The Shopping Mall as Consumer Habitat

The Shopping Mall as Consumer Habitat
PETER H. BLOCH
University of Missouri

NANCY M. RIDGWAY
University of Colorado

SCOTT A. DAWSON*
Portland State University

Although large enclosed shopping malls represent signt$icant institutions in modem Western culture, consumers’ activities within malls have been surprisingly underresearched. In the present study, consumers’ interrelationships with malls as consumption sites are explored using the concept of a habitat drawn from the ecological sciences. An empirical study of consumer activity within multiple mall habitats is then discussed. Specifically, this research explores drrerences in mall habitat activity patterns and identifies mall related shopping orientations that are useful in explaining these differences. Habitat: the natural place of a specimen is found

occurrenceof a species...the special locality, station, or spot in which
-Oxford

English Dictionary 1987, p. 995

Scientists from many disciplines agree that the behaviors of organisms are profitably studied within the environmental context or habitat in which they are found (Ehrlich and Roughgarden 1987; Kormondy 1984; Mehrabian and Russell 1974; Rappoport 1982; Whittaker 1974). Therefore, zoologists wishing to study a particular species typically collect data in the habitat where that species is found in abundance. In adapting a similar perspective to the study of consumer behavior, researchers may profit from studying habitats where consumers throng. Consumers, like wildlife, are likely to gravitate to a setting offering a favorable climate, a high potential for social interaction, a perceived freedom from safety concerns, and a large

Direct all correspondence to: Peter H. Bloch, University 65211. *Peter H. Bloch is associate professor, Department Missouri 65211. Nancy M. Ridgway is assistant professor Business and Administration, Boulder, Colorado 80309. Marketing at Portland State University, Portland, Oregon

of Missouri, Department of Marketing, Columbia, MO of Marketing at the University of Missouri, Columbia, of marketing at the University of Colorado, College of Scott A. Dawson is associate professor, Department of 97207.

Journal of Retailing, Volume 70, Number 1, pp. 23-42, ISSN 0022-4359 Copyright Q 1994 by New York University. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.

23

24

lournaf of Retaikng

Vol. 70, No. 1 1994

selection of consumable goods and experiences. The premise here is that in North America the large, enclosed shopping mall is a premier habitat for consumers. After discussing the cultural significance of malls and applying the concept of habitat to mall settings, an empirical study is described. The study first examines the behaviors occurring in malts and then groups inhabitant into niches based on patterns of behavior. Because consumer behavior in malls is increasingly diverse, this reseat+& focuses needed attention on the experiential consumption of a setting as well as the consumption of goods within a setting. The present study also investigates shopping orientations or benefits that bring consumers to malls. Because of the unique position of the shopping mall in our cutture, spe&Ic rna~~-relatedo~en~tion items are developed rather than borrowed from past storefocused research. These orientation items are then used to explain differences in inhabitant activity patterns. Finally, the implications of study results to future research and retail practice are discussed.

The Mall and kocidy Despite the significance of mafls in our culture, Feinberg and Meoli (1991, p. 426) note that one would be “hard pressed to find a scholarly treatment of malls” in the academic journals. Even within the field of retail resarch, the emphasis has primariiy been upon the store rather than the mall as the unit of analysis. Surveys indicate that 75% of Americans go to a mall at least once a month, and time budget analysis shows that we spend more time in shopping malls than anywhere else outside of home and work (Kowinski 1985; Stoffel 1988). Mall transactions account for 50% of all retail sales dollars and 13% of the U.S. GNP (Feinberg and Meoli 1991). Although these figures are impressive by themselves, the mall has transcended its initial role as an economic entity to become a column center for social and recreational activity (Crabam 1988). Sociologists and urban planners believe malfs have played a central role in the suburbanization of modern America as they became major elements in the lifestyles of consumers (Stockil 1972). Traditionally, developers attracted consumers to malls through the promise of a wide assortment of stores and merchandise available in a single location. Over the years malls have grown farger and their one-stop convenience has expanded to indude service outlets and entertainment providers. Even relatively small shopping malls today offer fast-food courts, art exhibits, restaurants, video arcades, movie theaters, hair salons, and dental offtces. Not only can visitors consume products and services in a variety of ways within the mall, the mail itself offers experiences that are consumable. From their inception, enclosed malls have offered patrons the advantage of climatic comfort and freedom from the noise and traff’nz which characterizes other shopping venues. More recently, mall interiors have evolved from comfortable, yet mediocre spaces, to become architecturally rich with lavish materials and sophisticated design elements such as multi-ievel atriums and curved escalators (Donovan and Rossiter 1982; Gregorson 1988; Stockil 1972). Malls have also become important meeting places, especially for young peopIe and seniors (Graham 1988; Feinberg, Meofi and Sheffler 1989). Mall managers have built on this trend by ins~tu~ng many special events such as home improvement expos, walking clubs, art exhibits, health screening, auto shows,

The Shopping Mall as Consumer Habitat

25

and live music (Christman 1988). The West Edmonton Mall in Alberta has given the ultimate expression to the mall as a consumable experience with its 800 stores, 110 restaurants, and 400,000 square foot theme park. In fact, this mall has become Canada’s top tourist attraction (Henry 1986; Kowinski 1986). In the following section, this paper attempts to focus needed attention on consumer behavior within malls by using the metaphor of the habitat.

CONSUMER

HABITATS

Habitat Activities

Adapting the definition of Hickman, Roberts, and Hickman (1984), the term consumer habitat is used here to represent a physically circumscribed space where consumers are normally found. Malls and other large marketplaces would qualify as habitats because such institutions attract large numbers of individuals who spend a relatively long time on-site. Suggesting that the mall is a significant habitat for consumers is just the beginning, however. In a natural habitat such as a lake, varying patterns and levels of behavior can be observed across different species and even within species (Smith 19’74). Some of a habitat’s species occupy a broad niche, engaging in a wide range of behaviors and interacting with a variety of environmental elements. Other inhabitants may be more specialized with a narrower range of behaviors and interactions. According to Hanson (1964), the real goal for researchers is to understand the behavioral niches of organisms in the habitat. Within a consumer habitat, individuals also may be categorized into groups that vary in their patterns of behaviors such as browsing, shopping, or buying. Differences also may occur with respect to usage and disposition activities. Consider the case of an collector car flea market, such as those held in Hershey, Pennsylvania. Some consumers in this temporary habitat engage in a narrow range of purposeful activities in order to obtain a particular autopart and solve a specific restoration problem. Another category of individuals may attend the flea market to browse among the interesting automotive junk without a firm buying objective (Bloch, Ridgway, and Sherrell 1989), and some may use the market as a means to dispose of parts via swaps with vendors. In addition to activities focused on the acquisition of goods and services, a number of the activities observed in consumer habitats may be classified as experiential consumption. Several researchers have argued that the goal of much consumption activity is to obtain satisfying experiences rather than goods, per se (Belk 1982; Hirschman 1984; Hirschman and Holbrook 1982; Holbrook and Hirschman 1982). Thus, in the context of consumer habitats, a location may itself be a source of pleasurable experiences consumed by visitors. For example, many of the visitors to the auto flea market engage in activities indicative of consuming the experience of the locale itself such as socializing with friends or camping. malls also may reflect the Similarly, recreational browsing in luxurious, “Galleria-class” experiential consumption of the physical habitat itself apart from merchandise-focused activity. In a more practical vein, some consumers use climate-controlled shopping malls as

26

Journal of Retailing

Vol. 70, No. 1 1994

locations for exercise during bad weather. In this study, we will attempt to explore the wide variety of consumer activities occurring within malls.

