Content uploaded by Sebnem Burnaz
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sebnem Burnaz on May 22, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
Store Disorderliness Effect: Shoppers' Competitive
Behaviours in a Fast-Fashion Retail Store
Journal:
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
Manuscript ID
IJRDM-06-2019-0193.R3
Manuscript Type:
Research Paper
Keywords:
Store Messiness, Human Crowding, Perceived Scarcity, Perceived
Competition, In-Store Hoarding, In-Store Hiding
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
STORE DISORDERLINESS EFFECT: SHOPPERS’ COMPETITIVE BEHAVIOURS
IN A FAST-FASHION RETAIL STORE
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to understand the effect of store messiness and human
crowding on shoppers’ competitive behaviours, in-store hoarding and in-store hiding, through
the mediating effect of perceived scarcity and perceived competition.
Design/methodology/approach: 2 (store messiness: messy x tidy) x 2 (human crowding:
high x low) between-subject factorial experiment was conducted online to manipulate retail
store atmospheric factors. A total of 154 responses were collected through Amazon MTurk.
The hypotheses were analysed using ANOVA and PROCESS (Hayes, 2013) procedure.
Findings: Results suggest that store messiness and human crowding affect competitive
behaviours through perceived scarcity and perceived competition. When consumers
experience store messiness, they are likely to hide merchandise in store thus making it
inaccessible for other consumers. Further, when they experience human crowding in the
store, they feel that the products will be gone immediately so they have a tendency to hoard
them.
Research limitations/implications: This study examined the effects of scarcity perception
by studying the case of fast fashion retailers; generalizability needs to be established across
different contexts.
Practical implications: Retailers should pay attention to the antecedents of in-store hoarding
and in-store hiding as these competitive behaviours may decrease the store sales due to the
inaccessibility of products for the potential buyers.
Originality/value: This research contributed to the retailing literature by finding a significant
relationship between human crowding, store messiness, and competitive behaviours through
perceived scarcity and competition.
Keywords: Store Messiness, Human Crowding, Perceived Scarcity, Perceived Competition,
In-Store Hoarding, In-Store Hiding, Fast-Fashion
Paper Type: Research Paper
Introduction
Despite the increasing number of online purchases, retailers still consider a physical retail
store as an important source of competitive advantage (Turley and Chebat, 2002). Physical
Page 1 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
2
store environment communicates the image of what is being sold (Bitner, 1992; Webber et
al., 2018; Wu et al., 2012). Several factors like product assortment, pricing tactics, and
promotional activities influence shopper decisions in a retail store. Further, store atmospheric
cues play a critical role in impacting consumer perceptions, experiences, and purchase
decisions (Ballantine et al., 2015). Lucia-Palacios et al. (2016) stated that atmospheric
physical design and perceived human crowding may affect cognitive and affective responses
by causing efficiency, confusion, stress, and frustration.
Atmospherics or the retail store environment refer to both tangible and intangible
aspects of a retail store design that can be purposefully designed to produce specific
emotional effects in consumers, thus effecting their purchase behavior (Parsons et al., 2010).
When consumers enter a store, they mostly pay attention to shelves, merchandise, store
layout, and human crowding. The visual complexity and clutter derived from disorganized
store layout, high human and spatial crowding can thus influence shoppers' cognitive and
affective responses (Chae and Zhu, 2014; Hu and Jasper, 2006; Jung Chang et al., 2014;
Krishen et al., 2010; Orth et al., 2016).
Fast fashion as a strategic concept impose rapid inventory turnover through the
implementation of a short renewal cycle and limited supply. Many fast-fashion retailers
induce scarcity perceptions in store by using promotional messages (Byun and Sternquist,
2008; Cook and Yurchisin, 2017; Joung, 2014). There are two different ways a retailer can
communicate the scarcity of a commodity in the marketplace: limited-time scarcity and
limited-quantity scarcity (Cialdini, 1985). The effects of scarcity have largely been examined
in the context of advertising messages and also promotional messages in the store with
limited time or merchandise quantity (Aggarwal et al., 2011; Jang et al., 2015). Stokols
(1972) indicated that conditions of social crowding introduce social constraints on available
Page 2 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
3
space and imply competition with other persons for scarce resources. Also, research done by
Castro et al. (2013) suggested product disorganization on store shelves can lead to perceived
scarcity and product popularity among consumers.
In this study, we suggest that social crowding due to human density and store
disorganization within retail store can induce scarcity and competition perceptions. Human
crowding and store messiness as factors affect store visual that can influence consumers’
merchandise perceptions for scarcity in the retail store environment. If there is high human
density in the store, then consumers may think that resources in the environment are scarce.
Also, messiness of merchandise might make consumers think that there is a promotion or sale
happening in the store so it might be difficult to find their products of interest within the
store. Similarly, human crowding and store messiness as drivers of scarcity perception can
lead to perceived competition among consumers. Shopping behaviours of consumers in such
store environments can be affected as they may feel an urge to take immediate action to grab
the product before it is gone (Byun and Sternquist, 2011). Thus, consumers may develop
competitive behaviours like in-store hoarding or in-store hiding to regain their freedom to
make a choice. In-store hoarding and in-store hiding behaviours exhibit strong desires of
possessiveness that are generated due to the fear of scarcity in the environment (Gupta and
Gentry, 2016a; 2016b).
This paper by examining the effects of human crowding and store messiness on
shoppers’ competitive behaviours contributes to the literature of retailing. In general,
perceived scarcity in the extant literature has been studied as a concept that is strategically
created by retailer through limited quantity and limited time scarcity (Gupta and Gentry,
2019). However, the role of retail environmental cues on perceived scarcity has not been
examined in detail. Further, prior studies have examined the effect of human crowding on
Page 3 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
4
perceived competition, perceived scarcity, and in-store behaviours (Byun and Mann, 2011;
Byun and Sternquist (2008, 2011). Till date there is no study that examines the simultaneous
effect of various store environmental cues on competitive behaviours through the mediating
effect of perceived scarcity and perceived competition. Further, there is no study in the extant
literature that examines the effect of store messiness on perceived scarcity, perceived
competition, and competitive behaviours like in-store hoarding and in-store hiding. The rest
of the article is organized as follows. First, we discuss the relevant literature related to our
conceptual framework. We then present how the data were collected and analysed. The last
section provides the discussion of the data analyses and the implications of our study.
