Journal of Consumer Marketing

A multi-dimensional approach to consumer motivation: exploring economic, hedonic, and normative

consumption goals
Isak Barbopoulos Lars-Olof Johansson

Article information:
To cite this document:
Isak Barbopoulos Lars-Olof Johansson , (2016),"A multi-dimensional approach to consumer motivation: exploring economic,
hedonic, and normative consumption goals", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 33 Iss 1 pp. 75 - 84
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JCM-08-2014-1091
Downloaded on: 03 April 2016, At: 10:01 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 49 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 475 times since 2016*

Downloaded by UFPB At 10:01 03 April 2016 (PT)

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:

(2016),"Psychographics of comparison shoppers", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 33 Iss 1 pp. 20-31 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/JCM-12-2014-1268
(2016),"Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility brands: the role of face concern", Journal of Consumer Marketing,
Vol. 33 Iss 1 pp. 52-60 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JCM-03-2013-0493
(2016),"Attribution of symbolic brand meaning: the interplay of consumers, brands and reference groups", Journal of Consumer
Marketing, Vol. 33 Iss 1 pp. 32-40 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JCM-12-2014-1243

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:478306 []

For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com

Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

A multi-dimensional approach to consumer

motivation: exploring economic, hedonic, and
normative consumption goals
Isak Barbopoulos and Lars-Olof Johansson

Downloaded by UFPB At 10:01 03 April 2016 (PT)

Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

Abstract
Purpose The purpose of the present research is to explore the (multi-) dimensionality of the highly influential gain, hedonic and normative master
goals. Despite being important drivers of consumer behavior, few attempts have been made to incorporate these goals into a single measure.
Design/methodology/approach Across three studies, the dimensionality of the gain, hedonic, and normative master goals are explored (Study
1), confirmed (Study 2) and validated (Study 3).
Findings A structure of five distinct sub-goals emerged, which were shown to be related to the original higher-order goals: thrift and safety
(related to the gain goal), moral and social norms (related to the normative goal) and instant gratification (related to the hedonic goal). These five
dimensions were shown to have satisfactory convergent, discriminant and construct validity.
Research limitations/implications The present research shows that consumer motivation is multi-dimensional, and that a distinction should be
made not only between higher-order utilitarian, hedonic and normative determinants but also between their corresponding sub-goals, such as social
and moral norms. A multi-dimensional approach to consumer motivation should prove useful in standard marketing research, as well as in the
segmentation of consumer groups, products and settings.
Originality/value The emergent dimensions encompass a broad range of research, from economics and marketing, to social and environmental
psychology, providing consumer researchers and practitioners alike a more nuanced and psychologically accurate view on consumer motivation.
Keywords Factor analysis, Scale development, Consumer goals, Consumer motivation
Paper type Research paper

Human behavior is purposeful and goal-driven, performed as

a means toward some end (Moskowitz and Grant, 2009), and
consumer behavior is no exception (Bagozzi, 1993). When a
goal becomes active, tension arises based on the discrepancy
between the current state and the desired state (Carver and
Scheier, 1981). To reduce this discrepancy, cognitive
resources attention, information processing, knowledge,
attitudes and motivation are mobilized and directed, helping
people identify feasible means (Janiszewski, 2008) and
determine their value (Kruglanski et al., 2002), based on
whether they are conducive or detrimental to the fulfillment of
the active goals (Frster et al., 2007). This process constructs
and reconstructs perceptions of value independently of
pre-existing preferences (Custer and Aarts, 2005).
Motivation is rarely homogenous (Lindenberg and Steg,
2007), and consumers frequently strive to maximize goal
fulfillment, and resolve goal conflict, by choosing means which
satisfy multiple goals simultaneously (Kopetz, 2007). Even
when a single goal is focal, weaker goals are rarely discarded
completely, and may still influence behavior (Lindenberg and
Steg, 2007). While the focal goal will exert the most influence

on cognitive processes, and thus determine which means are

taken into consideration, other goals may function as
tiebreakers when a choice is made between the means under
consideration (Kopetz, 2007). Consequently, it is important
to take multiple goals into account to better understand
consumer preferences and behaviors in a given situation.
Goals are thought to be mentally organized in hierarchical
networks, in which abstract higher-order goals are associated
with sub-goals and motives (Kruglanski et al., 2002), which, in
turn, are associated with means and behaviors (Carver and
Scheier, 1981; Kruglanski et al., 2002). Some higher-order
goals are so inclusive that they can be linked to whole areas of
knowledge, attitudes and sub-goals. Three such overarching
master goals have been identified and described in goal
framing theory (Lindenberg and Steg, 2007; Lindenberg,
2001a). These are the gain goal (to guard or improve ones
resources), the hedonic goal (to feel better right now) and
the normative goal (to act appropriately). The gain and
hedonic goals coincide with well-established theories in
economic and marketing research, for example, rational
choice theories (Schoemaker, 1982) and theories on affect and
emotions (Babin et al., 1994; Holbrook and Hirschman,
1982), whereas the normative goal has been researched mainly
within social and environmental psychology (Schwartz, 1977;
Stern, 2000; Kallgren et al., 2000). Although all three goals

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on
Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/0736-3761.htm

Received 6 August 2014

Revised 17 April 2015
17 August 2015
Accepted 8 September 2015

Journal of Consumer Marketing

33/1 (2016) 7584
Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0736-3761]
[DOI 10.1108/JCM-08-2014-1091]

75

Downloaded by UFPB At 10:01 03 April 2016 (PT)

Multi-dimensional approach to consumer motivation

Journal of Consumer Marketing

Isak Barbopoulos and Lars-Olof Johansson

Volume 33 Number 1 2016 7584

have proven effective at explaining different aspects of

consumer behavior, most theories typically focus on only one
goal (Lindenberg and Steg, 2007), and the normative goal is
often overlooked in the consumer literature (SanchezFernandez and Iniesta-Bonillo, 2007).
The aim of the present research is to establish an integrative
and multi-dimensional measure of consumer goals, which
takes not only the utilitarian and hedonic master goals into
account but also the normative goal. The three master goals
are purposefully chosen as a point of departure for this
measure, as they are well established and have been shown to
be highly influential in a variety of consumption settings.
However, as the master goals are abstract and overarching, an
important task is to examine their dimensionality. As of yet, it
is largely unknown whether the master goals are best
represented by single sub-goals (e.g. seek pleasure for the
hedonic goal) or by multiple distinct sub-goals (e.g. seek
pleasure, seek excitement and avoid effort). While the
fulfillment of an active sub-goal should lead to the fulfillment
of the corresponding master goal, the sub-goals may
accomplish this in different, sometimes conflicting, ways (e.g.
through variety-seeking when seeking excitement or choosing
the tried-and-true when avoiding effort). Across three studies,
the dimensionality of the gain, hedonic and normative goals is
explored (Study 1), confirmed (Study 2) and validated (Study
3). Complementary dimensions, as well as theoretical and
practical implications of the emergent structure, are discussed.

