“Motivation is what gets you started. Habit is what keeps you going”

I have further developed my research proposal and have provided it below, which addresses the literature and details my methodology, including my approach to analysing data. In updating my proposal, I have included more of a logical structure to the literature review, though am still working on trying to make my argument. Also, I have read a range of literature which I have used to help justify my case for using focus groups, though feel I could use some citations to previous studies to increase the validity of my methodology.  Though to be honest, at this point in time I am rather unsure about how I am meant to go about analysing the content from the focus groups once I have it. I understand the notion of coding the findings under themes, but what I really need is to delve into the rules of the game regarding the analysis and presentation of findings. I have spoken to Kerry and have been told not to worry at this point as it will be covered later in the course- perhaps a bit of light reading to help me out until then?

And as they say, honours is somewhat of a research apprenticeship, so any feedback on my proposal is always much appreciated.

- Ben

 

 

 

BUSN8018 Qualitative Research Methods – Research Project Outline

Ben Hamer (u4774372)

1.0 Overview of the Topic

Picture yourself going to get lunch at your favourite café on campus. When you get to the counter, you proceed to tell the attendant your order, and when prompted as to what drink you would like, you effortlessly reply asking for a bottle of water. Why is it that you were able to answer with little cognitive deliberation or thought?

When it comes to particular products, consumers will unconsciously act with minimal consideration to the goals and valued outcomes. Habitual buying behaviour occurs under conditions of low consumer involvement and minimal brand difference, often involving low-cost frequently purchased products (Kotler et al., 2006, pg. 168). This framework of practice occurs with automacity and is directly cued by the given context.

This project aims to conduct research into the habitual consumption habits of particular groups, exploring any potential implications for when contextual cues and product availability are taken away and the manner in which this affects consumption habits.

2.0 Literature Review

In order to understand habitual buyer behaviour, one must look at its origins in social psychology from the theories of practice. Bourdieu, Schatzki and Giddens are all prominent researchers in the field, who have each contributed to the literature and built on the foundations of the Weberian notion of social action and the Marxist concept of praxis (Schatzki, 1996).

Theories of practice describe the manner in which agents (individuals with the capacity to act freely) are socialised in a predefined social domain and subsequently form internalised relationships and habitual expectations. These practices are routinised types of behaviour that are interconnected by several elements.

Warde (2005) conducted exploratory research of sociology literature to produce a conceptual study that aimed to consolidate the broad principles from practice theory and apply it in an analysis of final consumption. In his philosophical account of practice, Warde describes practices as socially coordinated entities that require performance (the carrying out of practices that actualise it) for existence.  When applied to the domain of consumption, practice theory indicates that consumers develop particular behaviours through repeated actions, forming consumption habits and in turn an often effortless purchase decision. 

Through his research, Warde details how the conventions and standards of the practice steer behaviour, and that it is the engagement in the practice, rather than any personal decision about a course of conduct, that explains the nature and process of consumption.

Warde found that consumption occurs as items are appropriated in the course of engaging in particular practices, and that being a competent practitioner requires appropriation of the requisite services, possession of appropriate tools, and devotion of a suitable level of attention to the conduct of the practice.

Wayne Hoyer (1984) alludes to theories of practice through his study of consumer decision making for common repeat purchase products. He describes that when it comes to low involvement products, the consumers motivation to purchase is pre-thought and as such conducts his research on the assumption that consumers do not engage in a great deal of in-store decision making.

In making a repeat purchase decision of relatively low importance, consumers apply simple choice heuristics to provide a quick and effortless outcome, such as price, performance, affect, and normative factors (Bush & Hunt, 1982). This view of choice tactics infers that since the purchase takes place frequently, consumer evaluation occurs over a repeated number of trials. As such, many factors like continuous product evaluation and external processing influence consumer motivations outside of the pre-purchase stage. Therefore, with an absence of pre-purchase evaluation and little consideration for the brand, Hoyer’s research states that consumers do not make the optimal choice, but rather make their decision based on what satisfies their need in the given context.

