nomacorc, 2008;
Dolincar and Leisch, 2008; Barber, 2010; Barber et al.,
2009). The growing awareness of individual and industrial
impacts on the environment has lead to behavior and practice
modifications in production and the marketplace. One
concern is how to manage and create appropriate marketing
strategies related to the push-pull system of environmentally
friendly products between two subjects: consumers that
usually “pull” the goods or services they demand for their
needs and wants and producers or service providers that
“push” their products toward consumers. Consumers’
product and brand selections are further influenced by
habits, convenience, value, personal health concerns, and
individual responses to social and institutional norms. As a
result of increasing environmental concerns, consumers now
frequently make purchase decisions based on how products
satisfy their needs, while minimizing the negative impact on
the natural environment (GFK, 2007; Torgler et al., 2008).
Sustainable consumption is based on a decision-making
process in which consumers consider social responsibility in
addition to their needs and wants (Vermeir and Verbeke,
2006). Today’s environmentally-conscious consumers pay
attention to the image marketers project and adjust their
purchase behaviors in a way that favors those businesses that
convey a positive and ethical image (Creyer, 1997).
Additionally, “green” consumers are often willing to pay
more for environmental characteristics and are thus a prime
target market for environmentally friendly products. Although
green consumers often exhibit sincere intentions toward living
a greener lifestyle, they judge their environmental practices as
ineffective and do not expect companies to be perfect in order
to be considered “green” (Bazoche et al., 2008).
Recent research has reported a majority of consumers either
purchase or do not purchase a product based on
environmental attributes (Barber, 2010; Barber et al., 2009;
Bazoche et al., 2008; GFK, 2007). Furthermore, consumers
have expressed a willingness to pay a premium to purchase
environmentally friendly products (Barber, 2010; Bazoche
et al., 2008; GFK, 2007; Loureiro, 2003; Laroche et al., 2001;
Didier and Lucie, 2008). This suggests that consumers in
general are a prime marketing target for products promising
environmental benefits.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0736-3761.htm
Journal of Consumer Marketing
29/4 (2012) 280– 292
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0736-3761]
[DOI 10.1108/07363761211237353]
280
Over the years, a number of models have been proposed to
measure levels of consumer psychographics in various areas of
environmentalism and the relationship with purchase
intentions and behaviors (Bazoche et al., 2008; Hines et al.,
1987; Krause, 1993; Loureiro, 2003; Martin and Simintiras,
1994; Follows and Jobber, 2000; Schultz, 2002).
Psychographics encompass individuals’ values, attitudes and
lifestyles. Research suggests an inconsistency among
individuals’ expressed environmentally responsible attitudes
and actual purchase behavior. Consumers might feel more
strongly in some areas of concern than others (Samuelson and
Biek, 1991; Roozen and De Pelsmacker, 1998) and,
depending on the product, may be more or less willing to
trade off certain elements of value and quality for a more
environmentally sound product, despite what their expressed
purchase intentions are (Bazoche et al., 2008). This product-
specific, individual attitude is measured through reported
purchase intentions, and since purchase intention ultimately
leads to purchase behavior, it has been suggested as a key
predictive component (Follows and Jobber, 2000). However,
the measurement of expressed purchase intentions and the
comparison between expressed purchase intentions and actual
purchase behavior have been difficult (Follows and Jobber,
2000; Lange et al., 2002). Therefore, this study aims to
understand the relationship between psychographic
antecedents of expressed purchase intention and stated
willingness to pay have with actual purchase behavior by
comparing results from a self-administered survey with an
experiment based on the Vickery auction method.
Theoretical background
Environmentalism
Environmentalism is a dominant issue in today’s world. The
level of concern, however, is not entirely unanimous.
Nevertheless, an increasing percentage of the American
public believes there are significant issues with the
environment and desire to remedy these problems (Barber
et al., 2009). Earlier surveys repor ted that a majority of adults
in the USA said the quality of the environment is getting
worse, while 40 percent said it is getting better (Gallop, 2003,
2007). Six years later the polls show similar numbers with a
slightly more positive outlook down to 48 percent reporting
conditions are getting worse and 41 percent saying conditions
are improving. In response to the question rating the degree to
which they worry about environmental quality, Americans are
split roughly into thirds. However, the “highly worried” group
is down from 40 percent in 2008, and 43 percent in 2007
(Gallup, 2009).
It is generally accepted that increasing awareness of
environmental issues is due largely to mass media exposure
and to a lesser extent, marketing (Maibach, 1993; Lefebvre
and Flora, 1988). An individual’s level of concern about the
issues can be influenced by a variety of factors including
current political leadership (and perceived public policy),
level of personal comfort, marketing efforts to push
environmentally friendly products, and a shift in economic
concern. Whatever the case, there is an increasing awareness
of the impact individuals’ purchasing behavior has on many
ecological problems (Bazoche et al., 2008; GFK, 2007), and
is substantiated in shopping behaviors with an increase in
sales of products wrapped in recycled material (such as boxed
wine) and other ecologically compatible products (such as
CFC-free hairspray or unbleached coffee filters). Research
has shown that eco-conscious individuals are frequently
willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products
(Bazoche et al., 2008; GFK, 2007; Loureiro, 2003; Laroche
et al., 2001) which is good news for companies seeking to
integrate green practices and attract environmentally-friendly
buyers.
However, the key to long-term success in environmental
purchase behavior market research will be to put out a direct
message that targets a widespread audience. Increasing
dissemination of information will lead to increasing
environmental knowledge, changing attitudes and, thus,
buying behaviors. Bazoche et al. (2008) support this idea
and suggest that an increase in awareness and attitude is
important for changing human actions toward the
environment.
Proposed research hypotheses
Purchase decision-making can be complex, involving a
combination of needs and desires influenced by factors such
as the decision maker’s societal role, value system, and
cultural and environmental norms. Purchase behavior can be
influenced by internal (knowledge, attitude, personality) and
marketing (product, promotion, price) factors. To help
understand the antecedents to purchase intention for
environmentally friendly products, Follows and Jobber
(2000) constructed a hierarchy model of personal values –
attitude – purchase intention - behavior [based on the Theory
of Reasoned Action by Ajzen and Fishbein (1980)] to
demonstrate product-specific relationships between individual
values and attitudes on intent to purchase environmentally
responsible products. The model was based on a system of
values based on work by Homer and Kahle (1988), Schwartz
(1992), Thogerson and Grunert-Beckmann (1997), and
McCarty and Shrum (1994). These values were considered
as forecasting measures since they are considered to be stable
and act as standards on which attitudes are based (Follows
and Jobber, 2000). Follows and Jobber (2000) identified three
value systems of interest: self-transcendence (an active
concern for others), conservation (conscious conforming to
social expectations), and self-enhancement (a self-serving/self
gratification value). Each has a relationship with the perceived
consequences of individual purchase behavior and the
resulting purchase intention and behavior.
Regarding these perceived consequences, Follows and
Jobber (2000) viewed the two influential consequences as
environmental consequences (perceived effects of the
behavior on the natural environment) and individual
consequences (perceived effort or benefit of the behavior on
the individual). Depending on the perceived consequence,
purchase intention is found to hinge on a balance of the two
with the ultimate goal to maximize environmental benefits
while minimizing individual effort. The following sections will
discuss each of the study constructs and the corresponding
hypotheses.