The normative goal

The normative goal is associated with a heightened sensitivity
how one ought to act, according to personal norms, the
opinions of others and the society as a whole (Lindenberg and
Steg, 2007). As such, this goal is closely related to pro-social
and pro-environmental consumption. Although norms are
highly influential, they can be displaced by other goals.
Research has, for example, shown that, as costs of either
resources or effort increase, normative concerns become less
influential, a phenomenon referred to as the low-cost
hypothesis (Diekmann and Preisendrfer, 2003). The
normative goal is thought to be linked to sub-goals dealing
with appropriateness, moral obligations and social norms
(Dawes and Messick, 2000; Lindenberg and Steg, 2007).

Item generation
The list of items was generated in a top down fashion,
following a careful reading of the literature on the three master
goals and their possible sub-goals (Lindenberg, 2001a, 2001b,
2006; Lindenberg and Steg, 2007; Steg and Vlek, 2009), as
well as similar concepts in the literature (Ajzen, 1991; Babin
et al., 1994; Schwartz, 1977). Items were generated to cover
key aspects of the master goals, while, at the same time, being
nuanced enough to allow for the emergence of sub-goals, as
described in goal framing theory (Lindenberg and Steg,
2007). For example, items dealing with saving money (e.g.
Use your money in a frugal and price conscious way),
improving ones economy (Maintain or improve your
economy), as well as securing ones future needs (Use your
money for something that you may need in the future [but
perhaps not right now]), were generated to cover the gain
goal. In a similar fashion, items on improving ones mood,
seeking excitement and avoiding discomfort were generated to
cover the hedonic goal, and items on appropriateness, moral
obligations and social norms to cover the normative goal.
Consumers often seek to maximize goal fulfillment and
resolve goal conflict by choosing means which satisfy multiple
goals simultaneously (Kopetz, 2007). To account for the
possibility that sub-goals may be multifinal too, additional
items were generated that simultaneously covered aspects of
the following goals: items on long-term well-being, and the
enjoyment of shopping, were generated to cover gain-hedonic;
status seeking and reputation, to cover gain-normative; and
items on conscience, and self-esteem, to cover hedonicnormative.
In this way, the pool of items was made to cover a broad
range of theoretical concepts, from frugality to status seeking
while, at the same time, maintaining a close relationship to the
three master goals. The emergent factor structure may thus
shed light on the dimensionality of the three master goals: if
the master goals are unidimensional that is, each represented
by a single lineal sub-goal then three distinct dimensions
should emerge, each containing items associated with the
three respective master goals. If, on the other hand, the master
goals are multi-dimensional that is, represented by multiple
distinct sub-goals then additional sub-goals, related to
different aspects of the master goal, should be expected. The
final list contained 36 items; 6 for each master goal, and 6 for
each combination of 2 master goals.

The master goals

The gain goal
The gain goal entails a heightened sensitivity to changes in
personal resources (Lindenberg and Steg, 2007). When the
gain goal is active, consumers may be more sensitive to
variations in cost and perceived value, while concerns about
emotional, social or ethical consequences are of lesser
importance. Indeed, strong economic motivations have been
shown to displace or weaken other motivations, such as
personal responsibility and moral obligations, a phenomenon
referred to as motivation crowding out (Frey and Jegen,
2001). According to Lindenberg and Steg (2007), the gain
goal may be related to sub-goals dealing with saving money,
increasing ones income and dealing with threats to ones
financial security.
The hedonic goal
The hedonic goal makes consumers more sensitive to changes
in pleasure, mood and energy levels, while economic utility
and norms play a lesser role (Lindenberg and Steg, 2007).
Consumers have, for example, been shown to be less price
sensitive for hedonic goods compared to utilitarian goods
(Wakefield and Inman, 2003). Emotions and affect have been
shown to be an important aspect of consumption in a wide
variety of situations (Babin et al., 1994; Childers et al., 2001;
Pohjanheimo et al., 2010), including in highly functional
consumer decision contexts, such as the choice between
public transport and the car (Steg, 2005). The hedonic goal is
assumed to be related to sub-goals dealing with pleasure and
excitement, as well as avoidance of effort and negative feelings
(Lindenberg and Steg, 2007).
76

Multi-dimensional approach to consumer motivation

Journal of Consumer Marketing

Isak Barbopoulos and Lars-Olof Johansson

Volume 33 Number 1 2016 7584

Study 1

Social norms), whereas the other deals with the moral and
ideological aspects (Factor III, labeled Moral norms).
Finally, Factor V, labeled Instant gratification, with its focus
on short-term needs and comfort, is reminiscent of the
hedonic goal as described in goal framing theory (Lindenberg
and Steg, 2007). Although a second hedonic dimension is not
present in the five-factor solution, it may be of interest to note
that a dimension dealing with excitement (as opposed to
satisfaction and comfort), was close to emerge in the discarded
six-factor solution. This suggests that the hedonic goal could
perhaps also be divided into two sub-goals. Although the sixth
factor is theoretically interesting, the relatively conservative
five-factor model was used in subsequent analyzes, as it
represents an overall cleaner factor structure (i.e. has fewer
cross-loading and weak items).

Downloaded by UFPB At 10:01 03 April 2016 (PT)

The purpose of Study 1 was to explore the dimensionality of the

three master goals. A total of 207 participants were recruited
from a pool of voluntary research participants at the University of
Gothenburg, Sweden. The participants were randomly
assigned to one of three consumption contexts, namely, food
consumption, leisure time consumption and choice of savings
and investments. These contexts were chosen as they represent
different aspects of household consumption, and should
therefore increase the generality of the emerging structure. The
participants were e-mailed a link to the online questionnaire, in
which their assigned context was introduced (e.g. Imagine that
youre on the way to a grocery store to buy food and other
necessary consumables. What would you buy, based on what you
have or do not have at home right now?). The list of items was
presented with the following question: When you decided how
you would use your money, how important was it for you to
[. . .], followed by the 36 items which made up the continuation
of the question (e.g. Maintain or improve your economy). The
perceived importance of the items was rated on a five-point scale
ranging from 0 (not at all important) to 4 (very important).

