| Literature DB >> 34966316 |
Huiliang Zhao1,2, Xuemei Yao3, Zhenghong Liu4, Qin Yang2.
Abstract
The relationship between product pricing and product packaging plays an important role in the buying behavior of consumers, whereas customer satisfaction plays a mediating role. To test these hypotheses, research was conducted on university students in China. Questionnaire-based convenience sampling was conducted on 500 students for data collection using online and offline sources. A total of 367 (73%) students responded, and 17 questionnaires were rejected due to missing information. SPSS and AMOS software were used for the data analysis. Product pricing and product information were independent variables in this study, whereas consumer buying behavior was a dependent variable. Customer satisfaction is mediated by one dependent and two independent variables. Confirmatory factor analysis, path analysis, and discriminant validity in structural equation modeling revealed that product pricing and packaging had a statistically significant relationship with the buyer decision process. The introduction of satisfaction as a mediating variable led to the observation of full mediation in the case of product pricing and partial mediation in product packaging. Given the results of this research, product managers should adopt pricing tactics along with product packaging to influence the buying intentions of consumers.Entities:
Keywords: confirmatory factor analysis; consumer buying behavior; consumer satisfaction; product packaging; product pricing; structural equation modeling
Year: 2021 PMID: 34966316 PMCID: PMC8710754 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.720151
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
FIGURE 1Theoretical framework.
Reliability analysis.
| Variables | Items | Cronbach’s Alpha value |
| Product pricing | 12 | 0.70 |
| Product packaging | 7 | 0.72 |
| Satisfaction | 7 | 0.76 |
| Consumer buying behavior | 7 | 0.73 |
Descriptive statistics.
| Variables | Mean | Std. deviation | N |
| Product pricing | 3.40 | 0.96 | 350 |
| Product packaging | 3.90 | 0.88 | 350 |
| Customer satisfaction | 3.60 | 0.79 | 350 |
| Consumer buying behavior | 3.80 | 0.66 | 350 |
Pooled CFA model fitness tests.
| Category name | Index name | Full index name | Analysis value | Acceptable value | Literature |
| Absolute fit | RMSEA | Root Mean Square of Error Approximation | 0.05 | < 0.80 |
|
| Incremental fit | CFI | Comparative fit index | 0.91 | > 0.90 |
|
| Parsimonious fit | Chisq/df | Chi Square/Degrees of freedom | 2.43 | < 3 |
|
FIGURE 2Pooled confirmatory factor analysis.
Factor loading of items.
| Scale | Items | Factor loadings | Scale reliability |
| Product pricing | I am very concerned about low prices, but I am equally concerned about product quality. | 0.71 | 0.70 |
| When grocery shopping, I compare the prices of different brands to be sure I get the best value for the money. | 0.74 | ||
| When purchasing a product, I always try to maximize the quality I get for the money I spend. | 0.64 | ||
| When I buy products, I like to be sure that I am getting my money’s worth. | 0.70 | ||
| I generally shop around for lower prices on products, but they must still meet certain quality requirements before buying them. | 0.78 | ||
| When I shop, I usually compare the “price per ounce” information for brands I normally buy. | 0.66 | ||
| I always check prices at the grocery store to be sure I get the best value for the money I spend. | 0.69 | ||
| I am not willing to go to extra effort to find lower prices. | 0.65 | ||
| I will grocery shop at more than one store to take advantage of low prices. | 0.74 | ||
| The money saved by finding low prices is usually not worth the time and effort. | 0.70 | ||
| I would never shop at more than one store to find low prices. | 0.78 | ||
| The time it takes to find low prices is usually not worth the effort. | 0.66 | ||
| Product packaging | The packaging color impacts my buying behavior | 0.74 | 0.72 |
| The label of the package is important for me | 0.80 | ||
| The quality of the packaging material is important for me | 0.82 | ||
| The package design has an impact on me during my purchase | 0.61 | ||
| The printed information on the package helps me to purchase the specific product | 0.68 | ||
| The language used on the package influences my buying decision | 0.63 | ||
| Innovation and practicality in product packaging is important for me during purchasing | 0.76 | ||
| Customer satisfaction | I am very satisfied with the ease of use of this product | 0.83 | 0.76 |
| I am very satisfied with the information provided by this product | 0.76 | ||
| I am very satisfied with the personalization offered by this product for me. | 0.74 | ||
| My experience with this product is very satisfactory. | 0.71 | ||
| I am very satisfied with the packaging of this product. | 0.66 | ||
| This product fulfills my needs | 0.76 | ||
| The information on product packaging helps me in purchasing this product | 0.87 | ||
| Consumer buying behavior/Buyer decision process | I usually read online reviews of products before making a purchase decision. | 0.83 | 0.73 |
| Personal contact and communication with salesperson are important while shopping | 0.76 | ||
| Touching or seeing the products in person is an important part of the shopping experience | 0.54 | ||
| Blogs are an important source of information regarding products and services | 0.71 | ||
| Viral information (videos/articles etc.) influences my perception toward the products | 0.83 | ||
| I generally consult family and friends before making a purchase | 0.76 | ||
| I usually seek expert opinion online before purchasing a high involvement product | 0.71 |
HTMT analysis.
