Content uploaded by Tina M Lowrey
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Tina M Lowrey on Nov 04, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal
Shopping with consumers: reflections and innovations
Tina M. Lowrey, Cele C. Otnes, Mary Ann McGrath,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Tina M. Lowrey, Cele C. Otnes, Mary Ann McGrath, (2005) "Shopping with consumers: reflections and
innovations", Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 8 Issue: 2, pp.176-188, https://
doi.org/10.1108/13522750510592445
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750510592445
Downloaded on: 04 November 2018, At: 07:18 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 31 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 2700 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2005),"Grounded theory, ethnography and phenomenology: A comparative analysis of three qualitative
strategies for marketing research", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39 Iss 3/4 pp. 294-308 <a
href="https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560510581782">https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560510581782</a>
(2005),"Processes, relationships, settings, products and consumers: the case for qualitative diary
research", Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 8 Iss 2 pp. 142-156 <a href="https://
doi.org/10.1108/13522750510592427">https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750510592427</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:127747 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
Shopping with consumers:
reflections and innovations
Tina M. Lowrey
University of Texas, San Antonio, Texas, USA
Cele C. Otnes
University of Illinois, Urban-champaign, Illinois, USA, and
Mary Ann McGrath
Loyola University, Chicago, Illinois, USA
Abstract
Purpose – This paper reflects on the protocol suggested for using shopping with consumers (SWC)
as a means for gathering high-quality, naturalistic text in the field.
Design/methodology/approach – The original SWC method combined accompanying consumers
in the field as they shopped with in-depth interviews.
Findings – This paper reflects on how SWC has been used in past research, including new and
innovative applications of the method to a variety of research phenomena.
Research limitations/implications – The primary limitation of the approach is the amount of
time required to implement SWC thoroughly.
Practical implications – SWC has the advantages of a multi-method research design. In addition,
SWC hastens trust and rapport with informants, potentially yielding richer data.
Originality/value – This paper is unique in terms of reflections on how a variety of scholars have
used SWC to investigate phenomena of interest beyond that investigated in our original data
collection. In addition, we offer suggestions for future research in areas that could clearly benefit from
application of the method.
Keywords Shopping, Retailing, Qualitative research, Interviews
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
Over ten years ago, we began using a method for gathering qualitative data that we
termed shopping with consumers (SWC). Within the scope of several major research
projects that involved consumer shopping over the past decade, this method has
enabled us both to create rich datasets and illuminate shopping behavior in specific
contexts (McGrath and Otnes, 1995; Otnes et al., 1993, 1997). We believe the method
inherently generates text that, in conjunction with depth interviews, yields insights
that may otherwise remain hidden from researchers.
The world’s 100 largest retailers now generate $2 trillion in revenues, and each of
the major industrialized regions of the world can boast its own retail giants (Berman
and Evans, 2004). Recent studies continue to underscore the importance of shopping to
economic health, and some have specifically acknowledged the need to understand
consumers’ shopping activities (Ackerman and Tellis, 2001; Compeau and Nicholson,
1996; Nelson, 1996). Moreover, although some scholars sing the praises of SWC as a
technique for gathering high-quality naturalistic text (Davies et al., 1999), many have
stopped short of incorporating it into their research designs. This paper argues that
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/1352-2752.htm
QMRIJ
8,2
176
Qualitative Market Research:
An International Journal
Vol. 8 No. 2, 2005
pp. 176-188
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1352-2752
DOI 10.1108/13522750510592445
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
SWC is a valuable and effective method for gathering naturalistic data in the field.
While not without its shortcomings, we argue that SWC may be the most potent means
of capturing consumers’ shopping behavior, and when used in conjunction with depth
interviews, of acquiring valid and reliable perspectives on actual versus recalled
shopping activities.
Background
We wrote the original methodological paper in 1995 (Otnes et al., 1995), where we laid
out a protocol for use and described how it could be used in conjunction with other
methods (primarily depth interviews) to provide high-quality text. Given the focus of
this special issue, it seemed both appropriate and timely to reflect on the advantages
and disadvantages of this method, to review what has been learned through the
application of SWC by ourselves and others, and to offer advice on training researchers
in the use of this method. The studies using SWC since 1995 have examined shopping
both in traditional brick-and-mortar stores and online contexts. In this paper, we
describe how SWC has proven useful in these studies, and also explore how SWC can
help researchers push the envelope in research on activities involving
consumer/retailer interactions. First, we briefly describe the method as outlined in
Otnes et al. (1995), then devote the rest of the paper to the innovative ways SWC has
been used, along with ways in which SWC could be used in the future.
Steps involved in shopping with consumers
Our original method involved combining SWC with depth and other interviewing
techniques, yielding six basic steps that typically required five weeks to complete (Otnes
et al., 1995, pp. 106-8). A one-week gap is recommended between each step to minimize
researcher and informant fatigue. The first step was recruitment, which involved initial
solicitation of volunteers. Potential informants were screened through a preliminary
telephone contact to make sure volunteers met the criteria for our studies. Obviously,
criteria can differ depending upon the nature of the study, but our focus was on ensuring
consumers had a sufficient amount of shopping to complete during the study timeframe.
