Influence of human values on impulse buying behavior: A gender analysis

Cunha, Michele Aparecida; Rosa, Arthur Antonio Silva; Fernandes, Renato Borges; Fagundes, André Francisco Alcântara; Moretti, Sergio Luiz do Amaral

doi:10.1590/1678-6971/eRAMG240288

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to analyze the influence of human values on impulse buying behavior and whether this influence differs between genders.

Originality/value: The research contributes to the understanding of the relationship between the values individuals prioritize and their impulsive buying behavior. The results can offer guidance to professionals and business managers in conducting their sales strategies and to researchers when considering human values in investigations of buying behavior, enabling new understandings.

Design/methodology/approach: A model with two scales, impulsive buying and human values, consolidated in the Brazilian context, was applied, resulting in 414 responses analyzed through structural equation modeling.

Findings: The results demonstrated that human values affect impulsive buying behavior, indicating that the values of pleasure, emotion, and religiosity have a positive relationship, and the values of health and knowledge have a negative relationship. Samples by gender presented significant differences, as survival and emotion have a greater positive influence on impulsive buying in men, while women are more influenced by the pleasure and emotion values and have a negative relationship with the affectivity value.

Keywords impulse buying; human values; gender differences; consumer behavior; Functional Theory of Human Values

Resumo

Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo foi analisar a influência dos valores humanos no comportamento de compra por impulso e a diferença entre gêneros.

Originalidade/valor: A pesquisa contribui para a compreensão da relação entre os valores priorizados pelo indivíduo e seu comportamento de compra impulsiva. Os resultados podem orientar profissionais e gestores de negócios na condução de suas estratégias de vendas e orientar pesquisadores a considerar os valores humanos em investigações de comportamento de compra, o que possibilita novas compreensões.

Design/metodologia/abordagem: Um modelo com duas escalas, de compra impulsiva e de valores humanos, consolidadas no contexto brasileiro, foi aplicado resultando em 414 respostas, que foram analisadas por meio de modelagem de equações estruturais.

Resultados: Os resultados demonstram que os valores humanos impactam no comportamento de compra impulsiva, indicando que os valores prazer, emoção e religiosidade têm relação positiva, e os valores saúde e conhecimento têm relação negativa. Amostras por gênero evidenciaram diferenças importantes, já que sobrevivência e emoção apresentaram maior influência positiva na compra impulsiva em homens; e as mulheres são mais influenciadas pelos valores prazer e emoção e apresentam relação negativa quanto ao valor afetividade.

Palavras-chave compra por impulso; valores humanos; diferenças entre gêneros; comportamento do consumidor; Teoria Funcionalista dos Valores Humanos

INTRODUCTION

The ironic parody of Descartes’s expression “I shop, therefore I am”, by artist Bárbara Kruger (1987), represents the paradigm of consumer society, in which the act of consuming plays a role in people’s self-identity and represents their self-definition, personal values, and individual perspectives. Goods acquire meanings and are an extension of the being, which can trigger an impulsive purchase in consumers, suggesting the need to understand this aspect better (Sayre & Horne, 1996; Ruvio & Belk, 2013).

Impulse buying is often associated with an individual’s emotional state, characterized by immediate desire and urgent, unplanned need, with little or no evaluation of the purchase or its consequences, according to Stern (1962) and Rook (1987). This is a relatively common buying behavior, present in up to 50% of retail sales (Hausman, 2000), 39% of department store sales (Bellenger et al., 1978), 62% of supermarket sales, and 80% of luxury product sales (Ruvio & Belk, 2013), with more than 84% of American consumers admitting to engaging in some type of impulse purchase (Picchi, 2021).

Previous studies have linked individual consumer aspects with impulse buying behavior, including self-esteem (Dhandra, 2020), personality (Tarka et al., 2022), cognitive and affective responses in the relationship between internal and external stimuli (Kimiagari & Malafe, 2021), parasocial interaction and envy (Jin & Ryu, 2020), gender identity (Atulkar & Kesari, 2018), and more. However, the literature on which human values individuals prioritize and influence their impulsive buying behavior is still unclear.

Few studies have been dedicated to investigating the influence of human values on impulsive buying behavior (Lins & Pereira, 2011; Sokić et al., 2020; Lins et al., 2022). However, the current reality of markets, with higher levels of competition and increasingly globalized online marketplaces, requires organizations to develop sales strategies to identify variables related to purchasing behavior, including impulse buying. Creating a bond between customers and brands, leading to feelings of increased social status and accomplishment, is characteristic of developed economies and can favor the perpetuity of the brand and consumer satisfaction (Lins et al., 2022).

In this sense, there is room for exploration to identify the importance of human values as predictors of impulse buying behavior. Because it is an intrinsic factor, few studies have analyzed the relationship between human values and impulsive buying. Although we recognize this scarcity, we believe the relevance of this topic highlights the originality of this study in comparison with previous scientific work, as it presents new interpretations, measures, and results that contribute to scientific knowledge (Marquesi, 2021).

Some studies have investigated the influence of human values on buying behavior, such as Sharma and Jha (2017) and Aragão and Alfinito (2021), who analyzed the impact of human values on conscious and sustainable ecological buying behavior. Although those behaviors are unrelated to impulse buying, these investigations support the relationship between human values and purchases. If individual responses depend on value priorities and are causally important for purchase, then discussing the various aspects of buying behavior, including impulse buying, becomes relevant.

Individual consumer characteristics, widely used for market segmentation, can change the relationship between individual values and impulsiveness in purchasing, such as gender (Atulkar & Kesari, 2018). Some studies have proved that men and women act differently in their purchasing behavior, including factors such as involvement with the product and perceived quality (Lee & Workman, 2020), the attributes that influence willingness to pay (Kalantari et al., 2021), and more. Therefore, we also propose an analysis of the relationship between values and impulsive buying from a gender perspective.

In this context, the following question emerges: Which basic human values influence impulse buying behavior? To address this issue, this study aimed to investigate the influence of human values that individuals prioritize on impulse buying behavior and analyze differences by gender.

Specifically, this investigation adopted previously constructed and validated scales to measure the target constructs. The impulse buying tendency was measured using the scale of Rook and Fisher (1995), which describes normative characteristics in impulsive buying behavior and evaluates impulsiveness in purchases based on a conative evaluation. The values prioritized by individuals were measured using Gouveia’s Functional Theory of Human Values (FTHV) (1998, 2003), which highlights the functionality of values perceived as guides to behavior and expression of needs, having been consolidated in all Brazilian states and more than 50 countries (Gouveia et al., 2014a).

Due to the significant presence of impulsive behavior in purchasing decisions, many studies recognize the importance of understanding its factors for marketing professionals, retailers, and manufacturers (Bellini et al., 2017; Jones et al., 2003). This study can help guide strategic marketing decisions by proposing an analysis of factors that influence this behavior. It also seeks to contribute to reflections intrinsic to the individual since the current retail market is not limited to physical points of sale, which have the advantages of environmental stimuli - with the help of technology, online shopping tools have become widespread (Floh & Madlberger, 2013). Therefore, purchase decisions can occur in different environments, requiring deeper interaction with consumer values to awaken their interest. This context requires a greater understanding of the influencing factors by sales professionals. Gender differentiation analyses are also fundamental for market segmentation strategies, as the differences in purchasing behavior between men and women are consolidated in the literature (Peixoto & Gonçalves, 2022).

This investigation also highlights the human values that negatively impact impulsive buying. That is, which factors may help individuals and policies seeking to reduce this behavior because of its potential negative aspects, such as excessive buying (Faber & O’Guinn, 1992), indebtedness (Bonomo et al., 2017), and even pathological issues (O’Guinn & Faber, 1989).

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Impulse buying

Early studies on impulse buying were limited to “unplanned purchases” (Bellenger et al., 1978; Stern, 1962). Later, Rook and Hoch (1985) and Rook (1987) criticized the absence of other aspects in the literature and introduced greater developments to the research on impulse buying. The authors proposed a new conceptualization, indicating five elements that distinguish this behavior: 1. sudden and spontaneous desire to act; 2. a temporary state of psychological imbalance; 3. psychological conflict, with feelings of ambivalence towards impulse objects; 4. reduced cognitive evaluation of product attributes, with a high level of emotionality and low intellectual control of the purchase decision; and 5. disregard of consequences. Therefore, impulse buying can be influenced by environmental and situational stimuli and emotional and cognitive characteristics that vary between individuals (Rook & Fisher, 1995).