Environmental attitude
Attitudes strongly influence behavior and thus are essential to
consumer behavior research (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980;
Arcury, 1990; Bejou and Thorne, 1991; Samuelson and Biek,
1991; Follows and Jobber, 2000). Environmental attitude is
the multifaceted mental state involving beliefs, feelings,
values, and character associated with the propensity to act
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and WTP
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 29 · Number 4 · 2012 · 280 – 292
281
in an environmentally friendly manner or take part in
environmentally friendly behaviors. The typical marketing
approach is to identify attitudes about products, brands, and
services in order to adapt marketing strategies to reflect the
product accordingly. Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) suggested
that marketers can influence consumers’ attitudes and
intentions by targeting normative beliefs and modifying
them with new concepts consequently changing their
evaluations.
Concentrating on attidudinal measures in environmentally
friendly behavior, research has focused on values as the
predominant guide (Corraliza and Berenguer, 2000; Follows
and Jobber, 2000; Laroche et al., 2001; Schwartz, 1994;
Schwartz and Bilsky, 1987). Values are the most abstract
types of social cognitions that can be used in determining
human behavior by providing a glimpse into an individual’s
interpersonal world (Follows and Jobber, 2000; Grunert and
Juhl, 1995). Follows and Jobber (2000) considered self-
transcendence, conservation, and self-enhancement to
specifically reflect value systems that comprise an
individual’s attitudes toward the evironment, which in turn
drive environmentally responsible purchase behavior.
Self-transcendence values
Self-transcendence values consist of an active concern for
others and the desire to work for the good of society. Self-
transcendence is a personal journey of self-discovery, where
one strives for greater perfection, higher perspective, and
moves beyond prior concepts of behavioral limitations, which
goes beyond ego (Follows and Jobber, 2000). Individuals with
high self-transcendence values view others as an extension of
the self and, therefore, equate concerns of self with concerns
for society. Thus, individuals with high self-transcendence
values place a greater importance on pro-environmental
behavior, particularly if it proves to provide an overall benefit
to society.
H1. The self-transcendence values of those who express a
high level of purchase intention are significantly higher
than those of the other intention levels.
Conservation values
Conservation values consider the restraint of actions that
could upset or harm others and violate social norms (Grunert
and Juhl, 1995). These considerations ser ve to secure
relationships and traditions by preserving the status quo.
Follows and Jobber (2000) argued that individuals who place
a high level of importance on conservation values avoid
complicating their lives by not wanting to be involved with
something that is not considered a social norm and suggested
that subjects who report high levels of conservation values will
be consistently less likely to pay more for environmental
characteristics.
H2. The conservation values of those who express a low
level of purchase intention is significantly less than the
other intention levels.
Self-enhancement values
Self-enhancement values reflect the extent to which
individuals are motivated to enhance their own personal
interests and often are seen as a sort of self-serving bias as
individuals wish to see themselves. These self-concepts are
believed to develop in response to social experiences with the
goal to adapt behavior in order to achieve a positive reaction
from their close significant references (Grubb and Grathwohl,
1967). An individual’s evaluation of self will greatly influence
behavior. Thus, the more valued the self, the more organized
and consistent becomes the behavior. This is exemplified
through consumers’ propensity to purchase items that reflect
a positive self-image (Dunning, 2007; Banister and Hogg,
2004; Sedikides et al., 2007). Consumers with high self-
enhancement values place a greater importance on the
satisfaction a product provides and product image associated
with its ownership. Therefore, individuals who place a high
importance on self-enhancement values will be more
concerned about how a product will directly affect them
regardless of environmental consequences.
H3. The self-enhancement values of those who express a
high level of purchase intention are significantly higher
than those of the other intention levels.
Consequences of purchase behavior
The purchase of environmentally friendly products is
influenced by the attributes of perceived individual
consequences and the environmental consequences of the
purchase decision (Follows and Jobber, 2000). Amyx et al.
(1994) and Laroche et al. (2001) defined these attributes as
importance and convenience. Importance is the level of
ecological concern and its importance to the individual or
society; whereas convenience is the perceived convenience of
the ecologically favorable behavior for the good of the society.
Follows and Jobber (2000) were able to show there was a
positive relationship from attitude towards the environmental
consequences (of the purchase of a specific environmentally
responsible product) to environmentally responsible purchase
intention.
Environmental consequences. It is generally accepted that
consumers incorporate social issues into their purchasing
practices by evaluating the consequences of their
consumption on society (Follows and Jobber, 2000).
Therefore, as long as environmental issues remain a concern
and individuals report the desire to improve environmental
conditions, the marketplace can expect to see an increase in
the purchase of environmentally friendly products (Follows
and Jobber, 2000).
H4. The perceived environmental consequences of those
who express a high level of purchase intention are
significantly higher than those of the other intention
levels.
Individual consequence. Another explanation for inconsistent
environmentally friendly consumer activity is the perceived
consequences of the behavior on the individual (Follows and
Jobber, 2000). This refers to how the environmental
responsible behavior is perceived to affect an individual’s
personal satisfaction and includes the inconvenience of
recycling, returning for refilling, and any other perceived
increase of effort required that would influence intention or
behavior negatively. Low levels of individual consequence can
override environmental concerns and alter consistent
behavior.
H5. The perceived individual consequences of those who
express a high level of purchase intention are
significantly lower than those of the other intention
levels.
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and WTP
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 29 · Number 4 · 2012 · 280 – 292
282
Purchase intention
Notwithstanding the enveloping view that stated intentions
are possibly the best predictors of actual behavior (Ajzen and
Fishbein, 1980), it has long been recognized that answers to
stated intention questions are not perfectly correlated with
actual purchases (Morwitz, 1997, 2001). Purchase intention
has been measured in several ways, such as measuring the
expressed intention to purchase using a scale composed of
several positively worded statements of environmentally
responsible behaviors (Backhaus et al., 2005; Sun and
Morwitz, 2005; Young et al., 1998). This can produce a
halo-effect that encourages respondents to over-report
behaviors even though they may not actually follow through
(Barber et al., 2009; Schlosser, 2005). Measurement of
environmentally friendly purchase behavior, thus far, has been
challenging because often measures have been normative in
nature leading to an inflated level of reported environmental
responsible behavior not consistent with market data (Follows
and Jobber, 2000; Roozen and De Pelsmacker, 1998).
Willingness to pay
Another way to examine consumers’ behavioral intentions is
to assess their willingness to pay. Consumers’ willingness to
pay (WTP) is defined as “the maximum price a buyer is
willing to pay” (Didier and Lucie, 2008; Franke and Schreier,
2008; Voelckner, 2006; Wertenbroch and Skiera, 2002).
Much like purchase intention, measuring consumers’
willingness to pay using a self-administered survey
(contingent valuation) can be challenging (Franke and
Piller, 2004; Sichtmann and Stingel, 2007). With the
contingent valuation method (Mitchell and Carson, 1989),
respondents are asked to directly state their WTP for the
product or service. Although the contingent valuation method
is a relatively easy method, the external validity of this method
could be limited and researchers suggest that this method is
subject to the risk of overestimating actual WTP
(Wertenbroch and Skiera, 2002; Franke and Piller, 2004).
Another method to measure WTP is to use actual market
transaction data or auctions, such as the Vickery method
(Lange et al., 2002; Wertenbroch and Skiera, 2002).
Assessing actual purchase behavior using the Vickrey
auction method has been found to better elicit consumers’
truthful WTP, because consumers must buy the good in a real
transaction if their bid wins the auction (Lange et al., 2002;
Wertenbroch and Skiera, 2002). With the Vickrey auction
method, the highest bidder is awarded the object at the price
of the second-highest bid (Vickrey, 1961).
