Journal of Consumer Behaviour, J. Consumer Behav.

14: 4156 (2015)

Published online 26 November 2014 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/cb.1500

Effects of consumer embarrassment on shopping basket size and value: A

study of the millennial consumer
BRIDGET SATINOVER NICHOLS1*, DAVID RASKA1 and DANIEL J. FLINT2
1
Haile/US Bank College of Business, Department of Marketing, Economics, and Sports Business, Northern Kentucky University, Highland
Heights, KY , USA
2
Department of Marketing and Supply Chain Management, 314 Stokely Management Center, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN , USA
ABSTRACT
This paper examines how the emotion of embarrassment affects shopping behavior in a retail setting. In a series of three studies, we explore the
phenomenon of masking, which is dened as a coping strategy used by shoppers when experiencing embarrassment related to a purchase task.
Study 1 provides consumer insights into masking behaviors among Millennials. Study 2 empirically examines degrees of anticipated embarrassment
associated with purchasing a variety of personal care products and uses a controlled experiment to test the impact of embarrassment on the size of the
shopping basket (number of items purchased) and the value of the shopping basket. Study 3 examines basket size and value with respect to
complementary and counterbalancing products, and compares Millennial with non-Millennial consumers. Collectively, this research indicates that
both Millennial and non-Millennials use masking as a coping strategy for a variety of products due to anticipated embarrassment, translating into
enhanced basket sizes and values. This effect appears to be moderated by ones innate susceptibility to embarrassment. This study contributes to
our understanding of how the emotion of embarrassment inuences shopping basket composition in terms of its value and size. It also provides
insightful ndings relevant to retail practitioners. Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Although we know that emotions in general can have

signicant inuence on shopping behaviors (Wakeeld and
Baker, 1998), we know very little about the effects of
embarrassment. Although there are a variety of circumstances for consumers to experience embarrassment, the act
of purchasing a sensitive health related product generates
strong feelings of embarrassment across a wide range of
consumer segments (Wilson and West, 1981; Dahl et al.,
2001; Grace, 2009; Blair and Roese, 2013). As Americans
spend an average of $35 on such products each month
(Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2011; StatisticBrain.com,
2013), it is important to understand how shopping for these
types of products affects consumers and their in-store
behaviors. Specically, the present research focuses on how
anticipated embarrassment affects consumers shopping
baskets with respect to its size and value.
Of particular interest to researchers and practitioners, due
to generational size and spending power, is the Millennial
generation. Millennials currently comprise the largest consumer
segment, exceeding 79 million (Barton et al., 2014), and spend
an estimated $600 billion each year (Donnelly and Scaff, 2013).
Current college students are an important subset of this generation and are especially important to todays retailers because
they account for more than $400 billion in total spending
(Nelson, 2012). In addition, one study estimates that 78 per cent
of college students spend money on personal care items each
month (Studentawards inc, 2010). At the same time, college
students are notoriously embarrassed to purchase some personal
care items, including those dealing with sex and other physical
or hygienic conditions. This is becoming more frequent for male
Millennials who are now purchasing female products to treat
*Correspondence to: Bridget Satinover Nichols, Marketing, Economics, and
Sports Business, Northern Kentucky University, Highland Heights, KY
41099 USA.
E-mail: nicholsb1@nku.edu

Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

their skin after shaving, for example, in order to maintain their

looks, contributing to the emergent growth in personal female
care products geared toward men (Boyle, 2013). They are also
highly likely to self-treat in order to avoid costly doctor visits,
and are frequent drugstore shoppers (Schultz, 2012). In fact,
Millennials as a whole are more likely than any other consumer
group to patronize pharmacy/drug stores such as CVS and
Walgreens in the USA (Symphony IRI Group, 2012) or Boots,
Superdrug, or Gordons in the UK. For these reasons, it is important to gain a better understanding of when they feel
embarrassed, and how they cope with the task of purchasing
an embarrassing product as compared with the general consumer population. There are clear implications for theorists,
marketers, and retailers alike.
This paper contributes to our knowledge of how Millennials
cope with an embarrassing purchase task and how it inuences
store-level outcomes including the size and value of the shopping basket. As a form of coping, this paper introduces the term
masking, dened as a strategy consumers use to hide or cover up
an embarrassing product in an effort to avoid social scrutiny. In a
series of three studies, we show not only that masking is a common behavior motivated by purchase embarrassment (studies 1
and 2) but also that masking tendencies are inuenced by a
persons susceptibility to embarrassment (study 2) and when
additional products in the basket are complementary, rather than
counterbalancing, to the embarrassing product (study 3). Importantly, our results suggest that Millennials, as compared with
non-Millennials, are more prone to make behavior modications
in response to an undesired identity that can be signaled from
this type of shopping experience.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. First, we
discuss the emotion of embarrassment and review relevant literature, relying on theories of social anxiety, behavior modication,
and the Theory of Planned Behavior to formulate our predictions.
Next, we present the methodologies and results of the three

42

B. S. Nichols et al.

studies dealing with shopping for an embarrassing product. We

conclude by offering implications for theory and practice.

BACKGROUND
Embarrassment is a common emotion that almost everyone has
experienced, and is thought to be a normal and natural part of
the human experience (Miller, 1996). Embarrassment is felt when
an individuals behavior fails to gain social acceptance (Tangeny,
1999), and when he believes his behaviors may threaten his
desired social identity (Miller, 1995a). Theories of social anxiety are often used to explain the experience of embarrassment
(e.g., Semin and Manstead, 1981; Schlenker and Leary, 1982),
suggesting that the emotion surfaces when a person is
concerned that others will evaluate them as unsatisfactory.
Although people of any age are likely to nd themselves in
an embarrassing situation from time to time, some theorists
believe that self-consciousness and feelings of embarrassment
reach their peak during late adolescence (Edelmann, 1998),
partially because adolescents tend to be very concerned with
how others perceive them.
Although motivators for embarrassment are important, we
are more interested here in how people cope with it. According
to Goffman (1959), when individuals are involved in any kind
of social interaction, they engage in practices to avoid being
embarrassed or embarrassing others, and actively modify their
behavior to control the outward impression given to others.
These behavior modications are part of a schema of planning,
as opposed to being spontaneous, which helps in presenting an
effective front displayed for the sake of others (Miller,
1995b). Indeed, embarrassment is capable of motivating people to engage in behaviors aimed at reducing or avoiding social
rejection or judgment (Lewittes and Simmons, 1975), predominantly because embarrassing situations convey an undesired
public identity (Parrott and Smith, 1991). Thus, Goffmans
theory of social interaction and behavior modication is a
strong foundation for studying embarrassment in consumer
behavior contexts, especially in circumstances where face-face
interaction is inevitable and public identity is salient.
The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB, Azjen, 1991)
addresses how a persons beliefs about what others think about
him (subjective norm) and attitudes about certain in-store
behaviors (e.g., shopping for an embarrassing product) create
cognitive effort to control his own behavior and the outward
impression he presents to others. Anticipated embarrassment
motivates behavior particularly when a person fears the subjective
norms that dictate the emotion (e.g., Penz and Stottinger, 2005).
According to TPB, behavioral achievement relies on both the
motivation and the intention to enact a certain behavior. In the
context of embarrassing shopping situations, TPB would suggest
that people consciously plan and enact shopping behaviors to help
them reduce social rejection and judgments, which they believe
an embarrassing product would stimulate, even though the act
of purchasing an embarrassing product is, in itself, not taboo. This
highlights the importance of how anticipated emotions related to
a behavior inuence planned behaviors (Simonson, 1989;
Richard et al., 1996).
Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Masking: a cognitive coping strategy