Several scales have been developed to measure impulse buying behavior to predict this phenomenon (Puri, 1996; Rook & Gardner, 1993; Rook & Fisher, 1995; Weun et al., 1997; Youn & Faber, 2000; Verplanken & Herabadi, 2001). The scale developed by Rook and Fisher (1995) was adopted for this study because it is considered a consistent instrument for measuring impulse buying (Marot & Lins, 2021). It has been translated and validated (Dias et al., 2014; Souza et al., 2015) and is widely used in the Brazilian context (Aquino et al., 2020; Bonomo et al., 2017; Dias et al., 2014).

Utama et al. (2021) state that women are more likely to buy impulsively than men. In addition, Lins and Pereira (2011) mention that, in Brazil, the age group between 18 and 24 years old is the most likely to buy impulsively. Therefore, women and university students have become a lucrative target audience for companies, and these assumptions direct research interests. However, despite research stating that impulsive buying is related to factors intrinsic to the individual, stimulating emotional conflicts that affect decision-making (Kimiagari & Malafe, 2021), there is a shortage of investigations that relate human values to impulse buying.

Human values

Human values play an important role in people’s behavior, as they are a natural way of expressing or promoting them. That is why they are used to explain different behaviors, such as concern for environmental preservation (Ihemezie et al., 2021), humanitarian or economic reasons in the face of the Covid-19 pandemic (Coelho et al., 2021), organizational commitment (Gouveia et al., 2009), among others.

Rokeach (1973), Inglehart (1977), Schwartz (1992), and Kluckhohn (2013) indicate that human values have six conceptual characteristics: 1. they are beliefs, concepts, or categories; 2. they are related to behaviors and desirable states of existence; 3. they transcend specific situations; 4. they are ordered by different degrees of importance, forming a system of priorities; 5. they guide behaviors and event selection or evaluation; and 6. they cognitively represent human needs.

Among the various explanatory models of human values (Inglehart, 1977; Rokeach, 1968, 1973; Schwartz, 1992), the FTHV was adopted for this study. This theory was proposed by Gouveia (1998), integrating the models of Inglehart (1977) and Schwartz (1992), which were compared and discussed by the authors themselves (Gouveia et al., 2014a), conceptualizing values as guiding actions and expressions of needs to produce a “refinement of existing models” (Gouveia et al., 2014a). The theory has been improved in recent years (Gouveia, 2003; Gouveia et al., 2009; Gouveia et al., 2014b; Milfont et al., 2008) and has been widely used in research in more than 50 countries, seeking to represent reality better and to focus on the functions that values fulfill (Gouveia et al., 2014a).

Regarding purchasing decisions, human values are as influential as other important constructs such as product ratings, degree of deliberation, and lifestyle (Sharma & Jha, 2017) since people seek activities that promote the achievement of these values. Consumption is a form of expression of identity (Morewedge et al., 2021). However, even though the importance of human values as guides to behavior is evident, few studies have reported their influence on purchasing behavior. Therefore, finding evidence that human values influence impulse buying behavior (Lins et al., 2022) is relevant.

Human values as predictors of impulse buying behavior

Human values justify individuals’ decisions and can predict behavior (Ponizovskiy et al., 2020). The behavior of individuals is, then, a response to the search for conformity between their actions and values. The purchase decision process relates perceptions, attitudes, emotions, the formation of beliefs, and psychological processes; often, its motivation is purely instinctive (Aquino & Cechett, 2021), enabling predictions about the relationship between human values and impulsive buying.

So far, we have highlighted three studies that report on the role of human values in impulse buying behavior: Lins and Pereira (2011), Sokić et al. (2020), and Lins et al. (2022). They investigate antecedents of impulsive buying, including human values, and their findings, through different metrics, methodologies, and samples, indicate that there is a relationship between human values and impulse buying. However, they do not elucidate these values and how they are related.

Lins and Pereira (2011), who analyzed a sample of 154 students in Brazil, presented contradictory results showing that pleasure and personal stability positively correlate with impulsive buying. They indicate that this contradiction is a limitation that could be explored in new investigations. Sokić et al. (2020) suggest that impulsive buying is positively related to hedonic values, which are related to pleasure and instant gratification; the study was carried out in Croatia with a sample of 220 people, using scales that are unusual in the Brazilian context, and indicated that future investigations may explore other perspectives such as the difference between genders. Lastly, Lins et al. (2022) analyzed the context of Portugal and identified the evaluative subfunctions that interact with impulse buying. They found that the subfunction of promotion values is positively related to impulse buying, while the subfunction of interactivity values is negatively related.

These studies reinforce the postulate that the values individuals prioritize can influence buying behavior and, consequently, impulse buying. However, this study explicitly addresses these values, a question that has not been answered clearly in the Brazilian context yet. The investigation is proposed through consolidated scales for this context, contributing from a sampling perspective and with analyses that show a gender perspective, contributing to the knowledge and debate on this topic. Therefore, the following hypotheses were adopted as research premises for this study:

H1: Some human values are positively related to impulse buying behavior, while others are negatively related to this behavior.
H2: The relationship between human values and impulse buying differs by gender.

METHODOLOGY

This research is a study of a fundamental nature, with a descriptive objective and a quantitative approach, whose data collection took place through a survey. The data collection instrument was developed based on studies by Rook and Fisher (1995) and Gouveia (2003). The questionnaire was tested previously to determine its validity, clarity, and completion time. Minor adjustments were made after this pre-test to facilitate participants’ understanding.

A structured questionnaire consisting of three parts was used for data collection. The first part contained sociodemographic questions, and the second part contained nine items from the impulse buying scale by Rook and Fisher (1995), which were translated and validated as explained in the literature review section and presented in Table 1. Respondents analyzed the statements using a Likert scale from 1 (= strongly disagree) to 7 points (= strongly agree).

Thumbnail

Table 1
Rook and Fisher impulsive buying scale

Thumbnail

Table 2
Functional Theory of Human Values Scale

The third part of the questionnaire consisted of 18 items from the FTHV scale by Gouveia (2003), where respondents indicated the degree of importance of values as principles that guide their lives on a Likert scale from 1 (= totally not important) to 7 points (= totally important).

A total of 703 people participated in the interviews conducted at a Brazilian private higher education institution. All participants were undergraduate students, participation was voluntary, and the beginning of the questionnaire contained an explanation of the research and an informed consent form. Investigating the behavior of university students is common for consumer analysis (Bahrainizad & Rajabi, 2018; Salaceanu, 2019), and the young public is also the most inclined to buy on impulse (Amos et al., 2014; Luniya & Verghese, 2015).

The sampling was non-probabilistic, and the Survey Monkey tool was used by sending a link to students’ e-mails. The survey took place between October 22 and November 8, 2019. After disregarding the missing values, 414 questionnaires were validated. Of the participants, 65% were female and 35% were male. Age ranged between 18 and 54 years old, with 81.8% being between 18 and 25 years old. As for marital status, 87.3% are single, 7.3% are married, 0.7% are separated, and 4.6% did not indicate. Regarding occupation, 70% work and study and 30% only study. Among the respondents, 88.8% professed a religion, and 11.2% did not.

The relationship between human values and impulsive buying behavior was analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). The constructions of the structural model are reliable based on evaluating the measurement items (Hair et al., 2021). McDonald’s Omega test confirmed the reliability of the set of factors, as their values were above 0.70. In addition, the external loading of items on the impulse buying scale presented a value above 0.50, as recommended by the literature (Hair et al., 2021).

The structural model demonstrates the dependency relationships between the variables (Hair et al., 2021). The results indicate the most significant values that affect impulse buying behavior in three defined samples: general, men, and women. The analysis of adjustments of the models showed, based on the values of the polychoric correlation matrix, that there was no multicollinearity problem. This result was confirmed by the variance inflation factor (VIF) test, considering that the VIF values in the individual constructs and their average value were less than 5 (Hair et al., 2021).

The average variance extracted (AVE) test was performed to determine the convergent validity, and the Heterotrait-monotrait Ratio (HTMT) test was performed to determine the discriminant validity, indicating that there is discriminant validity of the model since the values of correlations between constructs were less than 0.850. The model’s fit was also verified using the Blindfolding test, which attested to the path coefficients’ predictive validity (Q²) since it presented values greater than zero. The Composite Reliability test was also performed to attest to the reliability of the model (Hair et al., 2021; Kline, 2015).