To truly understand consumers purchase intentions and
willingness to pay would be to use the same participants in
both the survey and auction processes. However, the
researchers could not locate any study that assessed the
same group of consumers using the survey method and the
auction method. Follows and Jobber (2000) study assessed
consumers’ values-attitudes-intentions using two self-report
measures: a survey with a follow-up phone call three months
later asking the research participants whether they purchased
the environmentally friendly product. Although their study
did assess the same cohort, it should not be deemed a reliable
assessment of intention behavior. Thus, the goals of this
experimental study were to first measure if a significant
difference exist between levels of expressed purchase intention
and the expressed willingness to pay reported during the
survey. Second is to determine if a significant difference exists
between the expressed willingness to pay segmented by
purchase intention and the actual purchase behavior resulting
from the auction.
H6. Those who express a higher level of purchase intention
would express a higher willingness to pay for an
environmentally friendly product than the other levels
of expressed purchase intention.
H7. Those who express a higher level of purchase intention
will actually pay more during the auction for an
environmentally friendly product than the other levels
of expressed purchase intention.
Research design
Product selected for study
To assess the hypotheses outlined in this study, we chose wine
as a product because the consumption is personal, allowing
for the testing of distinct levels of environmental knowledge
and attitudes. The wine industry as a global giant is growing
more competitive. Producers and marketers are seeking ways
to differentiate their brands to consumers. How consumers
perceive wine is an essential factor in the decision process and
to a brand’s success (Barber et al., 2009). Wine attributes are
numerous and can vary greatly depending on an assortment of
influences. These characteristics, in conjunction with
variations in individual preferences, make it extremely
difficult to determine which characteristics win out over
others, and at which point in the decision process the product
selection takes place. Furthermore, there is a range in
consumer attitude and behavior that further individualize
preferences. Since this affects the final purchase decision, it is
critical for companies to gain a more solid understanding of
these characteristics.
Design of study and sample selection
This study measured consumer purchase intention and
willingness to pay using an on-line survey and a controlled
experiment (auction). Potential participants, customers of a
local winery, retail store, and a restaurant, were recruited in
western Connecticut and were asked whether they would be
willing to take part in the two phases of the study. The
individuals selected had to meet the following criteria, they:
.must be 21 years of age or older;
.must be a wine drinker (drinking wine at least once a
week);
.must be involved in their household wine purchases;
.must not have taken part in a marketing or consumer
study in the previous three months; and
.must not be allergic to sulfides.
The first phase (one) used an on-line survey to assess their
attitudes-values-behaviors (see Table I). The URL link was
emailed to the participants who agreed to take part in both
phases of the study along with instructions on when and
where to meet for phase two of the study. A follow-up email
was sent one week after the survey was opened for
participants to complete and then again two weeks later. A
reminder email was sent to the participants at the end of week
four to remind them about phase two.
The second phase, which started four weeks later, used the
Vickery auction process and three information situations. A
total of 120 individuals agreed to participate in both phases of
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and WTP
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 29 · Number 4 · 2012 · 280 – 292
283
this study. Each participant was told a $25 participation fee
would be paid at the start of phase two of the study.
Phase One-online survey
Measures
There was an introductory paragraph that explained the study
and a normal statement of consent. The final section collected
respondents’ demographics (age, gender, education, and level
of income) and personal experience with the product (years
consuming wine, average price paid for a bottle of wine). Each
construct was measured using a bi-polar seven-point scale to
record the responses. CFA was performed to test the
measurement constructs.
The attitudinal assessment followed the work by Follows
and Jobber (2000). In their study, self-transcendence was
measured using statements dealing with universalism – the
belief in equal opportunity for all – and benevolence –
helpful, forgiving, and loving values. Conservation was
measured using conformity (self-controlled, obedient, and
polite) and security (neat, tidy) statements. Finally, the three
domains of self-enhancement measured were achievement
(ambition), hedonism (pleasure), and power (social
recognition). Purchase intention followed work by Bower
and Landreth (2001), Barber et al. (2009), and Loureiro
(2003), where they tested three statements on purchase
intentions for environmental wine products.
Expressed willingness to pay used the contingent valuation
method during the online survey to measure the price
participants would pay for an environmentally friendly
produced wine. Participants were given a benchmark
reference price of $15.00, and were asked to specify how
much more in dollars they would be willing to pay. This
benchmark was developed using the average price consumers
actually paid as reported in wine studies by Barber (2008),
Dodd et al. (2005), and according to the local retail wine
store.
To gain information about the data collection process and
the questionnaire, a pilot study was conducted (Churchill,
2004). The primary purpose was to determine whether the
instrument could be clearly understood by respondents and
ensure reliability of the instrument. For the pilot test, a web
link to the instrument was e-mailed to 25 customers,
randomly selected at a wine shop in Western Connecticut.
Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were used for the item scales
and ranged from a low of 0.71 for product experience to a
high of 0.89 for individual consequences. The full factor
analysis accounted for 81% of the total variance, with only
one factor loading less than 0.72. Based on the high reliability
of this pilot study, it was decided not to perform a second
pilot test. An analysis of the pilot respondents’ demographics
did not reveal any unusual characteristics that would require
modification of the survey.
Data analysis
Simple descriptive statistics, analysis of variances, reliability,
and confirmatory factor analysis were performed. Following
the work of Yuan et al. (2005) and Barber (2008), a new
variable was established for the purchase intention construct.
This variable categorized the respondents as “high,”
“moderate” or “low,” and used the overall mean and
distribution derived from data collected. The “high”
category was those that scored equal to or higher than the
mean plus one standard deviation. The “moderate” was the
mean and the “low” category was the mean less one standard
deviation.
To test the hypotheses, analysis of variance (“ANOVA”)
was performed with the psychographic antecedents and
consequences as dependent variables, with expressed
purchase intention (categorical variable) as the independent
variable. Post hoc pairwise comparison testing was performed
if any of the ANOVAs were significant using the Scheffe
´
method. This method tends to give narrower confidence
limits and is, therefore, the preferred method and the most
conservative with respect to type I errors (Hair et al., 1998).
Results of Phase One
Descriptive statistics
All of the 120 participants completed the on-line
questionnaire. Of the respondents 46 percent were male and
54 percent were female. The average age of respondents was
43 years. Respondents had high levels of education with 90
Table I Measurement scales (
n
¼120)
CFA
No. items Scale examples Response scale *Reliability (
a
)FL CR
Self-transcendence
value
6 Benevolence – Helpful (working for the
welfare of others)
Totally important to
totally unimportant
0.86 0.80-0.88 0.88
Conservation value 4 “Conformity – Obedient (dutiful,
respectful)”
Totally important to
totally unimportant
0.85 0.78-0.81 0.85
Self-enhancement
value
8 “Power – social recognition (respect,
admiration)”
Totally important to
totally unimportant
0.74 0.81-0.88 0.83
Environmental
consequences
7 “How wine production may affect the
environment is important to me.”
Agree to disagree 0.79 0.79-0.85 0.82
Individual
consequences
6 “It is important to me to find ways to avoid
waste.”
Agree to disagree 0.76 0.75-0.84 0.83
Purchase intention 5 “I would consider purchasing this product”,
“I intend to try this product”,
“I plan on buying this product”, and “I am
interested in tasting this product”.