It is not surprising that consumers experience emotional distress
and devise coping strategies in an effort to avoid unwanted attention when they feel embarrassed while shopping. For example,
Moore et al. (2008) found that participants reported a high
frequency of purchase rehearsal (go over in their mind what they
would say or do) and self-assurance (I shouldnt be embarrassed).
Beyond self-assurance, examples of behavior modication and
planned behavior related to purchase embarrassment are well
documented. For example, people dealing with incontinence
purchase sanitary napkins instead of adult diapers to avoid
feeling embarrassed and signaling to others that they are dealing
with a urinary problem (Kershaw and Schmall, 1993). College
students create strategies to avoid the public eye when purchasing condoms because they fear being labeled as promiscuous
(Dahl et al., 2005). Lewittes and Simmons (1975) conducted
naturalistic eld studies of college-aged men buying pornographic magazines and found that those who purchased these
magazines were more likely to request a bag than men who
purchased other types of magazines. They were also more likely
to purchase convenience-type items like gum in an effort to
disguise the true nature of their shopping trip and make the magazine less focal to observers. Brackett (2004) found that 16 per
cent of male and 41 per cent of female respondents mentioned purchasing additional items as a common coping strategy when buying condoms. This is echoed in a qualitative study by Picca and
Joos (2009), whereby descriptions of hiding or camouaging an
embarrassing product with more neutral items such as magazines,
gum, and candy were a common theme (Picca and Joos, 2009).
The prevalence of masking evident in previous research
suggests that shopping trips that are motivated by the need for
an embarrassing product should have observable effects on the
composition of the shopping basket, compared with when a
shopping trip is motivated by a non-embarrassing one. The rst
logical assumption is that shopping baskets will have more items
in the rst scenario compared with the latter. Thus, we make the
following predictions:
H1: The shopping basket size (number of items in the basket)
will be larger for participants purchasing an embarrassing
product than those who do not, and consequently,
H2: The shopping basket value will be higher for participants
purchasing an embarrassing product than those who do not.
Furthermore, given the cognitive effort required to successfully mask the embarrassing product (in line with TPB), it is likely
that consumers are specically aware of their extra expenditures,
rather than shopping mindlessly. Therefore, we expect that
H3: Shoppers who are purchasing an embarrassing product
will be able to accurately estimate the cost of their shopping trip.
Although for some people, the act of purchasing certain personal care products might seem daunting, terrifying, and extremely
embarrassing, it is possible that others may lack concern altogether.
The discrepancy is likely related to ones proneness to embarrassment. Indeed, the potential to experience or feel embarrassment
varies from person to person, and is considered an important
personality characteristic (Kelly and Jones, 1997). In concert with
our predictions thus far, we expect that
J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)
DOI: 10.1002/cb

The effect of embarrassment on shopping baskets

H4a/b: Susceptibility to embarrassment will moderate the
ndings of H1 and H2 such that those high (low) in the
trait should have higher (lower) (a) basket sizes and (b)
basket values.
We begin by attempting to better understand masking
from the consumer perspective, and the levels of embarrassment associated with a variety of personal care products.

STUDY 1
Study 1 was designed as an exploratory investigation to help
us garner a modern account of how Millennials deal with
embarrassing purchases in drug store settings and to discern
the extent to which masking is likely to occur. Instead of
focusing on one product type (e.g., condoms), we hoped to
learn of other products that might motivate masking behaviors.
Additionally, we hoped to discern if our conceptualization of
masking behaviors was suitable. We also hoped to extend
our understanding of the types of products Millennials feel
embarrassed about purchasing in order to shape an empirical
study (studies 2 and 3).
A class of 65 marketing students was asked by their
instructor to participate in a short online survey in which they
would remain anonymous. Students were emailed a link and
given 1 week to complete the survey. They were told that they
would need to recall a shopping experience and elaborate on
that experience. Once entering the study, participants were
given a brief denition of masking and were asked if they felt
they had ever shopped in this manner (yes/no). Participants
who answered yes were asked to describe the embarrassing
product and give a brief description of what they did to mask
it. Of the 65 students recruited, 58 participated in the survey.
Results
Sixty-seven per cent of the participants indicated that they
had previously masked an embarrassing purchase, suggesting
that people of this age demographic readily acknowledge the
behavior. (The 33 per cent who answered no were thanked
and routed to the demographic questions.) Of the 67 per cent,
23 were women, and 16 were men. The participants who
answered in the afrmative then gave a brief description of
the product and the circumstance. Two independent coders
coded the descriptions to identify the most common masking
behaviors, motives for masking behaviors, and type of products
being masked (inter-coder reliability = 0.98). The responses
indicated that for those who felt embarrassed, products related
to sexual health (40%), feminine care (40%), digestive health
(16%), foot care (4%), and weight loss products (4%) might
be most strongly related to masking behavior. Eighty-eight per
cent acknowledged purchasing additional items to mask the
embarrassing product by purchasing groceries (40%), magazines (20%), personal care products (16%), clothing (4%), using
self-checkout (4%), and bringing another person such as a parent
(4%). Finally, 48 per cent of the respondents indicated that their
motives for masking behavior were to avoid embarrassment
from people in general (32%), people they know (8%), and
cashiers (8%). These motives are predominantly characterized
Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

43

by comments, such as the examples in what follows, which

reect how the embarrassing purchase signals an unwanted
identity to others.
I once had to buy a pregnancy test. I felt embarrassed because I didnt want people to think bad upon me for what I
was buying. I was also younger at the time. The products I
used to cover it up were some magazines. [female, 22]
When I rst started buying condoms I felt embarrassed about
getting them. Usually I pick them up during my grocery shopping so they get thrown in with all the other grocery items. I
would, however, put them under another item so that
passers-by wouldnt see them and think well think things.
When in line I would still try to put them under other things.
[male, 21]

Discussion
Study 1 sheds light on the frequency and nature of masking
and helped us determine relevant embarrassing and masking
products for subsequent studies. Importantly, 88 per cent of those
who experienced embarrassment acknowledged purchasing
additional products to protect them from unwanted social judgment, interesting considering the budget constrained nature of this
consumer segment (Schultz, 2012). Almost half said that they
engaged in masking behaviors to avoid negative perceptions from
others. Additionally, the qualitative comments suggest that some
product categories could be responsible for eliciting greater anticipated embarrassment than others (e.g., feminine hygiene, sexual
health, urinary/gastrointestinal). The next study takes an empirical
approach to understanding the extent to which one core subset of
Millennials feels embarrassed to purchase personal care products.

STUDY 2
In study 2, we measured specic outcomes that would highlight the importance of the masking phenomenon. Here, we
examined (1) how embarrassment-induced masking behaviors
affect the total basket size and value of drug store shopping
trips and (2) how individual differences related to embarrassment inuence this effect.
Given the dearth of empirical studies in this area, we also
hoped to provide other informative results that could serve as
the impetus for future research studies. Specically, we sought
to gain a better understanding of what categories might drive
increased basket sizes and values for collegiate consumers,
and discern if men and women differ in masking behaviors.
Pretest
Given evidence from study 1 and previous research indicated
masking behaviors related to condoms and adult magazines, we
wished to rst determine which other personal care products elicit
strong feelings of embarrassment. In a pretest, we measured anticipated embarrassment associated with a wide set of personal care
products that could be considered sensitive, unmentionable, or
controversial, as well as those that should be less likely to elicit
such an emotion.
J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)
DOI: 10.1002/cb

44

B. S. Nichols et al.

Study participants were 300 undergraduate upperclassmen students from a large Midwestern University (n = 50)
and a large Southeastern University (n = 250) in the USA
(58% male, Mage = 21, 86% single, 4% married, 6% living
with partner; 2% had children).
Students were invited by their course instructor to participate
in the study. Students were able to access the study at the time
and place of their choice over a 2-week period by clicking
through a link sent to them by the instructor. Students were
not required to participate and could end their session at any
time. Once participants logged into the study, they were told that
they would be asked to express their feelings toward a variety of
products that could typically be purchased at a drugstore or pharmacy. Upon entering the study, participants were assured that
their responses would remain anonymous. Thus, we hoped to
gain truthful responses.
After the introduction, participants were shown, one at a
time, an image of 33 different products that we believed
would range in levels of purchase sensitivity. All images
were branded products that were believed to be category
leaders and would likely be recognizable to participants.
Each screen also included a label that described the product
in the case that the participants were not familiar with the brand
or purpose of the product (e.g., acne cream, hair removal
cream). The images were set to appear in random order for

each participant in order to avoid any sequence or fatigue

effects. After viewing each image, the level of anticipated
embarrassment was measured on a 7-point scale (1 = Not at
all, 7 = Extremely) assessing how embarrassed they would feel
if they needed to purchase the item shown in the picture in a
retail store environment. This measure was drawn from previous research (Dahl et al., 2001). Participants were able to go
back and change their responses to any of their ratings if they
desired. At the end, basic demographic data were collected,
including age, gender, family, and marital status. Afterwards,
participants were thanked for their participation and exited
from the study.
Empirically, we observed a wide range of anticipated
embarrassment related to the product set. Table 1 shows the
product rankings from most to least embarrassing. A series of
t-tests were conducted to examine gender differences in the
degree of embarrassment expressed for each product (Table 1).
Gender differences appear across most of the products. Male
embarrassment related mostly to feminine care products,
whereas female-anticipated embarrassment related mostly to
other sensitive products.
The pretest provided us with initial evidence that many
products in addition to condoms are embarrassing for college
students to purchase. These data were used to design the
experiment that follows.