In our studies, small monetary incentives were used to recruit volunteers.
The second step was an initial one-on-one depth interview designed to establish
rapport between the researchers and the volunteers prior to accompanying them on
shopping trips. Our initial interviews typically followed a specific schedule
(McCracken, 1988) across all informants to address key topics under study. During
these interviews, the first shopping trip was scheduled and an attempt was made to
address any logistical concerns participants may have had regarding these trips.
For example, meeting places and times were determined, rides were arranged
(if necessary), and issues such as who might accompany the researcher/informant team
were discussed. Given the inherently intrusive nature of this method, we believed it
was essential to allow informants to shop as “naturally” as possible, which means we
always permitted others to join in shopping if they would normally do so. In this step,
we also explained the process of taking notes during the trips so participants would not
be alarmed during the actual trip. Although taping of the shopping trips was a
possibility, we consistently refrained from doing so, opting instead to take skeletal
notes during the trip, followed by preparing detailed field notes immediately after the
interaction.
Shopping with
consumers
177
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
The third step was the initial shopping trip, which began either during transport
to or upon meeting at a predetermined retail setting. General baseline questions
were asked of all participants (e.g. “What are you shopping for today?”), but the nature
of this method guarantees the emergence of informant-specific questions. Thus,
researchers were not bound to follow the same schedule of questions for each
individual (indeed, differences arose in the researcher-informant relationship based on
the initial interviews). Topics that had been introduced in the first interview were
typically developed during this first shopping trip, along with new insights that were
generated in situ.
The fourth step was a second depth interview with each participant. Due to the
nature of this method, these interviews were tailor-made for each individual and did
not follow the same schedule. These interviews were designed to clarify specific
questions the researchers may have had about behaviors observed during the first
shopping trip. Although some clarifications were sought during the actual trip,
questions also often arose later, upon reflection as the researcher prepared detailed
field notes. Typically, the researcher incorporated these questions into the agenda for
the second interview. In addition, we used second interviews to develop insights that
may not have been evident during the first interviews, but became salient once actual
shopping behavior was observed. At the close of the second interview, the second
shopping trip was planned and scheduled.
The fifth step was the second shopping trip, which used identical procedures as the
first trip, although the shopping venue changed based on preferences of the
participants. By this stage in the researcher-informant relationship, a certain level of
familiarity was typically reached, and the informants began to interact with the
researchers as closer companions, often requesting opinions and advice. It is at this
juncture that the researcher must consciously try to remain neutral in terms of offering
opinions without offending the informant in the process. Although in our experience, it
seemed perfectly acceptable to assist in physical ways (e.g. helping carry bags), the
researcher had to cultivate a variety of non-committal responses when asked such
questions as, “Do you think my sister would like this blouse?” In short, we found that it
was difficult, but not impossible, for researchers to minimize their influence on the
actual shopping decisions being made. We understand the argument made by
Hirschman and Holbrook (1986) regarding the need to become personally involved
with the phenomenon under study (along with the notion that it may be impossible to
remain completely neutral (Oakley, 1981). Indeed, these issues are complicated ones
to address in conducting this type of research. In our case, we felt it was desirable to
become very involved with our participants up to a point, but refrain from influencing
actual purchases to the extent possible given a specific situation.
Finally, the sixth step was a follow-up interview after the usage occasion, which
differed depending on the phenomena being studied (e.g. in the case of our Christmas
gift-giving study, a phone interview was scheduled after the holiday). It may be
advisable to make the follow-up interaction an in-depth, face-to-face interview to allow
for deeper probing than is achievable during a telephone conversation (not to mention
the added bonus of being able to assess facial expressions and body language).
Regardless of the specific methodology, a follow-up interview is an excellent way to
clarify any remaining questions on the part of the researcher that may have arisen
during the second shopping trip, as well as an outlet for participants to provide
QMRIJ
8,2
178
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
additional information and insights (who typically were eager to share personal news
and reflective insights relevant to the research topic with the researchers).
We recommend the full six-step procedure in order to generate the type of text that
will provide deep insights. However, as we will describe below, other studies have been
conducted (both by ourselves and other researchers) that combine various
methodologies in innovative ways to provide multi-method research designs that go
beyond this basic six-step protocol.
Pros and cons of the method
Certainly, every method has its strengths and its weaknesses, and SWC is no
exception. We will briefly outline the shortcomings of the method, followed by a
comparison of its advantages and disadvantages to other research techniques
(see Otnes et al., 1995, pp. 102-5, for a thorough discussion of these points).
While we believe the disadvantages of SWC are minimal, they nevertheless need to
be seriously considered by any researcher considering the method. First, and primarily,
we discourage its use as a “stand-alone” method; in fact, the richest and most
theoretically rewarding text was produced when we combined SWC with other
techniques. Second, the method is limited to studies of shopping and other experiential
retail and service encounters.