Agree to disagree 0.87 0.80-0.91 0.88
Notes:CR¼Composite Reliabilities; FL ¼Factor Loadings; R= reverse coded; *=Seven-point bi-polar scale
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and WTP
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 29 · Number 4 · 2012 · 280 – 292
284
percent of the sample having earned a college degree. The
average income of respondents was $54,000, with 49 percent
reporting annual household income between $25,000 and
$50,000, while 50 percent reported incomes between $50,000
and $75,000. The average number of years respondents
reported consuming wine was 22. The average number of
bottles (750 ml) purchased per respondent was 13 per month,
with $14.90 per bottle the average amount spent during this
same period. Compared to other consumer studies that have
measured years of wine consumption and average price per
bottle, the results of this study, given the sample selected, is
not considered unusual. For example, in the study by Barber
(2008) respondents consumed wine on average 22 years and
spent on average $18 per bottle. Those with high expressed
purchase intentions had consumed wine for 22 years and
spent on average $15.23 per bottle. Those respondents with
low expressed purchase intentions consumed wine for 26
years on average and spent $14.26 per bottle.
Hypothesis testing
An analysis of variance (see Table II) showed the results of the
analysis on the dependent variables to assess which
contributed to the overall differences. Significant differences
were found among all but one of the independent variables
(H5 – individual consequences). Post hoc analyses for
significant criterion are shown in Table III.
Self-transcendence – Respondents had moderate self-
transcendence values (M¼4:3;SD ¼1:3). Interestingly,
those with low purchase intentions did not find self-
transcendence values as important (M¼3:9;SD ¼1:4),
suggesting that they are not as motivated to transcend
selfish concerns and promote the welfare of others.
Conservation values – Respondents reported moderate
rankings (M¼4:0;SD ¼1:4) suggesting that overall,
subjects who report high levels of conservation values will
be less likely to purchase environmental products. This is
evidenced by the low purchase intention respondents
reporting high conservation value importance
(M¼5:0;SD ¼1:2).
Self-enhancement values – which are concerned with how a
product will directly affect an individual, was moderately high
overall (M¼4:5;SD ¼0:9). Those reporting high purchase
intentions for environmentally friendly products interestingly
reported high self-enhancement values suggesting that
purchasing environmental products will advance their own
personal interests. Conversely, those with low purchase
intentions scored moderately on self-enhancement values
(M¼4:0;SD ¼0:7), suggesting that they are less concerned
about how the product will affect them and their image.
Environmental consequences – Respondents reported
moderate levels of environmental consequences
(M¼4:3;SD ¼0:6). Those reporting high levels of
purchase intention were more willing to evaluate the
consequences of their consumption on society than the
other two groups.
Phase two-experiment
The second phase of this study took place four weeks later in
two small banquet rooms of a Connecticut winery. The
protocol used in this experiment was developed by Lange et al.
(2002), adopted by Bougherara (2003) and Bazoche et al.
(2009). Participants were asked to evaluate wines and specify
their willingness to pay in three information conditions: blind
tasting, bottle (labels), and full (seeing the bottle while
tasting). Their study findings suggest significant differences in
willingness to pay among these three information conditions.
They found that the impact of external information was
greater than the impact of sensory characteristics in the case
of purchasing wines.
Six separate secessions were conducted with 20 persons in
each. The secessions lasted two hours with an hour break in-
between. Each participant was given the $25 participation fee
Table II Results of ANOVA testing
Mean square
Dependent variable Between Within
F
-statistic
p
-value Hypotheses
Self-transcendence values 10.37 1.67 6.24 0.00 *
H1
– YES
Conservation values 8.17 1.91 4.28 0.02 **
H2
– YES
Self-enhancement values 3.76 0.397 9.45 0.00 *
H3
– YES
Environmental consequences 3.51 0.333 10.56 0.00 *
H4
– YES
Individual consequences 0.057 0.779 0.073 0.93
H5
–NO
Notes:*
p
,0.00, **
p
,0.05;
n
¼120
Table III
Post hoc
results the psychographic and consequence measures
Overall
High purchase
intention (
n
523)
Moderate
purchase intention
(
n
577)
Low purchase
intention (
n
520)
Variable Mean Std Mean Std Mean Std Mean Std
Self-transcendence values 4.3 1.3 4.7a 1.4 4.1b 1.2 3.9b 1.4
Conservation values 4.0 1.4 3.3b 1.4 4.8a 1.3 5.0a 1.2
Self-enhancement values 4.5 0.9 5.3a 0.9 4.2b 0.8 4.0b 0.7
Environmental consequences 4.3 0.6 5.0a 0.6 4.1b 0.6 3.9b 0.5
Notes: Means with difference letters significant at
p
,0.05;
n
¼120
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and WTP
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 29 · Number 4 · 2012 · 280 – 292
285
as agreed to in Phase one. The four selected products were
California merlot wines. The first one was a conventional
product (not produced in an environmentally friendly
manner), the second wine was labeled by an independent
certifying body [Certified California Sustainable
Winegrowing (CCSW) program], the third was produced by
a vintner with an environmental approach (not advertised),
and the fourth product was a wine whose environmental
approach is well advertised. The four wines were assessed in
three different informational situations (blind tasting,
valuation with the label alone, valuation with tasting and the
corresponding label). The experiment was conducted in four
stages.
The session began by explaining the procedure verbally to
everyone. To ensure the auction process was fully understood,
a test-run auction was held with an alternative product (see
the Appendix).
The participants were seated in a room in such a way that
they could not communicate with each other. They had a
glass of water and tasting crackers to refresh the palate
between tastings.
The participants had to evaluate the wines in three
informational situations; blind tasting (sensory), label only
(no brand provided), and tasting with label (no brand
provided) (Lange et al., 2002). The participants tasted or
visually assessed and appraised each wine in a pre-established
order to control for the impact of the order of presentation of
the products on the assessment. After each evaluation, the
wine and/or label were taken away and their valuation
recorded. In this way participants could not revise their
valuations with hindsight after experiencing the other wines or
situations. After evaluation of each wine, participants wrote
down the maximum bid for the wine tasted, assuming that the
wine would be auctioned at the end of the experiment.
Participants were informed that only one situation (blind,
information only, or full information/sensory and a selected
wine in that situation) would be used. The situation was
randomly selected by one participant, who in turn was
randomly selected. This procedure was selected to avoid
strategic behavior leading participants to submit a high
reservation price only in situations they preferred. The
participants only knew that the price distribution reflected the
actual retail price of wines on the market. The participant
who submitted the highest price became the winner and had
to pay for the product, but at the second highest submitted
bid. This procedure allows participants to purchase a product
at a price lower than, or equal to the price he would normally
accept to pay. Finally, if the highest price suggested in the
randomly selected situation was lower than the current retail
price, there would be no winner. If there was a tie in high
price, then each got to purchase the wine.
Results of Phase Two
Each participant made 12 bids and 120 subjects took part in
the sessions, yielding a database of 1,440 observations
(reservation price bids). The goal was to determine whether
the environmentally friendly wines were valued more highly
and compare the price participants stated they were willing to
pay in Phase one. The mean prices of wine and situation are
provided in Table IV.
The results shows that the mean bids were higher in label
only situation ($17.15) than in the other situations, with the
full tasting and information situation between the other two.
This is a classic result highlighting that full sensory exposure
(tasting and full information) is a compromise between
sensory (blind tasting) and visual (label only). The valuation
with the Label alone revealed the belief associated with the
product (and, therefore, the expected quality). The situation
with complete information revealed the trade-off between
perceived quality and expected quality.