Benefits Motivating Habitat Occupancy and Activity

Ecological research shows that individuals will be most abundant where habitat conditions most closely meet the ideal and less numerous where conditions are less favorable (Nebel 1990). In general animals migrate or shift habitats to find more optimal settings. Habitat preferences and optimality also appear relevant to consumer situations. In fact, the body of literature on retail patronage can be viewed as the identification and choice of more optimal habitats for consumption. For example, when a new shopping center opens within an existing trade area, consumers who perceive that greater benefits are obtained from the new center are likely to migrate there. The benefits a consumer seeks provide a basis for determining the ideal habitat and thus guide habitat choice. It is posited here that different patterns of behavior within a habitat are influenced by variations in the orientations a consumer brings to the site. In other words, consumers who enter a habitat seeking different benefits are expected to behave differently while in the habitat. For example, consumers who are recreationally-oriented should display different patterns of shopping behavior than those who have a functional or economic orientation (Bellenger and Korgoankar 1980). Similarly, persons seeking social benefits should engage in more interpersonal activities while in a retail setting (Darden and Reynolds 1971). Although shopping benefits and orientations have been studied a number of times (see Westbrook and Black 1985 for a review of this work), most studies have looked at shopping in general or have focused on single stores. Research has not adequately addressed shopping benefits in the context of large-scale retail institutions such as malls. Because malls have increasingly become more than assemblages of stores, the examination of mall-related shopping benefits appeared to be a potentially valuable avenue of study. The remainder of this paper reports on an empirical study of consumer behavior within large, enclosed mall habitats. In this study, a broad set of mall behaviors are examined and varying behavioral patterns are used to categorize consumers. Shopping orientations or benefits relevant to malls as the unit of analysis are also identified. Finally, the effectiveness of these benefits in explaining behavioral variations among consumers is assessed.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

It is not difficult to argue that the shopping mall represents a significant habitat for consumers. In order to provide a better understanding of consumer behavior within this habitat, three research questions drawn from the above discussion are addressed:

Question 1:

What are the various patterns of behavior that occur within a mall habitat?

The Shopping Mall as

Consumer Habitat

27

Malls have become sites for an increasingly wide assortment of consumption activity. In order to address this first question, a taxonomy of behaviors that may occur in a mall habitat was developed and participation frequencies were determined. Mall inhabitants were then categorized into niches based on the variety and level of mall behaviors performed.
Question 2: Question 3: What benej?ts draw consumers to a mall habitat, and To what extent do the perceptions mall activity? of these benefits relate to variations in

These last two questions examine the benefits that attract consumers to the mall habitat and motivate their behaviors while in the habitat. Based on pretests and past work on shopping motives, a measure was developed to assess the perceived benefits specific to mall habitats. The dimensionality of this measure was examined along with its ability to explain

various patterns of mall activity among inhabitants.

METHOD

In attempting to study a consumer habitat, researchers are first confronted with the choice between a qualitative, interpretive design or a positivist survey approach. Each research approach offers a unique set of advantages and disadvantages (Guba 1990; Lincoln and Guba 1985) and each has been employed in relevant studies. For example, several recent studies have used qualitative methods to examine behavior occurring in consumption sites such as swap meets and theme parks (Belk, Sherry and Wallendorf 198X; O’Guinn and Belk 1989; Sherry 1990). On the other hand, past studies of shopping motives, patronage, recreational shopping, and search have primarily employed survey techniques (see Bellenger and Korgoankar 1980; Bloch et al. 1989; Jarboe and McDaniel 1987; Lesser and Jain 1985; Westbrook and Black 1985). In addition, past work on environmental influences on consumer behavior has typically employed positivist paradigms (Donovan and Rossiter 1982; Baker, Berry and Parasuraman 1988; Grossbart, Mittelstaedt, Curtis and Rogers 1975). Although mindful of the benefits of qualitative designs, a survey methodology was used in the present study to allow examination of a large number of individuals and a variety of behavioral patterns.

Sample

Regardless of the research approach chosen, on-site data collection was considered essential. Based on a number of contacts, one of the nation’s largest mall development firms agreed to provide access to several of their centers. In order to examine several examples of mall habitats, responses were obtained from 600 consumers at three malls located in suburban areas in the Midwest, Northeast, and South, respectively (200 consumers at each mall). To insure an adequate range of behavioral variation, the malls studied were all relatively new (average age 8 years) and relatively large. All three were classified as

28

journal of Retailing Vol. 70, No. 1 1994

“super-regionals” and averaged 168 stores and 1.1 million square feet. Trained personnel from mall research staff intercepted visitors as they were exiting the malls and asked for their participation in a research project about mall activity. Exit interviews were necessary so that respondents could report on the just concluded mall visit. To ensure adequate sample diversity, data collection occurred at a variety of times and days of the week. The survey’s sponsor was identified as faculty at three universities located in different regions of the country. Quota sampling was employed and interviewers selected respondents based on the known sex and approximate age (15 years or more) in accordance with pre-existing data on mall populations (these proportions were provided to them; Monitor 1988). In securing participation, prospective respondents were offered a $2 coupon redeemable on any mall purchase. Interviewers approached 2135 consumers and disqualified 188 due to age quotas, not exiting the mall, or being a mall employee. Among the remaining 1947 individuals approached and screened, 30.8% agreed to participate in the survey. These consumers were given a four-page, self-administered questionnaire. After collecting the completed questionnaires, the interviewers thanked the respondents and distributed the incentive.

Measures

Mall behaviors: Research question 1 focused on the behaviors that occur in the mall habitat and the use of such behavior to categorize members of the habitat. In addressing this question, a multi-item-behavioral inventory was devised based on the design of current malls, the types of outlets found in such malls, discussions with mall management’s research staff, and a review of existing literature on malls (Feinberg et al. 1989; Ridgway, Dawson, and Bloch 1989; Henry 1986; Jacobs 1984; Jarboe and McDaniel 1987; Kowinski 1985). Respondents provided yes/no answers regarding whether or not they had engaged in each of a list of activities during the present mall visit. The inventory, shown in Table 1, was intentionally broad in order to examine the gamut of behaviors occurring in a mall. Some of the items focused on purchasing products or services, and thus captured more traditionally studied functional aspects of consumer behavior. Other items examined less well studied experiential activity and consumption of the mall itself. These items tapped behaviors such as browsing, socializing, eating, exercising, or being entertained. Consumption benefits relating to malls: Organisms occupy a habitat because of benefits derived from that habitat (Hickman et al. 1984). Question 2 involved the identification of perceived benefits that presumably draw consumers to mall habitats. Although a number of studies have described various benefits obtainable from shopping, no existing measure has been tailored to large scale, multi-store mall settings. Thus, a new multi-item measure was developed. The initial set of items was based on a review of past work on shopping benefits or orientations (Westbrook and Black 1985) as well as writings on the sociology of the mall (Feinberg et al. 1989; Henry 1986; Kowinski 1985). The item set was also designed to explicitly consider experiential or hedonic benefits available to consumers in a mall (Hirschman 1984; Hirschman and Holbrook 1982; Holbrook and Hirschman 1982). Finally, items were included that addressed benefits derived from the mall itself, not just its