Table 1. Embarrassment ratings (higher gender value in bold)

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

Product (brand)

Mean

SD

Male
(n = 185)

Female
(n = 115)

Incontinence pads (Depend)

Yeast infection treatment (Monistat)
Douche (Summers Eve)
Vaginal itch cream (Vagisil)
Pregnancy test (Clearblue)
Hemorrhoid cream (Preparation H)
Romance novel
Massage oil (Liquid Love)
Constipation aid (Ex Lax)
Maxi pads (Always)
Adult magazine (Playboy)
Gas relief pills (GasX)
Personal lubrication (KY)
Hair loss treatment (Minoxodil)
Condoms (Trojan)
Fungal cream (Tinactin)
Tampons (Tampax)
Weight loss pills (Alli)
Denture adhesive (Fixodent)
Facial hair removal cream (Nair)
Bad breath treatment (BreathRx)
Laxative (Dexatrim)
Self-tanning cream (Clarins)
Acne wash (Clearasil)
Teeth whitener (Crest Whitestrip)
Deodorant (Ban)
Toilet paper (Charmin)
Disposable razors (Schick)
Soap (Irish Spring)
Shampoo (Suave)
Sunscreen (Banana Boat)
Toothbrush (Colgate)
Bandages (Band-Aid)

5.54
5.50
5.47
5.42
5.21
4.75
4.40
4.34
4.32
4.28
4.22
4.17
4.16
4.06
4.03
3.91
3.85
3.67
3.49
3.34
3.14
3.08
2.83
1.75
1.57
1.43
1.39
1.35
1.29
1.26
1.24
1.20
1.14

1.79
2.04
2.10
2.02
2.08
2.10
2.10
2.17
1.91
2.46
2.25
1.96
2.20
2.19
2.18
2.18
2.58
1.95
2.27
2.31
2.16
1.94
2.21
1.13
1.04
1.10
1.05
0.98
0.98
0.84
0.87
0.89
0.70

5.31
5.63
5.65
5.52
4.88
4.67
4.82
3.98
3.97
5.07
3.55
3.84
3.77
3.78
3.48
3.19
4.98
3.75
3.19
3.66
2.92
3.14
3.55
1.98
1.73
1.58
1.41
1.50
1.34
1.38
1.36
1.28
1.20

5.91
5.30
5.17
5.25
5.74
5.11
3.73
4.92
4.90
3.01
5.29
4.70
4.79
4.52
4.91
5.07
2.03
3.54
3.96
2.97
3.49
3.00
1.69
1.37
1.31
1.18
1.35
1.12
1.17
1.02
1.05
1.04
1.10

Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

p
0.01
0.16
0.06
0.26
0.00
0.14
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.37
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.56
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.60
0.00
0.13
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.15

J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)

DOI: 10.1002/cb

The effect of embarrassment on shopping baskets

Method and procedures
Study 2 was divided into two parts. Part 1 was conducted 7 weeks
prior to Part 2 so that any potential confound effects could be
avoided. Part 1 measured only susceptibility to embarrassment.
Part 2 focused on testing how embarrassment-related masking
behaviors inuence the total basket size and value.
In Part 1, 535 undergraduate students from two different
universities were sent a link from their course instructor
and asked to take part in an online survey for a small amount
of course credit. They were told that the study would ask
them questions about themselves so that marketers might
be able to better understand college-aged shoppers. Part 1
was composed of the susceptibility to embarrassment measure
(SES; Kelly and Jones, 1997). Studies have demonstrated the
scales reliability and validity for college students and adult
populations citing its positive relationship to other personal
characteristics including social anxiety and the use of
emotion-focused coping strategies (Maltby and Day, 2000).
Student names and email addresses were collected so that
responses from Part 1 could be matched with responses from
Part 2. Students were offered an alternative task to earn the
same form of credit, thus hoping to eliminate selection bias.
Basic demographic data including age, marital status, and
gender were also collected. A total of 465 students completed
Part 1 (86% response).
Part 2 employed a realistic simulated shopping laboratory
(Burke et al., 1992) using computer software. In Part 2, the
465 participants from Part 1 were sent a second link from
the same course instructor. Students were invited to participate
in the online study for a small amount of course credit (again,
an alternative assignment was offered). They were told that the
study was about drug store shopping. Students were able to
access the study at the time and place of their choice over a
2-week period. Of the 465 original participants, 414 completed
Part 2 (89% response).
Study design and materials
Part 2 used an experimental design in order to test the behavioral
differences between an embarrassing and non-embarrassing
purchase task. Once logged into Part 2 of the study, participants
were told that they would be asked to assume that they were in
need of a specic personal care product and that they were going
to shop for this product at a well-known drug store. Participants
were shown an exterior image of the store (which has many
locations in both cities where the students were located). They
were told that after making their needed purchase, they would
then, if they wished, be able to shop for other items available
at the store and, at the end, they would be asked some questions
about their shopping trip.
Participants were randomly assigned to purchase either an
embarrassing product (hemorrhoid treatment or vaginal itch
cream) or a non-embarrassing product (adhesive bandages),
which were chosen based on the results from the pretest.
From the pretest, a pairwise t-test indicated that purchasing
bandages was signicantly less embarrassing than purchasing hemorrhoid cream, t (299) = 28.74, p < 0.001 (see
means in Table 1). A similar difference was present between
purchasing bandages and vaginal cream, t (299) = 34.55,
p < 0.001. Additionally, these products did not produce any
Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

45

gender differences in anticipated embarrassment; thus, we

believed they would not introduce an immediate confound.
Participants were shown a screen that displayed the following: Imagine that you are in a Walgreens store to purchase one of the items below and you need to purchase it
on this trip to the store. You have narrowed your choice to
three different brands that meet your needs. Please select
which of the three choices below you would like to purchase.
Once you make your choice, you can check out with your
item, or continue shopping. Our intention for allowing the
participants to make a choice from the three options was to
encourage a more realistic feeling one might have in a shopping experience. Each participant was shown a screen with
three images of products within the category, each with its
respective retail price (Appendix A). Each choice set
included two branded products, and one generic store brand.
The vaginal cream brands were Vagisil, Monistat, and the
stores private label brand. The hemorrhoid brands were
Preparation H, Tucks, and the stores private label brand. The
bandage brands were Band-Aid, Nexcare, and the stores private
label brand. The specic retailer and its brands used were well
known to the sample and were included to provide the most
realistic choice option set possible and to account for the
value-consciousness of some shoppers. Each set was also composed of products at three different price points. The placement
of each image was randomized to avoid any sequence effect.
After selecting their item, participants moved on to the
next screen, which told them the following: Below are other
items which can be bought during your shopping trip. You
can scroll down to see these items, and if you wish, you
can select them for purchase. If you do not wish to purchase
anything else, scroll to the bottom and click next to check-out.
Participants were shown nine products in ve different categories:
candy/gum, personal care, magazines, snacks, and drinks. Again,
both national brand and store brand products were used, along
with the respective retail price for each. The images were rotated
within each category to avoid sequence effects. (A screen shot
sample is shown in Appendix B.) Participants were allowed to
take as much time as they needed to shop, and could go back
and change their purchase selections if they desired. Next,
participants were asked to click continue, and checkout with
their items.
On the next screen, participants were told that they were
nished shopping and that they would be asked some
questions about their shopping trip and some of their
general shopping patterns. The survey software prevented
participants from going back to review their purchases
once they completed their shopping. First, participants
were asked to estimate how much money they had just
spent on their shopping trip, using a sliding scale that
ranged from $0 to $100, with $0.01 increments. Participants
used their computer mouse to move the slider to the appropriate number. Next, participants were asked to rate the degree
of embarrassment they would feel (e.g., anticipated embarrassment) if they had to purchase that item on a real shopping
trip (1 = Not at all, 7 = Extremely). They were also asked to
explain why they selected their initial product from the set
of three choices. This was used as an attention check to be
sure participants were aware of the product type they were
J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)
DOI: 10.1002/cb