Literature Review
Disorderliness in a Retail Store – Store Messiness and Human Crowding
Retailers should understand physical store shopping process and effective factors influencing
the shopping experience. They should move beyond a concentration on the product to a focus
on the consumers’ store experience (Puccinelli et al., 2009). Retail store environmental cues
such as store design, ambient, and social factors have an impact on shoppers’ perceptions,
evaluations, emotions, and decisions (Kaltcheva and Weitz, 2006). Recent studies have
mentioned that disordered and visually complex retail store environments may influence
consumers' experiences and responses while they are shopping (Ballantine et al., 2015; Chae
and Zhu, 2014; Douce et al., 2014; Fennis and Wiebenga, 2015; Orth and Wirtz, 2014; Orth
et al., 2016; Mehta, 2013; Van Rompay et al., 2012).
In environmental psychology literature, disorderliness as visual clutter refers to the
crowding and a lack of organization. Further, visual clutter has been known to be a driver of
visual complexity that leads to a chaotic environmental perception and influence shoppers'
Page 4 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
5
cognitive, affective, and behavioural responses. In this study, we define disorderliness with
high visual merchandise clutter-store messiness and human crowding in a fast-fashion retail
store.
Various studies have been conducted to investigate the effect of perceived human
crowding on shoppers' cognitive (attitudes, perceptions, values etc.), emotional (pleasure,
arousal, dominance) and behavioural (approach-avoidance behaviour, behavioural intentions)
responses (Alawadhi and Yoon, 2016; Eroglu and Machleit, 1993; Eroglu et al., 2005; Kim
and Kim, 2012). Past studies suggested mix effects of human crowding. Some studies
emphasized negative effects of perceived human crowding on shopping satisfaction (Kim and
Runyan, 2011; Lucia-Palacios et al., 2016; Machleit et al., 1994; Machleit et al., 2000), while
a few mentioned its positive effects (Eroglu et al., 2005; Li et al., 2009; Pons et al., 2006).
Positive effect of human crowding in retail store has received little attention with respect to
its negative effect (Byun and Mann, 2011). This differential effect of human crowding
depends on shopping context as utilitarian or hedonic, individual traits as tolerance for
crowding, prior expectations of consumers based on store format (departmental store vs
discount store) or retail concept (high-end designers or low-proced fast-fashion stores) (Byun
and Mann, 2011; Kim and Kim, 2012). Thus based on the extant literature it can be suggested
that human crowding in a fast-fashion retail store can induce different perceptions, emotions,
and behaviours.
Recent research investigated the effect of messiness as a driver of environmental
disorder on perceptions, emotions, and behaviours. Messy and crowded shelf displays in store
environment can lead to complexity in a grocery retail store thus influencing process fluency
of environment which in turn affects pleasure, attractiveness of environment, and response
behaviours (Chae and Zhu, 2014; Orth and Wirtz, 2014; Orth et al., 2016). Also, previous
Page 5 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
6
research found out that disorganized shelves in a grocery retail store can lead to
contamination fear and popularity perception among products (Castro et al., 2013).
Besides grocery retail stores, consumers also may encounter store messiness, as another
store disorderliness cue in a fast-fashion retail store. Fast-fashion retailers such as ZARA,
H&M and Forever 21, by implementing short renewal cycles for their products tend to attract
lots of consumers to their stores (Byun and Sternquist, 2008; Cook and Yurchisin, 2017;
Gupta and Gentry, 2016a; 2016b; 2019). High influx of consumers can lead to disorganized
shelves, unsorted merchandise, and messy racks within the store, while they try to find some
products of interest. Further, recent study done by Coskun et al. 2019 suggested that both
human crowding and store messiness lead to retail shopper confusion that affect consumers’
behavioural intentions such as spending time in the store, store patronage and revisit
intentions.
The Role of Store Messiness and Human Crowding on Perceived Scarcity
Perceived scarcity reflects limited merchandise supply as well as the deliberate manipulation
of merchandise availability by the retailer (Gupta, 2013). Scarce goods and services appear to
be more valuable and tend to increase consumer desire to own them (Aggarwal et al., 2011;
Lynn, 1991; Pons et al., 2014). As items become scarce, people may lose freedom to make a
free choice. Because people dislike their freedom to be threatened, their reaction to regain
freedom leads them to want scarce items drastically more than before (Cialdini, 1985).
Scarcity enhances the perceived value of products and opportunities, thus resulting in higher
product desirability, increased quantities purchased, shorter searches, greater satisfaction with
the purchased product , positive attitude toward the retailer, and impulsive buying behaviour
(Aggarwal et al., 2011; Cook and Yarchisin, 2017; Lynn, 1991). There are two different ways
Page 6 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
7
a retailer can communicate the scarcity of a commodity in the marketplace: limited-time
scarcity and limited-quantity scarcity (Cialdini, 1985). Under limited-time scarcity (LTS), the
offer is made available for a particular period of time, after which the offer becomes
unavailable (e.g., “Sale ends this Monday”). Limited-quantity scarcity (LQS) refers to the
promotional offer made available for a particular quantity of the product and the degree of
scarcity increase with each unit sold (e.g., “Only 100 units available at this price”).
The effects of scarcity have largely been examined in the context of advertising
messages and also in store promotional messages focusing on limited time or merchandise
quantity (Aggarwal et al., 2011). However, retail store atmospheric cues like crowding and
store messiness can also lead to perceived scarcity conditions. Stokols (1972) indicated that
social crowding may imply competition with other shoppers for scarce resources by
introducing social constraints on available space in the environment. People may attribute a
higher level of human crowding to greater competition among the shoppers, especially when
shoppers compete for limited products or deals in a dynamic environment (Li et al., 2009;
Lucia-Palacios et al., 2016).
Also, messiness in a retail store can lead to perceived scarcity. Messy store layouts, as
suggested above, are mostly ineviatable in fast-fashion. Messiness lower consumers’ design
perceptions which in turn effect perceived value, service, and merchandise quality in store
(Baker et al., 2002; Douce et al., 2014). Some research emphasized that messiness in retail
store environment may lead to high product popularity and high perceived value of products
(Castro et al., 2013). Also, Chae and Zhu (2014) stated that messiness as a sign of
disorderliness in the environment can cause a feeling loss of freedom in the decision-making
process. Therefore, store messiness in retail store may affect the perceived scarcity of
Page 7 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
8
merchandise by imposing loss of freedom, thus affecting the decision making process of
consumers. Based on the extant literature the following is proposed (see Figure 1):
H1: In a fast fashion store, store messiness can lead to perceived scarcity among consumers.