Study 2
The purpose of Study 2 was to confirm the emergent five
factor structure from Study 1. Confirmatory factor analysis
was performed on a new sample, consisting of a total of 255
participants, recruited from a pool of voluntary research
participants at Karlstad University, Sweden. Convergent,
discriminant and criterion-related validity of the five
dimensions was also assessed.
Upon arrival, the participants were given 100 SEK
(approximately 10) in real money, with which they were to
buy a chocolate bar (100 g). The participants could choose
between two chocolate bars:
1 one regular chocolate bar at the cost of 20 SEK
(approximately 2); and
2 one carbon compensated green chocolate bar at the cost
of 50 SEK (approximately 5).

Exploratory factor analysis

The data from the three contexts were pooled for increased
generality. Principal component analysis was performed using
an oblique rotation method as the dimensions are assumed to
be naturally correlated. A total of nine factors had an
eigenvalue 1. Following recommendations by Costello and
Osborne (2005), multiple factor solutions were extracted,
ranging from one to nine extracted factors, and then evaluated in
terms of explained variance on the one hand, and signs of
over-extraction on the other. The five-factor solution was chosen,
as it was the structure with the highest explained variance without
any signs of over-extraction (i.e. no factors made up mainly of
weak or cross-loaded items). Ten items with low communalities
( 0.5) were then removed one by one, as recommended by
Costello and Osborne (2005), and three items were removed due
to cross-loadings, as recommended by Tabachnick and Fidell
(2001). The result was a 23-item five-factor solution explaining a
total of 61.9 per cent of the variance. Cronbachs alpha was
satisfactory, ranging from 0.76 (Factor 2) to 0.86 (Factor 1).
Component correlations did not show signs of excessive overlap,
ranging between 0.21 (Factor IV-V) and 0.23 (Factors I-IV
and II-III) (Table I).

The participants then kept the chocolate bar of their choice as

well as the remaining money as compensation for their
participation. After completing the purchase task, the
participants were asked to rate the importance of the items on
the same five-point scale used in Study 1.
The purpose of the purchase task was to assess the ability of
the emergent structure to explain choice, as well as to test
whether the individual dimensions behave as may be expected.
While both alternatives are hedonic in nature, they differ from
each other in that they entail a trade-off between money on the
one hand, and environmental impact on the other. Choice of
the green chocolate bar may thus be expected to be negatively
related to the Thrift dimension and positively related to the
Moral norms dimension. While Thrift and Safety are both
assumed to be related to the gain goal, and Moral and Social
norms to the normative goal, Safety and Social norms are not
expected to be related to the choice of either chocolate bar as
they are not assumed to be related to the money saving aspect
of the gain goal or the moral aspect of the normative goal.
Furthermore, although both alternatives are hedonic in
nature, the Instant gratification dimension is not expected to
be related to either choice, as the two chocolate bars are
assumed to be about equal in their ability to satisfy this goal.
Some minor changes were made to the 23-items scale from
Study 1. Following recommendations by Churchill (1979),
the wording of the items were improved by splitting
double-barreled statements into separate items (e.g. from

The emergent dimensions

Factor I, labeled Safety, contains items regarding securing
ones future well-being and feeling safe, and may thus deal
with the financial security aspect of the gain goal (Lindenberg
and Steg, 2007). Although it may also share some
characteristics with the hedonic goal, due to its focus on
well-being, it does not share the (assumed) short time frame of
hedonic goal, and it is not concerned with pleasure or
excitement. Factor IV, labeled Thrift, with its focus on
frugality and resource efficiency, is clearly related to the gain
goal, and seems to cover the money saving and economic
aspect of this master goal.
The normative goal too seems to be represented by two
distinct dimensions, one concerned with the social aspects,
such as fitting in and gaining approval (Factor II, labeled
77

Multi-dimensional approach to consumer motivation

Journal of Consumer Marketing

Isak Barbopoulos and Lars-Olof Johansson

Volume 33 Number 1 2016 7584

Table I Factor pattern matrix with item wordings (translated from Swedish), as well as factor labels, loadings, main-loading items, Cronbachs alpha,
eigenvalue and explained variance
Factor label
Safety

Social norms

Downloaded by UFPB At 10:01 03 April 2016 (PT)

Moral norms

Thrift

Instant gratification

When you decided how you would use your money, how important was it
for you to. . .
Increase or secure your future well-being
Increase or secure your future safety
Be more comfortable in the future (but perhaps not right now)
Feel calmer and safer
Use your money on something that you may need in the future (but perhaps not
right now)
Act in line with what you think most others find appropriate
Feel like a good person in the eyes of others
Show others that you have done right for yourself
Maintain or improve your self-esteem
Do or get something that is prestigious
Feel like you acted morally right
Show others that you took a stand for something
Feel that your way to use your money was consistent with your ideals and opinions
Act the way you think that one should
Take consideration of your surroundings
Use your money in a frugal and price conscious way
Use your money in an affordable and cost-effective way
Maintain or improve your economy
Use your money in a conscious way
Consume in moderation
Get something that you wanted or needed for now
Satisfy immediate needs
In the short term act in a way that was comfortable or in some way increased your
immediate comfort
Number of main-loading items
Cronbachs alpha
Initial eigenvalue
Initial explained variance (%)

II

III

IV

0.81
0.79
0.75
0.69
0.63
0.78
0.70
0.68
0.64
0.59
0.82
0.72
0.72
0.63
0.54
0.86
0.77
0.76
0.63
0.59
0.82
0.81
0.75
5
0.86
5.4
23.6

5
0.76
3.6
15.8

5
0.78
2.2
9.6

5
0.82
1.6
7.0

3
0.77
1.4
5.9

Note: Factor loadings 0.32 were suppressed for increased readability

of approximation (RMSEA 0.08) and comparative fit index

(CFI 0.88). Factor loadings range from 0.50 to 0.89
(average 0.73), and are all significant at p 0.001, suggesting
sufficient convergent validity.