There is also a possible need for similarity between the researcher and the
informant on some dimensions (most noticeably, in our experience, gender). In our
research, female and male researchers had different types of interactions with our
participants, who were predominantly female. Although we are not suggesting the
genders of the researcher and informant must always be the same, sensitivity to the
types of experiences that may be realized is essential. In addition to gender, it is
possible that extreme differences in socio-economic status or age between the
researchers and the consumers may also require special attention and sensitivity on the
part of the researcher.
As previously mentioned, there is a potential for consumers to alter their behavior
due to the presence of the researcher. Although there is no way to eliminate this
problem completely, it can be managed. In our opinion, it is essential for researchers to
remain as neutral as possible in the field when participants ask for their opinions and
advice, despite the need to establish rapport. Our own experience suggests that, over
time, individuals become more relaxed and natural in their interactions with
the researchers, such that their behavior seems to be less monitored than one might
fear.
Finally, shopping with consumers is obviously a costly endeavor, both in terms of
time and money. Generating the text is labor-intensive, and transcribing the text
involves either a great deal of time (if doing it oneself) or a fair amount of money
(if outsourcing it). In addition, financial incentives may be required to attract
informants (more than is typical of other methods, in some cases, due to the amount of
time involved). In addition to these self-evident costs, it should be pointed out that there
are other costs to the researcher. Shopping with consumers requires great patience and
self-restraint. People have very different shopping styles, and the role of the researcher
is to offer as little interference as possible. Researchers considering this method should
reflect on whether they have the ability, patience, and/or temperament to allow the
shopping trip to unfold as the consumer desires.
Shopping with
consumers
179
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
Based upon our extensive experience using this method, we believe the advantages
of SWC clearly outweigh the disadvantages. First, when combined with other methods,
the multi-method aspect of the research design invigorates each research technique
that is used. For example, observation alone does not allow researchers to verify and
clarify questions that arise, whereas interviewing alone does not allow observation of
actual behavior. Obviously, SWC, as we have outlined, allows the researcher to do both
– observe actual behavior and ask individuals to assist in the researcher’s
interpretation of that behavior. While consumers’ explanations of their behaviors are
rarely taken at face value, it is nevertheless very valuable to acquire those
explanations, and compare them with actual shopping behavior. For example, a
participant may try to rationalize a particular action but the researcher is free to accept
or reject this explanation. This situation obviously points to the need on the
researcher’s part to balance his or her own interpretations with those of the informants,
a statement which applies to many qualitative methods.
Second, we believe the method hastens the trust and rapport that develops between
the researcher and the informant. In short, SWC involves a shared activity that is
typically enjoyed by the participant and that creates a less academic “space” for
interaction. Even when conducted in their own home, interviews can often be
intimidating experiences, since the researcher may be viewed as an intellectual
stranger. Although such perceptions of social distance can also emerge during
shopping, there is something inherently democratic about the activity that puts the
participant on more of an equal footing with the researcher. In fact, the consumer
may perceive that he or she is actually the expert, and feel more comfortable
expounding upon issues pertaining to the acquisition and purchase of goods or
services in situ.
Finally, since consumers establish their own agendas for the shopping trips, and
typically explain their behavior while it is occurring, researchers are able to gain
insights that may not have occurred to individuals during an interview. That is,
different insights may emerge during the process of shopping then would be reported
at another time. Similarly, because the researcher can question the participant while
shopping, different insights may emerge than those obtained through passive
observation, which does not offer the researcher any chance to question those being
observed. We believe that the variety of text generated while shopping with consumers
is the biggest advantage of the method.
Past use of the method
As discussed in Otnes et al. (1995), the earliest researchers who used shopping with
consumers did so in order to capture verbal protocols in retail settings and develop
quantitative models of consumer in-store decision making (Bettman, 1970; King, 1969).
In contrast, early uses of the method by scholars working primarily in anthropology
and sociology were intended to help produce a more holistic, naturalistic
understanding of shopping behavior (Miller, 1993; Prus and Frisby, 1990). Since the
discussion of SWC by Otnes et al.(1995), the method has been used almost exclusively
by scholars working within the interpretive paradigm, and their research has
demonstrated that SWC is a potent method for generating meaningful findings with
regard to a variety of topics. In this section, we review the ways SWC has been used,
and the insights that the method has contributed.
QMRIJ
8,2
180
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
Not surprisingly, our own research has employed the SWC protocol in a variety of
studies that explore aspects of shopping. For example, McGrath and Otnes (1995) used
the method to study the ways strangers interact in the retail setting, in conjunction with
depth interviews and observation. This text enabled them to develop a framework of the
overt (e.g. the “help-seeker”) and covert (e.g. “the follower”) interpersonal influences that
emerged when strangers interacted with each other in a variety of retail locales.
We have also used SWC to study issues pertaining to an overlooked concept of
consumption-related emotions (Richins, 1997), that of “consumer ambivalence”
(Lowrey et al., 1998; Otnes et al., 1997). Using the SWC protocol of alternating depth
interviews and shopping trips, and accompanying that protocol with same-sex focus
groups, enabled us to interpret how consumers’ mixed emotions that occurred
sequentially or simultaneously influenced their wedding planning experiences.