46

B. S. Nichols et al.

Table 2. Mean basket sizes, values, and cost estimates per condition
Treatment group

Basket size

Actual basket value (SD)

Estimated basket value (SD)

Paired t-test p

Embarrassment
Non-embarrassment
t-value
d

9.18 (3.89)
7.64 (3.90)
3.95**
0.39

$27.06 (13.79)
$22.02 (12.81)
3.74**
0.37

$26.21 (15.98)
$21.85 (11.56)

0.51**
0.55**

0.79
0.20

**p < 0.001.

purchasing and not just clicking through quickly. Next, names

and email addresses were collected (in order to pair with Part
1), and participants were thanked and exited from the study.
Results
Descriptive statistics
The nal data set was composed of 414 undergraduate students from the same Midwestern (n = 119) and Southeastern
(n = 295) Universities as study 1 (59% male, 41% female,
Mage = 21). Scores on the SES measure ranged from 33 to 169
(M = 85.44; SD = 23.61), where higher scores indicate greater embarrassment. The SES measure was internally reliable ( > 0.70).
A summary of the purchase frequencies of the focal products was
as follows:
Vaginal Cream: Vagisil (32%), Monistat (22%), store
brand (46%),
Hemorrhoid Cream: Preparation H (73%), Tucks (13%),
store brand (14%), and
Bandages: Band-Aid (48%), Nexcare (5%), store brand (49%).
Manipulation check
In order to ensure an appropriate manipulation, we rst evaluated the embarrassment ratings. First, the degree of embarrassment expressed between the two embarrassment treatments
was evaluated. No signicant differences were observed between the vaginal itch cream (n = 99) and the hemorrhoid
cream (n = 103), Mvag = 4.17 versus Mhem = 4.09, t (200)
= 0.29, p = 0.76. Thus, these two treatments were combined
to form one embarrassment condition.1 Those in the embarrassment condition expressed greater embarrassment with their
purchase task (n = 202, M = 4.13, SD = 1.99) than did those in
the non-embarrassment condition (n = 212, M = 1.27,
SD = 0.85), t (413) = 19.24, p < 0.0001. Additionally, there were
no differences in anticipated embarrassment based on the brand
chosen for purchase for any of the purchase tasks. Therefore, we
concluded that the manipulations worked as intended.
Hypotheses tests
To test the rst hypothesis, the effect of purchasing an
embarrassing product on the size of the shopping basket, we rst
operationalized the basket size by summing the number of
1
Although vaginal creams are gender-specic, we did not observe any differences in the embarrassment ratings, nor the dependent measures based on
gender when looking within the vaginal cream treatment. Thus, we assume
that men were able to express felt embarrassment with the vaginal cream
purchase task. The vaginal creams were used as a treatment because of their
scoring in the pretest, and the need to include more than one product for generalizability. Additionally, no gender differences were found with respect to
the hemorrhoid creams.

Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

products each participant selected for purchase. The treatment

product (vaginal cream, hemorrhoid cream, bandages) was not included in the calculation. Using independent t-tests, a signicant
difference in basket size was present such that those in the embarrassment condition purchased, on average, 1.54 more items than
those in the non-embarrassment condition (Table 2). Thus, H1
was supported.
Next, we examined the value of the shopping basket. Shopping basket value was operationalized by summing the cost of
the products selected for purchase. The cost of treatment product
was not included in the basket value calculation, because the
price of the treatment products varied. Using independent t-tests,
a signicant difference was found between the values of the
shopping baskets (Table 2). Thus, we also nd support for H2.
Therefore, it seems that when people feel embarrassed, they
have a slight inclination to purchase more items, which translates into a signicant increase in the value of their shopping trip.
In this case, those who were purchasing an embarrassing
product spent, on average, $5.00 more on their total shopping
trip than those who were purchasing bandages.
To examine this further, we compared the actual values of
shopping baskets with the basket cost estimates provided by
each participant (H3). (Here, we also subtracted the cost of
the rst product from the cost estimate). We were interested
in knowing if the embarrassed shoppers kept track of their
expenditures, as the TPB would support. We suspected that
because masking seems to be a conscious coping strategy,
participants would be able to accurately estimate the cost of
their shopping trip. In both the embarrassment and nonembarrassment groups, participants were able to accurately
estimate how much money they spent as their actual basket
values were signicantly correlated to their cost estimates
(Table 2). Paired t-tests between the estimates and actual
basket values were not signicant for either group. Thus,
H3 was supported.
Next, moderated multiple regressions were conducted to test
the predictions in H4 (Aiken and West, 1991). The regression
model testing an interaction between SES2 and the treatment
on total basket size was signicant; thus, H4a is supported.
Additionally, the SES measure and treatment both produced
signicant main effects (Table 3). A t-test (using median split)
shows that those in the embarrassment condition who were
highly susceptible to embarrassment purchased more items than
those who were low on this trait. In the non-embarrassment
condition, the basket sizes were statistically equal (Table 4). A
2
We also tested the personality variable of public self-consciousness
(Scheier and Carver, 1985) as conducted by Blair and Roese (2013) but
did not nd any signicant moderation, and thus, we do not discuss it
further.

J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)

DOI: 10.1002/cb

The effect of embarrassment on shopping baskets

47

Table 3. Results of moderated multiple regressions examining the interaction effects of susceptibility to embarrassment and the treatment on
basket size and basket value
Model 1: basket size
Variables
(Constant)
Embarrassment task (EMB)a
SES
SES EMB

0.35
0.29
0.60

SE
1.0
1.4
0.01
0.01

Model 2: basket value

p
0.000
0.041
0.000
0.001

t
4.70
1.99
4.37
3.28

Model t
R2
F-change

0.43
0.34
0.67

SE
3.53
4.95
0.04
0.05

p
0.007
0.011
0.000
0.000

0.09
13.70**

t
2.70
2.43
5.14
3.64
0.10
14.50**

SES, susceptibility to embarrassment measure.

a
Embarrassment treatment coded 0, non-embarrassment coded 1.
**p < 0.001.

Table 4. t-tests for susceptibility to embarrassment

Embarrassment
condition
High

Low

Basket size
10.59
7.83
Basket value $32.30 $22.01

Non-embarrassment
condition
t

High

Low

7.35
7.63
5.30**a
5.32**b $21.48 $21.93

t
0.28
0.44

**p < .001.

a
d = .71.
b
d = .73.

signicant interaction with the treatment was also observed

related to total basket value, where a main effect of SES
and the treatment was also present (Table 3). A t-test shows
that those in the embarrassment condition who were highly
susceptible to embarrassment spent signicantly more
money than those who were low on this trait. In the nonembarrassment condition, the basket values were statistically equal (Table 4). Thus, H4b is supported.3
Post hoc test
We examined potential product categories responsible for
differences observed in the basket sizes and values between
the embarrassment and non-embarrassment groups. Between
the embarrassment and non-embarrassment groups, all ve categories produced a signicant difference in number of products
purchased, and four of the ve groups produced a difference in
category value (Table 5). Therefore, there does not appear to be
any one category responsible for masking, but some type of
individual or situational difference could drive those specic
masking behaviors not observable from our data.
Discussion
Study 2 shed important light on one manner in which embarrassment inuences Millennial shopper behavior in a retail setting.
The result of an enhanced shopping basket size is a critical nding
with signicant contribution to retail theory and practice.
Although the embarrassment group purchased roughly 1.5 extra
items compared with the non-embarrassment group, this nding
should not be discounted, as it led to a signicant increase in
3

Age and relationship status were included in the regression models but were
not signicant.

Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

basket value of approximately $5.00. This could imply that

Millennials mask embarrassing purchases with more expensive
items. Additionally, it might imply that people feel that only
one or two extra items are needed to detract attention from the
sensitive and embarrassing product in their basket. This study
seems to support the notion that masking is probably an intentional, thoughtful behavior for college-aged Millennials.
H4 conrmed our suspicion that Millennials highly susceptible to embarrassment were even more prone to engage in masking
behaviors that result in an even more expensive shopping trip.
This is not altogether surprising, given this groups level of social
awareness and desire to avoid embarrassment. These individuals
are likely to be more concerned with impression management
and outward appearances, and behave in ways that protect
and shape their self-presentation. The simple act of needing
to purchase an embarrassing product might heighten ones
cognitive efforts and behavior modication linked with ones
social identity.

STUDY 3
According to a recent study, buying non-embarrassing items to
draw attention away from an embarrassing purchase should
attenuate anticipated embarrassment relative to purchasing the
embarrassing product alone. This follows our logic with respect
to masking. However, mitigating anticipated embarrassment
through the purchase of additional items can only be achieved
when the additional product is perceived to counterbalance
(vs. complement) the undesired identity signaled by the
embarrassing product (Blair and Roese, 2013). According to
the balanced basket hypothesis, it is the basket composition as
a whole that attenuates anticipated embarrassment (Blair and
Roese, 2013). As an example, although most people would
not deem toilet paper to be highly embarrassing to purchase
(as our study 2 pretest indicates), adding toilet paper to a basket
with anti-diarrheal medicine or hemorrhoid cream would be
predicted to exacerbate anticipated embarrassment because it
complements, rather than counterbalances, both anti-diarrheal
and hemorrhoid cream. This is due to the resulting identity
balance of the basket, or the product assortment within the
basket that creates a holistic meaning (Blair and Roese, 2013).
According to the same theory, a product that is unrelated to
J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)
DOI: 10.1002/cb

48

B. S. Nichols et al.

Table 5. t-tests of number and cost of items selected for purchase by product category
Number of category items selected

Category
Candy
Personal Care
Snacks
Drinks
Magazines

Category value

EMB

Non-EMB

EMB

Non-EMB

2.09
1.98
1.81
1.92
1.38

1.71
1.59
1.48
1.70
1.16

3.25**
3.75**
2.70**
1.92*
2.11*

0.31
0.37
0.27
0.18
0.20

4.47
9.15
3.09
3.31
7.01

3.42
7.28
2.67
2.81
5.82

3.55**
2.73**
1.67
2.17*
2.28*

0.34
0.26
0.16
0.21
0.22

*p < 0.05.
**p < 0.001.

the embarrassing product should stimulate a generalized attenuation of embarrassment because the unrelated purchase is more
likely to mask the embarrassing one and also make it less
attentionally salient. Considering the differences in basket size
and value found in study 2, we expect that purchasing an additional product that is complementary (counterbalancing) to the
embarrassing product will exacerbate (attenuate) masking behaviors that are observable in both basket size and basket value.
Study 3 was conducted in an effort to extend our ndings from
study 2 and to integrate them with the balanced basket hypothesis
suggested by Blair and Roese (2013). In line with the identity
balance of the basket, we make the following predictions:
H5: An additional purchase that complements the
embarrassing product will exacerbate masking behavior
and result in larger basket sizes than the purchase of the
embarrassing product alone, and consequently,
H6: An additional purchase that complements the
embarrassing product will result in higher basket values
than the purchase of the embarrassing product alone.
H7: An additional purchase that counterbalances the
embarrassing product will attenuate masking behavior
and result in smaller basket sizes than the purchase of
the embarrassing product alone, and consequently,
H8: An additional purchase that counterbalances the
embarrassing product will result in lower basket values
than the purchase of the embarrassing product alone.

STUDY DESIGN AND MATERIALS

As in study 2, participants were told that they would be asked
to assume that they were in need of one or more personal care
products and that they were going to shop for their item(s) at a
well-known drug store. Rather than having a brand choice, participants were randomly assigned to one of four purchase tasks:
Preparation H hemorrhoid cream alone (embarrassing product
only), Preparation H and Charmin toilet paper (complement),
Preparation H and Sharpie markers (counterbalance), or
Band-Aid bandages (control). The remaining materials were
virtually identical to those of study 2, except that we included
a new category called ofce, which contained items such as
pens, notebooks, binders, and markers. We also included
Charmin toilet paper in the personal care category, which
was not in the original choice set.
Following the shopping experience, participants were
asked to estimate the cost of their shopping trip, and then
to indicate how embarrassed they would be to shop for the
item(s) they were originally asked to buy. Participants in
the complementary and counterbalance conditions were also
asked how much the two products in their task were related
to each other (1 = not related, 5 = very related). This was used
to conrm that the non-embarrassing additional products
were suitable as complementary or counterbalance items.
Last, basic demographic information was collected.

RESULTS
METHOD AND PROCEDURES
Study 3 employed two sampling procedures. A total of 259
participants were recruited from a large Midwestern university
through a campus-wide email invitation sent to students,
faculty, and staff members. Participants were encouraged to
participate in exchange for a chance to win a $20 Amazon gift
card. Participant names and contact information were collected
in a separate study link in order to preserve anonymous
responses to the study stimuli and encourage truthful answers.
In addition, 145 participants were recruited using Amazons
Mechanical Turk. Our rationale for employing the two
sampling pools was to discern if differences would be found
between University and non-University participants. It also
provided us with a wider age range and the ability to compare
Millennial with non-Millennial consumers.
Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Descriptive statistics
Before testing our hypotheses, we rst reviewed the data to
ensure that our participants completed their shopping task.
Of the original 408 participants, 20 did not purchase the item
or items they were required to purchase. These responses were
eliminated from further analysis. Of the 388 remaining participants, 67 per cent were women ranging in ages from 18 to
73 years (M = 32), 56 per cent were single, 31 per cent
married, and 12 per cent living with a partner. Scores on the
SES measure ranged from 13 to 87 (M = 48.45; SD = 16.56),
where higher scores indicate greater embarrassment.
Manipulation checks
Two one-way ANOVAs were used to ensure our manipulations were successful. Results revealed that participants felt
more embarrassed when purchasing the hemorrhoid cream
J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)
DOI: 10.1002/cb

The effect of embarrassment on shopping baskets

alone (M = 2.84, SD = 1.67), with the Charmin toilet paper
(M = 3.54, SD = 1.77) and with Sharpie markers (M = 2.72,
SD = 1.69), than when purchasing Bandages (M = 1.38,
SD = 0.92), F (3, 385) = 34.81, p < 0.0001, 2 = 0.21. Our results
also revealed that purchasing the hemorrhoid cream with the
toilet paper was more embarrassing than purchasing the hemorrhoid cream with the markers (p < 0.01), or purchasing the
hemorrhoid cream alone (p < 0.01). Thus, our manipulation
for the complementary condition seemed to be successful.
However, participants did not feel any less embarrassed when
purchasing the Sharpie markers compared with purchasing the
hemorrhoid cream alone (p = ns), as the identity balance of the
basket would postulate. Anticipated embarrassment was higher
for all treatments compared with the control (p < 0.001). Next,
we compared the extent to which participants in the counterbalance and complement treatments believed their assigned products
were related to each other. In support of our expectation, participants believed that the Charmin toilet paper was more related to
the Preparation H (M = 3.55) than were the Sharpie markers
(M = 1.30), t (95) = 15.13, p < 0.0001.

