Literature Review包含幾個部分
2.1 Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is attempt to let people understand the importance of store choice to retailers and the main issue in this area, also, through these literature, finding the gap in this area.
2.2 price and store patronage
In the past years, numbers of researchers investigate various factors on customer store choice (Bucklin, 1966; Williams and Dardis, 1972). Comparing all the influencing factors, many researchers consider price as one of the most important elements to influence customer store choice (Seiders and Costley, 1994; Dawar and Parker, 1994). Donald et al. (1993) hold the same view; they argue that price is one of the most important elements to customer store choice decision. According to this view, most researchers hold the point that price is playing the central role in all purchase situations; therefore, how price impact customer store choice has been an interested issue for past researchers, they have done many studies to find out the relationship between price and patronage. (Mitra, 1995; Rao and Monroe, 1988). Among a series of researches, most of them support the price-store choice relationship, Yavas (2003) considered price is the motivation of customers store patronage, it means customer patronize the store because of the price provided by the stores. Seiders and Costley (1994) hold the similar view, they found price is the main decisive factor to customer store patronage, they support whether consumers patronize the store largely influenced by the prices that store offers.
At the same time, a number of researchers point out that price is one of the most important elements for customers taking into considered when they are shopping. (Biswas et al., 2002; Urbany et al., 1998), they argue that, customers suggest price represents the money they must be sacrifice during the purchase process. In the past, many researchers have spent much time to measure what are the elements of price influence customers store choice (Bell and Lattin, 1998; Fox et al., 2004). Among of these researchers, Fox et al. (2004) consider price is just a money cost, consumers change products 如何寫Literature Review what they want by sacrifice equal money, Finn and Louviere (1996) suggest that price is an intangible concept such as store image while Sweeney and Soutar (2001) relate price to consumer value in some extent. Donald et al. (1993) launch that without doubt, price is one of the most important factors to customer purchase decision, at the same time, they mention in all purchase situation, price as the expenditure they must sacrificed customer should to considered as well (Donald et al. 1993).
Because there have many factors link price to customer store choice, thus, there have some different findings among these researches. According the research by Yavas (2003) suggests that price is a very important element for customers store choice and is the major motivation for consumer shopping; in other words, consumers store patronage is driven by price. While Seiders and Costley (1994) got the similar result, they argue that price is the determinant factor in customer store choice and it to be the major element to customer shopping decision, and they consider customers are sensitive and have the accurate concept to the price. While Fox et al. (2004) hold the different view with Yavas and Seiders and Costley, he found that compared with promotions and store assortment, price play less important role to driving customer purchase.#p#分頁標題#e#
According to M. Moore et al. (2006 value to use part two) research, they support that customers take low price as their major driver in purchasing situation, that means price consciousness is positively related low price strategies implemented by stores while price consciousness is negatively related high price strategies implemented by stores. (M.Moore et al. 2006) at the mean time, sale proneness is positively related price reduction strategies implemented by stores while negatively related no price reduction implemented by stores (M.Moore et al. 2006). M.Moore et al. (2006) posit consumers are sensitive to prestige, they support prestige sensitivity is positively related prestige-oriented pricing strategies implemented by stores while negatively related to everyday low price and value-oriented pricing strategies implemented by stores. At last, M.Moore et al. (2006) posit consumers believe price is related with quality, therefore, M.Moore et al (2006) support price/quality schema is positively related to prestige-oriented pricing strategies implemented by stores while price/quality schema is negatively related to everyday low price and value-oriented pricing strategies implemented by stores.
Among these studies, a series of researches are focus on price-related behaviour, some of these researchers related a variety of factors that affect customer store choice to price. Olson (1977) mentions consumers perception of price, quality or value can be influenced by store name. However, Rao and Monroe (1989) consider consumers perception of price, quality or value could little influenced by store name, moreover, Dodds (1995) found consumers perception of value does not influenced by store name, but their perceptions of price, quality and intention to purchase should be influenced by store name. Finally, Dodds (1995) concluded that the evaluation of products and purchase behaviour are influenced by both price and store name.
2.3 consumer perception of price
2.3.1 The effect of price on store choice