In addition, we discovered how these emotions were related to three different levels of
ambivalence, namely:
(1) psychological (stemming from internal emotions);
(2) social (stemming from role conflict with others); and
(3) cultural (stemming from discrepant cultural values).
Otnes (1998) also used SWC when examining the roles that the bridal salon could play
for brides. Employing a team of undergraduate students trained in SWC, she found
salons can serve as a school, storehouse, dressing chamber, and ritualistic singularizer
for the bride.
Miller (1998) conducted an extensive ethnography of shopping behavior among 76
households in North London. Although not referring to the SWC protocol per se, Miller
combined interviews with shopping trips at an array of retail sites. These activities
enabled him to discover that even mundane shopping activities have meaning for
consumers that extend beyond their functional aspects of “provisioning.” In particular,
Miller’s “theory of shopping” argues that for women in particular, shopping is “one of
the primary means by which relationships of love and care are constituted by practice”
(p. 18). Moreover, women who perform what he terms the sacrificial work of shopping
consistently reward themselves in the field for doing so, by purchasing fattening,
edible “treats” for themselves and their children. Miller’s (1998, p. 42) description of this
behavior demonstrates how vital it was for him to accompany shoppers in the stores:
Many of these treats are eaten before they even reach the check-out, so that they are paid for
using the empty wrappers .... Curiously, there is also one extremely common practice
amongst adults of eating one or more grapes soon after entering the supermarket, as a kind of
treat taken from the supermarket itself. A high proportion of shoppers do this, and few
shoppers were observed to eat any other commodity without paying.
In short, Miller’s use of SWC, coupled with interviews, enabled him to offer new
theoretical insights into the meaning of shopping, and to argue convincingly that for
women, shopping represents a sacrifice of time and effort that enables them to express
love to their families.
Sherry (1998) conducted a four-year ethnography of Nike Town Chicago, combining
SWC with intercept interviews, observations, and autodriving (conducting interviews
around visual stimuli such as photographs; see Heisley and Levy, 1991). The text
gleaned specifically by SWC enabled Sherry to study consumers’ in-store reactions to
Shopping with
consumers
181
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
Nike Town’s premium pricing policy, and the tendency of shoppers to regard Nike
Town as more of a sightseeing destination than a retail store (or in one consumer’s
words, as a “shrine” Sherry, 1998, p. 118). He used this text to create an extensive
interpretation of the three-story Nike Town Chicago store as a “site magnet for secular
pilgrims” (p. 141) who reaffirm the tenets of destination and experientially oriented
marketing. Moreover, his findings affirm the assumptions of architects, interior
designers, and brand managers that designing “cathedrals to consumption” does
enhance consumers’ experience with, and affinity for, brands.
Likewise, McGrath (1998) employed SWC, projective techniques, interviews, and
traditional observational techniques in her study of male and female differences in
shopper preferences at an outlet mall. Although primarily reporting findings with
respect to the projective techniques in this study, later works that explored male
shopping behavior (Otnes and McGrath, 2001) validated her findings that both men
and women often expect shopping to satisfy an emotional component, and that
“all shoppers seek a level of attention and a level of service that may lie beyond the
conventional” (McGrath, 1998, p. 451).
Recently, Xia (2003) used SWC along with more limited-access observational
techniques to explore issues pertaining to internet browsing. She argued that
combining depth interviews with shopping trips enabled her to capture incidences of
casual browsing behavior that consumers might have forgotten or deemed
unimportant to discuss in an interview, to compare consumers’ narratives of their
own browsing activities with those recorded by the researcher, and to help the
researcher formulate relevant and insightful questions for follow-up interviews.
Specifically, Xia instructed participants to engage in the type of browsing in which
they would normally engage on internet web sites of their choice, in their homes or
wherever they typically conducted internet shopping. The text gleaned from these
methods was then used to make refinements to what Xia terms the
“browsing/searching continuum,” which categorized consumers’ shopping activities
based on their level of engagement with retail stimuli and the goal-directedness of their
behavior. It also enabled her to refine the conceptual distinctions between functional
and recreational browsing.
Lowrey et al. (2004) employed SWC in their longitudinal study of Christmas
shopping. During five Christmas seasons in a 12-year period (1990-2001), they
interviewed and shopped with the same five women (Lowrey and Otnes, 2003).
The insights that pertain to using SWC in a longitudinal research design are as follows:
SWC enabled them to compare shopping activities at the same retail stores, to enhance
validity in terms of understanding marked changes in shopping strategy, and to
understand how consumers’ in-store activities might have changed over the years.
For example, in 1990, Laura reveled in going to stores as early as possible
(e.g. 6:00 a.m.) the day after Thanksgiving, in order not only to engage in the hustle and
bustle that accompanied the kick-off to the Christmas shopping season but also to
assist and direct other customers in securing bargains. That year, she actually brought
bags with large amounts of promotional circulars into the stores, and showed
consumers who were looking at the products being advertised where they could get
better deals. However, by 1994, she had lost interest in being “the bag lady,” and merely
offered helpful advice to fellow shoppers when it was convenient for her to do so. As her
income increased over the years, Laura became less and less inclined to bargain-shop,
QMRIJ
8,2
182
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
and while she relayed that information to the researchers in an interview, the more
perfunctory and less bargain-driven nature of her actual shopping behavior validated
her descriptions, and demonstrated that her behavior, and not just her description of
her behavior, had undergone significant change. Moreover, the researchers used field
notes generated from SWC as talking points in depth interviews from one year to the
next (e.g. “I noticed you compared prices a lot on a gift you were giving to your
daughter (back in 1992); talk about whether you still do that.”)