The structural model tests showed that, based on the models for the general sample, the sample composed of men and the sample composed of women, the values of the Composite Reliability Index varied between 0.602 and 0.766. The AVE varied between 0.141 and 0.246, McDonald’s Omega varied between 0.778 and 0.856, and Blindfolding varied between 0.0444 and 0.75, based on the analyzed models. Human values could explain about 9.3% of the general sample’s impulse buying variation. In comparison, the model for the sample composed of men presented an explanatory potential of approximately 11.8%, and the model for the sample composed of women explained about 15%.

These findings indicate that human values influence impulsive buying. This explanatory value may be related to the low age of the interviewees. Although younger audiences are more prone to impulsive buying, the FTHV proposes that individuals tend to have a more integrated value system as they age. Therefore, basic values become more congruent with maturity, resulting in stronger correlations (Gouveia et al., 2014a).

RESULTS

The results presented in Figure 1 demonstrate that five human values are related to impulsive buying: pleasure (0.195), emotion (0.135), and religiosity (0.079), with a positive relationship; and health (-0.130) and knowledge (-0.090), with a negative relationship. This confirms H1, as there were values with a positive relationship and values with a negative relationship with impulse buying.

Figure 1
Result for the general sample

An analysis was also made of whether the values influencing impulse buying behavior differ between genders. The results are presented in Figure 2, for men, and in Figure 3, for women, and corroborate H2, which states that gender differences exist in the relationship between human values and impulsive buying.

Figure 2
Results for the male sample

Figure 3
Results for the female sample

Table 3 summarizes the results presented in the figures to facilitate the visualization and allow the comparison of the three scenarios. In the male sample, the variables explained about 11.8% of the variation in impulse buying, and the human values that presented statistical significance were survival (0.112) and emotion (0.166). Although the coefficients are significant at 10%, it is noteworthy that the size of the sample composed of men is smaller than the other two models, which is a limitation of this study that can be explored in new investigations. For women, the model explained about 15% of the variation in impulse buying; the values pleasure (0.259) and emotion (0.132) presented statistical significance and a positive relationship with impulse buying, while affection (-0.129) showed a negative relationship.

Thumbnail

Table 3
Human values that influence impulse buying in the three groups

Based on the significance of the coefficients in the general sample, only emotion, pleasure, and health present statistical significance at the 1% level, indicating that these are the most relevant values to explain impulse buying. In the male sample, the coefficients present statistical significance for an alpha of 10%, while for women, the coefficients of emotion and pleasure present statistical significance for an alpha of 5%.

Table 3 also presents the tests performed to determine model fit. The Composite Reliability test confirmed the reliability of the male and female sample models since their values were greater than 0.70. Although the general sample had a value lower than this limit, McDonald’s Omega confirmed the reliability of the set of factors, which presented values greater than 0.70 in the three analyzed models. The AVE, however, presented a value lower than 0.50 in the three analyzed models. The Blindfolding test presented values greater than zero in the three models, confirming the model’s predictive validity. The validity of the model was also confirmed by the HTMT test, with the correlations between the constructs presenting values lower than 0.850 (Hair et al., 2021; Kline, 2015).

The multicollinearity problem between the constructs was verified using the polychoric correlation matrix and the VIF. The VIF values confirmed the result observed in the polychoric correlation matrix, that is, the absence of a multicollinearity problem in the models, since the VIF values in the individual constructs, as well as the average value of the VIF, are less than 5 (Hair et al., 2021).

DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS

The results for the general sample, presented in Figure 1, reinforce the idea of the common issue of “heart versus mind” (Shiv & Fedorikhin, 1999), which is an experiential and rational system that is deliberate in making purchase decisions. Rook (1987) states that impulse behavior is more prone to emotional reactions and experimentation than decisions based on cognition.

The values related to pleasure and emotion are directly related to the consumer’s mood. The literature usually approaches this theme as a hedonic aspect, suggesting that the entertainment potential reflects the emotional value of purchases. Its effect is an increase in involvement, excitement, a sense of freedom, the fulfillment of fantasies, escapism, and experience of gratification (Babin et al., 1994). Beatty and Ferrell (1998) state that the pleasure of shopping produces positive feelings, which in turn influences the desire to buy impulsively. Weinberg and Gottwald (1982) and Santini et al. (2019) report that impulsive consumers exhibit tremendous enthusiasm, fun, delight, and joy.

The religiosity value represents aspects of beliefs in specific ideals linked to individual religious commitment, which shape their value structure and influence attitudes and behaviors (Schwartz, 1992). From a motivational point of view, religiosity can be intrinsic or extrinsic (Allport, 1950). Intrinsically motivated individuals live their daily lives strictly according to their religious beliefs, while extrinsically motivated individuals adopt religious teachings selectively to meet individual needs, fulfill social objectives, and be part of a group (Allport, 1950; Allport & Ross, 1967).

Singh et al. (2021) analyzed the influence of these two dimensions of religiosity on impulsive buying behavior in India. Even though religion promotes self-control, extrinsic religiosity showed a positive relationship with impulsive buying behavior. The results of this study go in this same direction; however, aspects of this value are still little explored in Brazil, requiring further investigations to deepen the understanding of the Brazilian reality.

The health value presented a negative relationship with impulsive buying. Little attention has been given in the literature to this aspect of consumers. The major discussions focus on evidence of a greater tendency towards impulsive behavior in the purchase of unhealthy snacks (Moayery et al., 2018; Verplanken et al., 2005), which could infer that consumers who prioritize health tend to buy food in a healthy, less impulsive way. Further research investigating this relationship is encouraged.

The knowledge value also showed a negative relationship with impulse buying, in line with other studies that have observed that education level has a negative relationship with impulsive buying. A higher level of education is expected to lead customers to think, observe, and explore products; in addition, such customers may have more excellent financial knowledge. These factors may help customers associate expenditure level with the expected benefits of the product, reducing the probability of unplanned purchases (Bruyneel et al., 2006; Nadeem et al., 2017; Rana & Tirthani, 2012). Education level may represent this value as well as the aspect of rationality, whereby analyzing the calorie information listed in a product’s nutrition facts could reduce the likelihood of buying these items on impulse (Lee et al., 2017).

Gender analysis is relevant from a theoretical point of view because retailers often market their products according to gender, as this segmentation has been widely used (Atulkar & Kesari, 2018; Santini et al., 2019). The analyses presented in figures 2 and 3 demonstrate differences between genders regarding the influence of impulsive buying, in line with Silvera et al. (2008) and Atulkar and Kesari (2018).

The influence of the emotion value was positively significant for all samples; however, it was the only relevant value in common between samples. The survival value showed positive significance only for men, while the pleasure (positive relationship) and affection (negative relationship) values were relevant only for women.

Previous research indicates gender differences in negative mood regulation strategies. While women tend to focus on the source of distress, men tend to look for distractions (Thayer et al., 1994). Based on this result, it can be inferred that women would spend more time reflecting on situations linked to the survival value, while men would tend to act more on impulse when faced with decisions that trigger this value.

Regarding the difference in significance of the pleasure value, previous studies indicate that women find more pleasure and spend more time and energy on shopping activities than men (Santini et al., 2019; Dholakia, 2000). For the affectivity value, which refers to close relationships such as families, Park et al. (1991) indicate that family relationships have an affective dimension that influences purchasing decisions. However, most of the research on family decision-making explores aspects of power relations over who makes purchasing decisions in families, and little attention is paid to the role of affection in family consumption decisions (Park et al., 1991).

Floyd et al. (2021) state that the result of almost all empirical studies comparing women and men regarding affectionate behaviors indicates that women express more affection than men do, which could help explain the findings of this study regarding the significance of affectivity in the sample composed of women. The negative correlation indicates that the more women are motivated by affectivity, the less likely they are to buy on impulse.

As for the path coefficients in the general sample, the pleasure, emotion, and health values presented a greater relationship with impulsive buying, in that order. Therefore, these human values are the most important for explaining impulse buying since the three showed significant relationships at the 1% level. In the male sample, the emotion value was more important than the survival value, while for the female sample, the pleasure value was more relevant than emotion.