H2: In a fast fashion store, human crowding can lead to perceived scarcity among consumers.
The Role of Store Messiness and Human Crowding on Perceived Competition
Scarce resources have been suggested as a primary driver of competition among consumers
(Knowles and Linn, 2004; Nichols, 2012). A retail situation that creates competition, such as
Black Friday, can impact consumers’ emotional and behavioural reactions (Byun and
Sternquist, 2008; Nichols, 2010). When store offerings are limited, the store can promote a
sense of competition among the shoppers, thus driving them to act more urgently to acquire
scarce offerings (Byun and Sternquist, 2008). Nichols (2010) suggested that scarcity signals
like limited time offers, merchandise quantity, and limited experiences in a store can
influence competition perception among individuals. Few studies also suggested that the
presence of other shoppers creates human crowding that further leads to a perception of
competition (Byun and Mann, 2011; Nichols, 2010). Further, Castro et al. (2013) suggested
that when consumers notice that there is limited merchandise and is disorganized on the shelf
they may infer that the product is scarce. It is also suggested that these scarce and
disorganized products that are not digestible may lead to product popularity among
consumers, thus leading to competition among the consumers. Product desirability will be
high in a messy retail store due to high perceived loss of freedom to make a choice. Thus,
based on the extant literature, we can suggest that store messiness and human crowding can
lead to perceived competition in a retail store and the following is proposed (see Figure 1):
Page 8 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
9
H3: In a fast fashion store, store messiness can lead to perceived competition among
consumers.
H4: In a fast fashion store, human crowding can lead to perceived competition among
consumers.
Competitive Behaviours – In-Store Hoarding and In-Store Hiding
Scarcity signals such as "Buy it now or it won't be here tomorrow" are succesful retail
strategies that are used by fashion retailers to attract consumer. Such a signal encourages
immediate action as consumers want to grab the products immediately before they are no
longer available and carry them around the store while shopping. This behaviour is called "in-
store hoarding" and is defined as a behaviour where consumers take possession of an item
and keep it for themselves during their shopping although they are not sure whether or not
they will buy it (Byun and Sternquist, 2008, 2011, 2012). Further, commodity theory suggests
that limited availability of a product or opportunity enhances behavioural responses through
an increased desire for ownership (Brock, 1968). Byun and Sternquist (2008) stated that in-
store hoarding is a response to a sudden urge to obtain the product generated due to scarcity,
uncertainty about product availability, competition among shoppers, and product factors such
as quality, design, and color. Under limited availability conditions, anticipated gains of
buying tend to trigger in-store hoarding with a fear of losses. Consumers encountering a
scarcity of a product are likely to be stimulated to hoard the product immediately before it is
taken by other consumers. Studies have revealed that hoarding is motivated by the fear of
scarcity or unavailability of a product. Shoppers become more impulsive in acquiring
products when there are limited time offers or they are uncertain about product availability in
the next store visit because of limited quantity offers (Byun and Sternquist, 2008, 2012;
Page 9 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
10
Gupta and Gentry, 2016a:2016b). Research studies have reported some key motivations for
in-store hoarding at fast fashion stores as the perception of scarcity, desire to possess
products of interest, avoidance of competition from other shoppers, and sense of urgency
(Gupta and Gentry, 2016a:2016b).
“In-store hiding” is another competitive in-store behaviour that consumers may
indulge in scarce retail enviornment conditions. Studies have defined in-store hiding
behaviour as an intentional act of removing the desired product from other consumers’ sight
and, hence, a functional way to increase the odds of buying the desired item later (Gupta and
Gentry, 2016a;2016b). Consumers tend to hide the merchandise behind the rack or under the
table, hanging a garment under another one, and putting the item in a wrong place. Key
motivations for indulging in hiding behaviours at fast fashion stores, similar to in-store
hoarding, include the perception of scarcity, the desire to possess products of interest, and the
avoidance of competition from other shoppers. Delaying buying decision, store policies, and
messiness of the store are some other distinct motivations that encourage in-store hiding
behaviours among consumers. A study done by Gupta and Gentry (2016a) suggested that
consumers find easier to hide things if a store is disordered and chaotic because it increases
the chances of masking the product from other consumers and even from the sales associates.
Reactance theory can set the theoretical background to understand how perceived
scarcity and perceived competition lead to in-store hoarding and in-store hiding behaviours in
a fast-fashion retail store. This theory emphasizes an individual’s reaction to the loss of
perceived freedom. According to reactance theory, if an individual’s freedom is threatened or
eliminated, s/he experiences psychological reactance, which is a motivational state directed
toward safeguarding a person’s behavioural freedom (Brehm, 1966; Clee and Wicklund,
1980, Byun and Sternquist, 2008, 2011). This motivation leads to an intensified desire to
Page 10 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
11
accomplish the restricted behaviour and increases its perceived attractiveness (Brehm and
Brehm, 1981). A product’s limited availability or perceived scarcity can connote a threat or
loss of personal freedom and therefore, may trigger psychological reactance that leads to
increased attention, attraction to the unavailable good, and ultimately, increased consumer
motivation to obtain the alternative that is no longer accessible (Ditto and Jemmott, 1989;
Markus and Schwartz, 2010; Worchel and Brehm, 1971). Thus, we anticipate that store
messiness and human crowding can cause perceived competition in a retail store through
perceived scarcity, which further influences consumers' competitive behaviours.
Based on the extant literature, the following is proposed (see Figure 1):
H5: In a fast fashion store, store messiness can lead to in-store hoarding among consumers.
H6: In a fast fashion store, human crowding can lead to in-store hoarding among consumers.
H7: In a fast fashion store, store messiness can lead to in-store hiding among consumers.
H8: In a fast fashion store, human crowding can lead to in-store hiding among consumers.
H9: In a fast-fashion store, store messiness can lead to in-store hoarding among the
consumers through the mediating effect of perceived scarcity and perceived
competition.