In summary, SWC has demonstrated its value as a research technique that enables
us to:
(1) learn about what different types of shopping mean to consumers;
(2) understand the significance of retail atmospherics for consumers;
(3) supplement other research techniques in order to enrich and complete both
methods; and
(4) enable researchers to effectively study shopping in a longitudinal manner.
Training in the method
As is true of most other qualitative methods, the best training in SWC follows the
learning-by-doing model. In the past, when we have successfully trained both
undergraduate (Otnes, 1998) and graduate students (Lowrey et al., 2004) to use this
method, we have always provided careful instructions prior to their entry into the field,
and also built time into the research design for a thorough and attentive debriefing and
review of field notes after the students’ initial interactions with informants in retail
settings. In addition to providing students with basic grounding in observational
methods (Denzin and Lincoln, 1992) and interviewing techniques (McCracken, 1988)
(since SWC is often used in conjunction with depth interviews), we believe the
following points are critical with regard to training both students and novice
researchers in the use of SWC.
(1) We instruct students to carry a small notepad that they can fit in their hand.
However, it is important to caution them not to be so intent on note-taking that
their attention is directed away from what consumers are actually doing, but to
use the notebooks sparingly in order to capture particularly rich verbatims,orto
write notes or questions they can probe in subsequent interviews or shopping
trips. We discourage students from taking tape recorders or video-recorders
because of their intrusiveness, and because worries over equipment
functionality may distract them from observing activities.
(2) With regard to the amount of time researchers should remain in the field on a
single shopping trip, we follow the “shorter is better” recommendations made
by others (Bogdan and Taylor, 1984), in order to reduce intrusiveness and
participant and researcher fatigue. Specifically, we recommend shopping trips
ranging from 45 minutes to 11
2hours, with immediate scheduling of interviews
within the next week in order to probe shopping trip activities, topics, and/or
questions that emerged in the retail setting.
(3) Following standard recommendations for participant observation, we tell
students the most important way to maintain the reliability and validity of
the text is to create their field notes immediately after the shopping trips.
Shopping with
consumers
183
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
By “immediately after” we mean they should move from parking their cars to
parking themselves in front of their computers in order to ensure the highest
quality text possible. An excerpt from field notes created after a shopping trip
demonstrates the level of detail possible:
Belle was having trouble getting into this particular dress. The saleswoman was not
around, so zipping the dress up from the back was a hard task for Belle. With her head
out, she then looked outside the dressing room door for the saleswoman and said, “I’m
abandoned ...” (The saleswoman came and) after having trouble getting the train’s
hook to attach to the dress...called in another saleswoman to help. (With another
dress) Belle was having a hard time zipping the slip, so she yelled from the dressing
room door, “Can you come here?”
(4) We have found that one of the most effective training exercises is to send teams
of student researchers to engage in “interobserver cross-checking” (Adler and
Adler, 1992, p. 381), to discuss pre- and post-conceived notions of these
encounters, and to compare note-taking in terms of quality and perspective.
Moreover, this exercise clearly demonstrates how researchers’ assumptions and
biases can influence the recording and interpretation of text. To avoid
overwhelming participants, we recommend sending no more than two students
on any given shopping trip.
(5) We remind students of the important issues that emerge because of gender
differences between researchers and consumers (as mentioned earlier). As we
pointed out in the original article on SWC, all of our female participants brought
others on the shopping trips that they knew would be conducted by a male
researcher. While we do not know if this was because of perceived safety issues,
or just to ensure a certain level of comfort, for shopping trips where researchers
are interested in seeing consumers shop alone, these issues should be
proactively addressed by the research team.
(6) While this final point is certainly not exclusive to SWC, there is a need to teach
students a certain level of closure etiquette. In our experience, the level of
rapport that is typically generated often leads to a strong desire on the part of
informants to offer a parting gift at the end of the set of interactions (and at
times, on the part of the researchers as well). As long as these gifts are
not elaborate, students should not hesitate to accept such tokens of the bonding
that has taken place. Ironically, while they are providing valuable information
to researchers, it is often the case that participants actually feel they have
received gifts of companionship, time, or other gestures. As a result, they often
want to be able to reciprocate through small tokens, and refusal of these gifts
might annoy or offend informants.