Although price is very important in customers store choice, however, it does not means it only plays positive role, in some extent, price also play negative role. Monroe and Krishnan (1985) suggest divide the influence of price into both positive and negative role in the purchasing behaviour. At the same time, Lichtenstein et al. 1990) hold the similar view, they support that the conception of price may influence consumer purchase behaviour in both positive and negative part. Price represents quality, value, prestige in its positive part, in its negative part, price means economic sacrifice. Two concepts of price role will discuss in the literature. Customers who perception price in positive part will accept higher price, who perception price in negative part may seeking lower price (Donald et al. 1993).
2.3.2 The positive role
There have at least two positive role of price, firstly, to customers, price is the symbol of quality, value, status or prestige, it means in some extent, customers often related levels of price to levels of quality, value or prestige, it can be generally consider that higher price represent higher quality, higher value, higher prestige, in other words, higher prices positive affect purchase behaviour. (Lichtenstein et al., 1990), Erickson and Johansson (1985) mention consumers relate price to quality, higher price has positive role in purchase behaviour. Brucks et al. (2000) get the similar result, he argue that the price often used as the lever of the quality, value or prestige of product, brands or retailer image for consumers. Overall, customers pay much attention on price, and they often use the price as the indicator to identify the quality of the product and take price as a factor to decide whether to purchase during the whole shopping situation and consumption (Monroe and Krishnan, 1985). Lichtenstein, Bloch, and Black (1988) hold the perception that higher price product are more favourable because of higher quality has more additional outlays. The research of Tellis and Gaeth’s (1990) indicate that consumers sometimes prefer purchase higher price product because of higher quality. Secondly, some consumers related price to prestige, they support price is the symbol of other people’s attitude to this purchase (Donald et al. 1993). Donald et al. (1993) called this situation “prestige sensitivity”. Take customer purchase expensive wine for example, they consume expensive wine, not because the high quality of the wine, but they can receive many social senses from other people (Calder and Burnkrant 1977).#p#分頁標題#e#
2.3.3 The negative role
Because price represents economic sacrifice, so Donald support that higher price has negative effect on purchase behaviour. (Donald et al.1993). While in the negative part; price is been considered as economic sacrifice, the past researchers identifies price role into the following five elements, price consciousness, sale proneness, value consciousness, price mavenism and coupon proneness. To some customers, their perception of price is narrowly reflected to price consciousness (Donald et al. 1993).
Lichtenstein et al. (1993) define price consciousness as ‘the degree to which consumers focus exclusively up on paying low prices’; several researchers share the similar definition to price consciousness (e.g., Erickson and Johansson 1985; tellis and Gaeth 1990). The second negative element is sale proneness, the principle of sale proneness is similar with coupon proneness, Lichtenstein et al. (1993) mentioned consumers become more sensitivity when price is in sale form, in other words, more purchase should be happened when the price is lower than regular price (e.g. was *2.99, now *1.99;) or competitors price (e.g. TESCO *2.99, Parkson*2.79) (Donald et al., 1993) , it means customers may prefer buy product in sale form, while the products with regular price. Lichtenstein et al.(1993) gave a definition to Value consciousness in 1993, they argue that value consciousness is a complex context, it refer to customers concern how much of the price they paid versus what is the level of quality or value they received. Donalds et al. (1993) support the negative role of price is also including coupon proneness; they suggest that individual customer to be influence by lower price or coupons in many types of products during the whole shopping process. Cotton and Babb (1978) and Schindler (1990) support this perception; they found the sales volume will be increasing obviously because of lower price or coupon offered. Lichtenstein, Netemeyer, and Burton’s (1990) research indicates that compared with noncoupon price product, the sales of products in coupon form increased sharply. However, Igal Hendel & Aviv Nevo (2001) have different view about price promotion, they conclude that temporary price discount can result in increasing store sale volume. The last element of price negative role is price mavenism, Donald et al. (1993) define price mavenism as consumers are the source to gather the information of all kinds of products and stores with the lowest price for each item, and communicate with other consumers for request the most effective price information. Feick and Price (1987) support this view; they define some customers who gather the information about price and transmit them to others are the “market mavens”. According to Donald et al. (1993) price mavenism plays significant negative role to some customers because they may desire to be a “price maven” to seek low price information for other people.