H10: In a fast-fashion store, store messiness can lead to in-store hiding among the consumers
through the mediating effect of perceived scarcity and perceived competition.
H11: In a fast-fashion store, human crowding can lead to in-store hoarding among the
consumers through the mediating effect of perceived scarcity and perceived
competition.
H12: In a fast-fashion store, human crowding can lead to in-store hiding among the
consumers through the mediating effect of perceived scarcity and perceived
competition.
Page 11 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
12
Insert Figure 1 here
Methodology
Experimental Design and Stimuli
To test the causal effect of store messiness and human crowding on perceived scarcity,
perceived competition and in-store competitive behaviours, this study conducted a 2
(messiness: messy x tidy) x 2 (crowded: high x low) between-subjects factorial design with
an online experiment where participants were randomly assigned to one of the 4 treatments.
Before main experiment, a pretest was conducted to check the manipulations of store
environment as messy and crowded to lead perception for scarcity and competition in the
store. There are four different store environments with high and low level of crowding and
messiness. The store pictures representing four different conditions were shown to the
respondents randomly. The participants (N= 152: mean age= 37.45 years, SD= 11.70; 57.2%
female) were recruited from the Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk).
To check the manipulation of store crowding and messiness we conducted two
independent samples t-test with crowding and messiness as the factors and the mean
composites “perception of crowding” and “perception of messiness” as the dependent
variables. According to the analysis highly crowded store were perceived as more crowded
than low crowded store (Mhigh=4.45, Mlow=2.61; (t (150) = -8.90, p< 0.001)) and high messy
store were perceived as messier than low messy store (Mhigh=5.43, Mlow=2.87; (t (150) = -
10.20, p< 0.001)) as intended. Also respondents were asked about the reality of the store and
asked to indicate whether they have been to a store like that. 98.7 per cent of respondents
found the store in picture as real and also 82.2 per cent of them stated that they have been to a
store like that in the pictures.
Page 12 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
13
For the main experiment, each participant in one of the four store conditions was shown
visuals of a retail store. Every condition consisted of two different visuals for the same store
to give a walkthrough view for products on displays and racks. For example, in the low
crowded conditions, two people were visible in the pictures but in the high crowded condition
fourteen people were visible. In the low messy-tidy condition, merchandise was organized
well on the displays and racks, but in the high messy condition merchandise was scattered.
These arrangements for crowding were made with the help of a photo shop software.
Messiness was manipulated in an actual clothing store and store pictures with suitable
messiness level for conditions were taken. Positioning and posture of the individuals and
merchandise were controlled to avoid confounding effects of other variables. Further,
participants were given a shopping scenario to read. The scenarios described a clothing
shopping situation as a good representative for messiness and human crowding within a retail
context. Participants were instructed to read the scenario and imagine themselves shopping in
the described situation (see Appendix for store visuals and shopping scenarios). To prevent
any bias, store or brand names were not provided to participants. Manipulations were adapted
from the study of Albrecht et al. (2017) (see Appendix for exemplary scenarios and store
visuals).
Participants
Data for main experiment were collected through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). The
usable sample consisted of 154 participants. In total, 48 per cent of all respondents were
female, the average age was M=37.84 (SD=12.47) ranging from 20 to 71 years. The
participants of the experiment were mainly well educated (57.3 per cent had university
degree) and 85 per cent of them were employed, 12.4 per cent of them were currently
Page 13 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
14
unemployed and 2.6 per cent of them were students. Also 49 per cent of respondents had
spent most of their life in an urban area while 39.9 per cent had spent in a small town and
11.1 per cent had spent in a rural area.
Measures
After seeing pictures and scenarios that manipulate store messiness and human crowding,
respondents completed a questionnaire that measured constructs like perceived scarcity,
perceived competition, in-store hoarding, and in-store hiding. All responses were measured
on 5-point Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Perceived scarcity was
measured by two items: “Products of interest will be often scarce” and “I find items with
limited availability” (adapted from Byun and Sternquist, 2012). Perceived competition was
measured by three items: “I feel competition with other consumers”, “I will be conscious
about other consumers' behaviours” and “I feel like I am competing with other shoppers for
products” (adapted from Byun and Mann, 2011). Then respondents were given competitive
behaviour measures adapted from Gupta and Gentry (2016b). In-store hoarding was
measured by two items: “Sometimes when I select a product, I do not want to put it down
although I am not sure if I would buy it or not” and “I would carry more products than what I
intend to buy”. In-store hiding was measured by three items: “I would purposely hide them
within the store in secret hiding places so other consumers might not buy them”, “I would put
them in completely different section where nobody else could see” and “I would hide items
so that they would be available to me later”. To check the manipulation of human crowding
and store messiness, respondents rated the items “The store is crowded with people”, “There
are too many shoppers”, “The store's merchandise looks messy” and “The store's
merchandise looks disorganized” respectively. Also, perceived realism of the scenario and
Page 14 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
15
adaptation of the shopper to the scenario were measured to understand the believability of the
study. After completing these measurements, participants responded demographic questions.
Results
A summated scale (mean of items) was calculated for crowding and messiness manipulation
measures for main experiment (αcrowding= 0.96; αmessiness= 0.95). Results confirmed that
participants in the high crowded situation perceived the store as more crowded (Mhigh= 4.04;
SD= 0.94) than participants in the low crowded situation (Mlow= 1.65; SD= 0.99; F (1, 152) =
235.776, p < 0.001). In the high messiness situation, participants perceived the store as
messier (Mhigh= 4.24; SD= 0.89) than participants in the low messy situation (Mlow= 1.63;
SD= 0.95; F (1, 152)= 311.060, p < 0.001).
Also, a two-way ANOVA was conducted to examine if there is any interaction effect
between crowding and messiness that is not intended for manipulations. For crowding, the
main effect of messiness did not reach significance and also for messiness, the main effect of
crowding did not reach significance (p> 0.05). The interaction effect between crowding and
messiness was non-significant for all crowding (F (0.27) = p > 0.05; η2= 0.00) and messiness
(F (0.567)= p > 0.05; η2= 0.004) manipulation measures. These findings confirm the
effectiveness of the manipulations.