Future suggestions for using the method
Given our current reflections on SWC, specifically on how we and other researchers
have used it since we first explicated the method, we now have more evidence that
SWC is a compelling method, and can more ably discern its contributions. As a result,
we have a few suggestions for ways researchers could push the envelope and employ
SWC in studies pertaining to shopping. First, it would be interesting to use SWC in the
study of auction behavior. This is a specialized case involving time-constrained
QMRIJ
8,2
184
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
transactions in which product information is incomplete but sales are often final. It
may also be a context ripe for the study of cognitive dissonance, as buyers must either
incorporate purchases into their lives or find another outlet or rationalization for a
less-than-perfect choice. Accompanying potential bidders to live auctions or
incorporating Xia’s (2003) modifications to sit with online bidders as they negotiate
electronic auction sites (e.g. e-Bay) could prove quite illuminating. In addition, other
types of electronic shopping with consumers (e-SWC) could provide insights into what
might be a very specialized type of shopping behavior.
Second, “guided” shopping, in which individuals hire shopping tour guides, would
be an appropriate phenomenon to investigate using SWC. We know of two types of
guided shopping:
(1) department store assistants, or “personal shoppers,” who typically aid a single
consumer in the purchasing of seasonal wardrobes, collections of household
items, holiday gifts for a variety of recipients, etc.; and
(2) shopping experts who typically take groups of consumers on tours within a
specific city (e.g. Chic Shopping Paris).
Studying this type of guided shopping would illuminate our understanding of the
encapsulated purchase process. Within a limited time frame, consumers must
buy-or-walk, while simultaneously assessing their degree of trust in the shopping
guide.
Third, and peripherally related to the above, any type of group shopping activity
could be illuminated through the use of SWC. In several regions of the United States
(and, we expect, elsewhere as well), bus trips take large groups of consumers from
smaller towns to urban shopping centres for a concentrated day of shopping.
Moreover, longer tours to cities often incorporate shopping excursions into their
itineraries. Shopping with consumers on these trips could expand our understanding of
special types of shopping, such as that for souvenirs, collectibles, and of course, gifts.
On a less organized scale, simply shopping with friendship (or kinship) groups could
yield interesting results, including possible new insights into the ritualistic behaviors
that seem to guide teenagers’ use of shopping malls as gathering places, and a greater
understanding of shopping as avocation. Furthermore, new constructs in consumer
behavior, such as power relations within social networks and other types of social
influence on consumption (Lowrey et al., 2004) are areas that could obviously be
illuminated through the use of SWC in conjunction with other methods.
Finally, pushing the envelope further for SWC (at least as we have used it in the
past), Reason’s (1998) notion of co-operative inquiry could be used to modify and
further enhance the method. This involves ensuring that:
...all those involved in the research are both co-researchers, whose thinking and decision
making contribute to generating ideas, designing and managing the project, and drawing
conclusions from the experience, and also co-subjects, participating in the activity being
researched (p. 264, emphasis in the original).
This could mean that the initiating researchers would allow consumers to be actively
engaged in determining how the research would progress. Although we have typically
sought the opinions of our own participants with respect to our findings, we have not
taken the extra steps outlined by Reason that would categorize our method as truly
Shopping with
consumers
185
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
co-operative. Alternatively, a group of researchers could actively study their own
shopping behavior.
Final reflections
Although potentially yielding great benefits to researchers interested in retail-oriented
behavior, SWC has been relatively overlooked as a viable and valuable research
technique. We hope this paper and our earlier work have demonstrated the value of
incorporating this method into qualitative research design. For if “learning by doing” is
a truism, certainly learning by shopping with consumers is the methodological parallel
to this adage.
References
Ackerman, D. and Tellis, G. (2001), “Can culture affect prices? A cross-cultural study of shopping
and retail prices”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77 No. 1, pp. 57-82.
Adler, P.A. and Adler, P. (1992), “Observational techniques”, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S.
(Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 377-92.
Berman, B. and Evans, J.R. (2004), Retail Management, Prentice- Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Bettman, J.R. (1970), “Information processing models of consumer behavior”, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 370-6.
Bogdan, R. and Taylor, S.J. (1984), Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods, Wiley,
New York, NY.
Compeau, L.D. and Nicholson, C.Y. (1996), “Experiential descriptions versus objective
descriptions: the power of a first-person view of shopping”, in Corfman, K.P. and
Lynch, J.G. Jr (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 23, Association for Consumer
Research, Provo, UT, pp. 158-60.
Davies, B., Baron, S. and Harris, K. (1999), “Observable oral participation in the survuction
system: toward a content and process model”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 44 No. 1,
pp. 47-53.
Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (1992), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications,
Newbury Park, CA.
Heisley, D. and Levy, S.J. (1991), “Autodriving: a photoelicitation technique”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 257-82.
Hirschman, E.C. and Holbrook, M.B. (1986), “Expanding the ontology and methodology of
research on the consumption experience”, in Brinberg, D. and Lutz, R.J. (Eds), Perspectives
on Methodology in Consumer Research, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, pp. 213-44.
King, R.H. (1969), “A study of the problem of building a model to simulate the cognitive
processes of a shopper in a supermarket”, in Haines, G.H. Jr (Ed.), Consumer Behavior:
Learning Models of Purchasing, The Free Press, New York, NY, pp. 22-67.
