Modeling Consumer Perception of Public Space in Shopping Centers

This article presents a study of the effects of various shopping center design and management attributes on consumer evaluations of the public space appearance (or atmosphere) in shopping centers. Examples of such attributes are level of maintenance, area for pedestrians, window displays, street layout, and street activities. A model is estimated from responses to experimentally controlled descriptions of hypothetical shopping centers. This conjoint analysis or stated preference-based model is compared with a similar regression model estimated from a cross section of perceptions of existing shopping centers. The conjoint and cross-sectional models are tested for their external validity on a holdout sample of respondents. It is concluded that both models perform equally well, but that the approach using hypothetical alternatives allows more detailed insight in the effects of the various shopping center attributes. Consumer perception of retail environments has been studied with a variety of methods, including repertory grid techniques, content analysis, self-stated importance ratings of researcher-defined attributes, factor analysis of attri45 AUTHORS’NOTE: This research was supported by a grant from the Social and Environmental Research Foundation, which is part of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research. ENVIRONMENT AND BEHAVIOR, Vol. 31 No. 1, January 1999 45-65 © 1999 Sage Publications, Inc. © 1999 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. at Eindhoven Univ of Technology on October 26, 2007 http://eab.sagepub.com Downloaded from bute ratings of shopping alternatives, and multidimensional scaling of similarities between shopping alternatives (see, e.g., Finn & Louviere, 1990; Gentry & Burns, 1978; Lindquist, 1974; Mazursky & Jacoby, 1986; Steenkamp & Wedel, 1991; Timmermans, 1993; Zimmer & Golden, 1988). Most studies focused either on finding the major dimensions of retail image or on the assessment of the relative influence of these dimensions on retail patronage. In contrast, retail managers and urban planners typically are more interested in effects of the detailed and physically defined actionable attributes that are elements of the urban design or retail marketing mix than in these broadly defined dimensions. Although such attributes may have relatively small impacts on retail patronage (e.g., Nevin & Houston, 1980), they may be most actionable or cost-effective. For example, to assess the effectiveness of shopping center upgrading plans, interest may focus on the various attributes that underlie consumer evaluations of the public space appearance or atmosphere in shopping centers (cf. Brown, 1994; Davies & Bennison, 1978; Dawson & Lord, 1985; Loukaitou-Sideris, 1997; Robertson, 1994). In spite of the large range of available methods, the relative influence of such attributes typically cannot be determined unequivocally, because the previously described methods usually are applied to cross-sectional data that were collected from existing shopping centers. Attributes of existing centers often are correlated to the extent that it is difficult to disentangle the effects of the separate attributes. For example, parking rates at shopping centers typically are correlated with the size of the shopping center, because inner-city shopping areas are the most expensive areas in which to park. Moreover, observations only can be obtained for attribute values that are currently available; hence, it is difficult to predict how consumers will perceive the appearance of totally new shopping center formats or designs. Finally, it is difficult to draw causal conclusions from cross-sectional data. An efficient way to avoid these limitations and determine the effects of each of an object’s attributes on the evaluation of this object is conjoint analysis, or stated preference modeling as it is called in other disciplines (for reviews, see Batsell & Louviere, 1991; Carson et al., 1994; Green & Srinivasan, 1978, 1990; Hensher, 1994; Louviere, 1988a, 1988b; Timmermans, 1984; Timmermans & Golledge, 1990). In conjoint experiments, responses are collected to hypothetical multiattribute alternatives. In the analysis, the overall response is decomposed into the separate contributions of the various attributes. These contributions can be estimated very efficiently because the researcher can use optimal experimental designs to generate the multiattribute stimuli. Conjoint analysis typically is applied to model preference structures, but it also can be applied to study perceptions. This article describes one such 46 ENVIRONMENT AND BEHAVIOR / January 1999 © 1999 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. at Eindhoven Univ of Technology on October 26, 2007 http://eab.sagepub.com Downloaded from application, a conjoint experiment to study the relative influence of various physical aspects of shopping centers on the perception of the general appearance of the public space within shopping centers. The goal of the article is to investigate and illustrate the usefulness of conjoint approaches to measure the relative influence of such attributes in the perceptual process. We compare conjoint-based attribute weights with attribute weights derived from a cross section of attribute perceptions of existing centers. We also present results pertaining to the external validity of conjoint-based models, as the external validity of models based on responses to hypothetical stimuli are a recurring topic in discussions on the usefulness of conjoint models. Thus, the major research questions of this study are: (a) To what extent do particular shopping center attributes influence the perception of the public space in retail environments? and (b) To what extent do the advantages of the experimental conjoint-based approaches over cross-sectional approaches apply in this context, in particular with respect to the validity of the model results? To achieve our goals, the article is structured as follows. After quick reviews of the conjoint and consumer retail perception literatures, we describe our experimental procedure. Next, regression models are estimated from a cross section of perceptions of existing shopping centers and from the experimental data. Both models are used to predict perceptions reported by an independent sample of respondents; hence, we provide comparative tests of external validity. The article concludes with a discussion of results and some suggestions for further research. CONJOINT RETAIL STUDIES AND SHOPPING CENTER ATTRIBUTES Conjoint preference and choice analysis concerns the estimation of models from responses that are collected in experimentally controlled hypothetical situations. Descriptions of hypothetical alternatives are presented to participants who are asked either to rate their preference for these alternatives (usually profiles of attributes) or to choose from sets of alternatives. Because by design the attributes in the profiles are mutually independent and because the hypothetical alternatives are not restricted to participants’ current domains of experience, this