Reliability and Validity of the Measures
Table I shows the construct measures statistics including factor loadings for construct validity
and Cronbach's α for construct reliability. Principal component analysis was conducted to
examine the factor structure of the variable measurement scales. The analysis suggested a
significant Bartlett's test of sphericity (p= 0.00) and a satisfactory value for KMO (KMO=
Page 15 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
16
0.81). All scales had acceptable factor loadings above 0.70. Cronbach's α value for each
construct was found to be more than 0.70, which is satisfactory ensuring the reliability of the
data (Nunnally, 1978). Correlation analysis was done to determine the discriminant validity
of the measures. The Pearson correlation coefficient measuring the degree of association
between the constructs are shown along with overall mean scores and standard deviations of
constructs in Table II. The Pearson correlation coefficient measures indicate that all the
constructs were positively related.
Insert Table I here
Insert Table II here
Main Analyses
Impact of store messiness and human crowding on perceived scarcity
To test H1 and H2, a two-way ANOVA was conducted to see the main and interaction effects
of store messiness and human crowding on perceived scarcity. Analyses revealed that
respondents had higher scores on perceived scarcity for high crowding and high messy
situations. Results suggested that there was a main effect of human crowding on perceived
scarcity (highcrowd= 3.18; lowcrowd= 2.46, (F (1, 152)= 22.626, p< 0.01). Also there was a
main effect of messiness on perceived scarcity (highmessiness= 3.12; lowmessiness= 2.51, F (1,
152) =16.239, p< 0.01). The interaction effect between crowding and messiness was not
significant for perceived scarcity (F (1, 152)= 0.395, p> 0.05). So, H1 and H2 were
supported.
Impact of store messiness and human crowding on perceived competition
Page 16 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
17
H3 and H4 suggested that high store messiness and high human crowding respectively
increase perceived competition. Thus, a two-way ANOVA was conducted to examine the
main and interaction effects of human crowding and store messiness on perceived
competition. According to the findings, respondents had higher scores on perceived
competition for high crowding and high messy situations. Results suggested that there was a
main effect of crowding on perceived competition (highcrowd= 3.30; lowcrowd= 2,06; (F (1,
152)= 48.618, p< 0.01) and a main effect of messiness on perceived competition
(highmessiness= 2,87; lowmessiness= 2,50; F (1,152)= 4.36, p< 0.01). Also, interaction effect
between crowding and messiness was not significant for perceived competition (F (1, 152) =
0.013, p> 0.05). Thus, H3 and H4 were supported.
Impact of store messiness and human crowding on in-store hoarding and hiding behaviours
To test H5-H8, the effect of human crowding and store messiness on in-store hoarding and
in-store hiding, two different two-way ANOVAs were conducted. First, the main effect of
human crowding on in-store hoarding was significant (highcrowd= 2,98; lowcrowd= 2,57, (F (1,
152)= 5.40, p< 0.01) and thus, H6 was supported. But the main effect of store messiness on
hoarding was not significant (F (1, 152)= 0.014, p> 0.05); thus H5 was not supported and the
interaction effect of human crowding and messiness on hoarding was not significant (F (1,
152)= 1.32, p> 0.05). Furthermore, the main and interaction effect of human crowding and
store messiness on in-store hiding behaviour were analysed using two-way ANOVA.
Analysis suggested that there was no main effect of human crowding on in-store hiding
behaviour (F (1, 152) = 0.696, p> 0.05) but there was significant main effect of store
messiness on in-store hiding behaviour (highmessy= 2.16; lowmessy= 1.82, (F (1, 152)= 5.40, p<
0.05). Lastly, the interaction effect between human crowding and store messiness on in-store
Page 17 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
18
hiding was found non-significant (F (1, 152)= 0.50, p> 0.05). Thus, H7 was supported but H8
was not supported. Table III reports the ANOVA results.
Mediation analyses for perceived scarcity and perceived competition
To test H9-H12, whether the perceived scarcity and perceived competition serially mediated
the effect of store messiness and human crowding on competitive behaviours, the indirect
effect of messiness and crowding on in-store hoarding and hiding were examined by using
Hayes’ (2013) serial mediation analyses.
Insert Table III here
The model with two serial mediators was tested using Hayes’ PROCESS macro (model 6)
(Hayes, 2013). PROCESS utilizes an ordinary least squares or logistic regression based path
analytical framework to estimate direct and indirect effects in mediator models. Additionally,
the macro implements bootstrap methods for inference about indirect effects in mediation
models. A bootstrapping method (sample of 5.000) was used to provide 95% confidence
intervals for both direct and indirect effects because of the relatively small sample size
(Preacher and Hayes, 2004). These confidence intervals should not include zero to indicate a
significant indirect effect.
As predicted there was a significant indirect effect of store messiness on in-store
hoarding intentions through both perceived scarcity and perceived competition (BC 95% CI
[0.054 to 0.259]). Also, results suggested a significant indirect effect of human crowding on
in-store hoarding intentions through both perceived scarcity and perceived competition (BC
95% CI [0.045 to 0.242]). Hence, the results suggested that crowding and store messiness
Page 18 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
19
influence in-store hoarding intentions through perceived scarcity and perceived competition
sequentially with the serial mediation effect, thus supporting H9 and H10.
Results also suggested that there was a significant indirect effect of store messiness on
in-store hiding intentions through both perceived scarcity and perceived competition (BC
95% CI [0.036 to 0.241]). Also, results suggested a significant indirect effect of human
crowding on in-store hiding intentions through both perceived scarcity and perceived
competition (BC 95% CI [0.048 to 0.253]). Hence, the results suggested that crowding and
store messiness influence in-store hiding intentions through perceived scarcity and perceived
competition sequentially with the serial mediation effect, thus supporting H11 and H12.
In conclusion, results suggest that consumers have a tendency for in-store hoarding
and in-store hiding behaviours when there is high human crowding or high store messiness
through perceived scarcity and competition. When they experience high crowding and
messiness in the store, they perceived a scarce environment thus feeling a sense of
competition. This feeling leads them to behave in a competitive manner as in-store hoarding
and in-store hiding. Table IV and Figure 2 shows the mediation analysis results for direct and
indirect effects.