Wendy Wood and David Neal (2009) outline the habitual consumer through a qualitative analysis of existing case studies and secondary data and apply Verplanken and Orbell’s (2003) scale of Self Report Index of Habit Strength to ascertain how habits are formed and changed.

When consumers respond repeatedly to a stimulus in a stable context, a direct memory association occurs between the response and the contextual cue. When this repetition constantly yields value-added outcomes, a cognitive transition occurs in the consumer from outcome-oriented to context-cued responses and as such habits are developed. Therefore, consumption habits can be categorised by two distinct traits, in that they are repeat actions with rewarding outcomes, and that they are also slow to change which ensures they are retained for future use.

In applying practice theory to consumption, it was found that whilst the habits themselves are difficult to manipulate, the influence of habits on behaviour can be broken.  By conducting a small scaled observational analysis, Wood and Neal identified that efforts to break habits involve inhibiting the cued response by exerting self control, blocking the mechanisms that trigger performance and removing cues in the performance context.

From the study, not only were the researchers able to apply theories of practice to buyer behaviour and define the habitual consumer, but they found that simple direct cuing mechanisms underlying habits account for repeated product consumption. In particular, when repetition occurs in stable contexts, consumers often form context-response links in memory that directly trigger future habitual responses.

An analysis of sociological practice theory (Warde, 2005), the habitual consumer (Wood & Neal, 2009), and consumer motivations for repeat purchasing (Hoyer, 1984) provides an understanding of practice theory as it applies to low involvement habitual consumption. However, there is no existing research to suggest what would happen if a particular contextual cue was taken away and the effect that this would have on consumption habits (the habit disconuity hypothesis). As such, the proposed research project seeks to explore this, as well as analyse the effects of withholding product availability in particular contexts to ascertain whether it has an impact on overall product consumption habits.

3.0 Research method

In 2011, the University of Canberra (UC) in Australia banned the sale of bottled water on campus in an attempt to influence students to become healthier and environmentally conscious. As a result, a comparative case study of bottled water will be conducted, with separate focus groups being held between students from the Australian National University (ANU) and UC.

Focus groups have been selected in order exploit the social context, being conducted with a conclusion verification approach. Product consumption is influenced by implied social pressures and the opinions of others. Therefore, focus groups will be used so that respondents can feed off the social dynamic and interact in a manner that gives a true representation of attitudes and behaviours towards the consumption of the product (Fern, 1982). Furthermore, social attitudes and behaviours of a particular group within the community are best represented by having that group interact together and communicating/expressing views as a collective.

Focus groups have also been selected due to resource constraints (Fern, 1982). The study requires a broad range of information in order to ascertain attitudes and test the habitual disconuity hypothesis. With only one individual conducting the research in a short period of time, there will not be enough time to generate sufficient ideas that are representative of the group. Therefore, with focus groups bringing a sample from the community together at the one time, it is much more efficient and conducive to the study.

In order to ensure consistency and reliability, the focus groups will take place on campus so that the students are immersed in the relevant environment. The focus groups will be conducted by the researcher, who will promote interaction and drive conversation from a predefined discussion guide without influencing responses.

4.0 Data Analysis

Information collected from the focus groups will be written up in a transcript and analysed, paying particular attention to the group’s consumption habits and response to contextual cues. In order to ensure validity, the composition of the group will reflect the wider population, which will be determined through the careful selection of participants in accordance with demographic data. Furthermore, it is proposed that the focus groups will be conducted in accordance with the split-half method, whereby each sample group will be split into two different focus groups so that findings can be crossed checked in order to achieve consistency.

5.0 Relevant Literature (as of 12 March 2011)

Bush, R., & Hunt, S. (1982). Marketing Theory: Philosophy of Science Perspectives. Chicago: American Marketing Association.

Carpenter, G.S. & Nakamoto, K. (1989). Consumer Preference Formation and Pioneering Advantage. Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 285 – 298.

Fern, E.F. (1982). The Use of Focus Groups for Idea Generation: The effects of group size, acquaintanceship, and moderator on response quantity and quality. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 1, 1 – 13.

Holt, D.B. (1995). How Consumers Consume: A typology of consumption practices. The Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 1-16.