In addition to indicating the most relevant human values to explain impulsive buying, especially emotion, this study contributed to the literature by exposing the differences between the relationship between human values and impulse buying by gender. This result suggests that gender is an essential aspect to consider when analyzing the relationship between human values and impulse buying.

CONCLUSIONS

This study aimed to analyze the influence of human values on impulse buying behavior and the difference between genders. When testing the proposed models based on the impulse buying scales of Rook and Fisher (1995) and Gouveia’s FTHV (2003), the hypotheses that: 1. there is a relationship between human values and impulsive buying behavior, and 2. this relationship differs between genders were confirmed.

Five values were found to have a significant relationship with impulsive buying behavior. Three values have a positive influence: pleasure, emotion, and religiosity, and two values have a negative influence: knowledge and health.

Previous studies have explored aspects associated with pleasure and emotional values, not as value systems but as a form of hedonic behavior and emotional response to purchase stimuli (Beatty & Ferrell, 1998; Santini et al., 2019), and this study is in line with this perspective of the analysis. We also highlight the religiosity value, which positively correlates with impulsive buying. Although religion promotes self-control and discourages a desire for possessions (Schwartz, 1992), this result corroborates other studies (Singh et al., 2021). Nevertheless, the Brazilian context still lacks specific evidence to clarify this relationship, a suggestion for future investigations.

When differentiated by gender, the emotional value affects both genders, although it is more intense for men. On the other hand, the survival value presents a positive relationship only for men. The values of pleasure (positive relationship) and affectivity (negative relationship) were relevant only for women. The latter’s influence lacks further evidence on purchasing behavior; research is encouraged (Park et al., 1991).

This debate presents academic contributions to consumer behavior to identify human values that interact with impulse buying. There are also contributions to the field of business management. Because distance shopping has gained relevance, understanding the intrinsic aspects of the target audiences can provide professionals with the knowledge to help develop strategies to influence situations involving the purchase process to attract and keep customers, as well as gender segmentation strategies that can be useful, considering values as a predictor of buying behavior.

Society can also benefit from the study’s findings that provide evidence of human values with the potential to reduce impulsive buying, which can guide policies with this objective. Consumers might be interested in reducing impulse buying behavior by focusing on values such as health and knowledge, which have a contrary relationship to impulse buying and were little explored by previous investigations.

This study has limitations inherent to surveys with interviews, such as the public composing the sample, which in this study was composed mainly of students. Such limitations may include the sample’s homogeneity, scope, and balance, which prevent generalizations. Another limitation was the number of incomplete responses discarded, which may have happened due to the number of items in the questionnaire; future research may explore reduced scale models (Marot & Lins, 2021). We also suggest that future investigations consider the context of interviewees, their role in terms of responsibility for the purchases within their household, and the financial value of their decisions.

Therefore, new research is encouraged with other groups and contexts on the impact of human values on impulsive buying. Other socio-demographic, environmental, situational, and technological variables can be considered, such as purchasing environments, specific products, or products with different life cycles, as well as more specific investigations of underexplored values to provide more clarity, such as the relationship between religiosity and impulse buying.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This study was financed in part by the Brazilian Federal Agency for Suport and Evaluation of Graduate Education (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Capes) - Finance Code 001 - and the Minas Gerais Research Support Foundation (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa de Minas Gerais - FAPEMIG).

RAM does not have information about the existence of open data regarding this manuscript.
RAM does not have authorization from the authors and/or evaluators to publish this article’s review.