Insert Table IV Here
Insert Figure 2 here
Conclusion and Discussion
To-date, various studies have examined the effect of retail store environment cues on
shoppers’ behavioural responses (Ballantine et al., 2015; Machleit et. al., 2000; Eroglu et. al.,
2005, Pons et. al., 2014; Wu et al., 2012). The current study examines the importance of store
disorderliness effect, human crowding, and store messiness, on shoppers’ perceptions, which
in turn affect behaviours in a fast-fashion retail store. It further examines the role of human
Page 19 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
20
crowding and store messiness on perceived scarcity and perceived competition, which further
influence the consumers’ competitive behaviours. The results of this study suggest that
human crowding and store messiness differentially influence competitive behaviours through
perceived scarcity and perceived competition. When consumers experience high human
crowding and high messiness in store, they feel perceived scarcity and competition from
other consumers, thus leading to in-store hoarding and/or in-store hiding as competitive
behaviours. The results suggest that human crowding influences in-store hoarding intentions
however, high messiness does not influence in-store hoarding directly. On the other hand,
high crowding does not influence in-store hiding directly but messiness directly influences in-
store hiding intentions. When consumers experience in-store messiness, they find it easier to
hide merchandise in a place away from the other consumers. However, when the store is
crowded, consumers feel that the products will be gone immediately due to the other
consumers’ availability in the store so they have a tendency to hoard items although they are
not sure to purchase them. Scarcity perceptions derived from store disorderliness lead to
competition among shoppers and with the feeling of freedom lose in a scarce and competitive
environment, shoppers need to take an action to safeguard their behavioural freedom. Thus,
this study suggests that how consumers behave strategically when they experience different
environmental cues within the store.
Contributions, Managerial Implications, and Limitations
Findings of this study contribute to the literature by investigating the effect of human
crowding and store messiness as drivers of scarcity and competition which further lead to in-
store hoarding and in-store hiding behaviours. This study contributes to the retailing literature
by suggesting a significant relationship between human crowding, store messiness, and
Page 20 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
21
competitive behaviours through perceived scarcity and competition. Also, prior research
about in-store hoarding and in-store hiding deployed survey data collection method by using
mall intercept survey or by collecting data from student samples. The current study aims to
find a causal effect of human crowding and store messiness on in-store hoarding and in-store
hiding behaviours, by deploying experimental design to manipulate store environmental
factors. This study also provides various managerial implications to the retailers. With the
cut- throat competition in the fashion industry, promoting product scarcity in a store could be
advantageous as it creates an urgency to buy among the consumers (Gupta and Gentry,
2016a). However, retailers should also be aware that perceived scarcity can lead to various
competitive consumer behaviours like in-store hoarding and in-store hiding. Behaviours like
in-store hiding could be detrimental for the store’s financial performance, as hiding a product
inhibits its sale. Retailers should pay attention to the antecedents of in-store hoarding and in-
store hiding because holding the items without buying decisions or moving items away from
the other consumers’ sight can decrease sales of the store. Given, the results of this study
suggest that store messiness and human crowding can differentially influence in-store
hoarding and in-store hiding; the store employees should pay attention to the level of
crowding and messiness. They should take proactive measures to control hoarding behaviours
by formulating strategies that encourage carrying a limited amount of merchandise across
store. Further, retail strategies that encourage organized consumer traffic flow thus reducing
human crowding should be encouraged within the floor plans. Also, sales associates should
pay closer attention to the organization and messiness of products in the store shelves or
displays as it can help prevent in-store hiding behaviours.
Despite its contributions, this study comes with its own limitations. This study
examined the effects of scarcity by studying the case of fast fashion retailers; generalizability
Page 21 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
22
needs to be established across different contexts. Also, further research should investigate the
shopping motivation effects on the relationship between perceived scarcity, competition, and
competitive behaviours. Motivational orientation as situational and also as a personal trait
should be investigated in the future studies because motivational orientation can influence the
effect of human crowding or store messiness on perception of scarcity and competition. Also,
further research should investigate the effect of this in-store competitive behaviours derived
from store environmental cues on impulsive spending or actual buying behaviour in the retail
store.
References
Aggarwal, P., Jun, S. Y., and Huh, J. H. (2011), “Scarcity messages”, Journal of Advertising,
Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 19-30.
Alawadhi, A., and Yoon, S. Y. (2016), “Shopping behavioral intentions contributed by store
layout and perceived crowding: An exploratory study using computer walk‐through
simulation”, Journal of Interior Design, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 29-46.
Albrecht, C. M., Hattula, S., and Lehmann, D. R. (2017), “The relationship between
consumer shopping stress and purchase abandonment in task-oriented and recreation-oriented
consumers”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 45 No. 5, pp. 720-740.
Baker, J., Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D., and Voss, G. B. (2002), “The influence of multiple
store environment cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 66 No. 2, pp. 120–141.
Page 22 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
23
Ballantine, P. W., Parsons, A., and Comeskey, K. (2015), “A conceptual model of the holistic
effects of atmospheric cues in fashion retailing”, International Journal of Retail and
Distribution Management, Vol. 43 No. 6, pp. 503-517.
Bitner, M. J. (1992), “Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on
customers and employees”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 No. 2, pp. 57-71.
Brehm, J. W. (1966), “A Theory of Psychological Reactance”, : Academic Press, Inc., New
York
Brehm. S. S.. and Brehm. J. W. (1981), Psychological Reactance: A Theory of Freedom and
Control, Academic Press, San Diego. CA
Brock, T. C. (1968), Implications of Commodity Theory for Value Change, Academic Press.
New York
Byun, S. E., and Mann, M. (2011), “The influence of others: The impact of perceived human
crowding on perceived competition, emotions, and hedonic shopping value”, Clothing and
Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 284-297.
Byun S. E, and Sternquist B. (2008), “The antecedents of in-store hoarding: measurement and
application in the fast fashion retail environment”, The International Review of Retail,
Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 133–147.
Page 23 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
24
Byun S. E, and Sternquist B. (2011), “Fast fashion and in-store hoarding – the drivers,
moderator, and consequences”, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp.
187–201.
Byun, S. E., and Sternquist, B. (2012), “Here today, gone tomorrow: Consumer reactions to
perceived limited availability”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp.
223-234.
Castro, I. A., Morales, A. C., and Nowlis, S. M. (2013), “The influence of disorganized shelf
displays and limited product quantity on consumer purchase”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 77
No. 4, pp. 118-133.