Use your money in a frugal and price conscious way to Use

your money in a frugal way and Act price consciously).
Items which became redundant after this procedure (due to
the existence of similar items) were removed. A few item
wordings were made more succinct by removing unnecessary
words (e.g. from Feel like you acted morally right to Act
morally right). Other than these cosmetic changes, the scale
and the contents of the dimensions remained essentially the
same. This version of the scale consisted of 27 items in total
(Appendix 1).

Initial assessment of convergent and discriminant

validity
According to Hair et al. (2010), convergent validity is
supported if average variance extracted (AVE) is greater than
0.5 and if composite reliability (CR) is greater than AVE. AVE
is greater than 0.5, ranging between 0.51 (Social norms) and
0.61 (Moral norms) and CR is greater than AVE, ranging
between 0.83 (Safety) and 0.86 (Social norms), for all
dimensions. Therefore, convergent validity is supported.
Discriminant validity is supported if the maximum shared
squared variance (MSV), as well as the average shared squared
variance (ASV; Hair et al., 2010), are lower than AVE. MSV
is lower than AVE, ranging between 0.24 (Thrift and Instant
gratification) and 0.39 (Safety and Social norms), and so is
ASV, ranging between 0.10 (Instant gratification) and 0.24
(Moral norms), in all cases. Discriminant validity is thereby
supported.

Confirmatory factor analysis

Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to test the
consistency of the emergent five factor structure across a new
sample. Multiple models were defined with increasing
separation between the emergent dimensions, ranging from a
one-factor model to the emergent five-factor model. As can be
seen in Table II, the improvement in chi-square for each
subsequent model is significant at p 0.001, which suggests
that the model fits the data better when the dimensions are
separated rather than combined. The five-factor model based
on the results of Study 1 has acceptable model fit in terms of
relative chi-square (CMIN/df 2.56), root mean square error
78

Multi-dimensional approach to consumer motivation

Journal of Consumer Marketing

Isak Barbopoulos and Lars-Olof Johansson

Volume 33 Number 1 2016 7584

Table II Model fit indices (CMIN, CMIN/df, RMSEA and CFI) for the four different models, each with increasing separation between the five dimensions
(see the column labeled factor structure)
Model

Factor structure

1 (one-factor)
2a (three-factor)
2b (three-factor)
3a (four-factor)
3b (four-factor)
3c (four-factor)
4 (five-factor)

T S IG MN SN
T S; IG; MN SN
T; S IG; MN SN
T S; IG; MN; SN
T; S IG; MN; SN
T; S; IG; MN SN
T; S; IG; MN; SN

CMIN

df

CMIN/df

CMIN

df

RMSEA

CFI

2,088.96
1,496.59
1,485.05
1,180.76
1,170.67
937.07
619.47

252
249
249
246
246
246
242

8.29
6.01
5.96
4.80
4.76
3.81
2.56

592.37
603.91
304.29
314.38
547.98
317.60

3
3
3
3
3
4

0.17
0.14
0.14
0.12
0.12
0.11
0.08

0.41
0.60
0.60
0.70
0.70
0.78
0.88

Downloaded by UFPB At 10:01 03 April 2016 (PT)

Notes: A B means that A and B load on the same factor, while A; B means that A and B load on separate factors; T thrift; S safety;
IG instant gratification; MN moral norms; SN social norms. Also note that delta for model 4 was calculated in comparison to 3c, and that delta
for models 3a and 3b were calculated in comparison to model 2; p 0.001

appropriately) were also included among the 27 items, and

rated on the same scale. The purpose of these items was to
assess the relationship between the five emergent dimensions
and the original master goals as described in goal framing
theory (Lindenberg and Steg, 2007).

Criterion-related validity
In total, 54.1 per cent of the participants chose the regular,
non-carbon compensated, chocolate. A binary logistic
regression was performed with choice (regular vs green
chocolate) as the dependent variable and the five dimensions
as independent variables. The Moral and the Thrift
dimensions are as expected significantly related to the choice
of green chocolate, the former positively (B 2.29, p
0.001) and the latter negatively (B 2.66, p 0.001).
Whereas a one-unit increase in the Moral norms dimension
increased the odds of choosing the green chocolate by 9.85
times, a one unit increase in Thrift dimension decreased the
odds of choosing the more expensive green chocolate by a
factor of 14.29. Unlike Thrift and Moral norms, Safety and
Social norms were not significantly related to the choice (B
0.62, p 0.064; B 0.09, p 0.831, respectively). This
demonstrates the importance of distinguishing between the
sub-goals of a given master goal, as they differ in their
relationship to choice. Furthermore, while chocolate is
hedonic, instant gratification was unrelated to choice (B
0.19, p 0.565). This demonstrates that even when a goal
is salient, it may not be related to choice, as the alternatives
under consideration may be equal in their ability satisfy the
goal. In this case, goals that correspond to the unique
properties of the means influence choice.

Construct validity
In the second part of the questionnaire, approximately half of
the participants were asked to what extent they seek different
kinds of information before they decide where to travel (N
138), and the other half to what extent they were interested in
different upgrades to a hypothetical travel package (N 131).
One type of information was formulated to correspond to each
of the five emergent dimensions:
1 Thrift-information on rebates and deals;
2 Safety-insurance, safety and unrest;
3 Instant gratification-recreation, entertainment and excursions;
4 Moral norms-environmental standards and emissions; and
5 Social norms-opinions and recommendations of ones friends.
Likewise, one hypothetical travel package upgrade was
formulated for each of the five dimensions:
1 Thrift-preference for a 10 per cent rebate;
2 Safety-upgraded travel insurance;
3 Instant gratification-deluxe package;
4 Moral norms-environmentally friendly transportation and
accommodations; and
5 Social norms-trendy and popular destination and hotel.