The 5hopping Malt as Consumer Habitat

29

t '

| '

2

¢"4 ~

'4) '~

¢ '4 P-,, ~r

<

!i z E u~ ,~ 25

¢2:

30

Journal of Retailing Vol. 70, No. 1 1994

constituent stores or products. All items were in the form of a statement with responses recorded on five-point Likert scales ranging from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree.” The initial item set was refined via two pretests. In the first, a sample of students from three universities was instructed to respond to the benefit items in the context of the mall they had visited most recently. Young adults are particularly numerous in enclosed malls and thus were believed to represent a useful group for pretesting (Graham 1988). Based on reliability testing and factor analysis, the initial item pool was revised and a second pretest was done, using new samples of students. Following these pretests, a set of 21 items was retained for further use. These items (shown in Table 3) covered a variety of possible benefits that may accrue to mall visitors. These benefits included boredom relief: (“When I’m bored malls are a good place to go”), keeping abreast of new trends (“Shopping malls are a good place to find out what’s new”), and social activity (“Going to a mall is particularly enjoyable when I go with friends”). As a final pretest of all measures, a complete questionnaire covering behaviors and orientations was prepared and given to 50 consumers intercepted at a mall not subsequently used in the main data collection. Consumers in this pretest were instructed to respond to survey items and then note those items that seemed ambiguous or difficult to complete. Results from this field pretest led to several small changes in the final questionnaire’s instructions and layout.

RESULTS

Activity

Patterns of Inhabitants

The first research question addressed the patterns of behavior occurring in mall habitats by examining responses to the behavioral inventory. Because a mall represents a large complex consumer habitat, a variety of behavioral patterns was expected to emerge. Table 1 indicates that over 70 percent of respondents across the three malls engaged in activities relating to the purchase of goods. Relatively few persons reported that they had purchased services, despite growing opportunities to do so. As with a natural environment, eating activity was common with nearly half of the inhabitants reporting that they ate a snack during their mall visit while approximately 30 percent had a full meal. A significant proportion of those surveyed engaged in an experiential behavior focused on the mall itself. About one quarter of the respondents walked for exercise, while over a third looked at mall exhibits. A number of other visitors reported socializing, another type of experiential consumption available in a mall. Over 60 percent of respondents participated in browsing activity. In natural habitats, animals benefit from the setting itself and not just the food resources available in the setting. Trees can provide one species with cool shade while dense brush may provide another with security. The habitat metaphor thus supports the finding that mall inhabitants consume the mall itself as well as objects offered within the mall. After looking at behavioral frequencies, the next task was to uncover categories or “niches” of mall inhabitants based on reported activity patterns. In order to determine these groups,

The Shopping Mali

as Consumer Habitat

31

factor analysis was employed to reduce the set of activity items. The correlation matrix (phi) for the dichotomous items provided the input to this analysis. Vhrimax rotation produced the four factor solution shown in Table 1. The first factor captured non-purchase activities and was labeled consumption the mull. Walking in the mall and perusing mall exhibits clearly represent experiences and activities provided by the mall rather than by its constituent stores. The last two items loading on this factor were concerned with affiliation activities enabled by a mall visit. None of the four items referred to purchasing or acquisition behaviors. Items loading on the second factor were focused on the consumption of services within the mall. It should be noted that loadings for this factor were relatively low despite the fact that cross-loadings on other factors were not problematic. Malls are becoming more significant as locations for service providers. Hair stylists and recreational services have been joined by a range of health care facilities. Although the items loading on this factor all represent the service dimension that is increasingly prevalent in malls, the diversity of these services may partially explain the relatively modest loadings. The third factor encompassed items on browsing and eating and thus addressed the passing of time in the mall without clear objectives. The last factor centered on what may be an overemphasized mall activity; the consumption of tangible products. As shown in the table, malls appear to have transcended the role of purchase site to become a center for many possible activities. In the next step of the analysis, respondents were classified into habitat groups or niches based on differences in behavioral patterns. In forming these groups, participation scores on the four factors were used in a multi-step cluster analysis (Hair, Anderson, Tatham and Black 1992). Using Ward’s method, the factor scores were used to cluster consumers. Plotting the distance measures associated with the resulting dendogram and applying a scree test suggested a four cluster solution. In the second stage of the process, seeds from this solution were used to set initial cluster centers using a K-means clustering procedure. These seeds then formed the initial centers of the final clusters. Table 2 profiles the inhabitant clusters by illuminating the behavioral patterns that distinguish them. Each cell in the table provides two figures. The first figure represents the percentage of cluster members who reported “high” participation in the behaviors comprising each activity factor. Based on frequency distributions, high participation was defined as engaging in two or more of the factor’s constituent activities. For Factor 2, where activity rates were lower, the definition of high participation was relaxed to include consumers who engaged in one or more activities. In order to compare the activity profile of each cluster with that of the total sample, each percentage was indexed to overall sample percentages. These index numbers constitute the second cell entries shown in parentheses. That is, the percentage of high scorers for the total sample was assigned an index score of 100 and percentage figures for each cluster were expressed relative to the total. To illustrate, 38 percent of the total sample qualified as high level participants for the first activity factor pertaining to consumption of the mall. As a total sample figure, 38 percent was assigned an index value of 100. Among members of cluster 2,49 percent were high participants, yielding an index value of 129 (.49/.38). Differences in the percentages of high participation were also compared across clusters. The x2 values shown at the right of the table indicate that there were significant variations

of

TABLE 2

Description of Clusters: Percentage of High Scorers by Clustera
Cluster 3
Grazers Cluster 4 Min imahb x2 Total Sample Cluster 1 Ma// Enthusiasts Cluster 2 Traditionalists P<

A. Activity Factor 38% 100%

1.

Consumption

of the Mall

49%
(129)

0%

0% (0) 17% (81) 9% (21) 26% (63) 168

684.4 30.2 478.4 63.3

.OOl .OOl .OOl .OOl

1OO)b (263)

(0)
22% (104) 100% (233) 51% (124) 119 20%

2.

Consumption

of Services

21%
33% (157) 85% (198) 44%

15% (71) 0% (0) 47% (115) 166 28%

100) 43% 100) 41% 100) (107) 147 24%

3.

Passing Time

4.