REFERENCES

Allport, G. W. (1950). The individual and his religion: A psychological interpretation MacMillan.
Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5(4), 432. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021212
» https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021212
Amos, C., Holmes, G. R., & Keneson, W. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of consumer impulse buying. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(2), 86-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2013.11.004
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2013.11.004
Aquino, D. M. K., & Cechett, R. A. (2021). Decisão de compra do consumidor na ótica do neuromarketing e na era da conectividade contínua. Revista Perspectiva, 45(170), 29-40. https://doi.org/10.31512/persp.v.45.n.170.2021.182.p.29-40
» https://doi.org/10.31512/persp.v.45.n.170.2021.182.p.29-40
Aquino, S. D. D., Natividade, J. C., & Lins, S. L. B. (2020). Validity evidences of the buying impulsiveness scale in the Brazilian context. Psico-USF, 25, 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-82712020250102
» https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-82712020250102
Aragão, B. S., & Alfinito, S. (2021). The relationship between human values and conscious ecological behavior among consumers: Evidence from Brazil. Cleaner and Responsible Consumption, 100024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clrc.2021.100024
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clrc.2021.100024
Atulkar, S., & Kesari, B. (2018). Role of consumer traits and situational factors on impulse buying: Does gender matter? International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 46(4), 386-405. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-12-2016-0239
» https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-12-2016-0239
Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 644-656. https://doi.org/10.1086/209376
» https://doi.org/10.1086/209376
Bahrainizad, M., & Rajabi, A. (2018). Consumers perception of usability of product packaging and impulse buying: Considering consumers’ mood and time pressure as moderating variables. Journal of Islamic Marketing, 9(2), 262-282. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-04-2016-0030
» https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-04-2016-0030
Beatty, S. E., & Ferrell, M. E. (1998). Impulse buying: Modeling its precursors. Journal of Retailing, 74(2), 169-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(99)80092-X
» https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(99)80092-X
Bellini, S., Cardinali, M. G., & Grandi, B. (2017). A structural equation model of impulse buying behaviour in grocery retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 36, 164-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.02.001
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.02.001
Bellenger, D. N., Robertson, D. H., & Hirschman, E. C. (1978). Impulse buying varies by product. Journal of Advertising Research, 18(6), 15-18.
Bonomo, B., Mainardes, E. W., & Laurett, R. (2017). Compra não planejada e endividamento pessoal: Uma análise de relação. Revista Administração em Diálogo, 19(3), 49-69. https://doi.org/10.23925/2178-0080.2017v19i3.32758
» https://doi.org/10.23925/2178-0080.2017v19i3.32758
Bruyneel, S., Dewitte, S., Vohs, K. D., & Warlop, L. (2006). Repeated choosing increases susceptibility to affective product features. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 23(2), 215-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.12.002
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.12.002
Coelho, G. L. H., Hanel, P. H., Vilar, R., Monteiro, R. P., Cardoso, F. J. V., & Gouveia, V. V. (2021). Who prioritizes the economy over health? The role of political orientation and human values. Personality and Individual Differences, 179, 110890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110890
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110890
Dhandra, T. K. (2020). Does self-esteem matter? A framework depicting role of self-esteem between dispositional mindfulness and impulsive buying. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 55(1), 102135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102135
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102135
Dias, S. E. F., Santos, R. M., Martins, V., & Isabella, G. (2014). Efeitos das estratégias de marketing de compras coletivas sobre o comportamento impulsivo. Revista Brasileira de Marketing, 13(3), 138-151. https://doi.org/10.5585/remark.v13i3.2646
» https://doi.org/10.5585/remark.v13i3.2646
Dholakia, U. M. (2000). Temptation and resistance: An integrated model of consumption impulse formation and enactment. Psychology & Marketing, 17(11), 955-982. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6793(200011)17:11<955::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-J
» https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6793(200011)17:11<955::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-J
Faber, R. J., & O’Guinn, T. C. (1992). A clinical screener for compulsive buying. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 459-469. https://doi.org/10.1086/209315
» https://doi.org/10.1086/209315
Floh, A., & Madlberger, M. (2013). The role of atmospheric cues in online impulse-buying behavior. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 12(6), 425-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2013.06.001
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2013.06.001
Floyd, K., Morman, M. T., Maré, J., & Holmes, E. (2021). How Americans communicate affection: Findings from a representative national sample. Communication Quarterly, 69(4), 383-409. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2021.1951794
» https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2021.1951794
Gouveia, V. V. (1998). La naturaleza de los valores descriptores del individualismo y del colectivismo: Una comparación intra e intercultural [PhD Dissertation, Faculdade de Psicologia, Universidade Complutense de Madri, Espanha].
Gouveia, V. V. (2003). A natureza motivacional dos valores humanos: Evidências acerca de uma nova tipologia. Estudos de Psicologia, 8(1), 431-443. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-294X2003000300010
» https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-294X2003000300010
Gouveia, V. V., Milfont, T. L., Fischer, R., & Coelho, J. A. P. D. M. (2009). Teoria funcionalista dos valores humanos: Aplicações para organizações. Revista de Administração Mackenzie, 10(3), 34-59. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-69712009000300004
» https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-69712009000300004
Gouveia, V. V., Milfont, T. L., & Guerra, V. M. (2014a). The Functional Theory of Human Values: From intentional overlook to first acknowledgment: A reply to Schwartz. Personality and Individual Differences, 68, 250-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.03.025
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.03.025
Gouveia, V. V., Milfont, T. L., & Guerra, V. M. (2014b). Functional theory of human values: Testing its content and structure hypotheses. Personality and Individual Differences, 60, 41-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.12.012
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.12.012
Gouveia, V. V., Vione, K. C., Milfont, T. L., & Santos, W. S. (2015). Guiding actions and expressing needs: On the psychological functions of values. Psykhe, 24(2), 1-14.
Hair, J. F., Junior, Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) Sage.
Hausman, A. (2000). A multi-method investigation of consumer motivations in impulse buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(5), 403-426. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760010341045
» https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760010341045
Ihemezie, E. J., Nawrath, M., Straub, L., Stringer, L. C., & Dallimer, M. (2021). The influence of human values on attitudes and behaviours towards forest conservation. Journal of Environmental Management, 292(1), 112857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112857
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112857
Inglehart, R. (1977). The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among western publics Princeton University Press.
Jin, S. V., & Ryu, E. (2020). “I’ll buy what she’s wearing”: The roles of envy toward and parasocial interaction with influencers in Instagram celebrity-based brand endorsement and social commerce. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 55, 102121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102121
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102121
Jones, M. A., Reynolds, K. E., Weun, S., & Beatty, S. E. (2003). The product-specific nature of impulse buying tendency. Journal of Business Research, 56(7), 505-511. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00250-8
» https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00250-8
Kalantari, H. D., Johnson, L. W., & Perera, C. R. (2021). The effect of gender on willingness to pay for mass customized running shoes. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 12(2), 161-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2020.1867878
» https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2020.1867878
Kimiagari, S., & Malafe, N. S. A. (2021). The role of cognitive and affective responses in the relationship between internal and external stimuli on online impulse buying behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 61, 102567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102567
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102567
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Guilford Publications.
Kluckhohn, C. (2013). Values and value-orientations in the theory of action: An exploration in definition and classification. In: T. Parsons, & E. Shils. Toward a general theory of action (pp. 388-433). Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674863507.c8
» https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674863507.c8
Kruger, B. (1987). Untitled (I shop therefore I am). Private collection, Zurich. Figure, 24.
Lee, Y. H., Wang, C. M., & Lee, W. H. (2017). Does looking delicious mean really delicious? The effects regarding menu design on consumer’s ordering behaviour. Journal of Accounting, Finance & Management Strategy, 12(1), 1-23.
Lee, S.-H., & Workman, J. E. (2020). Trendsetting and gender matter: Brand loyalty, perceived quality, and word-of-mouth. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 12, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2020.1835523
» https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2020.1835523
Lins, S. L. B., & Pereira, R. D. C. D. F. (2011). Comprou sem querer? Entenda o porquê! Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, 13, 376-395. https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v13i41.836
» https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v13i41.836
Lins, S., Areias, J., Castro, R., & Aquino, S. (2022). What basic human values influence impulse buying and status consumption. Italian Journal of Marketing, 2022(2), 233-248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43039-022-00046-z
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s43039-022-00046-z
Luniya, P., & Verghese, M. (2015). A study on impulse buying and its determinants: A literature review. Pacific Business Review International, 8(1), 66-69.
Marot, T. A., & Lins, S. L. B. (2021). Evidências preliminares de validade de versão reduzida da escala de compra por impulso de Rook e Fisher. Suma Psicológica, 28(2), 112-119. https://doi.org/10.14349/sumapsi.2021.v28.n2.6
» https://doi.org/10.14349/sumapsi.2021.v28.n2.6
Marquesi, S. C. (2021). Originalidade na escrita acadêmica: A pergunta de pesquisa em foco. Linguarum Arena, 12, 115-129. https://doi.org/10.21747/1647-8770/are12a7
» https://doi.org/10.21747/1647-8770/are12a7
Milfont, T. L., Gouveia, V. V., & Fischer, R. (2008). A functional theory of terminal values. Australian Journal of Psychology, 60(37).
Moayery, M., Cantín, L. N., & Martíns, J. J. G. (2018). Reflective and impulsive predictors of unhealthy snack impulse buying. Review of Marketing Science, 16(1), 49-84. https://doi.org/10.1515/roms-2018-0038
» https://doi.org/10.1515/roms-2018-0038
Morewedge, C. K., Monga, A., Palmatier, R. W., Shu, S. B., & Small, D. A. (2021). Evolution of consumption: A psychological ownership framework. Journal of Marketing, 85(1), 196-218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920957007
» https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920957007
Nadeem, H., Akmal, M., Omar, S., & Mumtaz, A. (2017). Impact of gender, education and age on impulsive buying: Moderating role of consumer emotional intelligence. International Journal of Transformation in Operational & Marketing Management, 1(2), 2581-4842.
O’Guinn, T. C., & Faber, R. J. (1989). Compulsive buying: A phenomenological exploration. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(2), 147-157. https://doi.org/10.1086/209204
» https://doi.org/10.1086/209204
Park, J. H., Tansuhaj, P. S., & Kolbe, R. H. (1991). The role of love, affection, and intimacy in family decision research. ACR North American Advances, 18, 651-656.
Peixoto, M. M. C. L., & Gonçalves, C. A. (2022). Geração e sexo como determinantes do comportamento sustentável: Evidências de um experimento. Revista FSA, 19(3). https://doi.org/10.12819/2022.19.3.1
» https://doi.org/10.12819/2022.19.3.1
Picchi, A. (2021). The American habit of impulse buying. CBS News https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-american-habit-of-impulse-buying/
» https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-american-habit-of-impulse-buying/
Ponizovskiy, V., Ardag, M., Grigoryan, L., Boyd, R., Dobewall, H., & Holtz, P. (2020). Development and validation of the personal values dictionary: A theory-driven tool for investigating references to basic human values in text. European Journal of Personality, 34(5), 885-902. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2294
» https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2294
Puri, R. (1996). Measuring and modifying consumer impulsiveness: A cost-benefit accessibility framework. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 5(2), 87-113. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0502_01
» https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0502_01
Rana, S., & Tirthani, J. (2012). Effect of education, income, and gender on impulsive buying among Indian consumer an empirical study of readymade garment customers. Indian Journal of Applied Research, 1(12). https://doi.org/10.15373/2249555X/SEP2012/50
» https://doi.org/10.15373/2249555X/SEP2012/50
Rokeach, M. (1968). The role of values in public opinion research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 32(4), 547-559. https://doi.org/10.1086/267645
» https://doi.org/10.1086/267645
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values Free Press.
Rook, D. W. (1987). The buying impulse. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(2), 189-199. https://doi.org/10.1086/209105
» https://doi.org/10.1086/209105
Rook, D. W., & Fisher, R. J. (1995). Normative influences on impulsive buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 305-313. https://doi.org/10.1086/209452
» https://doi.org/10.1086/209452
Rook, D. W., & Gardner, M. P. (1993). In the mood: Impulse buying’s affective antecedents. Research in Consumer Behavior, 6(7), 1-28.
Rook, D. W., & Hoch, S. J. (1985). Consuming impulses. ACR North American Advances, 12, 23-27.
Ruvio, A. A., & Belk, R. W. (2013). The Routledge companion to identity and consumption Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203105337
» https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203105337
Salaceanu, C. (2019). The evolution of human values: A comparative study of values in adolescents and emerging adults. Postmodern Openings, 10(2), 74-83. https://doi.org/10.18662/po/72
» https://doi.org/10.18662/po/72
Santini, F. D. O., Ladeira, W. J., Vieira, V. A., Araujo, C. F., & Sampaio, C. H. (2019). Antecedents and consequences of impulse buying: A meta-analytic study. RAUSP Management Journal, 54(2), 178-204. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-07-2018-0037
» https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-07-2018-0037
Sayre, S., & Horne, D. (1996). I shop, therefore I am: The role of possessions for self-definition. ACR North American Advances, 23, 323-328.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6
» https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6
Sharma, R., & Jha, M. (2017). Values influencing sustainable consumption behaviour: Exploring the contextual relationship. Journal of Business Research, 76, 77-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.03.010
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.03.010
Shiv, B., & Fedorikhin, A. (1999). Heart and mind in conflict: The interplay of affect and cognition in consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(3), 278-292. https://doi.org/10.1086/209563
» https://doi.org/10.1086/209563
Silvera, D. H., Lavack, A. M., & Kropp, F. (2008). Impulse buying: The role of affect, social influence, and subjective wellbeing. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25(1), 23-33. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760810845381
» https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760810845381
Singh, J., Singh, G., Kumar, S., & Mathur, A. N. (2021). Religious influences in unrestrained consumer behaviour. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 58, 102262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102262
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102262
Sokić, K., Korkut, D., & Šestanović, A. (2020). Relationship between impulsivity, value orientations and impulsive buying. Managing Global Transitions: International Research Journal, 18(3), 195-210. https://doi.org/10.26493/1854-6935.18.195-210
» https://doi.org/10.26493/1854-6935.18.195-210
Souza, M. A. P., Lins, S., & Feres-Carneiro, T. (2015). Adaptação da escala de compra por impulso de Rook e Fisher para o contexto brasileiro [Sociedade Brasileira de Psicologia]. 45th Annual Meeting of Sociedade Brasileira de Psicologia, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3266.7607
» https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3266.7607
Stern, H. (1962). The significance of impulse buying today. Journal of Marketing, 26(2), 59-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224296202600212
» https://doi.org/10.1177/002224296202600212
Tarka, P., Kukar-Kinney, M., & Harnish, R. J. (2022). Consumers’ personality and compulsive buying behavior: The role of hedonistic shopping experiences and gender in mediating-moderating relationships. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 64, 102802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102802
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102802
Thayer, R. E., Newman, J. R., & McClain, T. M. (1994). Self-regulation of mood: Strategies for changing a bad mood, raising energy, and reducing tension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(5), 910. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.67.5.910
» https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.67.5.910
Utama, A., Sawitri, H. S. R., Haryanto, B., & Wahyudi, L. (2021). Impulse buying: The influence of impulse buying tendency, urge to buy and gender on impulse buying of the retail customers. Journal of Distribution Science, 19(7), 101-111. https://doi.org/10.15722/jds.19.7.202107.101
» https://doi.org/10.15722/jds.19.7.202107.101
Verplanken, B., & Herabadi, A. (2001). Individual differences in impulse buying tendency: Feeling and no thinking. European Journal of Personality, 15(1), 71-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.423
» https://doi.org/10.1002/per.423
Verplanken, B., Herabadi, A. G., Perry, J. A., & Silvera, D. H. (2005). Consumer style and health: The role of impulsive buying in unhealthy eating. Psychology & Health, 20(4), 429-441. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440412331337084
» https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440412331337084
Weinberg, P., & Gottwald, W. (1982). Impulsive consumer buying as a result of emotions. Journal of Business Research, 10(1), 43-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(82)90016-9
» https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(82)90016-9
Weun, S., Jones, M. A., & Beatty, S. E. (1997). A parsimonious scale to measure impulse buying tendency. American Marketing Association: Enhancing Knowledge Development in Marketing, 8, 306-307.
Youn, S., & Faber, R. J. (2000). Impulse buying: its relation to personality traits and cues. Advances in Consumer Research, 27, 179-185.