Table V reflects the results of H6 and H7 testing. Overall
respondents reported a lower price they were willing to pay
during the auction than they expressed during the online
survey. Both H6 and H7 were supported. For H6, high
purchase intention respondents reported significant
differences in expressed willingness to pay during the survey
stating they would pay on average 62 percent more for an
environmentally friendly product. Moderate purchase
intention respondents stated they would pay 25 percent
more, while Low purchase intention respondents stated they
would only pay 11 percent. H7 was supported, with High
purchase intention respondents actually paying more than the
other two intention segments.
Discussion
Consumer demand is growing for environmentally friendly
products and the need to remain competitive has prompted
marketing professionals to seek information concerning
environmentally responsible purchase behavior. With this
growth in the breadth and depth of environmentally friendly
products there is a positive change in consumers’ concern for
the environment. It is also important to understand
consumers’ values and attitudes to aid in the prediction of
their purchase behavior. The first phase of this study used a
self-report survey to assess values, attitudes, and expressed
purchase intentions. The hypotheses generally support the
differences between levels of expressed purchase intentions
(high, moderate, and low) and the attitudinal values and
consequences of behavior. The decision to purchase an
environmentally responsible product or an alternative product
requires a deliberate conscious evaluation of environmental
consequences and the overall concerns for society. For
example, those respondents with high expressed purchase
intentions (see Table III) felt strongly about the importance of
environmental consequences and had strong self-
transcendence values, indicating a greater importance placed
on pro-environmental behavior (and environmental
consequence concerns) for the overall benefit to society. On
the other hand, intention to purchase can be influenced by
how individuals perceive the purchase activity against their
Table IV Mean WTP according to wine and situation (n ¼120)
All Respondents
Situation
B L FI Over all
Concannon Vineyards $13.40 $15.00 $14.10 $14.17
Frey Vineyards $17.10 $17.90 $17.60 $17.53
Rodney Strong $17.20 $18.30 $17.60 $17.70
Lolonis Winery $16.50 $17.40 $16.80 $16.90
Overall average price $16.05 $17.15 $16.53 $16.58
Environmental wines $16.93 $17.87 $17.33 $17.38
Notes: B= Blind; L= Label; FI ¼Full information
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and WTP
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 29 · Number 4 · 2012 · 280 –292
286
own personal satisfaction, whether it is an inconvenience, or
impacts their self-image. If the purchase activity negatively
impacts their self-image or the effort to comply is too great,
then expressed purchase intention will be low.
Interestingly, in this study, those that reported high
purchase intention also reported strong individual
consequences, suggesting that for them, there was a direct
link between environmental consequences, their concern for
society as a whole, and the self- image that consuming
environmentally friendly products would project linking their
strong values and beliefs to their self-image. However, those
that reported low purchase intentions (see Table III) were not
as concerned about environmental consequences (it was not
important whether wine bottles or other packaging adds to
landfills), suggesting they are more concerned for their
personal satisfaction and convenience than the benefits to
society as a whole. It appears that intention is formed as the
endresultofanevaluationortrade-offbetweenthe
environmental and individual consequences. The results are
consistent with the findings in studies investigating the
relationship between inconveniences and recycling behavior
(Follows and Jobber, 2000; Thogerson and Grunert-
Beckmann, 1997).
Finally, this study assessed participants stated willingness to
pay more for an environmentally friendly product and their
actual purchase behavior during an auction process.
Interestingly, the High purchase intention respondents
stated willingness to pay was 40 percent higher than what
they actually paid, while for the Low purchase intention
respondents, what they stated was nearly the same as what
they paid. This result for the Low intention respondents
aligns with their stated values and attitude, where they were
less concerned about how the product will affect them or their
image, had low concern from the impact on the environment
of their personal consumption, and was not motivated
towards the concerns or welfare of others.
Implications
There are several important implications from this study for
marketing professionals. First, in order to increase purchase
intentions of an environmentally responsible product,
consumer promotion should address both environmental
and individual product consequences. To change
environmental attitudes, communications must explain the
positive environmental consequences of the product and the
negative consequences of the product alternative. It is
important that any communications focus on the product-
specific consequences, not generalized environmental
consequences. For example, a company marketing
environmentally responsible wine should not discuss the
problems of global warming or vineyard management (such as
scarce water, herbicides, or pesticides) which are less
personal, but should address the specific hazards and
recycling issues associated with the glass bottle and use of
cork. As discussed previously, it is not enough to just promote
the positive consequences of an environmentally friendly
product. Attempts must be made to reduce the negative
individual consequences of an environmentally friendly
product. Packaging and advertising should communicate the
product is not as inconvenient or as difficult to use as the
consumer believes. For example, advertising for wines could
highlight the quality and benefits of non-traditional packaging
material (box wines or screw caps) and thus the efficient
procedures for use and recycling. Understanding the relevant
negative individual consequences associated with wine
purchasing and then modifying the product to reduce these
consequences is a critical strategy to bring about attitudinal
change. It is, therefore, important for marketing professionals
to embrace a proactive “push” position that allows them to
develop products that can satisfy a consumer’s personal
satisfaction as well as the long-term welfare of society.
Another implication concerns the use of values to stimulate
attitudinal change. As values are desired end states,
environmentally responsible attitudes and intentions can be
portrayed as a means to achieving the values. That is,
communications can promote an environmental consequence
as being consistent with a particular value orientation. For
example, the reduction in landfill sites resulting from using
non-traditional wine recyclable packaging could be depicted
as beneficial to the welfare of others, which is a desired end
state for those holding strong self-transcendence values.
These consumers would then adopt positive environmental
attitudes to support their value orientation.
Accordingly, focusing marketing efforts on whether or not
customers will pay a premium for “green” products brings
with it a number of constraining assumptions. First, green
products do not have any tangible benefits for customers
other than making them feel good about helping the planet.
Second, green products are generally more expensive to
produce than non-green products. While customers may not
pay extra for the intangible benefit of helping the planet, they
Table V Comparing Phase One and Phase Two willingness to pay (
n
¼120)
All respondents
High intention to purchase
(
n
523)
Moderate intention to
purchase (
n
577)
Low intention to purchase
(
n
520)
Phase one (Survey) expressed price
willing to pay for environmentally
friendly wine
a
$21.49 $24.32
b
$20.84
b
$16.61
b
Phase two (Auction) actual price
willing to pay for environmentally
friendly wine
$17.38 $17.43
c
$16.82
c
$16.64
c
Average price currently paying for a
750 ml bottle of wine
$14.90 $15.23 $14.65 $14.26
Notes:
a
=in the online survey respondents were asked how much more they would be willing to pay for an environmentally produced wine over a base price of
$15. The amount in this table represents that value plus the $15 base price.
b
=
H6
was supported,
p
,0.05.
c
=
H7
was supported,
p
,=0.05
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and WTP
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 29 · Number 4 · 2012 · 280 –292
287
will pay for the value of direct benefits they personally receive.
The ploy is to align direct customer benefits with
environmental benefits. Offering products at competitive
priceswhilehelpingtheenvironmentmaycreatean
opportunity to add value for customers and to increase
market share. Thus, marketers need to understand which
aspects of “green” matter to which customer segments and
how these attributes compare to other features, functions, and
price. For example, some consumers that have demonstrated
environmental sensitivity may place a high value on the
convenience signaling of wine products that use screw top
closures even if they will not pay for a “lower lifecycle carbon
footprint”.