Study 3
The purpose of Study 3 was to further test the convergent and
discriminant validity of the dimensions, as well as to fully test
the construct validity of the five dimensions. A total of
269 participants were recruited from a pool of voluntary
research participants at the University of Gothenburg,
Sweden. The participants were e-mailed a link to the online
questionnaire, in which they were asked where they would like
to travel, and what they would like to do at the destination, as
if they were planning a vacation right now. The remainder of
the questionnaire was divided into three parts, plus a
follow-up questionnaire filled out approximately one week
later. In the first part, the participants were asked to rate the
importance of the items in the 27-item scale from Study 2
(Appendix 1) in relation to the described vacation travel
context. Three one-item measures representing the three
master goals (gain: Guard or improve your resources;
hedonic Feel better right now; and normative Act

The participants rated to what extent they seek these types of

information on a seven-point scale, ranging from 0 (not at all),
to 6 (to a very high extent), and to what extent they were
interested in each of the five travel package upgrades, ranging
from 0 (not at all interested) to 6 (extremely interested).
Convergent and discriminant validity
In the third part of the questionnaire, five scales that are
expected to be related to the emergent dimensions were
included, to further assess their convergent validity. For
Thrift, four items representing the price dimension of the
consumer perceived value scale (PERVAL; Sweeney and
Soutar, 2001) was included. This scale was rated on the same
scale as the five dimensions. From Schwartzs (1992) value
theory, six items representing the security value, three items
representing hedonism and nine items representing
79

Downloaded by UFPB At 10:01 03 April 2016 (PT)

Multi-dimensional approach to consumer motivation

Journal of Consumer Marketing

Isak Barbopoulos and Lars-Olof Johansson

Volume 33 Number 1 2016 7584

universalism were included for Safety, Instant gratification

and Moral norms, respectively. The importance of these
values were rated on a nine-point scale: 1 (opposed to my
values), 0 (not important), 1-2 (unlabeled), 3 (important), 4-5
(unlabeled), 6 (very important), 7 (of supreme importance).
Eight items from the consumer susceptibility of interpersonal
influences scale (CSII; Bearden et al., 1989), was included for
Social norms, rated on a seven-point scale, ranging from 0
(not true at all) to 6 (precisely true). Finally, two motivational
constructs which are assumed to be unrelated to the five
dimensions were included to further test discriminant validity:
promotion and prevention regulatory focus (Higgins et al.,
2001). These were rated on a seven-point scale, ranging from
0 (not true at all) to 6 (precisely true).
Out of the original 269 participants, 232 (86.2 per cent)
answered the follow-up questionnaire a week later. In this
questionnaire, the participants were asked to answer the other of
the two questions regarding information prior to choice (N
117), and upgrades preference (N 115). The purpose of the
follow-up questionnaire was to assess whether the relationships
fluctuate over time, as well as to reduce the impact of potential
demand effects.

(Thrift-rebates and deals r 0.29, p 0.001; Safetyinsurance, safety, and unrest r 0.32, p 0.001; Instant
gratification-recreation, entertainment, and excursions r
0.46, p 0.001; Moral norms-environmental standards and
emissions r 0.25, p 0.003; Social norms-opinions and
recommendations of ones friends r 0.23, p 0.006). Out
of these five correlations, four do not differ significantly in
strength between T1 and T2, the exception being Instant
gratification-recreation, entertainment and excursions, which
was significantly weaker at T2 (rT1 0.46 vs. rT2 0.13, Z
2.80, p 0.005).
All five dimensions correlate positively and significantly
with their corresponding upgrade preferences at T1 (Thrift-10
per cent rebate r 0.22, p 0.012; Safety-travel insurance
r 0.26, p 0.003; Instant gratification-deluxe package
r 0.27, p 0.002; Moral norms-environmentally friendly
transportation and accommodations r 41, p 0.001; Social
norms-trendy and popular destination and hotel r 0.19, p
0.029). None of the correlations are significantly different at
T2 compared to T1; however, Instant gratification-deluxe
package was marginally stronger at T2 (rT1 0.26 vs. rT2
0.46, Z 1.67, p 0.095; two-tailed).

Convergent and discriminant validity

Bivariate correlations were calculated between each of the five
dimensions and the five corresponding scales, as well as the
two unrelated motivational constructs. As expected, all five
dimensions are positively and significantly correlated with
their corresponding scales (Thrift-price r 0.68, p 0.001;
Safety-security value r 0.27, p 0.001; Instant
gratification-hedonic value r 0.34, p 0.001; Moral
norms-universalism value r 0.37, p 0.001; Social
norms-CSII r 0.34, p 0.001), while the correlations
between the dimensions and promotion and prevention
regulatory focus are considerably weaker, ranging between
0.17 (p 0.007) for Social norms-promotion and 0.04 (p
0.521) for Moral norms-prevention. In fact, only two out of
the ten correlations are statistically significant; Social
norms-promotion (r 0.17, p 0.007) and Safetypromotion (r 0.13, p 0.038).
Fishers r-to-Z was calculated to assess whether the
correlations between the dimensions and their corresponding
scales are significantly stronger than the correlations between
the dimensions and either of the regulatory focus dimensions.
The Z value suggests that this is the case in nine out of ten
comparisons. Only Safety-security (r 0.27, p 0.001) vs
Safety-promotion (r 0.13, p 0.038), was not statistically
significant (note that negative signs were removed before the Z
value was calculated); however, at Z 1.69, it was marginally
significant (p 0.091; two-tailed).

The dimensions in relation to the original master

goals
Regression analyses were performed with the three one-item
measures representing the original master goals described by
Lindenberg and Steg (2007) as independent variables, and each
of the five dimensions as dependent variable. As may be
expected, Thrift and Safety are primarily explained by the gain
item ( 0.46, p 0.001 and 0.56, p 0.001,
respectively), Instant gratification by hedonic ( 0.48, p
0.001) and Moral norms by normative ( 0.58, p 0.001).
Social norms seems to be explained by the gain ( 0.40, p
0.001) and the normative items ( 0.34, p 0.001), which
suggests that the Social norms dimension may cover aspects of
both goals. It has previously been shown that people may comply
with norms to gain rewards or avoid punishment (Burnkrant and
Cousineau, 1975), which may explain this result.

General discussion
The aim of the present research was to explore the
dimensionality of the three master goals described in
goal-framing theory (Lindenberg and Steg, 2007), and, in
doing so, develop an integrative and multi-dimensional
measure of consumer goals. Five distinct dimensions emerged
in Study 1, which could be confirmed in Study 2, and
validated in Study 3.
The emergence of two dimensions related to the gain goal
(Thrift and Safety), and two dimensions related to the
normative goal (Moral and Social norms), demonstrates that
the master goals are indeed multi-dimensional. The
distinction between these sub-goals is important, as the
activation of each sub-goal is likely associated with different
preferences and behaviors.