Consumption

of Products

Cluster Size

% of Total Sample

28%

8. Shopping Intensity Item 78 5.3 4.9 6.2 6.1 106 70 5.3 4.6 96 6.6 4.7 49 3.6 4.2 31.65 11.1 3.92 .OOl .OOl .Ol

Number of Minutes in the Mall

Number of Stores Visited During Trip to Mall

Number of Mall Visits in Previous 30 Days

Notes:

a. With the exception of Factor 2 (Services) high scorers were defined as those subjects who engaged in two or more activities per factor. nor Factor 2, high scorers were those subjects engaging in one or more activities.

b. Figures in parentheses represent percentages indexed to total sample results.

The Shopping Mall as Consumer Habitat

33

across clusters for all four of the activity factors. Thus, there appears to be different niches among mall inhabitants who interact with the setting in significantly different ways. Analysis of the figures in Table 2 provides insight into the character of each of the mall inhabitant clusters. Cluster 1 included over 24 percent of the sample (N1 = 147) and was distinguished by higher than average values on every activity dimension. This cluster includes very active mall denizens and is labeled accordingly as the Mull Enthusiasts. These individuals engage in a wide range of behaviors that include relatively high levels of purchasing, usage of the mall, and experiential consumption. These individuals consider the mall as an important site and play a variety of habitat roles. The second cluster was somewhat larger in size (28 percent; N2 = 166). Members of this group scored higher than average on mall-focused activities (e.g., looking at mall exhibits, walking in the mall for exercise). They were also relatively high scorers on product purchasing. They were relatively unlikely to browse, eat or consume services. Members of this cluster were primarily in the mall to take advantage of typical mall services or store merchandise. Accordingly, this cluster was labeled the Traditionalists. The third cluster, representing 20 percent of the respondents (N3 = 119), is primarily distinguished by its higher than average tendency to pass time in the mall browsing and eating. These inhabitants, labeled the Grazers, also scored a little above average in product purchasing activity, perhaps due to impulse buying during their browsing. Further inspection of the data indicated that this group had the highest percentage of members (60%) who had made an impulse purchase. The Grazers’ participation rates in services buying activity were similar to the overall sample while socializing/mall-oriented activity was essentially nil. The last cluster comprised 28 percent of the respondents (N4 = 168). Members of this category were termed Minimalists due to their relatively low average participation in all activity domains. These individuals appear to be reluctant habitat occupants engaging in relatively few activities while in the mall. They seem to be particularly uninvolved with eating, browsing, mall services, and socializing activities. Fram and Axelrod (1990) suggest that there is a portion of the population that considers malls to be a hassle due to time constraints and role strain. Perhaps these hassled individuals desire to get in and out of the mall as efficiently as possible and thus tend to be minimalists in their mall activities. The mall inhabitant clusters were formed on the bases of distinctive activity patterns. To determine whether membership in a particular cluster was isomorphic with other variables, additional analyses were performed. For descriptive purposes and to better understand the clusters, they were first contrasted on demographic variables. Although some variation across clusters was found, the differences were not significant at the .05 level. Thus, the behaviorally-based inhabitant groups were not further distinguished on the basis of variables such as age or socioeconomic status. Going beyond demographics, the four clusters were also compared on several mall shopping intensity items (see bottom of Table 2). There were statistically significant differences across the clusters in terms of time spent in the mall and the number of different stores visited (F = 3 1.65, p < .OO1; F = 11.08, p < .OO1, respectively). Consistent with their behavioral description, the Enthusiasts stayed in the mall for the longest time (1 hour 46 minutes) and visited the greatest number of stores (6.1). The Grazers occupied the mall habitat nearly as long (1 hour: 36 minutes) and visited approximately the same number of stores (6.6). Given the Grazers’ penchant for browsing and eating, it is likely that these

34

Journal of Retailing Vol. 70, No. 1 1994

The Minimalists spent the least time in the mall (49 minutes) and visited the fewest number of stores (3.6). Again, this is no surprise given their restricted range of behavioral activity while in the mall. The clusters were also profiled on the number of times they had visited the mall during the previous 30 days. As noted in Table 2, the Mall Enthusiasts stood apart from the other clusters in their frequency of mall habitation. Not only does this group spend more time in the mall, they come more often.

inhabitants are not in much of a hurry and seek variety in their browsing.

Consumption Benefits Pertaining to Malls Dimensions: Several analyses were conducted to examine Question 2 pertaining to mall-focused consumption orientations. The objective here was to consider a variety of perceived benefits that motivate consumer presence in mall habitats. In addressing Question 2, the underlying structure of the benefit items was first examined in the process of data reduction. The 21 Likert items described earlier were subjected to principal components factor analysis with varimax rotation. Factor scores were also calculated for each respondent for use in subsequent analyses. The results of the factor analysis, shown in Table 3, revealed a six-factor solution. The six factors each had eigenvalues greater than 1.0 and accounted for 64.3 percent of the total variance in the full set of 21 items. The first factor was labeled uesthetics as it reflected an appreciation of the physical design or appearance of the mall habitat. All of the statements loading on this factor referred to an attention to the architectural and interior design elements of malls. This dimension has not been mentioned in previous shopping orientation typologies despite the considerable resources being devoted to retail aesthetics and research evidence indicating the importance of atmosphere (Baker et al. 1988; Bitner 1992; Donovan and Rossiter 1982; Grossbart et al. 1990; Kotler 1973). This factor is based on the premise that the built environment of mall habitat may serve as an attraction for those consumers who notice and enjoy attractive spaces. The second factor captured escape as a motivating benefit relevant to malls. Items loading on this factor referred to malls as a relief of boredom and an escape from routine. According to Graham (1988), malls are frequently used to relieve boredom or loneliness. Malls offer high levels of sensory stimulation and an opportunity to drown out problems. Unlike movies and restaurants, there is no stigma attached to visiting a mall alone. Thus, for many individuals, malls may serve as highly accessible, low cost sites for diversion. This factor also parallels the findings of Tauber (1972) who found that shopping is a boredom reliever for some consumers. The third factor was labeled expIorafion. Items loading on this factor captured the perceived enjoyment of exploring new products or stores while in the mall. This dimension tapped consumers’ desires for variety or novelty as discussed by a number of authors (Hirschman 1980; Lesser and Jain 1985; Raju 1980). Factor 4 reflected benefits akin to Csikszentmihalyi’s (1975; 1990) concept of flow experiences. Flow has been described as a pleasurable state of absorption that is associated with losing track of time. Items loading on the fourth factor referred to achieving a flow-like