Chae, B., and Zhu, R. (2014), “Environmental disorder leads to self-regulatory failure”,
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 40 No. 6, pp. 1203-1218.
Cialdini, R. B. (1985), Influence: Science and Practice, 5th ed., Pearson Education. Boston,
MA
Clee, M. A., and Wicklund, R. A. (1980), “Consumer behaviour and psychological
reactance”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 389-405.
Page 24 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
25
Coskun, M., Gupta, S., and Burnaz, S. (2019), “Human crowding and store messiness:
Drivers of retail shopper confusion and behavioral intentions”, Journal of Consumer
Behaviour, Vol. 18 No.4, pp. 313-331.
Cook, S. C., and Yurchisin, J. (2017), “Fast fashion environments: consumer’s heaven or
retailer’s nightmare?”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 45
No. 2, pp. 143-157.
Ditto, P. H., and Jemmott, J. B. (1989), “From rarity to evaluative extremity: Effects of
prevalence information on evaluations of positive and negative characteristics”, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 16.
Doucé, L., Janssens, W., Swinnen, G., and Van Cleempoel, K. (2014), “Influencing consumer
reactions towards a tidy versus a messy store using pleasant ambient scents”, Journal of
Environmental Psychology, Vol. 40, pp. 351-358.
Eroglu, S. A., and Machleit, K. A. (1993), “Atmospheric factors in the retail environment:
sights, sounds and smells”, in North American - Advances in Consumer Research eds. Leigh
McAlister and Michael L. Rothschild, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, Vol.
20, pp. 34.
Eroglu, S. A., Machleit, K., and Barr, T. F. (2005), “Perceived retail crowding and shopping
satisfaction: the role of shopping values”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58 No. 8, pp.
1146-1153.
Page 25 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
26
Fennis, B. M., and Wiebenga, J. H. (2015), “Disordered environments prompt mere goal
pursuit”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 43, pp. 226-237.
Gupta, S. (2013), The psychological effects of perceived scarcity on consumers’ buying
behaviour. PhD Thesis. University of Nebraska, available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/
(Accessed: 15 June 2017)
Gupta, S., and Gentry, J. W. (2016a), “The behavioural responses to perceived scarcity–the
case of fast fashion”, The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer
Research, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 260-271.
Gupta, S., and Gentry, J. W. (2016b), “Construction of gender roles in perceived scarce
environments–Maintaining masculinity when shopping for fast fashion apparel”, Journal of
Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 251-260.
Gupta, S., and Gentry, J. W. (2019), “Should I Buy, Hoard, or Hide?’-Consumers’ responses
to perceived scarcity”, The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer
Research, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 178-197.
Hayes, A. F. (2013), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process
Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. Guilford Publications.
Hu, H., and Jasper, C. R. (2006), “Social cues in the store environment and their impact on
store image”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 34 No. 1,
pp. 25-48.
Page 26 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
27
Jang, W. E., Ko, Y. J., Morris, J. D., and Chang, Y. (2015), “Scarcity message effects on
consumption behaviour: Limited edition product considerations”, Psychology and Marketing,
Vol. 32 No. 10, pp. 989-1001.
Joung, H. M. (2014), “Fast-fashion consumers’ post-purchase behaviours”, International
Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 42 No. 8, pp. 688-697.
Jung Chang, H., Yan, R. N., and Eckman, M. (2014), “Moderating effects of situational
characteristics on impulse buying”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 298-314.
Kaltcheva, V. D., and Weitz, B. A. (2006), “When should a retailer create an exciting store
environment?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 107-118.
Kim, J. E., and Kim, J. (2012). “Human factors in retail environments: a
review”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 40 No. 11, pp.
818-841.
Kim, J. H., and Runyan, R. (2011), “Where did all the benches go? The effects of mall kiosks
on perceived retail crowding”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 130-143.
Page 27 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
28
Knowles, E. S., and Linn, J. A. (2004), Resistance and Persuasion, Psychology Press, New
Jersey, NY.
Krishen, A. S., Bui, M., and Peter, P. C. (2010), “Retail kiosks: how regret and variety
influence consumption”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol.
38 No. 3, pp. 173-189.
Li, J.-G.T., Kim, J.-O., and Lee, S.Y., (2009), “An empirical examination of perceived retail
crowding, emotions, and retail outcomes”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp.
635–652.
Lynn, M. (1991), “Scarcity effects on value: A quantitative review of the commodity theory
literature”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 43-57.
Lucia-Palacios, L., Pérez-López, R., and Polo-Redondo, Y. (2016), “Cognitive,
affective and behavioural responses in mall experience: A qualitative approach”,
International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 4-21.
Machleit, K. A., Kellaris, J. J., and Eroglu, S. A. (1994), “Human versus spatial
dimensions of crowding perceptions in retail environments: A note on their
measurement and effect on shopper satisfaction”, Marketing Letters, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp.
183-194.
Page 28 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
29
Machleit, K. A., Eroglu, S. A., and Mantel, S. P. (2000), “Perceived retail crowding and
shopping satisfaction: what modifies this relationship?” Journal of Consumer Psychology,
Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 29-42.
Markus, H. R., and Schwartz, B. (2010), “Does choice mean freedom and well-being?”,
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 344-355.Mitchell, D. J. (1994), “For the
smell of it all: functions and effects of olfaction in consumer behaviour”, in NA - Advances
in Consumer Research, eds. Chris T. Allen and Deborah Roedder John, Provo, UT:
Association for Consumer Research, Vol. 21 pp. 330.
Mehta, R. (2013), “Understanding perceived retail crowding: A critical review and research
agenda”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 642-649.
Nichols, B. S. (2010), Exploring and explaining consumer competition: A mixed-methods
approach to understanding the phenomenon. PhD Thesis, University of Tennessee, available:
https://trace.tennessee.edu/ (Accessed: 21 June 2016)
Nichols, B. S. (2012). “The development, validation, and implications of a measure of
consumer competitive arousal (CCAr)”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp.
192-205.
Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Page 29 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
30
Orth, U. R., and Wirtz, J. (2014), “Consumer processing of interior service environments: the
interplay among visual complexity, processing fluency, and attractiveness”, Journal of
Service Research, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 296-309.
Orth, U. R., Wirtz, J., and McKinney, A. (2016), “Shopping experiences in visually complex
environments: a self-regulation account”, Journal of Service Management, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp.