Construct validity
A series of bivariate correlations were calculated between the
dimensions and the corresponding information search types
and preferences, for the original questionnaire (from here on
referred to as T1), and the follow-up one week later (T2). To
compare correlation strength between T1 and T2, Fishers
r-to-Z transformation was calculated. All correlations between
the dimensions and their corresponding information search
types are positive and statistically significant at T1

The five dimensions

Thrift and safety
Two distinct dimensions were shown to be related to the
gain goal, namely, Thrift and Safety. The Thrift dimension,
80

Downloaded by UFPB At 10:01 03 April 2016 (PT)

Multi-dimensional approach to consumer motivation

Journal of Consumer Marketing

Isak Barbopoulos and Lars-Olof Johansson

Volume 33 Number 1 2016 7584

which was related to the price dimension of the PERVAL

(Sweeney and Soutar, 2001), and the search for
information on rebates and deals, and a preference for a 10
per cent rebate, in Study 3, likely deals with the money
saving aspect of the gain goal.
Safety, on the other hand, was related to, among other
things, the security value type of Schwartzs (1992) value
theory, which, in turn, is related to seeking harmony and
stability (Bardi and Schwartz, 2003), as well as avoiding
dangers and risks in purchase situations (Richins, 2005). This
sub-goal likely deals with the financial security aspect of the
gain goal, as it relates to securing ones long-term well-being.
Utility may not only be achieved by minimizing the cost of
a purchase but also by maximizing the benefit. The price of an
item has been shown to correlate positively with perceptions of
quality and, at the same time, negatively with perceived value
(Dodds et al., 1991), which suggests that consumers looking
for high quality may not necessarily be interested in high
value, and vice versa. We therefore propose that a
quality-oriented dimension may complement the Thrift and
Safety dimensions.

motivation to act in accordance with norms from a fear of

social sanctions may differ greatly from acting in accordance
with norms due to personal or moral convictions and
obligations.

Likelihood of activation
All else being equal, goals will differ in their a priori strength
(Lindenberg and Steg, 2007). According to goal framing
theory, the hedonic goal is the most basic goal, as it requires
the least support from the social surroundings, and is therefore
most likely to be a priori activated. In comparison, the gain
goal needs external support to be activated, as it relies on the
presence of institutions (e.g. property rights), and the
normative goal needs more external support yet, as it requires
institutions, moralization, as well as social sanctions.
Similarly, Maslow (1970) argues that basic needs are
prioritized over more abstract needs. Physiological needs
(health, food and sleep) are thought to be the most basic,
followed by security (steady income, health insurance), social
(belonging, affection), esteem (self-worth, social recognition)
and self-actualization (personal growth).
In the present research, Instant gratification was related the
hedonic goal, and, as it entails satisfying immediate needs, it
may be the most basic of the five dimensions, and therefore,
likely to be the a priori strongest. The Thrift and Safety
dimensions are related to the gain goal, and are similar to
security needs (more specifically, Thrift to preserving
resources and Safety to avoiding risks), and may therefore be
second strongest. Social norms is related to both the gain and
normative goal, and is similar to social needs, and is therefore
likely the third strongest. Moral norms is related to the
normative goal, and is perhaps related to the more abstract
social, esteem and maybe even self-actualization, needs. As
such, Moral norms is likely a priori the weakest of the five
dimensions. However, that is not to say that Moral norms is a
weak, or less motivating, goal. The a priori strength of the
goals may influence their likelihood to be activated, but it does
not necessarily influence their strength once activated.

Instant gratification
The Instant gratification dimension is the most hedonic of the
emergent dimensions, and seems to entail a striving for
satisfaction and comfort. Like the higher-order hedonic
master goal, this dimension seems to have a short time frame
(Lindenberg and Steg, 2007), which may make it relatively
unstable compared to the other goals. Indeed, the relationship
between this dimension and the corresponding constructs
varied over the approximately one week that passed between
the original questionnaire in Study 3 and the follow-up
questionnaire.
Hedonism is often treated as unidimensional or bi-polar
(e.g. pleasant-unpleasant; Batra and Ahtola, 1990), despite
the fact that some hedonic motives are conceptually different
from each other (e.g. stimulation vs comfort; Ormel et al.,
1999). The hedonic goal can, therefore, perhaps also be
divided into two (or more) sub-goals, for example, one dealing
with contentment and comfort, and one dealing with
stimulation and excitement. This would be in line with
research that show that we may seek to either increase or
decrease our stimulation level, depending on the balance
between our current vs our optimal stimulation level
(Steenkamp and Baumgartner, 1992).

Contributions and applications

The present research contributes theoretically and practically,
as the emergent structure not only provides evidence for the
multi-dimensionality of the three master goals described in
goal framing theory (Lindenberg and Steg, 2007), but also
offers an integrative method of measuring these goals across a
variety of consumption contexts. Integrating multiple
consumption goals into a single measure, provides a richer and
more detailed account of consumer motivation, which would
not be possible using uni- or bi-dimensional measures.
Knowing that a given target group is motivated primarily by
Thrift and Moral norms, for instance, may suggest that they
are interested in conserving personal as well as environmental
resources, for example by bringing their own bags to the store,
buying second hand or buying in bulk (thus reducing
transportation costs). However, another group that is
motivated by Social norms and Moral norms, but not Thrift,
may be more interested in showing others that they are willing
to make sacrifices for the environment, for example, by buying
more expensive eco-labeled products.