According to Dodds (1995), no matter a positive or negative role the price plays, it is the main cue to aid customers to make decisions in some complex shopping situation. At the same time, Monroe and Krishnan (1985) hold the point that although the price as the symbol of quality, however, it also differs from customer to customer during the purchasing process. Donald et al. (1993) considered because price represents the money customers should to sacrificed, higher price plays negative role in purchase situation.#p#分頁標題#e#

According to Erickson and Jahansson (1985), due to the perception of price-level, price plays direct negative effect and indirect positive effect on purchase intentions.

According to Lichtenstein, Bloch, and Black (1988), when consumers perception price in negative role, they will seek purchase lower prices; while consumers perception price in positive role, they more likely choose higher prices. Both theoretical and empirical evidence suggests this perception of price should related negative role positively while related positive role negatively to active purchase (Lichtenstein, Bloch, and Black 1988; Sherif, Sherif, and Nebergall 1965).
2.4 Price promotion
R.Krishnan (1998) argue that the most popular strategies retailers use to increase store traffic and stimulate purchase is price promotion. Biswas and Blair (1991) suggest purchase stimulate is related to consumer individual internal reference price. That means when customers purchase product, they may have internal reference price to compare with the average market price (Biswas and Blair, 1991). Another researcher Winer (1986) called it as “expected price” and Kamen and Toman (1970) named it “fair price”. Thus, R.Krishnan (1998) concludes that price discount, advertised reference price in the price promotion (was *1.99, now *1.69) or comparative price advertisements (e.g. Parkson*1.69 TESCO*1.99) can changes consumers’ internal reference price. R.Krishnan (1998) concludes that the greater price discount, the lower internal reference price consumers have. The research by Blattberg and Neslin (1990) found that price promotion seems has negative influence on customer perception of product quality. According to Dodson, Tybout, and Sternthal (1978) explain to this situation, they argue that it can be evaluated by self perception theory that is an attribution theory of how consumers explain events, when they purchase discount product, they often impute these discount benefit to poorer quality. Therefore, R.Krishnan (1998) concluded that when higher price discount emerging, the lower quality perception consumers have. According to Dickson and Sawyer (1990), customers store choice decision is largely influenced by variety promotions such as price discount, seasonal promotion and point-of-purchase. In the past researches, most of them are focus the impact of promotions on category sales or brand sales, in contrast, only little studies on the impact of price promotion on store choice (Marketing Science Institute 2000). According to Erdem and Keane (1996) customers can get many benefits from price promotion because current and future price information should enable customers save money, particularly, customers can make a shopping plan more effectively to choose which store to shopping and how many quantities of products to buy if they have the future discount information (Krishna 1994a,b). According to Bettman, Johnson and Payne (1990), much more current and future discount information may cause consumers shopping task complex because consumers need spend more time to consider a large number of decision factors to maximum their benefits from these discount information. The recent research by (price reduce) investigate three different behavioural impact which can explain differential effect on consumers’ decision when they gather these discount information in complexity shopping task. The first impact#p#分頁標題#e#

Grewal, Monroe, and Krishnan (1998) considered price promotion is widely used by retailers to attract customers purchase behaviour and increase store traffic. However, Doug Raymond (President and CEO of Retail Advertising and Marketing) mention that price promotion cannot used as regular and often strategies to attract consumers. According to Progressive Grocer (1992), it will be very odds that retailer wants to use price promotion to attract customers and wants to maintain margins. Moreover, R.Krishnan (1998) concludes that price promotion may induce to store traffic which will generate the negative effects on the quality of products and image of store.

Many past literatures have the evidence that most of consumers prefer switching the stores when they can receive the benefits from the promotions (Lal & Rao, 1997; Fox & Hoch 2005). At the meantime, Gupta (1993) argue sometime customers do not want to buy particular product, however, they compete the purchase process because of they have attracted by the sale promotions. However, Bell and Lattin (1998) mention that although customer affect by promotion in some extend, but there should have some differences between customer to customer when they consider the factors to decide store choice, for example, customers who like purchase large number of goods each time prefer every-day low price promotion while customers who like purchase small number of goods each time prefer high-low promotional pricing. At meantime, Parker et al. (2003) do not think promotion is a good strategy to increase customer store choice, he argue that frequency promotion or low price strategy is not always good thing, there has some incredible relationship between price levels and the concept customers hold of the product and store image. Indeed, too frequency promotions and too low price can lead to negative patronage to the store. Blattberg et al. (1995) mention the similar point, they argue that short-term price promotions can increase sale volume, however, long-term price promotions seems to be weak effect. (Blattberg et al.1995). Krider & Weinberg (2000) suggest customer store shopping decision cannot be judged by price promotion only; Rhee & Bell (2002) hold the same point, they found that although price promotion can attract customers switching store shopping and increase store volume, it cannot remain long, they argue that the customer may visit another stores for many reasons except price promotion.
Chandon and Wansink (1999) suggest that there have two reactions to the promotions among customers. The first reaction is increasing sale volume; in other words, more quantity of product demand in store; the second reaction is the storage of this product in the future. On the other hand, Brandweek (1994) point out that, the customers who change the brand choice because of the sale promotion will change back to their used brand after the sale promotions. Another research Simonson et al. (1989) found that although the variety and frequently promotion is necessary, however they must pay attention on the promotional brand package, they mention when customer found the product of promoted brand or activities is not useful for them, they will stop buying behaviour. However, Bucklin and 英#p#分頁標題#e#Literature Review英語寫作Lattin (1991) hold the different point, he mention that while customers shopping in store, they often influenced by price promotion or point-of-purchases when they have no purchase plan, but, when they have a purchase plan, they will not influenced by promotion activities.

Conclusion:
According to Keller (2003), increasing customer patronage is not only by offering variety product brand and suitable merchandise, but also need different product brands, goods and service from their competitors. Baker et al. (2002) point out the similar view, he mention that the store layout is an important element in providing information and guide to customers shopping in store, and customers’ shopping behavior and store choice decision is influence by many factors such as merchandise in store, pricing, the quality of product, store design, staff service, physical facilities and so on. Ailawadi and Keller (2004)