The Shopping Mall as Consumer Habitat

35

psychological state while visiting the mall. In some cases, malls resemble Las Vegas casinos where patrons become relatively isolated from cues relating to time and weather (Kowinsky 1985). If the consumption activity is sufficiently pleasant, the hours may glide by. Although flow has not been specifically mentioned in past work on shopping orientations, Lesser and Kamal(l991) asked consumers whether shopping makes them feel like they are in “another world.” In Factor 5, knowledge or epistemic gains stimulating mall occupancy were represented. Items loading here referred to the receipt of information about new stores and new products. Whereas Factor 3 focused on the pleasures of novelty seeking, Factor 5 addressed benefits inherent in new information (i.e., “Shopping malls are a good place to find out what’s new”). These benefits may be similar to those stimulating market mavenism (Feick and Price 1987). Furthermore, in Tauber’s (1972) taxonomy, “learning about new trends” was considered one category of shopping motive. The last factor captured social or affiliation benefits which resemble those found in nearly all previous shopping orientation typologies (Tauber 1972; Westbrook and Black 1985). It was comprised of two items, each of which addressed an enjoyment of talking to and socializing with others. Feinberg et al. (1989) suggest that social motives may be particularly strong in the context of malls. One can argue that compared with free-standing stores, malls offer greater opportunities to socialize due to the presence of open spaces, benches, and food courts. Despite some similarities with previous research on shopping orientations, the taxonomy proposed here differs in several ways. First, this research focuses on the mall rather than the store as the unit of analysis. Due to the physical size of malls, the diversity of their constituent tenants, the presence of common areas, and their significance in modem culture, looking at benefits specific to mall-related consumption appears justified. In addition, this taxonomy gives particular emphasis to experiential consumption in a retail context. The focus here is on benefits of being in the mall habitat and experiencing the mall. Unlike past classifications, this taxonomy gives less attention to benefits pertaining to the process of buying such as role enactment and bargaining. Perceptions of Mall Benefits Across Inhabitant Clusters: To explore Research Question 3, factor scores on the orientation items were next compared across the four inhabitant clusters derived earlier using multivariate analysis of variance (see Table 4). Here, the focus was on determining the extent to which these benefits or orientations related to differences in activity patterns while in the mall. The overall orientation profiles of the four clusters were significantly different (Multivariate F = 5.98, p < .OOl). Clusters were also compared on the orientation dimensions individually. Scores on four of the six benefit dimensions (Escape, Flow, Epistemic, and Social) differed significantly over the four clusters. Examining Table 4 suggests that the Enthusiasts were likely to perceive the habitat as a source of many benefits. First, this group reported that the mall was a source of escape or boredom relief. This is not surprising given the Enthusiasts’ relatively high participation in experiential activities. Enthusiasts also were most likely to derive flow experiences while in the mall. According to Csikszentmihalyi (1990), flow is a rare and desirable state. Thus, one may speculate that the achievement of flow while in a mall may encourage continuation of the Enthusiasts’ high activity levels. This cluster also represent high scorers on epistemic and social benefits. Enthusiasts are

TABLE 3

Factor Loadings of Mall Benefit Items
Factor

1
Factor 5
Factor 2 Escape Benefits .lO Factor 3 Exploration Factor 4 Epistemic Flow Needs

Aesthetic
Appea

Factor 6 Social

Comunalities

/tern .84 .83 .03 .03 .16 .85 .81 .78 .55 .02 .03 .07 .lV .l 1 .13 .27 .23 -.04 .18 .02 .22 -.03 5.59 .26 .29 .05 .07 2.20 .79 .69 .lO .lV -.Ol .03 .04 .02 .25 .14 -.l 1 .42 2.10 .81 .45 -.Ol .Ol .12 .27 .l 1 .06 .07 .lO .83 .75 .58 .43 .23 .25 .ov -.04 .12 .05 1.41 .08 .14 .41 -.14 -.13 .25 .33 .05 -.07 .ll .Ol .18 .ll .16 .33 -.l1 .74 .65 .57 .43 .21 -.02 7.16 -.04 .15 .22 .08 .78 .70 .08 .07 .03 .lS .07 .oo .09 .03 .12 .Ol .12 .20 .30 .07 .24 .Ol

I

The interior design of malls usually attracts my attention

.ov
.19

.08
.lO

.76 .76 .15 -.12 .lO .08 .05 -.06 .12 .02 .05 .03 .15 -.07 .33 .06 -.03 .ov .28 .79 .69 1.03 .75 .67 .47 .39 .70 57 .51 .37 o< 7 .74 .67 .s : P ; ” s B g 2. .70 .74 .a2 .78 .68 .54 .69 .63 .54

I notice colors and textures in mall interiors I notice things in mall interiors and architecture that pass other people by Compared to most people, I pay less attention to the interior designs of shopping

centers [-la

When I’m bored, malls are a good place to go

When I’m alone and need something to do, the mall is a good place to go

When I’m bored, I don’t need a good reason to go to a shopping mall

I need to be looking for a specific item for me to want to visit a shopping mall [-I

Investigating new products at the mall is generally a waste of time [-I

No products interest me enough to make me want to browse in a mall store [-I

Investigating new stores at the mall is generally a waste of time [-I

I lose track of time when I’m in a mall

Time seems to fly by when I’m at a mall

When I leave a mall, I am sometimes surprised to find it’s dark outside

Going to the mall is particularly enjoyable when I go with friends

I learn a lot by visiting the mall and just looking around

I consider a visit to the mall to be a learning experience

Shopping malls are a good place to find out what’s new

In the mall, certain retailers are especially fun to visit because they sell products that interest me

I usually feel friendly and talkative to others when I’m at a mall

The mall is a place where I usually avoid talking to other people [-I

Eigen va lues

Note: a. Negative itemswere reversexored prior to the factor analysis

The Shopping

Mall as Consumer Habitat

37

relatively likely to satisfy needs for new information and needs to socialize while occupying the mall habitat. The Traditionalists did not score highly on any single benefit factor and scores on the escape factor proved to be particularly low. Perhaps these experiential benefits and escape in particular may simply be irrelevant to these rather purposive visitors. Their emphasis is obtaining goods available in the mall and other potential benefits are not salient to them. The Grazers, on the other hand, were distinguished by relatively low scores on benefit dimensions other than escape. Like the Enthusiasts, members of this cluster used the habitat as a place to “kill” time browsing and eating. This sort of activity would appear to fit with a desire for escape and boredom relief. The Minimalists were the lowest scorers on every benefit dimension. Those consumers who consume the mall least are less likely to perceive benefits from being in the habitat. The Minimalists may visit the mall to solve a highly specific purpose or to accompany a family member. In general, these individuals may be similar to Fram and Axelrod’s (1990) “distressed shopper” and their visit to the mall may simply be a necessary evil. None of the four clusters were characterized by the realization of aesthetic benefits. Even Mall Enthusiasts did not report being particularly attuned to the architectural highlights characterizing many malls. It would be inappropriate, however, to conclude that mall design and interiors are not important to consumers. Consumers may take the pleasantness of the mall habitat for granted. They may visit a mall assuming that it will be comfortable and visually pleasing without paying any special attention to the atmospherics. Perhaps, the atmospherics of a mall that lacks an attractive, updated design will be most noticed, but in a negative manner. Additional research on the environmental psychology of malls using different measures and methods seems highly worthwhile given the substantial resources being devoted to mall design and rehabilitation. Finally, the exploration benefit factor also failed to distinguish among the clusters. In examining Table 4, one should interpret possible causal links between mall activity and perceived benefits with caution, however. The direction of the relationships just noted

TABLE 4 Perceived Mall Benefits Among Different
Cluster 2

Activity Clustersa
Cluster 4

Benefit Dimension

Cluster 1 Mall Enthusiasts
.04 .20 -.05 .33 .29 .27

Cluster3
Grazers
.oo .20 .07 -.lO -.04 .06

Traditionalists
.oo -.15 .08 .07 -.04 -.02

Minimalists
-.03 -.17 -.08 -.30 -.20 -.26

F=
.14 16.45 1.06 11.47 6.41 7.63

P’
“S

Aesthetics
Escape Exploration Flow Epistemic Social

.OOl ns ,001 .003 ,001

Note: a: Cell entries reflect mean factor scores on the row dimension for the specified inhabitant cluster. Multivariate F = 5.98, p < .OOl

38

Journal of Retailing Vol. 70, No. 1 1994

remains unclear. The question remains whether extensive mall activity allows the experience of more benefits or does the pursuit of these benefits stimulate greater habitat consumption? One can plausibly argue for each of these directions and additional study will be needed to uncover their relative significance.