Hoyer, W.D. (1984). An Examination of Consumer Decision Making for a Common Repeat Purchase Product. The Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 3, 822 – 829.

Kotler, P., Adam, S., Brown, L., & Armstrong, G. (2006). Principles of Marketing. New South Wales: Pearson Australia.

Landon, E.L. (1974). Self Concept, Ideal Self Concept, and Consumer Purchase Intentions. The Journal of Consumer Research, 1, 44 – 51.

Laurent, G. & Kapferer, J. (1985). Measuring Consumer Involvement Profiles. Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 41 – 53.

Moors, A., & De Houwer, J. (2006). Automacity: A Theoretical and Conceptual Analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 297 – 326.

Murphy, P.E. & Enis, B.M. (1986). Classifying Products Strategically. The Journal of Marketing, 50, 24-42.

Schatkzi, T. (1996). Social Practices: A Wittgensteinian Approach to Human Activity and the Social Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Verplanken, B., & Orbell, S. (2003). Reflections on past behaviour: A self-report index of habit strength. Journal of Applied Psychology, 33, 1313 – 1330.

Warde, A. (2005). Consumption and Theories of Practice. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5, 2, 131 – 153.

West, P. M., Brown, C.L., & Hoch, S.J. (1996). Consumption Vocabulary and Preference Formation. The Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 120 – 135.

Wood, W., & Neal, D.T. (2009). The Habitual Consumer. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 4, 579 – 592.

"Fear not those who argue but those who dodge"

As another week goes by, I look back and reflect on my continual understanding on the rules of the game and think of how this can be applied to my project.

Strong qualitative research requires a good design, with the purpose of convincing the audience of your research and providing a plausible argument for what you have done. I am working on the design for my research at the moment, where I anticipate to conduct comparative focus groups. But I still need to argue the case for why I am choosing focus groups, and justify it with past studies and citations from the literature.

One thing that I have learnt, evident through my ever-transforming thesis topic, is that the researcher has to be flexible and respondent to change. Similarly, a qualitative research design will keep changing, so I am learning to keep an open mind and ensure that I am adaptive to any developments in my research. It seems like I was quite naïve entering into the research game- It turns out you don’t just pick a topic and run with it. Rather, the development stage is one that is quite lengthy, because the end result is only as good as the research question that directed the study. If you plant bad seeds, you won’t get a good tree!

Also, the research question directs the study so it is important to determine a research topic early on in the process and identify a relationship for what it is you will be investigating. This is where I am currently at- pouring through past studies (in particular their limitations and direction for future research) to identify gaps in the literature and derive a topic*. At times it can feel like trying to find a needle in a haystack, but the needle is in there somewhere and with hard work and determination you will find it.

In developing the topic, you must justify why it is interesting, and the methodology should be chosen based on its ability to obtain the data that answers the research question. Therefore, you need to be able to link your evidence to a claim and give explanation for why you are doing it. Which comes back to the notion of the argument- As long as you can justify your case you will be able to make your cause plausible. I sometimes take the same approach when arguing with my parents, but they don’t seem to like it as much…

*You must be cautious about criticisms you make on prior studies though- You don’t want to go offending the original researcher as they could be the one that ends up marking your thesis.

"A man is least himself when he talks in his own person; when he is given a mask he will tell the truth"

In class the other day I did a short presentation on projective techniques in qualitative research, which caught the interest of my peers as it is a relatively unexplored research method.

I would like to illustrate the concept of projective techniques through an example. When you question a man who just bought a Mercedes about his purchase intentions, he will most likely respond by saying things such as “it does not depreciate very much”, “it has better mileage than you would expect”, and “it is comfortable to drive”. However, if you were to ask him as to why he thought his neighbour bought a Mercedes, the same person will likely respond with something like “he’s such a status seeker”. Therefore, it can be said that individuals are likely to give honest answers to disguised questions.

On that note, projective techniques are based on the assumption that when directly questioned, respondents will not express their true feelings as they don’t want to embarrass themselves or they wish to the ‘right’ answer. As such, projective techniques are indirect means of questioning that enables respondents to project beliefs and feelings onto a third party, often providing considerable freedom in their response. They are best used for attitudinal based studies, when it is either difficult for the respondent to qualify their response, when the interviewer is sceptical of the level of honesty in the response, or as a round-about way of asking an otherwise difficult question.