194-217.
Parsons, A. G., Ballantine, P. W., Ballantine, P. W., Jack, R., and Parsons, A. G. (2010),
“Atmospheric cues and their effect on the hedonic retail experience”, International Journal of
Retail and Distribution Management. Vol. 38 No. 8, pp. 641-653.
Pons, F., Mourali, M., and Giroux, M. (2014), “The density–satisfaction relationship
revisited: The role of scarcity and consumers’ affective reactions in a crowded retail
situation”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 54-60.
Preacher, K. J., and Hayes, A. F. (2004), "SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect
effects in simple mediation models", Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and
Computers, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 717-731.
Puccinelli, N. M., Goodstein, R. C., Grewal, D., Price, R., Raghubir, P., and Stewart, D.
(2009), “Customer experience management in retailing: understanding the buying process”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 15-30.
Page 30 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
31
Stokols, D. (1972), “A social-psychological model of human crowding
phenomena”, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 72-83.
Turley, L.W. and Chebat, J. (2002), “Linking retail strategy, atmospheric design and
shopping behaviour”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 18 No. 1-2, pp. 125-144.
Van Rompay, T. J., Tanja-Dijkstra, K., Verhoeven, J. W., and van Es, A. F. (2012), “On store
design and consumer motivation: Spatial control and arousal in the retail context”,
Environment and Behaviour, Vol. 44 No. 6, pp. 800-820.
Webber, C. D. C., Sausen, J. O., Basso, K., and Laimer, C. G. (2018), “Remodelling the
retail store for better sales performance”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, Vol. 46 No. 11/12, pp. 1041-1055.
Worchel, S., and Brehm, J. W. (1971), “Direct and implied social restoration of freedom”,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 294.
Wu, J., Won Ju, H., Kim, J., Damminga, C., Kim, H. Y., and KP Johnson, K. (2013),
“Fashion product display: An experiment with Mockshop investigating colour,
visual texture, and style coordination”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Management, Vol. 41 No. 10, pp. 765-789.
Appendix: Manipulations
Page 31 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
32
Exemplary scenarios
High Crowded -High Messiness
Imagine that it is weekend and you are strolling around in a shopping mall. When passing a
clothing store, you decide to go in and browse. You enter and notice that the store is very
crowded and filled with many people. Because of the large number of other customers, it is
really hard to move smoothly through the store. Other people often bump into you. Also, the
store’s merchandise is very cluttered on the displays and racks and it looks messy making
it difficult to find some stuff.
Low Crowded – Low Messiness
Imagine that it is weekend and you are strolling around in a shopping mall. When passing a
clothing store, you decide to go in and browse. You enter and notice that the store is fairly
empty with only a few customers. Because of the lack of other customers, it is really easy to
move smoothly through the store. Other people do not bump into you. Also, the store’s
merchandise is very organized on the displays and racks and it looks tidy making it easy to
find some stuff.
Exemplary store visuals
Insert Appendix Image 1 here Insert Appendix Image 2 here
Page 32 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
Conceptual model
139x198mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 33 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
Conceptual model with causal paths
139x198mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 34 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
Table I. Construct validity and reliability results
Dimension
Items
Factor
Loadings
Cronbach’s α
Perceived
Scarcity
Products of interest will be
often scarce.
I find items with limited
availability.
0.863
0.784
0.73
Perceived
Competition
I feel competition with
other consumers.
I will be conscious about
other consumers' behaviours.
I feel like I am competing
with other shoppers for
products.
0.828
0.841
0.824
0.85
In-Store
Hoarding
Sometimes when I select a
product, I do not want to put
it down although I am not
sure if I would buy it or not.
I would carry more
products than what I
intend to buy.
0.874
0.828
0.76
In-Store
Hiding
I would purposely hide them
within the store in secret
hiding places so other
consumers might not buy
them.
I would put them in
completely different
section where nobody
else could see.
I would hide items so
that they would be
available to me later.
0.874
0.898
0.912
0.92
Page 35 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
Table II. Research constructs statistics
Notes: **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) ;
PS: perceived scarcity; PC: perceived competition; HO: hoarding; HI: hiding
Dimension
Mean
SD
PS
PC
HO
HI
PS
2.83
1.19
PC
2.74
1.29
0,540**
HO
2.78
1.21
0,399**
0,505**
HI
2.01
1.13
0,330**
0,413**
0,529**
Page 36 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
Table III. ANOVA results for tested hypotheses
Store
Messiness
Low Messiness (n=72)
Mean SD
High Messiness (n=82)
Mean SD
ANOVA
F Sig
Perceived
Scarcity
2.51
1.06
3.12
0.95
16.23
< 0 .01
Perceived
Competition
2.50
1.32
2.87
1.19
4.36
< 0.01
In-Store
Hoarding
2.65
0.98
2.75
0.97
0.387
> 0.05
In-Store
Hiding
1.82
1.03
2.16
1.05
5.40
< 0.01
Human
Crowding
Low Crowding (n=81)
Mean SD
High Messiness (n=73)
Mean SD
ANOVA
F Sig
Perceived
Scarcity
2.46
1.03
3.18
0.93
22.62
< 0.01
Perceived
Competition
2.06
1.09
3.30
1.12
48.61
< 0.01
In-Store
Hoarding
2.57
0.98
2.98
0.91
5.40
< 0.01
In-Store
Hiding
1.92
1.05
2.08
1.06
.971
> 0.05
Page 37 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
Table IV. Mediation analysis results
Perceived Scarcity Perceived Competition
Mediation effect
for in-store hoarding
β
BootLLCI
BootULCI
SE
Sig
Store Messiness
0.13
0.054
0.259
0.05
< 0.05
Human Crowding
0.12
0.045
0.242
0.04
< 0.05
Mediation effect
for in-store hiding
Store Messiness
0.11
0.036
0.241
0.05
<0 .05
Human Crowding
0.13
0.048
0.253
0.05
<0 .05
Notes: LLCI, lower limit confidence interval;ULCI, upper limit confidence interval;
SE: Standard Estimation, β : unstandardized coefficient
Page 38 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
High Crowded-High Messy
139x198mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 39 of 40 International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
Low Crowded-Low Messy
139x198mm (300 x 300 DPI)
Page 40 of 40International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