CONCLUSIONS

It is surprising that research on shopping malls is relatively scarce given that malls have altered the physical landscape of cities and have become significant engines of retail sales. In addition, the mall has become a central part of modern lifestyles, encouraging a growing number of mall activities and providing an expansive set of attractions. In trying to capture its significance, this study has portrayed the large enclosed mall as society’s dominant consumer habitat. As with any large habitat, it was expected that consumers would vary in the ways they behave in the mall and in the perceived benefits bringing them to the site. Results confirmed that considerable heterogeneity existed among mall denizens. Specifically, four mall inhabitant groups were identified-Enthusiasts, Traditionalists, Grazers, and Minimalists. Each group interacted with or consumed the mall habitat in a distinctive manner. In this study, the purpose was to provide a needed examination of consumer behavior in large retail institutions rather than conventional stores. In addition, the study sought to give needed attention to experiential consumption. It was believed that focusing strictly on how much a consumer spends or whether that consumer is a “recreational” shopper loses much of what actually happens in a shopping mall. A wide set of mall activities were investigated and tied to perceived benefits that were tailored to the mall habitat. It should be noted that this study did not include all possible mall inhabitants. For example, it would be interesting to question other mall personnel, including sales clerks, store managers, security guards, janitorial workers, and mall office personnel for additional insights into the “life” supported by this unique habitat. One might even study the marginal members of the mall habitat, such as homeless people and so called “mall-rats” who use the mall obsessively (Graham 1988; Jacobs 1984; Kowinski 1985). The present research represents one attempt to understand mall-related consumption. Future research could take many different directions. Studies could address environmental psychology issues and look at the effects of size, scale, complexity, and crowding on mall behavior. For example, do consumers seeking different mall benefits tend to prefer a habitat teeming with excitement, or one that quietly accommodates their activities. The concepts of architectural legibility and mystery also could be explored in a mall context. Researchers posit that people prefer an optimal mix of legibility and mystery in built environments (Kaplan 1987). The possibility of varying blends across consumer inhabitant groups also bears investigation. Given that many malls were built over 20 years ago, the impact of mall “aging” on consumer activities and patronage could be examined, particularly as it relates to consumer novelty seeking and boredom relief. The role of tenant mix as an attraction to consumers

The Shopping Mall as Consumer Habitat

39

also warrants investigation. In particular, the optimal balance of functional vs. recreational outlets could be examined. In addition, relative preferences for large anchor stores vs. small retailers may be affected by mall orientations. Consumers’ reactions to the increasing homogenization of mall store mixes also may be examined. The negative influence of malls is another area of potential promise. One issue is the role of malls in the reinforcement of materialistic values (Richins and Dawson 1992). In one location consumers are confronted with a concentrated presentation of those products associated with the “good life.” Perhaps mall enthusiasts have higher than average materialism profiles. Again the question of causal direction would have to be addressed. In a similar vein, malls are common sites for compulsive consumption (O’Guinn and Faber 1989). A person prone to compulsive shopping may react in malls as the compulsive gambler would in a casino. Research also might focus on socialization issues and the importance of malls to adolescents (Graham 1988; New York Times 1993). It also should be noted that the survey approach used in the present study is only one way to examine the life of a mall habitat. There appear to be significant opportunities to investigate the mall habitat using a qualitative or phenomenological approach. Researchers could take advantage of techniques such as observation, videography, and depth interviewing in the field to investigate consumer behaviors and motives pertaining to malls. It is interesting to note that such methods have become most associated with non traditional retailing such as flea markets and swap meets. Applying these techniques to the study of mainstream retail institutions such as malls would provide a valuable complement to the traditional survey methods employed here. Finally, the habitat concept and the perspective of the present study pertaining to malls appears relevant to the study of other retail institutions. A number of marketplaces appear to qualify as habitats, drawing large numbers of consumes and allowing them to engage in a variety of activities. Research could examine the activities of settings such as touristoriented festival marketplaces (e.g., Pier 39 in San Francisco, South Street Seaport in New York), large, enduring downtown department stores (e.g., Wanamaker’s in Philadelphia), and big city auto-shows. Other promising subjects would be the huge mega-stores, warehouse clubs, and “category killers” that are becoming increasingly prevalent (USA Today 1992). In summary, this study has attempted to “freeze in time” a shopping mall habitat and its denizens as a unit for study in hopes of producing a clearer picture of the environment and its many purposes, influences, and attractions. In future study, scholars are encouraged to hold a broad view of what constitutes consumption activity in the marketplace. As shown in this study, researchers should remain mindful that in addition to acquiring goods, many consumes seek to experience a habitat in many other ways.

Acknowledgment: The authors would like to thank the research department Simon & Associates for their assistance in making this project possible.