Examples of projective techniques are:

-          Word association test

-          Sentence completion method (eg. people who drink beer are …)

-          Role playing

To read further about projective techniques, please see the article by Haire (1950), who was the first to write about them in the Journal of Marketing. The article can be found by following the link: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1246942

"Efforts and courage are not enough without purpose and direction"

Research must have a purpose. And as I am into my swimming, I can’t help but draw a comparison (it may not necessarily be the right one, but I’m always up for a metaphor no matter how abstract it may seem to others). When you begin the race, you have a start point and an end point. You have a motivation for doing it, which is driven by a goal or anticipated result. Similarly, as researchers we need to have a reason for why we are conducting the research – identified from a gap in the literature-, which is driven by propositions and theory.

In order for the research project to be meaningful, it needs to either make a value-added contribution to the existing literature, and sometimes contribute to (or create a new) theory. Essentially, you should be able to answer the question of “so what?” when confronted by your sceptics. 

So I have taken it upon myself to go about doing a bit of reading as to what theory is. Popper (2002) defines theories as nets cast to catch what we call ‘the world’-to rationalize, to explain, and to master it. We endeavour to make the mesh ever finer and finer. ß As I said, I can’t deny a good metaphor.

I have also come across a paper that has helped me address this concept of a theory from a paper by Sutton and Straw from Administrative Science Quarterly,  titled ‘What Theory is Not’. The authors adopt an editorial perspective here to highlight some of the common flaws of academics in their attempt to make a theoretical contribution. In actual fact, their article is highlighting the rules of the game for theoretical and literary contributions- how poignant!

They identify five key rules to go by:

-          References to theoretical development and prior studies does not qualify as a theoretical contribution. This has struck a particular chord with me, as I have seen in both the writing of students and academics that they cite for the sake of it, or otherwise make an irrelevant citation. Whilst researchers need to acknowledge the stream of logic that they are drawing on, they also need to explicate the causal logic they contain.

-          Data is not theory. Empirical evidence plays an important role in confirming, revising or discrediting existing theory, as well as guiding the development of new theory. But the data in itself, without explanation, is irrelevant. Data describes which empirical patterns were observed, whereas the theory answers the question of why. Researchers need to be able to know the amount and kind of evidence required to ensure it is made meaningful.

-          The variables are an important part of the theoretical contribution, but do not alone constitute theory. The theory must explain why the variables or constructs come about an why they are connected.

-          The authors argue that many researchers put forward a diagram as their theory. Even though good diagrams should causal relationships in a logical structure, they rarely constitute theory on their own. Rather, they are recommended as a visual aid to complement the theory and aid in its structure.

-          Hypotheses can be an important part of a well crafted conceptual argument, though theoretical models are not simply a statement of the hypothesis. Hypotheses do not contain logical arguments about why empirical relationships are expected to occur. A true hypothesis is a concise statement about what is expected to occur, not why it is expected.

It is beneficial for all researchers, whether experienced or those like me who are new to the field, to have a thorough understanding of the rules of the game and the manner in which individuals go about making contributions to the theory and literature. In essence, it is about ensuring that the research is driven by a purpose (sourced from a gap in the literature), and that the data is made meaningful to ascertain casual relationships.

"Ever wonder about those people who spend $2 apiece on those little bottles of Evian water? Try spelling Evian backward"

After today’s class with Kerry, I have determined the direction for my semester project that will guide me throughout the course. It supplements my current thesis topic and lays a strong foundation for me to carry on with once the course has finished.

Based on the practices and structure of consumption, my research project will look into the habitual and contextual purchase of the product, which for the purposes of the study will be bottled water. Consumption of habitual products is often spontaneous and a physical practice rather than a conscious purchase choice. Consumers do not often make a planned choice to travel to a vendor and purchase a bottle of water. Rather, it is a result of their habits and contextual environment that drives the purchase decision.