Moral and social norms

The normative goal is represented by two distinct sub-goals,
one dealing with ideals and moral obligations, covering the
ethical aspect of the normative goal, and the other with fitting
in and gaining prestige, dealing with the social aspect
(Lindenberg and Steg, 2007). Whereas the former was shown
to be related to universalism (Schwartz, 1992), and
pro-environmental behaviors (Studies 2 and 3), the latter was
shown to be related to consumer susceptibility to interpersonal
influences (CSII; Bearden et al., 1989), which, in turn, has
been shown to be related to compliance and conformity,
suggesting that people with high ratings on such a dimension
would be especially sensitive to social sanctions of different
kinds (Burnkrant and Cousineau, 1975). Thus, the distinction
between these normative sub-goals is important, as the
81

Downloaded by UFPB At 10:01 03 April 2016 (PT)

Multi-dimensional approach to consumer motivation

Journal of Consumer Marketing

Isak Barbopoulos and Lars-Olof Johansson

Volume 33 Number 1 2016 7584

Unlike values and traits, consumption goals are

context-dependent, meaning that they vary not only between
individuals but also within individuals. In the proposed
measure, the dimensions were not formulated with a specific
setting or product category in mind; on the contrary, the
structure was explored, confirmed and validated across a
variety of contexts and for different products. Consequently,
the measure can take both individual and situational variance
into account, and may thereby be used to identify not only
segments of consumers but also segments of consumption
contexts. It may, for example, be used to assess changes in
motivation across different product types, department stores
or online vs offline shopping. The pattern of goal activation for
a given target group, across situations and product types, may
provide valuable knowledge regarding what information
consumers are likely to attend to in the given context, as well
as what attributes they are likely to prefer and what marketing
campaigns and interventions may be most effective.
To date, most consumer scales are uni- or bi-dimensional in
nature (Sanchez-Fernandez and Iniesta-Bonillo, 2007), focus
on only a few determinants (e.g. susceptibility to normative
influences; Batra et al., 2001), consist of situationindependent constructs (e.g. consumer values; Kahle et al.,
1986; or personality traits; Aluja et al., 2010), or are applicable
to specific settings or product categories only, such as travel,
sports, entertainment, tobacco and alcohol (e.g. the theory of
consumption values; Sheth et al., 1991; or the travel
experience scale developed by Bello and Etzel, 1985) and they
seldom include normative determinants (Sanchez-Fernandez
and Iniesta-Bonillo, 2007). We believe that the integrative,
multi-dimensional and situation-sensitive nature of the
proposed measure sets it apart from similar measures, and it
should therefore be a good complement to already established
scales in the consumer literature.

questionnaire (ZKA-PQ): a factor/facet version of the

Zuckerman-Kuhlman personality questionnaire (ZKPQ),
Journal of Personality Assessment, Vol. 92 No. 5,
pp. 416-431.
Babin, B.J., Darden, W.R. and Griffin, M. (1994), Work
and/or fun: measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping
value, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 4,
pp. 644-656.
Bagozzi, R.P. (1993), On the neglect of volition in consumer
research: a critique and proposal, Psychology & Marketing,
Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 215-237.
Bardi, A. and Schwartz, S.H. (2003), Values and behavior:
strength and structure of relations, Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 29 No. 10, pp. 1207-1220.
Batra, R. and Ahtola, O.T. (1990), Measuring the hedonic
and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes, Marketing
Letters, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 159-170.
Batra, R., Homer, P.M. and Kahle, L.R. (2001), Values,
susceptibility to normative influence, and attribute
importance weights: a nomological analysis, Journal of
Consumer Psychology, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 115-128.
Bearden, W.O., Netemeyer, R.G. and Teel, J.E. (1989),
Measurement of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal
influence, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 15,
pp. 473-481.
Bello, D.C. and Etzel, M.J. (1985), The role of novelty in the
pleasure travel experience, Journal of Travel Research,
Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 20-26.
Burnkrant, R.E. and Cousineau, A. (1975), Informational
and normative social influence in buyer behavior, Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 206-215.
Carver, C.S. and Scheier, M.F. (1981), Attention and
Self-Regulation: A Control Theory Approach to Human
Behavior, Springer, New York, NY.
Childers, T.L., Carr, C.L., Peck, J. and Carson, S. (2001),
Hedonic and utilitarian motivations for online retail
shopping, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77 No. 4, pp. 511-535.
Churchill, G.A. (1979), A paradigm for developing better
measures of marketing constructs, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 64-73.
Costello, A.B. and Osborne, J.W. (2005), Best practices in
exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for
getting the most from your analysis, Practical Assessment,
Research & Evaluation, Vol. 10 No. 7, pp. 1-9.
Custer, R. and Aarts, H. (2005), Positive affect as implicit
motivator: on the nonconscious operation of behavioral
goals, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 89
No. 2, pp. 129-142.
Dawes, R.M. and Messick, D.M. (2000), Social dilemmas,
International Journal of Psychology, Vol. 35 No. 2,
pp. 111-116.
Diekmann, A. and Preisendrfer, P. (2003), Green and
greenback: the behavioral effects of environmental attitudes
in low-cost and high-cost situations, Rationality and
Society, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 441-472.
Dodds, W.B., Monroe, K.B. and Grewal, D. (1991), Effects
of price, brand, and store information on buyers product
evaluations, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 28 No. 3,
pp. 307-319.

Limitations
Although the master goals and sub-goals described in
goal-framing theory (Lindenberg and Steg, 2007) were
purposefully chosen as a point of departure, additional goals
may complement the measure, some of which have been
discussed already (e.g. quality and stimulation).
Future research
The multi-dimensional nature of the master goals warrants
further investigation into the underlying structure of
sub-goals. It should, furthermore, be investigated how the
sub-goals vary across demographics, personality variables (e.g.
traits or values), product types or brands and consumption
settings, as well as how they are related to, among other things,
price-sensitivity and variety-seeking. It would also be
interesting to study how the sub-goals are related to the
effectiveness of marketing strategies, such as information
campaigns, and incentive programs.

References
Ajzen, I. (1991), The theory of planned behavior,
Organizational Behavior and Human Decisions Processes,
Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211.
Aluja, A., Kuhlman, M. and Zuckerman, M. (2010),
Development of the Zuckerman-Kuhlman-Aluja personality
82

Downloaded by UFPB At 10:01 03 April 2016 (PT)