Limitations and future research
The study was restricted to the investigation of one type of
product. Wine is a high-involvement product for most
consumers, and usually represents a substantial investment
of time and money. Thus, from a theory-testing perspective
the product works well because it was possible to get very
clean measurements of intention and behavior. However, a
number of low-involvement products that are purchased on a
regular basis, such as paper products and detergents should
be tested. Because a person’s value orientation is relatively
stable over time it would be interesting to determine if values
affect attitudes toward some products more than others.
References
Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980), Understanding Attitudes and
Predicting Social Behavior, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
NJ.
Amyx, D., DeJong, P., Lin, X., Chakrabotry, G. and Wiener,
L. (1994), “Influencers of purchase intentions for
ecologically safe products: an exploratory study”, in Park,
C. (Ed.), Marketing Theory and Applications. Proceedings
from the 1994 AMA Winter Educators Conference, American
Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 341-7.
Arcury, T. (1990), “Environmental attitude and
environmental knowledge”, Human Organization, Vol. 49
No. 4, pp. 300-4.
Backhaus, K., Wilken, R., Voeth, M. and Sichtmann, C.
(2005), “An empirical comparison of methods to measure
willingness to pay by examining the hypothetical bias”,
International Jour nal of Market Research, Vol. 47 No. 5,
pp. 543-62.
Banister, E.N. and Hogg, M.K. (2004), “Negative symbolic
consumption and consumers’ drive for self- esteem: the case
of the fashion industry”, European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 38 No. 7, pp. 850-68.
Barber, N. (2008), “How self-confidence and knowledge
effects the sources of information selected during purchase
situations”, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, doctoral
dissertation.
Barber, N. (2010), “‘Green’ wine packaging: targeting
environmental consumers”, International Jour nal of Wine
Business Research, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 423-44.
Barber,N.,Taylor,C.andStrick,S.(2009),“Wine
consumers’ environmental knowledge and attitudes:
influence on willingness to purchase”, International
Journal of Wine Research, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 59-72.
Bazoche, P., Combris, P. and Giraud-Heraud, E. (2009),
“Willingness to pay for appellation of origin: results of an
experiment with pinot noir wines in France and Germany”,
Alimentation et Sciences Sociales, INRY, Ivry-sur-Seine,
Working Paper ALISS 2009-02.
Bazoche, P., Deola, C. and Soler, L. (2008), “An
experimental study of wine consumers’ willingness to pay
for environmental characteristics”, 12th Congress of the
European Association of Agriculture Economists, available at:
www.legrenelle-environment.fr/grenelle-environment
Bejou, D. and Thorne, D. (1991), “Exploring the differences
between recyclers and non-recyclers; the roles of
demographics and personal factors”, Proceedings of the
Southern Marketing Association Conference ’91, pp. 110-5.
Bougherara, D. (2003), “Co-labeling: a tool for
environmental conservation by consumers”, Faculty of
Economics and Management Science, University of
Burgundy, Dijon, doctoral thesis.
Bower, A. and Landreth, S. (2001), “Is beauty best? Highly
versus normally attractive models in advertising”, Journal of
Advertising, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 1-12.
Churchill, G.A. (2004), Basic Marketing Research, 5th ed.,
South-Western, Mason, OH.
Corraliza, J.A. and Berenguer, J. (2000), “Environmental
values, beliefs and actions: a situational approach”,
Environment and Behavior, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 832-48.
Creyer, E.H. (1997), “The influence of firm behavior on
purchase intention: do consumers really care about business
ethics?”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 6,
pp. 421-32.
Didier, T. and Lucie, S. (2008), “Measuring consumer’s
willingness to pay for organic and fair trade products”,
International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 32 No. 5,
pp. 479-90.
Dodd, T., Laverie, D., Wilcox, J. and Duhan, D. (2005),
“Differential effects of experience, subjective knowledge,
and objective knowledge on sources of information used in
consumer wine purchasing”, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 3-19.
Dolincar, S. and Leisch, F. (2008), “Selective marketing for
environmentally sustainable tourism”, Tourism Management,
Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 672-80.
Dunning, D. (2007), “Self-image motives and consumer
behavior: how sacrosanct self-beliefs sway preferences in the
marketplace”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 4,
pp. 237-49.
Follows, S.B. and Jobber, D. (2000), “Environmentally
responsible purchase behaviour: a test of a consumer
model”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 34 Nos 5/6,
pp. 723-46.
Franke, N. and Piller, F. (2004), “Toolkits for user innovation
and design: an exploration of user interaction and value
creation”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 21
No. 6, pp. 401-15.
Franke, N. and Schreier, M. (2008), “Product uniqueness as
a driver of customer utility in mass customization”,
Marketing Letters, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 93-107.
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and WTP
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 29 · Number 4 · 2012 · 280 –292
288
Gallup (2003), “Public slightly more negative than positive
about quality of the environment”, available at: www.gallup.
com/poll/101905/Gallup-Poll.aspx (accessed October 2,
2008).
Gallup (2007), “The state of environmentalism in the US”,
available at: www.gallup.com/poll/27256/state-enviro
nmentalism-us.aspx (accessed October 10, 2009).
Gallup (2009), “In US, concerns about global warming stable
at lower levels”, available at: www.gallup.com/poll/146606/
Concerns-Global-Warming-Stable-Lower-Levels.aspx
(accessed October 24, 2010).
GFK (2007), “Americans reach environmental turning point:
companies need to catch up”, Custom Research North
America, available at: www.prnewswine.com/cgi-bin/stories.
pl?acct¼104&story¼/www.story/08-22-207/00046497348
$edate#linktoppagebottom (accessed August 25, 2009)
Grubb, E.L. and Grathwohl, H.L. (1967), “Consumer self-
concept, symbolism and market behavior: a theoretical
approach”, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 4,
pp. 22-7.
Grunert, S.C. and Juhl, H.J. (1995), “Values, environmental
attitudes, and buying of organic foods”, Journal of Economic
Psychology, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 39-62.
Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R. and Black, W. (1998),
Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper
Saddle River, NJ.
Hines, J., Hungerford, H. and Tomera, A. (1987), “Analysis
and synthesis of responsible environmental behavior: a
meta-analysis”, Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 18
No. 2, pp. 1-8.
Homer, P.M. and Kahle, L.R. (1988), “A structural equation
test of the value-attitude-behaviour hierarchy”, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 638-46.
Krause, D. (1993), “Environmental consciousness”,
Environment and Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 126-42.
Lange, C., Martin, C., Chabanet, C., Combris, P. and
Issanchou, S. (2002), “Impact of the information provided
to consumers on their willingness to pay for champagne:
comparison with hedonic scores”, Food Quality and
Preferences, Vol. 13 Nos 7/8, pp. 597-608.
Laroche, M., Bergeron, J. and Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001),
“Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for
environmentally friendly products”, Journal of Consumer
Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 503-20.
Lefebvre, R.C. and Flora, J.A. (1988), “Social marketing and
public health intervention”, Health Educational Behavior,
Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 299-315.
Loureiro, M. (2003), “Rethinking new wines: implications of
local and environmentally friendly labels”, Food Policy,
Vol. 28 Nos 5/6, pp. 547-60.
McCarty, J.A. and Shrum, L.J. (1994), “The recycling of
solid wastes: personal value orientations and attitudes about
recycling as antecedents of recycling behaviour”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 53-62.
Maibach, E. (1993), “Social marketing for the environment:
using information campaigns to promote environmental
awareness and behavior change”, Health Promotion
International, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 209-24.