In doing so, I will conduct a comparative case study between tertiary students from The University of Canberra (UC), where the sale of bottled water has been recently been banned, and the Australian National University (ANU).  The case study will ascertain the attitudes between both groups of consumers, as well as see if anything occurs to consumption habits when the option to purchase (UC) is taken away from a primary location.

As such, the project will be focussed on habitual purchasing under the assumption that certain product choices are a result of the purchase environment and influenced by common practices and structures.

“The quest for certainty blocks the search for meaning. Uncertainty is the very condition to impel man to unfold his powers”

The last few days have once again involved a lot of change; who would have thought that an individual's research process held so much uncertainty? Last year when I applied to do my Honours, I was under the impression that I would form a topic at the beginning of the year, and that I would see it through to the end, with minor tweaks here and there. This is one hypothesis I have already found the answer to, as within a four week period I have not only changed the broad discipline I would be looking into (from e-marketing to consumer behaviour), but have taken many different turns.

I can draw similar parallels to driving. When you get in the car, you turn on the GPS and it plans out the route for you. But once you get familiar with the area you are driving in and get different advice (road signs etc.), you sometimes start to deviate from that original path and make your own way, still ending up in the same place.

I am quite motivated by change and uncertainty, as each time that I come up with a new idea, concept, or variable, I find myself refining my research problem and becoming more comfortable with it.

Below is the (current) proposal for my qualitative study, which will provide the foundations for further empirical research in my thesis.

BUSN8018 Qualitative Research Methods – Research Project Outline

Ben Hamer (u4774372)

1.0  Overview of the topic

When it comes to bottled water as a consumable, there is a lot of anecdotal commentary without a lot of theoretical support. As such, research will be conducted looking into the motivations behind consumers purchasing dual value products, in that they serve as both image and function. In the case of bottled water, it is predicted that consumers are not merely buying packaged water, but the image of a health conscious, fresh and vibrant individual that goes with it.

Societal attitudes infer that consumers believe that bottled water is a product that has been created by marketers and they have subsequently been tricked into buying something with little utility, purpose and value. Therefore, based on modern marketing theory (in particular the co-creation of value), the proposed study will ascertain whether the utility of the bottled water comes from the consumer rather than the product itself. In doing so, the research will query the market as to the actual product benefits compared to the perceived product benefits.

Furthermore, bottled water will be examined under an alternative paradigm, in analysing motivation for purchasing bottled water over the (often) free tap water and water fountain alternatives.

Being a generalist study, the target audience will represent a broad cross-section of society. However, due to ethical constraints, those under eighteen years old will not qualify for participation in the research.

2.0   The research gap

Criticism of bottled water, as a value co-created product, is centred on the differentiation and positioning between brands. However, research will be conducted into the core value provided by ‘water in a bottle’, and apply modern theory to determine the motivations behind consumers purchasing the product and what their perceived value of it is.

3.0  Research method

Exploratory research will be conducted and qualitative methodology adopted as a means of developing and refining the research problem. It is envisaged that this study will dissect the broad problem into something smaller and concise, influencing the direction of future empirical study on the topic.

Initially, the researcher will extend, synthesize and analyse available secondary in order to look at consumption motivations for low involvement impulse purchases so that a subsequent framework can be produced.

Following, two focus groups will be conducted as a means of acquiring feedback and attitudes from the predefined sample, using bottled water as the case study. A judgement sample will divide the two groups between bottled water users and non-users. As such, the researcher will be able to analyse the product perceptions from the two groups to see if there is a significant difference in attitudes and subsequently refine the core value that is embedded in the product.

In particular, it is anticipated that the focus group will determine the variables that motivate consumers to purchase bottled water, and why they do so over the tap alternative.  It is predicted that the information will be more specific and accurate with the potential to ask follow up questions and observe non verbal behaviour.

4.0   Relevant literature (as of 8 March 2011)

Vargo, SL and Lusch, RF. 2004. Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing. Journal of Marketing. Vol 68 (January 2004) pp 1 – 17.

Vargo, SL and Lusch, RF. 2008. Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. Vol 36 pp 1 – 10.