Multi-dimensional approach to consumer motivation

Journal of Consumer Marketing

Isak Barbopoulos and Lars-Olof Johansson

Volume 33 Number 1 2016 7584

Frster, J., Liberman, N. and Friedman, R.S. (2007), Seven

principles of goal activation: a systematic approach to
distinguishing goal priming from priming of non-goal
constructs, Personality and Social Psychology Review,
Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 211-233.
Frey, B.S. and Jegen, R. (2001), Motivation crowding
theory, Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 15 No. 5,
pp. 589-611.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E.
(2010), Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed., Pearson
Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Higgins, E.T., Friedman, R.S., Harlow, R.E., Idson, L.C.,
Ayduk, O.N. and Taylor, A. (2001), Achievement
orientations from subjective histories of success: promotion
pride versus prevention pride, European Journal of Social
Psychology, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 3-23.
Holbrook, M.B. and Hirschman, E.C. (1982), The
experiential aspects of consumption: consumer fantasies,
feelings, and fun, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9
No. 2, pp. 132-140.
Janiszewski, C. (2008), Goal-directed perception, in
Haugtvedt, C.P., Herr, P.M. and Kardes, F.R. (Eds),
Handbook of Consumer Psychology, Psychology Press,
London, New York, NY.
Kahle, L.R., Beatty, S. and Homer, P. (1986), Alternative
measurement approaches to consumer values: the list of
values (LOV) and values and live style (VALS), Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 405-409.
Kallgren, C.A., Reno, R.R. and Cialdini, R.B. (2000), A
focus theory of normative conduct: when norms do and do
not affect behavior, Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, Vol. 26 No. 8, pp. 1002-1012.
Kopetz, C. (2007), The quest for multifinality in goal
pursuit, Dissertation Abstracts International, Vol. 69 No. 2,
p. 1378.
Kruglanski, A.W., Shah, J.Y., Fishbach, A., Friendman, R.,
Chun, W. and Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2002), A theory of goal
systems, in Zanna, M.P. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental
Social Psychology, Academic Press, New York, Vol. 34,
pp. 331-378.
Lindenberg, S. (2001a), Social rationality versus rational
egoism, in Turner, J. (Ed.), Handbook of Sociological
Theory, Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York, NY.
Lindenberg, S. (2001b), Intrinsic motivation in a new light,
Kyklos, Vol. 54 Nos 2/3, pp. 317-342.
Lindenberg, S. (2006), Prosocial behavior, solidarity and
goal-framing processes, in Fetchenhauer, D., Flache, A.,
Buunk, B. and Lindenberg, S. (Eds), Solidarity and Prosocial
Behavior: An Integration of Sociological and Psychological
Perspectives, Kluwer, Amsterdam.
Lindenberg, S. and Steg, L. (2007), Normative, gain and
hedonic goal frames guiding environmental behavior,
Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 63 No. 1, pp. 117-137.
Maslow, A.H. (1970), Motivation and Personality, Harper,
New York, NY.

Moskowitz, G.B. and Grant, H. (2009), Four themes in the

study of goals, in Moskowitz, G.B. and Grant, H. (Eds),
The Psychology of Goals, The Guildford Press, New York,
NY.
Ormel, J., Lindenberg, S., Steverink, N. and Verbrugge, Lois,
M. (1999), Subjective well-being and social production
functions, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 46 No. 1,
pp. 61-90.
Pohjanheimo, T., Paasovaara, R., Loumala, H. and Sandell,
M. (2010), Food choice motives and bread liking of
consumers embracing hedonistic and traditional values,
Appetite, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 170-180.
Richins, M.L. (2005), What consumers desire: goals and
motives in the consumption environment, in Ratneshwar,
S. and Mick, D.G. (Eds), Inside Consumption: Consumer
Motives, Goals, and Desires, Routledge, New York, NY.
Sanchez-Fernandez, R. and Iniesta-Bonillo, .M. (2007),
The concept of perceived value: a systematic review of the
research, Marketing Theory, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 427-451.
Schoemaker, P.J.H. (1982), The expected utility model: its
variants, purposes, evidence and limitations, Journal of
Economic Literature, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 529-563.
Schwartz, S.H. (1977), Normative influences on altruism,
in Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental
Social-Psychology, Academic Press, New York, NY, p. 10.
Schwartz, S.H. (1992), Universals in the content and
structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests
in 20 countries, in Zanna, M.P. (Ed.), Advances in
Experimental Social-Psychology, Academic Press, New York,
NY, p. 25.
Sheth, J.N., Newman, B.I. and Gross, B.L. (1991), Why we
buy what we buy: a theory of consumption values, Journal
of Business Research, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 159-170.
Steenkamp, J.B. and Baumgartner, H. (1992), The role of
optimal stimulation level in exploratory consumer
behavior, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 19 No. 3,
pp. 434-448.
Steg, L. (2005), Car use: lust and must. Instrumental,
symbolic and affective motives for car use, Transportation
Research A, Vol. 39 Nos 2/3, pp. 147-162.
Steg, L. and Vlek, C. (2009), Encouraging proenvironmental behavior: an integrative review and research
agenda, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 29 No. 3,
pp. 309-317.
Stern, P.C. (2000), Toward a coherent theory of
environmentally significant behavior, Journal of Social
Issues, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 407-424.
Sweeney, J.C. and Soutar, G.N. (2001), Consumer
perceived value: the development of a multiple item scale,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77 No. 2, pp. 203-220.
Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (2001), Using Multivariate
Statistics, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA.
Wakefield, K.L. and Inman, J.J. (2003), Situational price
sensitivity: the role of consumption occasion, social context
and income, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 79 No. 4,
pp. 199-212.

83

Multi-dimensional approach to consumer motivation

Journal of Consumer Marketing

Isak Barbopoulos and Lars-Olof Johansson

Volume 33 Number 1 2016 7584

Appendix
Table A1 The five dimensions of the consumer motivation scale
Dimension

When you ___, how important is it for you to. . .

Thrift

Use your money in a frugal way

Act price consciously
Choose a cost-effective alternative
Maintain or improve your economy
Be economically responsible
Increase or secure your future well-being
Increase or secure your future safety
Be more comfortable in the future (but perhaps not right now)
Feel calmer and safer
Use your money on something that you may need in the future (but perhaps not right now)
Get something that you wanted or needed for now
Satisfy immediate needs
Choose an alternative that increases your immediate comfort
Act in a way that was comfortable
Increase your short-term well-being
Act morally right
Use your money in a way that was consistent with your ideals and opinions
Take a stand for something that you believe in
Act the way that you think one should
Lead by example
Take consideration of your surroundings
Act in a way that people who are important to you think is appropriate
Feel like a good person in the eyes of others
Maintain or improve your self-esteem
Show others that you have done right for yourself
Do or get something that is prestigious
Act the way that you think your circle of friends would want you to act

Safety

Instant gratification

Downloaded by UFPB At 10:01 03 April 2016 (PT)

Moral norms

Social norms

Note: The exact wording may vary given product and context

Corresponding author
Isak Barbopoulos can be contacted at: isak.barbopoulos@
psy.gu.se

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

84