Hypotheses tests
Basket sizes and values were operationalized in the same
manner as the previous study, whereby we excluded the
shopping task and values of the assigned products in the basket sizes and value calculations. Analysis revealed that the
basket sizes were higher when purchasing the hemorrhoid
cream and toilet paper together (complement), compared
with the other two embarrassment treatments and the control
(Figure 1); thus, H5 is supported. Consistent with this, the
basket values differed in the same pattern (Figure 2). Therefore, we also nd support for H6. With respect to H7 and H8,
basket sizes and values between the hemorrhoid cream alone
and the Sharpie markers (counterbalance) treatment did not
differ (p = ns), and both predictions are rejected. However,
this might be expected given the equal anticipated embarrassment rating in the manipulation check. It is also possible that

49

participants viewed the counterbalance product (markers) as

the rst masking item and therefore felt less motivated to
cover up the hemorrhoid cream.
In support of H3 from study 2, participants in each embarrassment treatment were able to accurately estimate the cost
of their shopping trip (paired t-tests, p = ns). However, in this
case, results revealed that participants purchasing the bandages
(control) overestimated the cost of their shopping trip by more
than $2.00, Mactual = $11.78 versus Mestimate = $14.00, t (103)
= 3.45, p < 0.001, d = 0.24. This might suggest that under
some circumstances, consumers who feel embarrassed actually
use more cognitive effort compared with non-embarrassing
shopping experiences.
Millennials versus non-Millennials
To explore the extent to which the Millennial segment is representative of consumers in general, we split our participants
into Millennial (aged 27 years or younger) and nonMillennial (aged 27 years and older) groupings. Results revealed that Millennials had larger basket sizes (Figure 1)
and basket values (Figure 2) than non-Millennials only when
they were tasked with purchasing the embarrassing product
with a complement. Basket sizes and values were equal for
the remaining treatments and the control. (All manipulation
checks were equal between the two segments). This might
suggest that a younger demographic is more prone to make
behavior modications in response to an undesired identity
that can be signaled from this type of shopping experience.

DISCUSSION
Study 3 provides a more holistic conceptualization of how
embarrassment affects shoppers. It also builds on previous
ndings by demonstrating how the identity balance of the
basket inuences not only the degree of embarrassment
consumers feel but also the behavioral outcomes that are
important to practitioners. However, in contrast to Blair and

Figure 1. Basket size means for the full sample, millennials, and non-millennials.

Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)

DOI: 10.1002/cb

50

B. S. Nichols et al.

Figure 2. Basket value means for the full sample, millennials, and non-millennials.

Roese (2013), our counterbalance treatment did not attenuate

anticipated embarrassment, nor did it affect consumers
differently than purchasing the embarrassing product alone.
This latter nding raises questions about the counterbalanced
basket and perhaps a consideration for the exact types of
products that a person is more or less able to counterbalance
with additional purchases. Here, a deeper exploration for
coping strategies is warranted.
In terms segmenting consumers based on generational differences, there appears to be some evidence that Millennials and
non-Millennials respond differently to embarrassing purchases.
Specically, the Millennials seemed to be over-reactive to an
undesirable identity that was created by the Preparation H &
Charmin purchase task. This suggests Millennials might be
more prone to create cognitive strategies to deal with enhanced
embarrassment or may experience a more severe threat to their
public identity portrayed through items in the shopping basket.

GENERAL DISCUSSION AND MANAGERIAL

IMPLICATIONS
These three studies contribute to our understanding of how
embarrassment inuences shopping behavior. To summarize,
our studies suggest that personal hygiene products differ in
the degree that they induce feelings of embarrassment, which
makes shoppers susceptible to buying more and spending more
money on the shopping trip, which we theorize as a coping
strategy to deter attention from the embarrassing product or
condition. This appears to occur for both Millennial and nonMillennial consumers. This supports contentions that concerns
about what other people think is something individuals grow
into, rather than something they grow out of (Vartanian,
2000; Bell and Bromnick, 2003), and that shopping for
personal care products can be embarrassing at any age (Bell,
2009). This should be especially interesting for retailers, as
recent data indicate that Millennials, although technologically
savvy and expert online shoppers, still prefer to shop in
Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

brick-and-mortar stores. In fact, in a global study of Millennial

consumers, 91 per cent claim to prefer shopping in drug stores,
and 83 per cent prefer to shop in mass merchandise stores
(Donnelly and Scaff, 2013). In addition, our results suggest
that not only do people intentionally mask but also that
masking is probably not an erratic behavior.
This research supports the notion that consumers feel even
more embarrassed when their basket composition reinforces
an unwanted public identity. It is plausible that consumers
would avoid such a situation and might actually separate
the two purchase tasks in order to avoid purchasing complementary items together. Retail and brand managers might
consider ways to encourage purchasing complementary products
in one shopping trip so they may benet from masking effects.
One possibility is to develop creative product bundling where
buying the embarrassing product and the complement makes
economic sense. This also points to an interesting dilemma for retailers concerned about within versus outside category
masking. There are plenty of non-embarrassing products within
the health and beauty category such as hair care products, shaving
cream, and toothpaste, all of which could serve as masking
products. But these items will be sought quickly upon placing
embarrassing products in ones basket. Thus, the issue of product
adjacencies becomes important; that is, which product categories
should be placed near embarrassing products if a retailer wishes to
increase their use as a mask and potentially create category lift?
Additionally, targeting individuals who are highly susceptible
to embarrassment might help retailers enjoy the greatest benet
from masking. Because people have many choices when it comes
to purchasing personal care products, such as shopping at a
grocery store, a drug store, a mass merchandiser (e.g., Walmart),
or an online pharmacy, retailers wishing to capitalize on
embarrassing purchases need to gure out how to encourage
patronage, particularly from this group. Depending on store
layout, it could be possible to increase the level of privacy from
other shoppers, while still encouraging masking behaviors. For
example, a discreet checkout line will help shield the embarrassed
shopper and encourage them to enter the store to purchase their
J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)
DOI: 10.1002/cb

The effect of embarrassment on shopping baskets

item. The area surrounding the discreet line can still be stocked
with products that will help deect unwanted attention for individuals who still feel embarrassment when interacting with a cashier.
These strategies relate to some of the recommended relationship
marketing tools found by Bojei et al. (2013) to increase retail
customer retention.
Our ndings also suggest that some differences exist between
Millennials and their elder generations when it comes to the
effects of shopping embarrassment. Retailers should consider
how to effectively utilize these differences in ways that benet
both the store and the consumer. In particular, Millennials are
characterized by the need for reciprocity between themselves
and marketers in such a manner that engagement, trust, sincerity,
and mutual respect are key factors for satisfaction and repatronage
(Barton et al., 2014).
Most research studies have examined consumer embarrassment from the perspective of the consumer, concluding
that managers and advertisers should attempt to reduce feelings
of embarrassment, and normalize the purchasing of some
sensitive products (e.g., Dahl et al., 2001; Iacobucci et al.,
2003; Moore et al., 2008). While attempting to comfort the shopper seems like a reputable approach, and could enhance certain aspects of the shopping experience, our study suggests that a
reduction in the emotion of embarrassment could potentially result in lost sales. Ethically speaking, although the retailer might
not attempt to increase felt embarrassment, they may decide to
avoid trying to reduce it in favor of alternative strategies.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

Although this study is subject to some limitations, it also
highlights many avenues for further study. First, we relied
solely on self-reports from US consumers. There are some
inherent limitations in self-reports, primarily that intended
and actual behaviors could be very different. Given previous
literature on masking and coping strategies, we believe that
our participants probably responded in a similar manner
compared with their actual behavior (literature supports the
notion that realistic shopping simulations produce results generalizable to actual shopping behaviors; see Burke et al., 1992).
Another limitation could be the use of a simulated shopping
task. Our hope was to present a method to accurately capture
some innate shopping tendencies while controlling for external
factors that inuence eld studies. Although we were able to
gage anticipated feelings of embarrassment, only a eld study
would be able to induce the most realistic sense of embarrassment in such a shopping endeavor. In fact, past studies suggest
that sometimes, simulated shopping experiments may actually
result in a biased tendency for participants to under-respond
because of a lack of natural environment needed to produce
the common response (Meyer and Assuncao, 1990).
Given our simulation, we were not able to observe any
other potential inuences in our ndings, such as speed of
shopping or the presence of other people. Future research
should attempt to discern to what extent these ndings may
be enhanced in a more realistic setting, and if other environmental conditions (e.g., age, gender, or attractiveness of the
checkout cashier, time of day, specic social presence of
Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