| Product pricing | Product packaging | Satisfaction | Buyer decision process | |
| Product pricing | ||||
| Product packaging | 0.29 | |||
| Satisfaction | 0.26 | 0.20 | ||
| Buyer decision process | 0.21 | 0.09 | 0.04 |
SEM, model fitness tests.
| Category name | Index name | Full index name | Analysis value | Acceptable value | Literature |
| Absolute fit | RMSEA | Root Mean Square of Error Approximation | 0.05 | < 0.80 |
|
| Incremental fit | CFI | Comparative fit index | 0.72 | > 0.90 |
|
| Parsimonious fit | Chisq/df | Chi Square/Degrees of freedom | 1.92 | < 3 |
|
FIGURE 3Direct effects of path analysis.
Results of indirect effects.
| Hypothesis | Causal path | Lower bound | Upper bound | P-value | Standardized estimated |
| H1 | Product Pricing → Consumer Buying Behavior | −0.16 | 0.09 | 0.00 | 0.23 |
| H3 | Product Packaging → Consumer Buying Behavior | −0.18 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.17 |
| H5 | Satisfaction → Consumer Buying Behavior | −0.13 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.39 |
FIGURE 4Indirect direct effects of path analysis.
Results of indirect effects.
| S/R | Hypothesis | Direct beta without mediation | Direct beta with mediation | Indirect beta/Standardized estimates | Mediation type observed |
| H2 | Product Pricing → Satisfaction → Consumer Buying Behavior | 0.23 | 0.35 | 0.16 | Full Mediation |
| H4 | Product Packaging → Satisfaction → Consumer Buying Behavior | 0.17 | 0.29 | 0.09 | Partial Mediation |
*** = Significance level at 1%.** = Significance level at 5%.
Hypothesis results.
| S/R | Research question | Hypothesis | Results | |
| 1 | RQ1: Is there a relationship between product pricing and buyer decision process? | Null | Product Pricing is not a significantly positive predictor of buyer decision process | Rejected |
| Alternative | Product Pricing is a significantly positive predictor of buyer decision process | Accepted | ||
| 2 | RQ2: Is there a relationship between product packaging and buyer decision process? | Null | Product Packaging is not a significantly positive predictor of buyer decision process | Rejected |
| Alternative | Product Packaging is a significantly positive predictor of buyer decision process | Accepted | ||
| 3 | RQ3: Is there a relationship between satisfaction and buyer decision process? | Null | Satisfaction is not a significantly positive predictor of buyer decision process | Rejected |
| Alternative | Satisfaction is a significantly positive predictor of buyer decision process | Accepted | ||
| 4 | RQ4: Is there a mediating effect of satisfaction among product pricing and buyer decision process? | Null | There is no significantly positive mediating impact of satisfaction among product pricing and buyer decision process. | Rejected |
| Alternative | There is a significantly positive mediating impact of satisfaction among product pricing and buyer decision process. | Accepted | ||
| 5 | RQ5: Is there a mediating effect of satisfaction among product packaging and buyer decision process? | Null | There is no significantly positive mediating impact of satisfaction among product packaging and buyer decision process. | Rejected |
| Alternative | There is a significantly positive mediating impact of satisfaction among product packaging and buyer decision process. | Accepted | ||