Lowrey, T.M. and Otnes, C.C. (2003), “Consumer fairy tales of the perfect Christmas: villains and
other dramatis personae”, in Otnes, C.C. and Lowrey, T.M. (Eds), Contemporary
Consumption Rituals: A Research Anthology, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ,
pp. 99-122.
Lowrey, T.M., Otnes, C. and Shrum, L.J. (1998), “Consumer ambivalence: perspectives gained
from shopping with consumers”, in Balderjahn, I., Mennicken, C. and Vernette, E. (Eds),
New Developments and Approaches in Consumer Behavior Research, Macmillan, London,
pp. 307-20.
QMRIJ
8,2
186
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
Lowrey, T.M., Otnes, C.C. and Ruth, J.A. (2004), “Social influences on dyadic gift giving over
time: a taxonomy from the giver’s perspective”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 30
No. 4, pp. 547-58.
McCracken, G. (1988), The Long Interview, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
McGrath, M.A. (1998), “Dream on: projections of an ideal servicescape”, in Sherry, J.F. Jr (Ed.),
The Concept of Place in Contemporary Markets, NTC Business Books, Lincolnwood, IL,
pp. 439-53.
McGrath, M.A. and Otnes, C. (1995), “Unacquainted influencers: when strangers interact in the
retail setting”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 261-72.
Miller, D. (1993), “Christmas against materialism in Trinidad”, in Miller, D. (Ed.), Unwrapping
Christmas, Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 134-56.
Miller, D. (1998), A Theory of Shopping, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.
Nelson, M.R. (1996), “Let’s talk shop: multiple interpretive perspectives on studying consumer
shopping behavior”, in Corfman, K.P. and Lynch, J.G. Jr (Eds), Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 23, Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 158-60.
Oakley, A. (1981), “Interviewing women: a contradiction in terms”, in Roberts, H. (Ed.), Doing
Feminist Research, Routledge, London, pp. 30-61.
Otnes, C. (1998), “Friend of the bride – and then some”, in Sherry, J.F. Jr (Ed.), Service Scapes: The
Concept of Place in Contemporary Markets, NTC Business Books, Lincolnwood, IL,
pp. 229-57.
Otnes, C. and McGrath, M.A. (2001), “Perceptions and realities of male shopping behavior”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77 No. 1, pp. 111-37.
Otnes, C., Lowrey, T.M. and Kim, Y.C. (1993), “Christmas shopping for ‘Easy’ and ‘Difficult’
recipients: a social roles interpretation”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20 No. 2,
pp. 229-44.
Otnes, C., Lowrey, T.M. and Shrum, L.J. (1997), “Toward an understanding of consumer
ambivalence”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 80-93.
Otnes, C., McGrath, M.A. and Lowrey, T.M. (1995), “Shopping with consumers: usage as past,
present and future research technique”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 2
No. 2, pp. 97-110.
Prus, R. and Frisby, W. (1990), “Persuasion as practical accomplishment: tactical maneuverings
at home party plans”, in Lopata, H.Z. (Ed.), Current Research on Occupations and
Professions: Societal Influences, JAI, Greenwich, CT, pp. 133-62.
Reason, P. (1998), “Three approaches to participative inquiry”, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, S.A.
(Eds), Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 261-91.
Richins, M. (1997), “Measuring emotions in the consumption experience”, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 127-46.
Sherry, J.F. Jr (1998), “Soul of the company store: Nike town Chicago and the emplaced
brandscape”, in Sherry, J.F. Jr (Ed.), Service Scapes: The Concept of Place in Contemporary
Markets, NTC Business Books, Lincolnwood, IL, pp. 109-46.
Xia, L. (2003), “A multi-method investigation of consumer browsing behaviors and unintended
information acquisition”, doctoral dissertation, Department of Business Administration,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL.
Shopping with
consumers
187
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
(Tina M. Lowrey is Associate Professor in the Department of Marketing at the University of
Texas at San Antonio. She has published articles in the Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of
Consumer Psychology, and Journal of Advertising, among others. She coedited (with Cele C. Otnes)
Contemporary Consumption Rituals: A Research Anthology, and has chapters in New
Developments and Approaches in Consumer Behavior Research, Gift Giving: A Research
Anthology, Marketing and Consumer Behavior Research in the Public Interest, and Gender Issues
and Consumer Behavior. Her research interests include gift-giving, ritualistic consumption and
psycholinguistic analyses of advertising. She has presented numerous papers on these topics at
conferences of the Association for Consumer Research, the Society for Consumer Psychology, the
American Marketing Association, the American Academy of Advertising, and others. She is a
member of the Psychology & Marketing editorial board and recently guest edited a special issue
of this journal focusing on application of psycholinguistic theories to advertising. She received
her PhD in communications from the Institute of Communication Research at the University of
Illinois in 1992.
Mary Ann McGrath is Professor of Marketing and the Director of the Master of Science in
Integrated Marketing Communication Program at Loyola University Chicago. She earned her
MBA and PhD degrees in marketing from Northwestern University. Her teaching and research
special interests include consumer behavior and marketing communications. She has published
numerous articles on shopping behavior, the retail setting, gender differences in consumer
behavior, gift exchanges, children in the marketing context, and the application of a variety of
qualitative methods to consumer research. She has also been a marketing consultant to several
major firms and retailers.