51

others) might inuence the results. For example, researchers

have found that the presence of both familiar and unfamiliar
people in a shoppers space can inuence shopping behavior
and attempts to preserve ones image (Argo et al., 2005; Kurt
et al., 2011). Examining how embarrassment and masking
behaviors might vary depending on the source of social presence would be a valuable stream of study. For example, do
people feel more or less embarrassed when the store is very
crowded and blending in becomes easy, or when only a
few people are present? Would the ages or genders of these
other people inuence embarrassment and masking? Grace
(2009) contends that service personnel, rather than other
shoppers, contribute the most to the discomfort people feel
when buying an embarrassing product. A Dutch study found
that embarrassment is a key factor deterring people from
buying condoms, especially when the condoms are placed
near the cashier (Gebhardt et al., 2012). Determining the
degrees of embarrassment these classications of people
create for the shopper would be an interesting study in itself.
Our store also contained a limited product choice set. It
is possible that our limited selection inuenced the results of
our study in some way. Related to product selection would
be to examine when and where embarrassed consumers
mask. For example, do they reach for items that are nearby
as they select the embarrassing item, do they browse the store
for items they also need, or do they select the masking items
at the point of purchase depending on the strength of the
embarrassment as they approach the cashier? A eld study
focusing on these behaviors would inform the retailer and
assist in managing and merchandizing to the embarrassed
shopper.
A more diverse cultural sample could reveal covariates of
our ndings. For example, Rehman and Brooks (1987) and
Waller et al. (2005) found differences in cultural sensitivities
to advertisements of controversial products. It would also be
useful to include education and income as covariates in similar studies to understand how these may inuence masking
and spending.
Future studies might also focus on the types of products that
people buy when they mask. For example, it is possible that if
the self-view is shaken by needing to buy something that causes
embarrassment, one may purchase certain products or brands that
help reinforce their self-view condence (Gao et al., 2009).
Because we did not collect information on our participants selfview, we are unable to examine individual basket contents with
this purpose in mind. Considering this, it is also possible that
our counterbalance treatment in study 3 did not adequately affect
ones self-view in order to produce a mitigating effect on
masking. In addition, although our enhanced basket sizes seemed
to contribute to enhanced basket values, they did so at different
rates (in study 3, 35% and 47%, respectively), implying that
perhaps the outcomes of basket size and value can be explored
deeper. Are there instances when two expensive items (perhaps
premium shampoo brands) may help restore ones self-view more
adequately than by purchasing more items (at a total lesser value)
and balancing the identity of the basket? Although our studies
were not designed to manipulate or test for this specically, identifying conditions under which a shopper opts to use one strategy
over another could be enlightening.
J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)
DOI: 10.1002/cb

52

B. S. Nichols et al.

Embarrassment and masking related to brand identity and

brand recognition may also inuence shopper behavior. For
instance, some brands are strongly associated with the
product type (e.g., Preparation H with hemorrhoids) and
are easily recognizable by others, posing increased risk for
others to identify ones embarrassing problem. It is possible
that consumers overlook this in favor of brand trust, effectiveness, and recognition; however, an empirical study
should be able to discern the importance of brand names
with respect to consumer embarrassment. Our study 2 results
showcase the choices that participants made with respect to
brand, but our study design did not allow us to draw conclusions related to this issue. Future research needs to explore
these and other specic factors related to embarrassment
within the brand and product type familiarity arena. Whereas
particularly well-known brands, such as Preparation H or
KY Jelly (a personal lubricant), have a strong likelihood of
being recognized quickly by other shoppers, lesser known
brands serving the same purpose may be less noticeable
and thus, less likely to catalyze masking behaviors. Similarly, a products purpose such as hemorrhoid cream
largely printed on the package may be more likely to stimulate masking behaviors. Future studies should explore the
effects of assumed recognition of brands purchased and ease
of identication of brand purposes. A consideration for
brand trust and effectiveness should be taken into account.
Our study relied on a minimal degree of store familiarity
only to ensure realism in the shopping task; however,
consumers are likely to use their knowledge and memory
of store designs, layouts, and even the probability of being
seen by someone they know when an embarrassing
purchase is needed. These considerations might also
inuence the consumers choice of where to shop when
purchasing products that induce embarrassment. Indeed,
store atmosphere can be a mitigating factor that consumers
use when deciding where to shop (Pan and Zinkhan,
2006); however, research has not adequately addressed
how store atmosphere can reduce or promote feelings of
embarrassment.
Future research should also explore typical shopping trip
budgets of various demographics for various shopping trip
types. Within these budgets, differences in masking behaviors as they relate to the price of embarrassing products

Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

purchased should be noted. For example, once an expensive

embarrassing product is selected, such as a pregnancy test,
are the masking products fairly inexpensive in order to counteract the cost, or are consumers more likely to purchase
other expensive items?
Channel type could be explored more thoroughly. Our
study was limited to a drug store retailer, an environment
consumers have associated with purchasing private products. It is possible the observed effects may be bolstered
or reduced in an environment not associated with such
purchases. For example, shoppers buying a hemorrhoid
cream in a grocery store may feel greater embarrassment
because the store is not directly associated with such
purchases. Conversely, consumers may feel less embarrassment due to greater ease for masking. Most consumers
shop for groceries relatively frequently, often lling their
baskets with a large variety of items, making masking
more convenient.
Finally, regional and national culture as it relates to norms of
behavior around consuming and purchasing products found to
be embarrassing in certain cultures ought to be examined more
closely. It is likely that cultural differences in embarrassability
(Singelis and Sharkey, 1995) will inuence in-store coping
mechanisms. The effects may be similar to our ndings here
but differ by product type. Some categories of products found
embarrassing by some demographics in the USA may be
entirely non-embarrassing in others despite the fact that all
humans can feel embarrassment. Clearly, the retail implications
will differ if such cultural differences are found.
For retailers, this study aids in the effort to gain a more
holistic picture of their customers, something many retailers
are striving to do at an accelerated rate through complex
basket analyses such as afnity, basket proling, and count
modeling (Moore, 2012). Unfortunately, these types of analyses cannot understand the complexity of the consumers
psyche and motivations.
In conclusion, our studies suggest that the emotion of
embarrassment can have important retail outcomes that
should not be ignored. Retail managers should be willing to
consider these outcomes when addressing issues dealing with
the store experience. Theorists and researchers should nd
many fruitful avenues for delving deeper into embarrassment
and the masking phenomenon.

J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)

DOI: 10.1002/cb

The effect of embarrassment on shopping baskets

53

Appendix A

Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)

DOI: 10.1002/cb

54

B. S. Nichols et al.

Appendix B

Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)

DOI: 10.1002/cb

The effect of embarrassment on shopping baskets

BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES
Bridget Satinover Nichols is an Assistant Professor of marketing
and sports business at Northern Kentucky University. She has
published in the elds of consumer behavior with particular focus
on decision making in social shopping environments, the effects
of emotions on shopping-related outcomes, and cause-related
marketing in the sports domain.
David Raska is an Assistant Professor of marketing at Northern
Kentucky University. He is the founder of Bluezoon and has published in the areas of self-regulated learning, persuasion knowledge,
and social impact branding.
Daniel J. Flint is the Regal Entertainment Group Professor of
Business and Director of the Shopper Marketing Forum in the
Department of Marketing and Supply Chain Management at The
University of Tennessee, Knoxville. His research and corporate
work focuses on helping rms understand the dynamic nature of
what customers and shoppers value, market sensing, marketing
strategy, and interorganizational relationships.