Martin, B. and Simintiras, A. (1994), “Determination of
green purchase behavior: a review of the literature and an
agenda for further research”, Marketing: Unity and Diversity,
Proceedings of the 1994 Marketing Educators Group
Conference, pp. 628-37.
Mitchell, R.C. and Carson, R.T. (1989), Using Surveys to
Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method,
Resources of the Future, Washington, DC.
Morwitz, V.G. (1997), “It seems like only yesterday: the
nature and consequences of telescoping errors in marketing
research”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 6 No. 1,
pp. 1-30.
Morwitz, V.G. (2001), “Methods for forecasting from
intentions data”, AIDS, Vol. 15, February, p. S23.
Nomacorc (2008), “Carbon footprint of wine closures”,
available at: www.corksupply.com/_pdfs/nomacorc_footpr
int.pdf (accessed September 10, 2009).
Roozen, I.T.M. and De Pelsmacker, P. (1998), “Attributes of
environmentally friendly consumer behavior”, Journal of
International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 21-41.
Samuelson, C.D. and Biek, M. (1991), “Attitudes toward
energy-conservation – a confirmatory factor-analysis”,
Journal of Applied Social Psychology,Vol.21No.7,
pp. 549-68.
Schlosser, A.E. (2005), “Posting versus lurking:
communicating in a multiple audience context”, Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 260-5.
Schultz, P.W. (2002), “Knowledge, information, and
household recycling: examining the knowledge-deficit
model of behavior change”, in Dietz, T. and Stern, D.C.
(Eds), New Tools for Environmental Protection: Education,
Information, and Voluntary Measures, National Academy
Press, Washington, DC, pp. 67-82.
Schwartz, S.H. (1992), “Universals in the content and
structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests
in 20 countries”, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,
Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 1-65.
Schwartz, S.H. (1994), “Are there universal aspects in the
structure and contents of human values?”, Journal of Social
Issues, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 19-45.
Schwartz, S.H. and Bilsky, W. (1987), “Toward a universal
psychological structure of human values”, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 878-91.
Sedikides, C., Gregg, A.P., Cisek, S. and Hart, C.M. (2007),
“The I that buys: narcissists as consumers”, Journal of
Consumer Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 254-7.
Sichtmann, C. and Stingel, S. (2007), “Limit conjoint
analysis and Vickrey auction as methods to elicit
consumers’ willingness-to-pay”, European Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 41 No. 11, pp. 1359-74.
Sun, B. and Morwitz, V.G. (2005), “Predicting purchase
behavior from stated intentions: a unified model”,
Department of Marketing, Carnegie Mellon University,
Pittsburgh, PA, working paper.
Thogerson, J. and Grunert-Beckmann, S.C. (1997), “Values
and attitude formation towards emerging attitude objects:
from recycling to general waste minimizing behaviour”, in
Brucks, M. and MacInnis, D.J. (Eds), Advances in Consumer
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and WTP
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 29 · Number 4 · 2012 · 280 –292
289
Research, Vol. 24, Association for Consumer Research,
Provo, UT, pp. 182-9.
Torgler, B., Garcia-Valinas, M. and Macintyre, A. (2008),
“Differences in preference towards the environment: the
impact of a gender, age and parental effect”, QUT School
of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of
Technology, Brisbane, pp. 1-37, discussion paper #221.
Vermeir, I. and Verbeke, W. (2006), “Sustainable food
consumption: exploring the consumer attitude-behaviour
intention gap”, Journal of Agr icultural Environmental Ethics,
Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 169-94.
Vickrey, W. (1961), “Counter speculation, auctions, and
competitive sealed tenders”, The Journal of Finance, Vol. 16
No. 1, pp. 8-37.
Voelckner, F. (2006), “An empirical comparison of methods
for measuring consumers’ willingness to pay”, Marketing
Letters, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 137-49.
Wertenbroch, K. and Skiera, B. (2002), “Measuring
consumers’ willingness to pay at the point of purchase”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 228-41.
Young, M.R., DeSarbo, W.S. and Morwitz, V.G. (1998),
“The stochastic modeling of purchase intentions and
behavior”, Management Science, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 188-202.
Yuan, J., So, S.I. and Chakravarty, S. (2005), “To wine or not
to wine: profiling a wine enthusiast for a successful list”,
Journal of Nutrition in Recipe & Menu Development, Vol. 3
Nos 3/4, pp. 63-79.
Appendix
Today you will have the opportunity to evaluate several wine
products in different information conditions. Each product
you will evaluate will be made available for purchase
according to an auction method. This method is the Vickrey
Auction method. The principle of this auction method
requires you to write on a paper, for each product evaluated,
the maximum price you would pay for one 750 bottle of this
product (the reservation price). Then the participant who
submitted the highest price becomes the winner and has to
pay for the product, not at the price he/she submitted, but the
second highest submitted bid. This procedure allows
participants to a product at a price lower than, or equal to
the price he would normally accept to pay. For example, if
there were four participants in this auction for a bottle of red
wine with the following bids: Participant 1 ¼$14, participant
2¼$16, participant 3 ¼$18 and participant 4 ¼$15, then
participant 3 wins the bottle and pays $16 for the bottle. They
were informed that if they submitted a successful bid on a
wine, they were obligated to purchase the wine that they bid
on at the auction market price.
We wish to know the value that the products have for you,
not their commercial value. When you do not like a product,
you can suggest a price as low as you wish, so long as this
price represents the price you are willing to pay for purchasing
the product.
The training phase will be performed with two bars of 70
percent dark chocolate. You will successively submit your
reservation price for each of these bars, initially on the basis of
brand and thereafter on the basis of observation of the
packaging. At the end of this training phase, you will have
submitted a price in four situations (two products £two
information conditions). Only one situation randomly
selected will become effective at this stage. In this situation,
the buyer will be a person who suggested the highest price and
will pay for the chocolate at the second highest price.
About the authors
Dr Nelson Barber, PhD, is an Associate Professor at the The
Whittemore School of Business and Economics, Department
of Hospitality Management, University of New Hampshire,
Durham, New Hampshire. He has taught courses in advanced
wine/beverage management, international food and culture,
and graduate-level marketing and finance. His research has
been published in Managing Service Quality, Journal of Travel
and Tourism Marketing, Journal of Hospitality Marketing and
Management, Journal of Consumer Marketing, and many
others. His MS is from Purdue University and PhD from
Texas Tech University. His research focuses on various
dimensions wine tourism, wine marketing, and decision
behavior. Nelson Barber is the corresponding author and can
be contacted at: nelsonbarber@msn.com
Pei-Jou Kuo, PhD, is an Assistant Professor at the
Whittemore School of Business and Economics,
Department of Hospitality Management, University of New
Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire. Dr Kuo has taught
courses in hospitality marketing, international food and
culture, and lodging operations management. Her research
has been published in International Journal of Hospitality
Management and Journal of Hospitality Marketing
& Management. Her MS is from University of
Massachusetts, Amherst and PhD from Pennsylvania State
University. Her research focuses on customer participation,
customization, and product differentiation in hospitality
services.
Melissa Bishop, PhD, is an Assistant Professor at the
Whittemore School of Business and Economics, Department
of Marketing, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New
Hampshire. Dr Bishop has taught courses in marketing,
consumer behavior, retailing, services marketing, advertising
and integrated marketing communications. Her research has
been published in Journal of Advertising and Journal of
Advertising Research. Her MBA and PhD are from the
University of Texas at Arlington. Her primary research
focuses on information processing in consumer behavior
contexts.