Cele C. Otnes is Associate Professor in the department of Business Administration, the
University of Illinois. She is also a member of the Campus Honors faculty, where she has taught a
seminar on contemporary consumer rituals. She teaches courses in retailing, promotions, and
consumer behavior at the undergraduate and MBA levels. She was previously a faculty member
in the Department of Marketing at Rutgers University and the Department of Advertising at the
University of Illinois. Her research focuses on understanding gift giving, as well as consumer
behavior during holidays and major rituals. She is coauthor with Elizabeth H. Pleck of Cinderella
Dreams: The Allure of the Lavish Wedding. She is also coeditor of Contemporary Consumption
Rituals: A Research Anthology (with Tina M. Lowrey) and Gift Giving: A Research Anthology
(with Richard F. Beltramini). She has published articles on ritualistic consumption in the Journal
of Consumer Research, Journal of Business Research, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Journal of Retailing, Journal of Advertising, Journal of Ritual Studies, and Journal of
Popular Culture, among others. She serves on the editorial board of several journals, and guest
edited a recent special issue of the Journal of Advertising that focuses on advertising and
consumer culture. She received her PhD in communications from the University of Tennessee in
1990.)
QMRIJ
8,2
188
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
This article has been cited by:
1. Evan Gravely, Evan Fraser. 2018. Transitions on the shopping floor: Investigating the role of Canadian
supermarkets in alternative protein consumption. Appetite 130, 146-156. [Crossref]
2. Maud Herbert, Isabelle Robert, Florent Saucède. 2018. Going liquid: French food retail industry
experiencing an interregnum. Consumption Markets & Culture 21:5, 445-474. [Crossref]
3. Michael Parzer, Irene Rieder, Eva Wimmer. 2017. Using Go-Alongs for exploring immigrant
entrepreneurs’ native customers. Current Sociology 65:7, 971-990. [Crossref]
4. S. Thomas, M. Chambault. Explicit Methods to Capture Consumers’ Responses to Packaging 139-159.
[Crossref]
5. Katayoun Zafari, Gareth Allison, Catherine Demangeot. 2015. Practising conviviality: social uses of ethnic
cuisine in an Asian multicultural environment. Journal of Consumer Marketing 32:7, 564-575. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
6. Katherine Sykes, Jan Brace-Govan. 2015. The bride who decides: Feminine rituals of bridal gown purchase
as a rite of passage. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ) 23:4, 277-285. [Crossref]
7. Michael Luck, Martin Benkenstein. 2015. Consumers between supermarket shelves: The influence of
inter-personal distance on consumer behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 26, 104-114.
[Crossref]
8. Maria Pecoraro, Outi Uusitalo. 2014. Exploring the everyday retail experience: The discourses of style
and design. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 13:6, 429-441. [Crossref]
9. Spanjaard Daniela, Young Louise, Freeman Lynne. 2014. Emotions in supermarket brand choice.
Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 17:3, 209-224. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
10. Stella Minahan, Patricia Huddleston. 2013. Shopping with my mother: reminiscences of adult daughters.
International Journal of Consumer Studies 37:4, 373-378. [Crossref]
11. Gary Mortimer. 2013. Rolling in the aisles: a comparative study of male and female grocery shopper
typologies. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 23:1, 1-30. [Crossref]
12. Sebastian Uhrich, Michael Luck. 2012. Not too many but also not too few. Qualitative Market Research:
An International Journal 15:3, 290-308. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
13. David Yoon Kin Tong, Kim Piew Lai, Xue Fa Tong. 2012. Ladies' purchase intention during retail shoes
sales promotions. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 40:2, 90-108. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
14. Linda Tuncay Zayer, Stacy Neier. 2011. An exploration of men's brand relationships. Qualitative Market
Research: An International Journal 14:1, 83-104. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
15. Catherine Demangeot, Amanda J. Broderick. 2010. Exploration and its manifestations in the context of
online shopping. Journal of Marketing Management 26:13-14, 1256-1278. [Crossref]
16. Alex J. Hiller. 2010. Challenges in researching consumer ethics: a methodological experiment. Qualitative
Market Research: An International Journal 13:3, 236-252. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
17. Giana M. Eckhardt, Anders Bengtsson. 2010. Naturalistic group interviewing in China. Qualitative
Market Research: An International Journal 13:1, 36-44. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
18. Dominique Meunier, Consuelo Vasquez. 2008. On Shadowing the Hybrid Character of Actions: A
Communicational Approach. Communication Methods and Measures 2:3, 167-192. [Crossref]
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
19. Catherine Demangeot, Amanda J. Broderick. 2006. Exploring the experiential intensity of online shopping
environments. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 9:4, 325-351. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
20. Katja Jarvela, Johanna Makela, Sanna Piiroinen. 2006. Consumers' everyday food choice strategies in
Finland. International Journal of Consumer Studies 30:4, 309-317. [Crossref]
Downloaded by HEC Paris At 07:18 04 November 2018 (PT)