of Melvin

40

Journal of Retailing

Vol. 70, No. 1 1994

REFERENCES

Baker, Julie, Leonard L. Berry and A. Parasuraman (1988). “The Marketing Impact of Branch Facility Design,” Journal of Retail Banking: 33-42. Belk, Russell W. (1982). “Acquiring, Possessing and Collecting: Fundamental Processes in Consumer Behavior.” In Marketing Theory: Philosophy of Science Perspectives, R. Bush and S. Hunt (eds). Chicago: American Marketing Association. Belk, Russell W., John F. Sherry and Melanie Wallendorf (1988). “A Naturalistic Inquiry into Buyer and Seller Behavior at a Swap Meet,” Journal of Consumer Research, 14(March): 449-470. Bellenger, Danny N. and Pradeep Korgoankar (1980). “Profiling the Recreational Shopper,” Journal ofRetailing, 58(Spring): 58-81. Bitner, Mary Jo (1992). “Servicescapes: The Impact of Physical Surroundings on Customers and Employees,” Journal ofMarketing, 56(April): 57-71. Bloch, Peter H., Nancy M. Ridgway and Daniel L. Sherrell (1989). “Extending the Concept of Shopping: An Investigation of Browsing Activity,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 17(Winter): 13-21. Christman, Edward (1988). “Mixing Entertainment, Retail.” Shopping Centers Today, 1: 4-5. Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly (1975). Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and Row. Darden, William R. and Fred D. Reynolds (1971). “Shopping Orientations and Product Usage Rates,” Journal of Marketing Research, I(November): 505-508. Donovan, Robert J. and John R. Rossiter (1982). “Store Atmosphere: An Environmental Psychology Approach,” Journal of Retailing, 5S(Spring): 34-57. Ehrlich, Paul R. and Jonathan Roughgarden (1987). The Science Of Ecology. New York: Macmillan. Feick, Lawrence F. and Linda L. Price (1987). The Market Maven: A Diffuser of Marketplace Information, Journal ofMarketing, Sl(January): 83-97. Feinberg, Richard A., Jennifer Meoli and B. Sheffler (1989). “There’s Something Social Happening at the Mall,” Journal of Business and Psychology, 4(Fall): 49-63. Feinberg, Richard A. and Jennifer Meoli (1991). “A Brief History of the Mall.” Pp. 426-427 in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 18. Rebecca Holman and Michael Solomon, (eds). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research. Fram, Eugene and Joel Axelrod (1990). “The Distressed Shopper,” American Demographics, (October): 44-45. Graham, Ellen (1988). “The Call of the Mall,” Wall Street Journal (May 13): 7R. Gregorson, John (1988). “Tailoring a Fashion Mall to its Urban Setting,” Building Design and Construction, 29(March): 74. Grossbart, Sanford L., Robert Mittelstaedt, William W. Curtis and Robert D. Rogers (1975). “Environmental Sensitivity and Shopping Behavior,” Journal of Business Research, 3(0ctober): 281294. Guba, E.G. (I 990). The Paradigm Dialog. Beverly Hills: Sage. Hair, Joseph F., Ralph E. Anderson, Ronald L. Tatham and William C. Black (1992). Multivariate Data Analysis. New York: MacMillan. Hanson, Earl D. (1964). Animal Diversity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Henry, Gordon M. (1986). “Welcome to the Pleasure Dome,” Time, 128 (October 27): 75. Hickman, Cleveland, Larry S. Roberts and Frances Hickman (1984). Integrated Principles of Zoology. St. Louis: Times Mirror.

The Shopping

Mall as Consumer Habitat

41

Hirschman, Elizabeth C. (1980). “Innovativeness, Novelty Seeking, and Consumer Creativity,” Journal of Consumer Research 7(December): 283-295. (1984). “Experience Seeking: A Subjectivist Perspective of Consumption,” Journal of Business Research, 12: 115-l 36. Hirchman, Elizabeth C. and Morris B. Holbrook (1982). “Hedonic Consumption: Emerging Concepts, Methods, and Propositions,” Journal of Marketing, 46(Summer): 92-101. Holbrook, Morris B. and Elizabeth C. Hirschman (1982). ‘The Experiential Aspects of Consumption: Consumer Fantasies, Feelings and Fun,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9(September): 132-140. Jacobs, Gerry (1984). The Mall. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. Jarboe, Glen R. and Carl D. McDaniel (1987). “A Profile of Browsers in Regional Shopping Mall,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, lS(Spring): 45-52. Kaplan, Stephen (1987). “Aesthetics, Affect and Cognition: Environmental Preference from an Evolutionary Perspective,” Environment and Behavior, 19(January): 3-32. Kormondy, Edward J. (1984). Concepts Of Ecology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kotler, Philip (1973). “Atmospherics as a Marketing Tool,” Journal of Retailing, 49 (Winter): 48-65. Kowinski, William S. (1985). The Mailing of America. New York: William Morrow and Co. (1986). “Endless Summer at the World’s Biggest Shopping Wonderland,” Smithsonian, 17(9): 34-43. Lesser, Jack A. and Sanjay Jain (1985). “A Preliminary Investigation of the Relationship Between Exploratory and Epistemic Shopping Behavior.” Pp. 75-85 in AMA Educators’ Proceedings, Series No. 51, Robert Lusch et al. (eds). Chicago: American Marketing Association. Lesser, Jack A. and Pushp Kamal (1991). “An Inductively Described Model of the Motivation to Shop,” Psychology Marketing, 8 (Fall): 177-191. Lincoln, Y.S. and E.G. Guba (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage. Mehrabian, Albert and J.A. Russell (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Monitor (1988). “Consumer Behavior in the Shopping Center,” 18(June): 1940. Nebel, Bernard J. (1990). Environmental Science: The Way the World Works. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. New York Times (1993). “After School Teen-Age Gatherings are Casting a Pall on the Mall Scene,” (November 23): 18. O’Guinn, Thomas C. and Ronald J. Faber (1989). “Compulsive Buying: A Phenomenological Exploration,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16(September): 147-157. 0’ Guinn, Thomas C. and Russell W. Belk (1989). “Heavenon Earth: Consumption at Heritage Village, USA,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16(September): 227-238. Oxford English Dictionary (1987). Vol. 6. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Raju, P. S. (1980). “Optimum Stimulation Level: Its Relationship to Personality, Demographics, and Exploratory Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 7(December): 272-282. Rapoport, Amos (1982). The Meaning of the Built Environment. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Richins, Marsha L. and Scott A. Dawson (1992). “Consumer Values Orientation for Materialism and its Measurement: Scale Development and Validation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 19(December): 303-3 16. Ridgway, Nancy M., Scott A. Dawson and Peter H. Bloch (1989). “Pleasure and Arousal in the Marketplace: Interpersonal Differences in Approach-Avoidance Responses,” Marketing Letters, l(2): 139-147. Sherry, John F. (1990). “A Sociocultural Analysis of a Midwestern American Flea Market,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17(June): 13-30. Smith, Robert L. (1974). Ecological and Field Biology. New York: Harper and Row.

42

Journal of Retailing

Vol. 70, No. 1 1994

Stockil, Peter (1972). “The Mall.” Pp. 52-62 in Enclosed Shopping Centres, Clive Darlow (ed). London: Architectural Press. Stoffel, Jennifer (1988). “Where America Goes for Entertainment,” New York Times (August 7): 11F. Tauber, Edward M. (1972). “Why Do People Shop ?,” Journal of Marketing, 36(October): 46-59. USA Today (1992). “Down the Aisles of a Megastore,” (December 7): 3B. Westbrook, Robert A. and William C. Black (1985). “A Motivation-Based Shopper Typology,” Journal of Retailing, 61(Spring): 78-103. Whittaker, John 0. (1974). Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mammals. New York: Knopf.