REFERENCES
Aiken LS, West SG. 1991. Multiple regression: Testing and
interpreting interactions. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.
Argo JJ, Dahl DW, Manchada RV. 2005. The inuence of a mere
social presence in a retail context. Journal of Consumer
Research 32(September): 20711.
Azjen I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational
Behavioral and Human Decision Processes 50: 179211.
Barton C, Koslow L, Beauchamp C. 2014. The Reciprocity Principle.
How millennials are changing the face of marketing forever.
Boston Consulting Group: Boston, MA.
Bell J. 2009. Why embarrassment inhibits the acquisition and use of
condoms: a qualitative approach to understanding risky sexual
behavior. Journal of Adolescence 32(2): 3793.
Bell J, Bromnick R. 2003. The social reality of the imaginary audience:
a grounded theory approach. Adolescence 38(150): 20519.
Blair S, Roese NJ. 2013. Balancing the basket: the role of shopping
basket composition in embarrassment. Journal of Consumer
Research 40(4): 67691.
Bojei J, Julian CG, Binti Che Wel CA, Ahmed ZU. 2013. The empirical link between relationship marketing tools and consumer
retention in retail marketing. Journal of Consumer Behaviour
12(3): 17181.
Boyle M. 2013. Yes, real men drink beer and use skin moisturizer.
Bloomberg Business Week. Available at http://www.businessweek.
com/articles/2013-10-03/men-now-spend-more-on-toiletries-than-on-shaving-products [July 5, 2014].
Brackett KP. 2004. College students condom purchase strategies.
The Social Science Journal 41(3): 45964.
Burke RR, Bari AH, Kahn BE, Lodish LM. 1992. Comparing
dynamic consumer choice in real and computer simulated environments. Journal of Consumer Research 19(June): 7182.
Dahl DW, Manchanda RV, Argo JJ. 2001. Embarrassment in
consumer purchase: the roles of social presence and purchase
familiarity. Journal of Consumer Research 28: 47381.
Dahl DW, Darke PR, Gorn GJ, Weinberg CB. 2005. Promiscuous
or condent? Attitudinal ambivalence toward condom purchase.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology 35(April): 86987.
Donnelly C, Scaff R. 2013. Who are the millennial shoppers? And
what do they really want? Accenture Outlook. Available at http://
www.accenture.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/PDF/Accenture-Outlook-Who-Are-Millennial-Shoppers-What-Do-They-Want-Retail.pdf
[June 1 2014].
Edelmann RJ. 1998. Why I study embarrassment. The Psychologist
11(5): 234.

Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

55

Gao L, Wheeler CS, Shiv B. 2009. The shaken self: product

choices as a means of restoring self-view condence. Journal
of Consumer Research 36(1): 2938.
Gebhardt WA, van der Doef MP, Billingly N, Carstens M,
Steenhuis I. 2012. Preferences for condom placement in stores
among young Dutch men and women: relationships with embarrassment and motives for having sex. Sexual Health 9(3): 2339.
Goffman E. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life.
Anchor Books: New York.
Grace D. 2009. An examination of consumer embarrassment and
repatronage intentions in the context of emotional service encounters. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 16: 19.
Iacobucci D, Calder BJ, Malthouse EC, Duhachek A. 2003. Psychological, marketing, physical, and sociological factors affecting
attitudes and behavioral intentions for customers resisting the
purchase of and embarrassing product. Advances in Consumer
Research 30: 23640.
Kelly KM, Jones WH. 1997. Assessment of dispositional
embarrassibility. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping 10: 30733.
Kershaw N, Schmall V. 1993. Managing Urinary Incontinence for
Healthy Aging. Pacic Northwest Extension: Corvallis, OR.
Kurt D, Inman JJ, Argo JJ. 2011. The inuence of friends on consumer spending: the role of agency-communion orientation
and self-monitoring. Journal of Marketing Research 48(4):
74154.
Lewittes DJ, Simmons WL. 1975. Impression management of
sexually motivated behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology
96(1): 3944.
Maltby J, Day L. 2000. The reliability and validity of a susceptibility
to embarrassment scale among adults. Personality and Individual
Differences 29(4): 74956.
Meyer RJ, Assuncao J. 1990. The optimality of consumer
stockpiling strategies. Marketing Science 9(Winter): 1841.
Miller H. 1995a. The presentation of self in electronic life: Goffman on
the Internet. Paper presented at Embodied Knowledge and Virtual
Space Conference, Goldsmiths College, University of London.
Available at http://www.dourish.com/classes/ics234cw04/miller2.
pdf [20 August 2013].
Miller RS. 1995b. On the nature of embarrassibility: shyness, social
evaluation, and social skill. Journal of Personality 63(2): 31539.
Miller RS. 1996. Embarrassment: Poise and Peril in Everyday Life.
Guilford Press: New York.
Moore J. 2012. Market basket analysis: a powerful tool for gaining
consumer insight. Cross-Channel Retailing. July: 39.
Moore SG, Dahl DW, Gorm GJ, Weinberg CB, Park J, Jiang Y.
2008. Condom embarrassment: coping and consequences for
condom use in three countries. AIDS Care 20(5): 55359.
Nelson T. 2012. Campus life back in session college students arrive condent, smarter and with climbing consumer
spending power. Available at http://www.globenewswire.
com [7 February 2013].
Pan Y, Zinkhan G. 2006. Determinants of retail patronage: a metaanalytical perspective. Journal of Retailing 82(3): 22943.
Parrott WG, and Smith SF. 1991. Embarrassment: actual vs. typical
cases, classical vs. prototypical representations. Cognition and
Emotion 5(56): 46788.
Penz E, Stottinger B. 2005. Forget the real thing take the copy! An
explanatory model for the volitional purchase of counterfeit
products. Advances in Consumer Research 32(1): 56875.
Picca LH, Joos KE. 2009. The great condom adventure: analyzing
college students narratives of buying condoms. Journal of
Sociological Research 1(1): 116.
Rehman SN, Brooks JR. 1987. Attitudes towards television advertisements for controversial products. Journal of Health Care
Marketing 7(3): 7883.
Richard R, van der Pligt J, de Vries N. 1996. Anticipated affect and
behavioral choice. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 18(2):
11129.
Scheier MF, Carver CS. 1985. The self-consciousness scale: a revised
version for use with General population. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology 15(8): 68799.

J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)

DOI: 10.1002/cb

56

B. S. Nichols et al.

Schlenker BR, Leary MR. 1982. Social anxiety and self-presentation: a

conceptualization and model. Psychological Bulletin 92(3): 64169.
Schultz EJ. 2012. How millennials are spending their precious
dollars on CPG. Advertising Age. Available at http://adage.
com/article/news/millennials-spending-precious-dollars-cpgs/
235960/ [9 February 2013].
Semin GR, Manstead ASR. 1981. The beholder beheld: a study of
social emotionality. European Journal of Social Psychology
11(3): 25365.
Simonson I. 1989. Choice based on reasons: the case of attraction
and compromise effects. Journal of Consumer Research 16(2):
158174.
Singelis TM, Sharkey WF. 1995. Culture, self-construal, and
embarrassability. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 26(6):
62244.
StatisticBrain.com. 2013. Consumer spending statistics. Available at
http://www.statisticbrain.com/what-consumers-spend-each-month/
[5 February 2013].

Copyright 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Studentawards inc. 2010. Students as consumers a syndicated study.

Available at http://www.studentawards.com/ [7 February 2013].
Symphony IRI Group. 2012. Millennial shoppers: tapping into the
next growth segment. Industry Report.
Tangeny JP. 1999. The self-conscious emotions: shame, guilt, embarrassment and pride. In Dalgleish T, Power MJ (eds). Handbook of Cognition and Emotion. John Wiley and Sons Ltd: New York; 54168.
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. 2011. www.bea.gov
Vartanian LR. 2000. Revisiting the imaginary audience and personal
fable constructs of adolescent egocentrism: a conceptual review.
Adolescence 35(140): 63961.
Wakeeld KL, Baker J. 1998. Excitement at the mall: determinants and
effects on shopping response. Journal of Retailing 74(4): 51540.
Waller DS, Fam K, Erdogan BZ. 2005. Advertising of controversial
products: a cross-cultural study. Journal of Consumer Marketing
22(1): 613.
Wilson A, West C. 1981. The marketing of unmentionables. Harvard
Business Review 59(1): 91105.

J. Consumer Behav. 14: 4156 (2015)

DOI: 10.1002/cb