Raymond Goodman Jr, PhD, is Professor at the
Whittemore School of Business and Economics,
Department of Hospitality Management, University of New
Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire. Dr Goodman has
taught courses in introduction to the hospitality industry,
human resource management, strategic management, and
lodging and restaurant industry operations. He has written
three books, his research has been published in the Cornell
Quarterly among others, and he has published a monthly
column, the “Lodging Executives Sentiment Index”, in
Lodging Hospitality Magazine. His Master’s and PhD in
Hotel Administration are from Cornell University. His
outreach focuses on issues involving retirement facilities
planning, design, marketing, management and operations.
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and WTP
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 29 · Number 4 · 2012 · 280 –292
290
Executive summary and implications for
managers and executives
This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives
a rapid appreciation of the content of this article. Those with a
particular interest in the topic covered may then read the article in
toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of the
research undertaken and its results to get the full benefits of the
material present.
Concern about the environment is growing among the
American public who are becoming more knowledgeable
about key issues and finding effective ways of addressing
them.
Mass media is mainly responsible for informing consumers
about the subject, although marketing plays a role too. The
outcome is greater awareness of how the attitudes and
behaviors of individuals and business organizations can
significantly impact on the welfare of the environment.
Consumer purchase decisions have always been influenced by
a range of different factors such as habit, convenience,
perceived value and reaction to prevailing social conventions.
These and other factors still have a bearing on choice,
although the final verdict for many people will also factor
ecological needs into the equation.
With this issue in mind, environmentally-concerned
individuals seek out companies who convey an image which
reflects ethical business practices. For their part, such firms
will frequently discover willingness among sustainable
consumers to pay a price premium for products that are
beneficial to the environment. Marketers are naturally
disposed to heavily promote such products and sales are
growing accordingly. The next step is to find a way of reaching
a larger audience with information that will further raise
knowledge and awareness of the environment and influence
consumer attitudes and behaviors.
Previous studies have explored how the values, attitudes
and lifestyles of individuals impact on their purchase
intentions and behaviors with regard to green issues. Many
have found some contradiction between these consumer
psychographics and actual buying behavior. Attitude appears
prone to variation depending on the product. Also important
is the ability to determine whether or not an individual might
sacrifice certain aspects of perceived value and quality in order
to secure a purchase that is more environmentally-friendly.
These studies have measured attitude against purchase
intention, which habitually serves as an antecedent to
purchase behavior.
The complexity of purchase decision making arises because
it is subject to influence from various internal and external
factors respectively associated with the individual and
marketing. Attempts to identify what influences
environmentally-friendly buying behavior have given rise to
different models. One view holds that personal values
determine attitude which in turn determines purchase
intention. Three value systems are mooted as particularly
influential and are labeled:
(1) Self-transcendence. This reflect a desire to act in ways that
profit others and society as a whole. Individuals rating
high on this value are thus likely to engage in pro-
environmental behavior where a benefit to society is
ascertained.
(2) Conservation. Maintaining the status quo is a driving force
for those passionate about this value. There is reluctance to
engage in activities which ‘violate social norms’ and could
disadvantage others. Evidence suggests a reluctance to pay
extra for ecologically-friendly products.
(3) Self-enhancement. The focus for those scoring high on
this value is to enhance their own self-image while
exhibiting behaviors that win the approval of significant
others. When selecting products, any environment effects
are secondary to the direct impact on themselves.
According to several studies, anticipated consequences to the
individual and the environment can determine whether or not
green products are purchased. The likelihood increases when
the consumer regards the activity as important and
convenient. Importance is evident where concern about
environmental issues persists, while individual consequences
could include the obligation to recycle or reuse products
purchased. Since effort is required, a negative impact on
behavioral intention can result.
Purchase intention and willingness to pay (WTP) have also
been examined in some detail. A frequent conclusion is that
discrepancy sometimes exists between intention and
subsequent buying behavior where environmentally-friendly
products are concerned. It is therefore mooted that actual
purchase is more probably where evidence of WTP exists.
An online survey formed the first stage of the current study
into these issues. Barber et al. recruited wine purchasers aged
21 or over from a winery, retail store and restaurant in western
Connecticut, USA. Wine was selected for the study because
consumption and preference are personal. The industry is
competitive and brand differentiation is important. Product
choice can be determined by a wealth of attributes that impact
on consumer perception. Also, the personal nature of wine
consumption assumes a variation of environmental knowledge
and attitudes.
A sample of 120 was obtained, with 54 percent being
female. Participants reported a mean age of 43 years-old and
90 percent had at least a college degree. The reported
behavior in terms of amount of years spent consuming wine,
number of bottles purchased each month and price paid per
bottle indicated mirrored earlier surveys.
Findings revealed that:
.Most respondents rated moderate in self-transcendence.
However, these values were not important among those
revealing low purchase intentions. This might indicate a
willingness to favor the self over others.
.Subjects with low purchase intention towards
environmental products regarded conservation values
highly. Ratings of these values were again largely
moderate though.
.High purchase intention was accompanied by high self-
enhancement values, indicating a belief that buying green
products serves personal interest too. Respondents low in
purchase intentions reported only moderate in self-
enhancement values. This shows lower concern about
how the product impacts on them.
.Moderate levels of environmental consequences were
signified. But where purchase intention was significant,
there was greater concern about the societal impact of
their purchase behavior.
The same subjects participated in the second study phase
involving a mock auction exploring purchase intention, WTP
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and WTP
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 29 · Number 4 · 2012 · 280 –292
291
and actual purchase behavior. Respondents evaluated four
Californian wines in three tasting conditions: sensory (blind
tasting), visual (exposure to the label only) and both together.
One wine was not produced in an ecologically-friendly way
but the other three were. However, this information was only
revealed for two of them. After tasting each wine, subjects
recorded their maximum bid for the ensuing auction.
Twelve bids were made by each respondent and analysis
showed:
.Average bids were higher in the label only scenario. This
suggests anticipation of product quality based on the
information provided.
.The price consumers were willing to pay was generally
lower than reported in the online survey.
.Positive correlation exists between levels of purchase
intention and the amount participants were willing to pay
for an environmentally-friendly wine.
.Those reporting high purchase intention actually paid
more than subjects whose intention to buy was moderate
or low.
In order to inspire attitude change, marketers should
communicate positive environmental consequences of a
product and the negative impact of choosing an alternative.
It is also important to minimize any negative individual
consequences of a green product. One way is to promote the
product as more convenient than users might assume. With
wines, emphasizing the advantages of non-traditional
packaging is recommended. Modifying a product to meet
personal requirements while helping society can also help
transform attitudes.
The authors additionally urge marketers to identify which
green factors are most important to each consumer segment
and in comparison with product attributes, functions or price.
Overall, the possibility that consumers will pay more for a
green product increases significantly when it also affords
direct personal benefits.
Future study might explore different products where
involvement is lower than with wine. Investigating if the
impact of values on attitudes could be product-dependent is
another option.
(A pre
´cis of the article “Measuring psychographics to assess
purchase intention and willingness to pay”. Supplied by Marketing
Consultants for Emerald.)
To purchase reprints of this ar ticle please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
Measuring psychographics to assess purchase intention and WTP
Nelson Barber, Pei-Jou Kuo, Melissa Bishop and Raymond Goodman Jr
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 29 · Number 4 · 2012 · 280 –292
292