References: Baker, Julie, Leonard L. Berry and A. Parasuraman (1988). “The Marketing Impact of Branch Facility Design,” Journal of Retail Banking: 33-42. Belk, Russell W. (1982). “Acquiring, Possessing and Collecting: Fundamental Processes in Consumer Behavior.” In Marketing Theory: Philosophy of Science Perspectives, R. Bush and S. Hunt (eds). Chicago: American Marketing Association. Belk, Russell W., John F. Sherry and Melanie Wallendorf (1988). “A Naturalistic Inquiry into Buyer and Seller Behavior at a Swap Meet,” Journal of Consumer Research, 14(March): 449-470. Bellenger, Danny N. and Pradeep Korgoankar (1980). “Profiling the Recreational Shopper,” Journal ofRetailing, 58(Spring): 58-81. Bitner, Mary Jo (1992). “Servicescapes: The Impact of Physical Surroundings on Customers and Employees,” Journal ofMarketing, 56(April): 57-71. Bloch, Peter H., Nancy M. Ridgway and Daniel L. Sherrell (1989). “Extending the Concept of Shopping: An Investigation of Browsing Activity,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 17(Winter): 13-21. Christman, Edward (1988). “Mixing Entertainment, Retail.” Shopping Centers Today, 1: 4-5. Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly (1975). Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and Row. Darden, William R. and Fred D. Reynolds (1971). “Shopping Orientations and Product Usage Rates,” Journal of Marketing Research, I(November): 505-508. Donovan, Robert J. and John R. Rossiter (1982). “Store Atmosphere: An Environmental Psychology Approach,” Journal of Retailing, 5S(Spring): 34-57. Ehrlich, Paul R. and Jonathan Roughgarden (1987). The Science Of Ecology. New York: Macmillan. Feick, Lawrence F. and Linda L. Price (1987). The Market Maven: A Diffuser of Marketplace Information, Journal ofMarketing, Sl(January): 83-97. Feinberg, Richard A., Jennifer Meoli and B. Sheffler (1989). “There’s Something Social Happening at the Mall,” Journal of Business and Psychology, 4(Fall): 49-63. Feinberg, Richard A. and Jennifer Meoli (1991). “A Brief History of the Mall.” Pp. 426-427 in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 18. Rebecca Holman and Michael Solomon, (eds). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research. Fram, Eugene and Joel Axelrod (1990). “The Distressed Shopper,” American Demographics, (October): 44-45. Graham, Ellen (1988). “The Call of the Mall,” Wall Street Journal (May 13): 7R. Gregorson, John (1988). “Tailoring a Fashion Mall to its Urban Setting,” Building Design and Construction, 29(March): 74. Grossbart, Sanford L., Robert Mittelstaedt, William W. Curtis and Robert D. Rogers (1975). “Environmental Sensitivity and Shopping Behavior,” Journal of Business Research, 3(0ctober): 281294. Guba, E.G. (I 990). The Paradigm Dialog. Beverly Hills: Sage. Hair, Joseph F., Ralph E. Anderson, Ronald L. Tatham and William C. Black (1992). Multivariate Data Analysis. New York: MacMillan. Hanson, Earl D. (1964). Animal Diversity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Henry, Gordon M. (1986). “Welcome to the Pleasure Dome,” Time, 128 (October 27): 75. Hickman, Cleveland, Larry S. Roberts and Frances Hickman (1984). Integrated Principles of Zoology. St. Louis: Times Mirror. The Shopping Mall as Consumer Habitat 41 Hirschman, Elizabeth C. (1980). “Innovativeness, Novelty Seeking, and Consumer Creativity,” Journal of Consumer Research 7(December): 283-295. (1984). “Experience Seeking: A Subjectivist Perspective of Consumption,” Journal of Business Research, 12: 115-l 36. Hirchman, Elizabeth C. and Morris B. Holbrook (1982). “Hedonic Consumption: Emerging Concepts, Methods, and Propositions,” Journal of Marketing, 46(Summer): 92-101. Holbrook, Morris B. and Elizabeth C. Hirschman (1982). ‘The Experiential Aspects of Consumption: Consumer Fantasies, Feelings and Fun,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9(September): 132-140. Jacobs, Gerry (1984). The Mall. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press. Jarboe, Glen R. and Carl D. McDaniel (1987). “A Profile of Browsers in Regional Shopping Mall,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, lS(Spring): 45-52. Kaplan, Stephen (1987). “Aesthetics, Affect and Cognition: Environmental Preference from an Evolutionary Perspective,” Environment and Behavior, 19(January): 3-32. Kormondy, Edward J. (1984). Concepts Of Ecology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Kotler, Philip (1973). “Atmospherics as a Marketing Tool,” Journal of Retailing, 49 (Winter): 48-65. Kowinski, William S. (1985). The Mailing of America. New York: William Morrow and Co. (1986). “Endless Summer at the World’s Biggest Shopping Wonderland,” Smithsonian, 17(9): 34-43. Lesser, Jack A. and Sanjay Jain (1985). “A Preliminary Investigation of the Relationship Between Exploratory and Epistemic Shopping Behavior.” Pp. 75-85 in AMA Educators’ Proceedings, Series No. 51, Robert Lusch et al. (eds). Chicago: American Marketing Association. Lesser, Jack A. and Pushp Kamal (1991). “An Inductively Described Model of the Motivation to Shop,” Psychology Marketing, 8 (Fall): 177-191. Lincoln, Y.S. and E.G. Guba (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage. Mehrabian, Albert and J.A. Russell (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Monitor (1988). “Consumer Behavior in the Shopping Center,” 18(June): 1940. Nebel, Bernard J. (1990). Environmental Science: The Way the World Works. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. New York Times (1993). “After School Teen-Age Gatherings are Casting a Pall on the Mall Scene,” (November 23): 18. O’Guinn, Thomas C. and Ronald J. Faber (1989). “Compulsive Buying: A Phenomenological Exploration,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16(September): 147-157. 0’ Guinn, Thomas C. and Russell W. Belk (1989). “Heavenon Earth: Consumption at Heritage Village, USA,” Journal of Consumer Research, 16(September): 227-238. Oxford English Dictionary (1987). Vol. 6. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Raju, P. S. (1980). “Optimum Stimulation Level: Its Relationship to Personality, Demographics, and Exploratory Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 7(December): 272-282. Rapoport, Amos (1982). The Meaning of the Built Environment. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Richins, Marsha L. and Scott A. Dawson (1992). “Consumer Values Orientation for Materialism and its Measurement: Scale Development and Validation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 19(December): 303-3 16. Ridgway, Nancy M., Scott A. Dawson and Peter H. Bloch (1989). “Pleasure and Arousal in the Marketplace: Interpersonal Differences in Approach-Avoidance Responses,” Marketing Letters, l(2): 139-147. Sherry, John F. (1990). “A Sociocultural Analysis of a Midwestern American Flea Market,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17(June): 13-30. Smith, Robert L. (1974). Ecological and Field Biology. New York: Harper and Row. 42 Journal of Retailing Vol. 70, No. 1 1994 Stockil, Peter (1972). “The Mall.” Pp. 52-62 in Enclosed Shopping Centres, Clive Darlow (ed). London: Architectural Press. Stoffel, Jennifer (1988). “Where America Goes for Entertainment,” New York Times (August 7): 11F. Tauber, Edward M. (1972). “Why Do People Shop ?,” Journal of Marketing, 36(October): 46-59. USA Today (1992). “Down the Aisles of a Megastore,” (December 7): 3B. Westbrook, Robert A. and William C. Black (1985). “A Motivation-Based Shopper Typology,” Journal of Retailing, 61(Spring): 78-103. Whittaker, John 0. (1974). Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mammals. New York: Knopf.