Analysis of Sales Promotion Effects on Household Purchase Behavior

to the same data. Instead <strong>of</strong> addressing the relationship between different constructs,
similarities between consumers were assessed. The authors examined whether there are
segments <strong>of</strong> consumers consistently prone to deals across different sales promotion types, or,
given some conceptual differences across deal-types, segments existing at a more dealspecific
level. Multi-item measures were used for eight deal-types across product classes.
Cluster analysis was performed on the average item scores for the eight deal-type measures.
The results showed evidence <strong>of</strong> a generalized deal proneness segment (ranging from 24% to
49% <strong>of</strong> the sample). Consumers within this segment are sensitive towards all different deal
types incorporated in the study. Strong support for the nomological validity <strong>of</strong> theses segmentbased
findings was found using marketplace behavior data from one single shopping trip
(across product classes). In both studies, self-report data was used to draw conclusions
(marketplace behavior was used only for validation purposes).
Bawa et al. (1997) recognized the deal-type specific character <strong>of</strong> deal proneness and
therefore focused on one specific promotion-type, coupons. This is one <strong>of</strong> the most <strong>of</strong> the
most important promotional vehicles used today in the United States. They studied coupons
use by considering the joint effects <strong>of</strong> coupon attractiveness and coupon proneness on
redemption and estimated this at the product category level, taking varying coupon
redemption behavior across categories into account. Respondents’ redemption intentions with
respect to coupons for two grocery categories (c<strong>of</strong>fee and detergent) and two service
categories (beauty salon/barber shop and oil change for automobiles) were measured using
questionnaires. Results underlined the importance <strong>of</strong> product category level estimation. Noncategory
specific coupon proneness measures have low predictive power and perform poor in
explaining using coupons in a specific category. One limitation <strong>of</strong> this study was that the
analyses were conducted on redemption intentions rather than on redemption behavior.
There are many skeptics who believe that responses to hypothetical scenarios (cf. the
self-report data used by Lichtenstein et al. (1995), the redemption intention data used by Bawa
et al. (1997)) are quite unreliable (Hensher et al. 1988). Individuals’ stated preferences might
not correspond closely to their actual preferences (Wardman 1988). People may not
necessarily do what they say. It is known from other marketing research sources that people in
the western world do tend to overestimate their responses under experimental conditions
(Kroes and Sheldon 1988). Of course, focusing on actual marketplace purchase behavior also
42