- A good summation of where S-D logic is since they first posited (haha) it in 2004 

Lusch, RF et al. 2007. Competing through service: Insights from service-dominant logic. Journal of Retailing. Vol. 83, No.1 pp 5 – 18.

Murphy, P.E. & Enis, B.M. (1986). Classifying Products Strategically. The Journal of Marketing, 50, 24-42.

Hausman, A. (2000). A Multi-Method Investigation of Consumer Motivations in Impulse Buying Behaviour, Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 1.

Holt, D.B. (1995). How Consumers Consume: A typology of consumption practices. The Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 1-16

Hoyer, W.D. (1984). An Examination of Consumer Decision Making for a Common Repeat Purchase Product. The Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 822 – 829.

Laurent, G. & Kapferer, J. (1985). Measuring Consumer Involvement Profiles. Journal of Marketing Research, 22, 41 – 53.

West, P. M., Brown, C.L., & Hoch, S.J. (1996). Consumption Vocabulary and Preference Formation. The Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 120 – 135.

Bass, F.M. & Talarzyk, W.W. (1972). An Attitude Model for the Study of Brand Preference. Journal of Marketing Research, 9, 93-96.

Carpenter, G.S. & Nakamoto, K. (1989). Consumer Preference Formation and Pioneering Advantage. Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 285 – 298.

Ross, I. (1971). Self-Concept and Brand Preference. The Journal of Business, 44, 38-50.

Landon, E.L. (1974). Self Concept, Ideal Self Concept, and Consumer Purchase Intentions. The Journal of Consumer Research, 1, 44 – 51.

Dawar, N. & Parker, P. (1994). Marketing Universals: Consumers’ use of brand name, price, physical appearance, and retailer reputation as signals of product quality. The Journal of Marketing, 58, 81 – 95.

Dommermuth, W.P. (1965). The Shopping Matrix and Marketing Strategy. Journal of Marketing Research, 2, 128 – 132.

“He who rejects change is the architect of decay. The only human institution which rejects progress is the cemetery”

As another week comes to a close and I look back over what has been, I cannot repress the smile that starts to spread across my face. It has been a time of personal accomplishment, finding myself submerging after what I felt was like being trapped under water with no surface in sight.

After my first few classes, it became apparent to me that I did not have an accurate understanding about academic research. I have learnt that it is so much more than taking a problem relevant to the discipline and collecting some findings for presentation. In particular, my research interest is concerned with a particular case study (bottled water) and purchase motivation. I was finding it difficult to find relevant literature, but realised I was searching for the wrong information; garbage in, garbage out. I now know the actual theoretical concepts that I want to test through my case study, which is in essence what my research will be based on.

The theories I will be looking at will concern consumer motivations and the framework for assessing consumer choice, the shopping matrix, product classification theory and preferential brand influences. This way, rather than solely looking at the consumption motivations for consumers of bottled water, I can narrow it down and make it more relevant by including their willingness to pay for bottled water over the tap alternative, as well as looking within the product category and determining how consumers come to choose one brand over another. Bottled water, being an unsought low-involvement product that has a free alternative out in the market, does not necessarily fit the current framework and it is this that I would like to explore.

I was originally looking at taking a social marketing approach to the bottled water market, using the research on consumer motivations to provide recommendations to government and NPO’s for how they can increase consumption of tap water and subsequently reduce the amount of plastic water bottles. I may still adopt this approach, but am leaning away from it as I just don’t feel as passionate or motivated by it.

Nonetheless, my greatest accomplishment, however minor it may appear to some, is that I read my first journal article where I came out the other side with a confident understanding about what was expressed, as well as notes for critiquing the literature. As a result of my coursework to date, I have learnt how to read and synthesise information effectively, rather than reading every word of the text and at the same time giving myself a headache trying to visualise. Furthermore, I found that I was getting into the habit of reading for readings sake rather than ensuring I only concentrated on those relevant to my topic. I think this was most likely due to having an unclear understanding about the actual theory relevant to my topic, but now that I have a more focussed direction I am able to select suitable articles.

Whilst on my adventure to find the research gap, I am endeavouring to remain on the path that will lead me to a theory that not only motivates me as the researcher, but is interesting to the discipline and general population at large.