Edited by

EDITORIAL BOARD

Editor-in-chief

Fellipe Silva Martins

Associated editor

Amalia Pérez-Nebra

Technical support

Gabriel Henrique Carille

EDITORIAL PRODUCTION

Publishing coordination

Jéssica Dametta

Language editor

Bardo Editorial

Layout designer

Libro

Graphic designer

Libro

Publication Dates

Publication in this collection
06 May 2024
Date of issue
2024

History

Received
23 Dec 2021
Accepted
02 Feb 2023

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

[1] Allport, G. W. (1950). The individual and his religion: A psychological interpretation MacMillan.

[2] Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5(4), 432. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021212
» https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021212

[3] Amos, C., Holmes, G. R., & Keneson, W. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of consumer impulse buying. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(2), 86-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2013.11.004
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2013.11.004

[4] Aquino, D. M. K., & Cechett, R. A. (2021). Decisão de compra do consumidor na ótica do neuromarketing e na era da conectividade contínua. Revista Perspectiva, 45(170), 29-40. https://doi.org/10.31512/persp.v.45.n.170.2021.182.p.29-40
» https://doi.org/10.31512/persp.v.45.n.170.2021.182.p.29-40

[5] Aquino, S. D. D., Natividade, J. C., & Lins, S. L. B. (2020). Validity evidences of the buying impulsiveness scale in the Brazilian context. Psico-USF, 25, 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-82712020250102
» https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-82712020250102

[6] Aragão, B. S., & Alfinito, S. (2021). The relationship between human values and conscious ecological behavior among consumers: Evidence from Brazil. Cleaner and Responsible Consumption, 100024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clrc.2021.100024
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clrc.2021.100024

[7] Atulkar, S., & Kesari, B. (2018). Role of consumer traits and situational factors on impulse buying: Does gender matter? International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 46(4), 386-405. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-12-2016-0239
» https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-12-2016-0239

[8] Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 644-656. https://doi.org/10.1086/209376
» https://doi.org/10.1086/209376

[9] Bahrainizad, M., & Rajabi, A. (2018). Consumers perception of usability of product packaging and impulse buying: Considering consumers’ mood and time pressure as moderating variables. Journal of Islamic Marketing, 9(2), 262-282. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-04-2016-0030
» https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-04-2016-0030

[10] Beatty, S. E., & Ferrell, M. E. (1998). Impulse buying: Modeling its precursors. Journal of Retailing, 74(2), 169-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(99)80092-X
» https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(99)80092-X

[11] Bellini, S., Cardinali, M. G., & Grandi, B. (2017). A structural equation model of impulse buying behaviour in grocery retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 36, 164-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.02.001
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.02.001

[12] Bellenger, D. N., Robertson, D. H., & Hirschman, E. C. (1978). Impulse buying varies by product. Journal of Advertising Research, 18(6), 15-18.

[13] Bonomo, B., Mainardes, E. W., & Laurett, R. (2017). Compra não planejada e endividamento pessoal: Uma análise de relação. Revista Administração em Diálogo, 19(3), 49-69. https://doi.org/10.23925/2178-0080.2017v19i3.32758
» https://doi.org/10.23925/2178-0080.2017v19i3.32758

[14] Bruyneel, S., Dewitte, S., Vohs, K. D., & Warlop, L. (2006). Repeated choosing increases susceptibility to affective product features. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 23(2), 215-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.12.002
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.12.002

[15] Coelho, G. L. H., Hanel, P. H., Vilar, R., Monteiro, R. P., Cardoso, F. J. V., & Gouveia, V. V. (2021). Who prioritizes the economy over health? The role of political orientation and human values. Personality and Individual Differences, 179, 110890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110890
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110890

[16] Dhandra, T. K. (2020). Does self-esteem matter? A framework depicting role of self-esteem between dispositional mindfulness and impulsive buying. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 55(1), 102135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102135
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102135

[17] Dias, S. E. F., Santos, R. M., Martins, V., & Isabella, G. (2014). Efeitos das estratégias de marketing de compras coletivas sobre o comportamento impulsivo. Revista Brasileira de Marketing, 13(3), 138-151. https://doi.org/10.5585/remark.v13i3.2646
» https://doi.org/10.5585/remark.v13i3.2646

[18] Dholakia, U. M. (2000). Temptation and resistance: An integrated model of consumption impulse formation and enactment. Psychology & Marketing, 17(11), 955-982. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6793(200011)17:11<955::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-J
» https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6793(200011)17:11<955::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-J

[19] Faber, R. J., & O’Guinn, T. C. (1992). A clinical screener for compulsive buying. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 459-469. https://doi.org/10.1086/209315
» https://doi.org/10.1086/209315

[20] Floh, A., & Madlberger, M. (2013). The role of atmospheric cues in online impulse-buying behavior. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 12(6), 425-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2013.06.001
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2013.06.001

[21] Floyd, K., Morman, M. T., Maré, J., & Holmes, E. (2021). How Americans communicate affection: Findings from a representative national sample. Communication Quarterly, 69(4), 383-409. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2021.1951794
» https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2021.1951794

[22] Gouveia, V. V. (1998). La naturaleza de los valores descriptores del individualismo y del colectivismo: Una comparación intra e intercultural [PhD Dissertation, Faculdade de Psicologia, Universidade Complutense de Madri, Espanha].