approach allows one to obtain estimates that are efficient and that are not confounded with characteristics of the current realworld choice situation. Numerous consumer studies have applied this technique in a large variety of research areas (e.g., Wittink & Cattin, 1989). Oppewal, Timmermans / CONSUMER PERCEPTION OF PUBLIC SPACE 47 © 1999 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. at Eindhoven Univ of Technology on October 26, 2007 http://eab.sagepub.com Downloaded from Although few of these applications concerned retailing problems, some studies made retail applications of conjoint approaches (Ahn & Ghosh, 1989; Louviere & Gaeth, 1987; Louviere & Johnson, 1990, 1991; Louviere & Meyer, 1981; Moore, 1990; Schuler, 1979; Timmermans, 1982; Timmermans, Borgers, & Van der Waerden, 1991; Timmermans, Van der Heijden, & Westerveld, 1982, 1984; Verhallen & De Nooij, 1982). Moreover, almost all conjoint applications in retailing have studied preference or choice instead of perception of retail destination. Conjoint applications in retailing also have been limited in that most studies focused on stores instead of shopping centers. Mazurski and Jacoby (1986) reviewed 26 store image studies (as a follow-up to the review by Lindquist, 1974) and found that the following image aspects were most frequently examined in these studies: merchandise quality, merchandise pricing, merchandise assortment, general service quality, salesclerk service, location, and atmosphere or pleasantness of shopping at the store. They concluded that these aspects are among the most important components of store image. Studies that focused on store choice and store image, however, typically have ignored the characteristics of immediate store environments, for example, the public environment within the shopping center. Though not the most important factor in determining consumer choice of retail destination, atmosphere and appearance of the immediate store environment may nevertheless contribute to the attractiveness of a store or shopping center. This is exemplified by Downs (1970), who proposed in his seminal paper that nine components constitute the image of urban downtown shopping centers. Among these nine, he distinguished four public space characteristics (structure and design, ease of internal movement and parking, visual appearance, and atmosphere). Further support for the importance of appearance comes from a study by Timmermans et al. (1982). They identified atmosphere and physical layout as the third and fourth most frequently used dimensions to distinguish among shopping centers in Eindhoven, the Netherlands; the most frequently used dimensions were size and distance. This conclusion was derived from principal components analyses that were performed for each of 20 individuals separately on the ratings she or he had supplied of the personal constructs that had mentioned in a repertory grid task (Hallsworth, 1988; Kelly, 1955). The repertory grid methodology avoids drawbacks of conventional approaches, such as semantic differentials—for which results are highly dependent on the researcher’s a priori specification of attribute items, and multidimensional scaling—for which the interpretation of scaling results typically is very subjective. This repertory grid study asked respondents to consider triads of shopping centers from the study area, and for each triad to name a construct 48 ENVIRONMENT AND BEHAVIOR / January 1999 © 1999 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. at Eindhoven Univ of Technology on October 26, 2007 http://eab.sagepub.com Downloaded from that distinguishes one center from the other two. This task was repeated using new triads until no new constructs were mentioned. The personal constructs that were produced in the 20 interviews by Timmermans et al. (1982) illustrate the kind of detailed attributes that are related to atmosphere and layout issues: cozyness, care for maintenance, quietness, well organized, dark or light, safety, sheltered or windy, information sufficiency, coveredness, compactness, pedestrianization, quality of window displays, special activities, intimacy, cleanliness. Clearly, many of these personal constructs can be manipulated more or less directly by retailers and developers as well as by designers and planners. Indeed, these attributes are important features in shopping center renewals and restructurings, which increasingly are used as instruments to improve the attractiveness of shopping centers. The relevance of public space characteristics also is confirmed by a study by Van Raaij (1983; see also Hackett, Foxall, & Van Raaij, 1993). In that study, a sample of 579 respondents evaluated shopping centers in Rotterdam on various attributes and provided ratings of the importance of these attributes. In a principal components analysis of the importance ratings, Van Raaij obtained five components that were labeled as follows: general evaluation, physical environment, efficiency, accessibility, and social environment. Of these five dimensions, three clearly reflect public space characteristics. Though these image studies provide insight into the elements and dimensions that constitute perceptions of shopping centers, they do not give quantified insight into the relative importance of each of the separate features. They also do not allow causality tests of the effects of attribute changes on public space appearance. Our study, therefore, focuses on the use of conjoint approaches to study the influence of physical aspects of shopping centers on perceptions and evaluations of the appearance and design of shopping centers. In particular, our focus is on the effectiveness of conjoint approaches over approaches using cross-sectional data. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE DEFINITION OF ATTRIBUTES Based on the extant literature (e.g., Davies & Bennison, 1978; Maitland, 1985; Zimmer & Golden, 1988) and personal interviews and pilot tests with consumers, we generated a list of 10 attributes that we hypothesized to affect evaluations of the appearance, layout, and furnishings of shopping centers. Oppewal, Timmermans / CONSUMER PERCEPTION OF PUBLIC SPACE 49 © 1999 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. at Eindhoven Univ of Technology on October 26, 2007 http://eab.sagepub.com Downloaded from The list of attributes and their possible values, or levels, are presented in Table 1. Note that we discard the word atmosphere to separate as much as possible the effects of individual retailers’ marketing mix strategies from variables that are instruments for shopping center designers and developers. The 10 attributes in Table 1 describe the appearance, layout, and furnishings of shopping centers. If these attributes are combined into profiles, these profiles describe only one of the shopping center image dimensions identified in previous research. To give respondents at least some idea of the center’s position on the other constituents of shopping center image and to avoid 50 ENVIRONMENT AND BEHAVIOR / January 1999 TABLE 1 Attributes and Levels to Describe the Appearance, Layout, and Furnishings of Shopping Areas