[23] Gouveia, V. V. (2003). A natureza motivacional dos valores humanos: Evidências acerca de uma nova tipologia. Estudos de Psicologia, 8(1), 431-443. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-294X2003000300010
» https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-294X2003000300010

[24] Gouveia, V. V., Milfont, T. L., Fischer, R., & Coelho, J. A. P. D. M. (2009). Teoria funcionalista dos valores humanos: Aplicações para organizações. Revista de Administração Mackenzie, 10(3), 34-59. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-69712009000300004
» https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-69712009000300004

[25] Gouveia, V. V., Milfont, T. L., & Guerra, V. M. (2014a). The Functional Theory of Human Values: From intentional overlook to first acknowledgment: A reply to Schwartz. Personality and Individual Differences, 68, 250-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.03.025
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.03.025

[26] Gouveia, V. V., Milfont, T. L., & Guerra, V. M. (2014b). Functional theory of human values: Testing its content and structure hypotheses. Personality and Individual Differences, 60, 41-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.12.012
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.12.012

[27] Gouveia, V. V., Vione, K. C., Milfont, T. L., & Santos, W. S. (2015). Guiding actions and expressing needs: On the psychological functions of values. Psykhe, 24(2), 1-14.

[28] Hair, J. F., Junior, Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) Sage.

[29] Hausman, A. (2000). A multi-method investigation of consumer motivations in impulse buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(5), 403-426. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760010341045
» https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760010341045

[30] Ihemezie, E. J., Nawrath, M., Straub, L., Stringer, L. C., & Dallimer, M. (2021). The influence of human values on attitudes and behaviours towards forest conservation. Journal of Environmental Management, 292(1), 112857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112857
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112857

[31] Inglehart, R. (1977). The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among western publics Princeton University Press.

[32] Jin, S. V., & Ryu, E. (2020). “I’ll buy what she’s wearing”: The roles of envy toward and parasocial interaction with influencers in Instagram celebrity-based brand endorsement and social commerce. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 55, 102121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102121
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102121

[33] Jones, M. A., Reynolds, K. E., Weun, S., & Beatty, S. E. (2003). The product-specific nature of impulse buying tendency. Journal of Business Research, 56(7), 505-511. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00250-8
» https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00250-8

[34] Kalantari, H. D., Johnson, L. W., & Perera, C. R. (2021). The effect of gender on willingness to pay for mass customized running shoes. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 12(2), 161-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2020.1867878
» https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2020.1867878

[35] Kimiagari, S., & Malafe, N. S. A. (2021). The role of cognitive and affective responses in the relationship between internal and external stimuli on online impulse buying behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 61, 102567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102567
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102567

[36] Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Guilford Publications.

[37] Kluckhohn, C. (2013). Values and value-orientations in the theory of action: An exploration in definition and classification. In: T. Parsons, & E. Shils. Toward a general theory of action (pp. 388-433). Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674863507.c8
» https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674863507.c8

[38] Kruger, B. (1987). Untitled (I shop therefore I am). Private collection, Zurich. Figure, 24.

[39] Lee, Y. H., Wang, C. M., & Lee, W. H. (2017). Does looking delicious mean really delicious? The effects regarding menu design on consumer’s ordering behaviour. Journal of Accounting, Finance & Management Strategy, 12(1), 1-23.

[40] Lee, S.-H., & Workman, J. E. (2020). Trendsetting and gender matter: Brand loyalty, perceived quality, and word-of-mouth. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 12, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2020.1835523
» https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2020.1835523

[41] Lins, S. L. B., & Pereira, R. D. C. D. F. (2011). Comprou sem querer? Entenda o porquê! Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, 13, 376-395. https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v13i41.836
» https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v13i41.836

[42] Lins, S., Areias, J., Castro, R., & Aquino, S. (2022). What basic human values influence impulse buying and status consumption. Italian Journal of Marketing, 2022(2), 233-248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43039-022-00046-z
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s43039-022-00046-z

[43] Luniya, P., & Verghese, M. (2015). A study on impulse buying and its determinants: A literature review. Pacific Business Review International, 8(1), 66-69.

[44] Marot, T. A., & Lins, S. L. B. (2021). Evidências preliminares de validade de versão reduzida da escala de compra por impulso de Rook e Fisher. Suma Psicológica, 28(2), 112-119. https://doi.org/10.14349/sumapsi.2021.v28.n2.6
» https://doi.org/10.14349/sumapsi.2021.v28.n2.6

[45] Marquesi, S. C. (2021). Originalidade na escrita acadêmica: A pergunta de pesquisa em foco. Linguarum Arena, 12, 115-129. https://doi.org/10.21747/1647-8770/are12a7
» https://doi.org/10.21747/1647-8770/are12a7

[46] Milfont, T. L., Gouveia, V. V., & Fischer, R. (2008). A functional theory of terminal values. Australian Journal of Psychology, 60(37).

[47] Moayery, M., Cantín, L. N., & Martíns, J. J. G. (2018). Reflective and impulsive predictors of unhealthy snack impulse buying. Review of Marketing Science, 16(1), 49-84. https://doi.org/10.1515/roms-2018-0038
» https://doi.org/10.1515/roms-2018-0038

[48] Morewedge, C. K., Monga, A., Palmatier, R. W., Shu, S. B., & Small, D. A. (2021). Evolution of consumption: A psychological ownership framework. Journal of Marketing, 85(1), 196-218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920957007
» https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242920957007

[49] Nadeem, H., Akmal, M., Omar, S., & Mumtaz, A. (2017). Impact of gender, education and age on impulsive buying: Moderating role of consumer emotional intelligence. International Journal of Transformation in Operational & Marketing Management, 1(2), 2581-4842.

[50] O’Guinn, T. C., & Faber, R. J. (1989). Compulsive buying: A phenomenological exploration. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(2), 147-157. https://doi.org/10.1086/209204
» https://doi.org/10.1086/209204

[51] Park, J. H., Tansuhaj, P. S., & Kolbe, R. H. (1991). The role of love, affection, and intimacy in family decision research. ACR North American Advances, 18, 651-656.

[52] Peixoto, M. M. C. L., & Gonçalves, C. A. (2022). Geração e sexo como determinantes do comportamento sustentável: Evidências de um experimento. Revista FSA, 19(3). https://doi.org/10.12819/2022.19.3.1
» https://doi.org/10.12819/2022.19.3.1

[53] Picchi, A. (2021). The American habit of impulse buying. CBS News https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-american-habit-of-impulse-buying/
» https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-american-habit-of-impulse-buying/

[54] Ponizovskiy, V., Ardag, M., Grigoryan, L., Boyd, R., Dobewall, H., & Holtz, P. (2020). Development and validation of the personal values dictionary: A theory-driven tool for investigating references to basic human values in text. European Journal of Personality, 34(5), 885-902. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2294
» https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2294

[55] Puri, R. (1996). Measuring and modifying consumer impulsiveness: A cost-benefit accessibility framework. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 5(2), 87-113. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0502_01
» https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp0502_01

[56] Rana, S., & Tirthani, J. (2012). Effect of education, income, and gender on impulsive buying among Indian consumer an empirical study of readymade garment customers. Indian Journal of Applied Research, 1(12). https://doi.org/10.15373/2249555X/SEP2012/50
» https://doi.org/10.15373/2249555X/SEP2012/50

[57] Rokeach, M. (1968). The role of values in public opinion research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 32(4), 547-559. https://doi.org/10.1086/267645
» https://doi.org/10.1086/267645

[58] Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values Free Press.

[59] Rook, D. W. (1987). The buying impulse. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(2), 189-199. https://doi.org/10.1086/209105
» https://doi.org/10.1086/209105

[60] Rook, D. W., & Fisher, R. J. (1995). Normative influences on impulsive buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 305-313. https://doi.org/10.1086/209452
» https://doi.org/10.1086/209452

[61] Rook, D. W., & Gardner, M. P. (1993). In the mood: Impulse buying’s affective antecedents. Research in Consumer Behavior, 6(7), 1-28.

[62] Rook, D. W., & Hoch, S. J. (1985). Consuming impulses. ACR North American Advances, 12, 23-27.

[63] Ruvio, A. A., & Belk, R. W. (2013). The Routledge companion to identity and consumption Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203105337
» https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203105337

[64] Salaceanu, C. (2019). The evolution of human values: A comparative study of values in adolescents and emerging adults. Postmodern Openings, 10(2), 74-83. https://doi.org/10.18662/po/72
» https://doi.org/10.18662/po/72

[65] Santini, F. D. O., Ladeira, W. J., Vieira, V. A., Araujo, C. F., & Sampaio, C. H. (2019). Antecedents and consequences of impulse buying: A meta-analytic study. RAUSP Management Journal, 54(2), 178-204. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-07-2018-0037
» https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-07-2018-0037

[66] Sayre, S., & Horne, D. (1996). I shop, therefore I am: The role of possessions for self-definition. ACR North American Advances, 23, 323-328.

[67] Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6
» https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6

[68] Sharma, R., & Jha, M. (2017). Values influencing sustainable consumption behaviour: Exploring the contextual relationship. Journal of Business Research, 76, 77-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.03.010
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.03.010

[69] Shiv, B., & Fedorikhin, A. (1999). Heart and mind in conflict: The interplay of affect and cognition in consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(3), 278-292. https://doi.org/10.1086/209563
» https://doi.org/10.1086/209563

[70] Silvera, D. H., Lavack, A. M., & Kropp, F. (2008). Impulse buying: The role of affect, social influence, and subjective wellbeing. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25(1), 23-33. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760810845381
» https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760810845381

[71] Singh, J., Singh, G., Kumar, S., & Mathur, A. N. (2021). Religious influences in unrestrained consumer behaviour. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 58, 102262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102262
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102262

[72] Sokić, K., Korkut, D., & Šestanović, A. (2020). Relationship between impulsivity, value orientations and impulsive buying. Managing Global Transitions: International Research Journal, 18(3), 195-210. https://doi.org/10.26493/1854-6935.18.195-210
» https://doi.org/10.26493/1854-6935.18.195-210

[73] Souza, M. A. P., Lins, S., & Feres-Carneiro, T. (2015). Adaptação da escala de compra por impulso de Rook e Fisher para o contexto brasileiro [Sociedade Brasileira de Psicologia]. 45th Annual Meeting of Sociedade Brasileira de Psicologia, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3266.7607
» https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3266.7607

[74] Stern, H. (1962). The significance of impulse buying today. Journal of Marketing, 26(2), 59-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224296202600212
» https://doi.org/10.1177/002224296202600212

[75] Tarka, P., Kukar-Kinney, M., & Harnish, R. J. (2022). Consumers’ personality and compulsive buying behavior: The role of hedonistic shopping experiences and gender in mediating-moderating relationships. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 64, 102802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102802
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102802

[76] Thayer, R. E., Newman, J. R., & McClain, T. M. (1994). Self-regulation of mood: Strategies for changing a bad mood, raising energy, and reducing tension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(5), 910. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.67.5.910
» https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.67.5.910

[77] Utama, A., Sawitri, H. S. R., Haryanto, B., & Wahyudi, L. (2021). Impulse buying: The influence of impulse buying tendency, urge to buy and gender on impulse buying of the retail customers. Journal of Distribution Science, 19(7), 101-111. https://doi.org/10.15722/jds.19.7.202107.101
» https://doi.org/10.15722/jds.19.7.202107.101

[78] Verplanken, B., & Herabadi, A. (2001). Individual differences in impulse buying tendency: Feeling and no thinking. European Journal of Personality, 15(1), 71-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.423
» https://doi.org/10.1002/per.423

[79] Verplanken, B., Herabadi, A. G., Perry, J. A., & Silvera, D. H. (2005). Consumer style and health: The role of impulsive buying in unhealthy eating. Psychology & Health, 20(4), 429-441. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440412331337084
» https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440412331337084

[80] Weinberg, P., & Gottwald, W. (1982). Impulsive consumer buying as a result of emotions. Journal of Business Research, 10(1), 43-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(82)90016-9
» https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(82)90016-9

[81] Weun, S., Jones, M. A., & Beatty, S. E. (1997). A parsimonious scale to measure impulse buying tendency. American Marketing Association: Enhancing Knowledge Development in Marketing, 8, 306-307.

[82] Youn, S., & Faber, R. J. (2000). Impulse buying: its relation to personality traits and cues. Advances in Consumer Research, 27, 179-185.

1	I often buy things spontaneously.
2	“Just do it” describes the way I buy things.
3	I often buy things without thinking.
4	“I see it, I buy it” describes me.
5	“Buy now, think about it later” describes me.
6	Sometimes I feel like buying things on the spur-of-the-moment.
7	I buy things according to how I feel at the moment.
8	I carefully plan most of my purchases.^* * Inverted code item.
9	Sometimes I am a bit reckless about what I buy.

Emotion	To enjoy challenges or unknown situations; to look for adventure.
Pleasure	To live for the moment; to satisfy all your desires.
Sexuality	To have sexual relationships; to obtain sexual pleasure.
Beauty	To be able to appreciate the best in art, music, and literature; to go to museums or exhibitions where you can see beautiful things.
Knowledge	To look for up-to-date news on not very well-known matters; to try to discover new things about the world.
Maturity	To feel that your purpose in life has been fulfilled; to develop all your capacities.
Affectivity	To have a deep and enduring affectionate relationship; to have somebody to share successes and failures.
Social support	To obtain help when you need it; to feel that you are not alone in the world.
Belonging	To have good neighborly relationships; to form part of a group, e.g., social, religious, sporting.
Success	To reach your goals; to be efficient in everything you do.
Power	To have the power to influence others and to control decisions; to be the boss of a team.
Prestige	To know that a lot of people know and admire you; when you are older, to be honored for your contributions.
Personal stability	To have the certainty that tomorrow you will have all that you have today; to have an organized and planned life.
Health	To look after your health at all times, not just when sick; not to be sick.
Survival	To have water, food, and shelter every day in your life; to live in a place with enough food.
Obedience	To fulfill your daily duties and obligations; to respect your parents, superiors, or elders.
Religiosity	To believe in God as the savior of humanity; to complete the will of God.
Tradition	To follow the social norms of your country; to respect the traditions of your society.

	General	Men	Women
Affectivity	-0.0689	-0.036	-0.129^* * ,
Social support	-0.0103	-0.017	-0.042
Beauty	0.0205	0.043	-0.006
Knowledge	-0.0904^* * ,	-0.082	-0.066
Coexistence	0.0023	0.012	0.022
Emotion	0.1346^* ***** indicate statistical significance at 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively.	0.166^* * ,	0.132^ , and
Stability	-0.0059	0.121	-0.081
Maturity	-0.0479	-0.129	0.012
Obedience	0.0186	0.022	-0.058
Power	-0.0197	0.003	0.010
Pleasure	0.1951^* ***** indicate statistical significance at 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively.	0.105	0.259^* ***** indicate statistical significance at 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively.
Prestige	-0.0133	0.023	-0.032
Religiosity	0.0794^* * ,	-0.033	0.074
Health	-0.1299^* ***** indicate statistical significance at 10%, 5%, and 1%, respectively.	-0.112	-0.109
Sexuality	0.0309	0.099	0.015
Survival	0.0550	0.112^* * ,	0.033
Tradition	-0.0030	0.058	-0.001
Success	0.0593	-0.010	0.098
R2	0.093	0.118	0.150
Compound Reliability (rho_a)	0.602	0.703	0.766
Average variance extracted (AVE)	0.141	0.236	0.246
McDonald’s Omega	0.778	0.779	0.856
Blindfolding (Total: 1-SSE/SSO)	0.0444	0.0451	0.075
Medium VIF	1.549	1.702	1.618

Influence of human values on impulse buying behavior: A gender analysis

Influência dos valores humanos no comportamento de compra por impulso: Uma análise entre gêneros

Abstract

Resumo

INTRODUCTION

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Impulse buying

Human values

Human values as predictors of impulse buying behavior

METHODOLOGY

RESULTS

DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS

CONCLUSIONS

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

REFERENCES

Edited by

Publication Dates

History