1. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT (IJM)
Volume 4, Issue 6, November - December (2013)
ISSN 0976-6502 (Print)
ISSN 0976-6510 (Online)
Volume 4, Issue 6, November - December (2013), pp. 128-134
© IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijm.asp
Journal Impact Factor (2013): 6.9071 (Calculated by GISI)
www.jifactor.com
IJM
©IAEME
A STUDY ON IMPULSE BUYING BEHAVIOR OF COLLEGE STUDENTS
FOR BRANDED APPARELS IN AHMEDABAD CITY
Prof. Sandip G. Prajapati
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Commerce,
The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara
Dr. Khuman L. Rathod
Associate Professor, M.B.A – Department,
Hemchandracharya North Gujarat University, Patan
ABSTRACT
Impulse buying has been defined as a spontaneous, immediate purchase without pre-shopping
intentions either to buy a specific product category or to fulfill a specific buying task. Apparel
industry is one of the primary segments of our Indian economy and one of the largest sources of
foreign exchange earnings. This industry contributes around 4 per cent of the GDP, 20 per cent of
industrial output, and slightly more than 30 per cent of export earnings. This apparel industry
provides employment to about 38 million people. For this researcher has used the questionnaire
which include quantitative research. The sampling method is Non-probability sampling technique, in
that convenience sampling is used. The collected data has been analyzed with the use of descriptive
statistics and inferential statistics. As in the research there is no significant difference between
fashion involvement, pre-decision process of purchase and post-purchase among various age groups,
family.
Key Words: Impulsive Buying, Consumer Behavior, Visual Merchandising, Fashion Involvement.
INTRODUCTION
Its hard core truth change is constant. And in 21st century high level of change remain contant
in the fashion and apparel industry. This industry is considered as dynamic one in India currently.
From previous few decades the fashion and apparel industry in India is on a boom due to the
increasing fashion consciousness among middle and upper class of Indians. Whether they are middle
class, college students or other youngsters having a high level of fashion sence which motivate them
to buy more and more which distinguish this class from others
128

2. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 4, Issue 6, November - December (2013)
The high thunder in the Indian apparel industry is due to various factors like, increasing
incomes levels, good trade policies adopted by the state governments, and flexible and high foreign
investment in the apparel industry. In current scenarios we can able to found all worlds best brands in
apparels to be present and available at each mall. World Brands like Mango, Armani and Diesel were
not known to us before few months back, but today these brands are known and available at almost
all Indian cities.
In past few years this industry passing or moving from emerging stage to a fully fledged
booms stage. The market value of the apparel in India is expected at around INR 200 Billion. While
branded apparel market's size is reached up to INR 50 Billion, which is a quarter of the total share.
The Indian apparel market can be categorized into branded and none branded apparels. Some well
known Apparel Brands in India are Arvind Mills, Raymonds, Madura Garments and Provogue
Zodiac Clothing. Beside this Indian apparel industry gives a birth and reorganization to some finest
designers who become famous not only in India but also at abroad levels. This introduction gives
move boost up to our apparel industry in last decade. According to Fashion Design Council of India
(FDCI) apparels created by designers in India is going to play a most important role in the
development of the apparel industry in the next coming years. At present Indian fashion designer
industry having market value up to` 1.8 Billion INR and it is anticipated to grow up to` 100 Billion
INR within the next coming decade.
LITERATURE REVIEW
According to the study conducted by ( Bellenger et all, 1978) & (Rook and Hoch , 1985)
impulsive purchases represented 27 % to 62 % of all department store purchases done by peoples
believe that they have experienced an impulse purchase. Other research findings also support this
reliving fact almost 90% of respondents have made grocery purchases on impulsively. According to
(Welles, 1986) between 30 to 50 % of all purchases can be classified by the buyers themselves as
impulse purchases.
Another researcher (Rook and Rook, 1987) identified impulse buying behavior with
descriptors such as a intense, exciting, spontaneous, urge to buy with the purchaser often ignoring the
consequences. While more recent research by Puri says that impulse buying as a trait rather than as a
classification of a purchase decision, researchers agree that consumers vary in their impulse-buying
tendency (Puri , 1996) (Rook & Fisher, 1995). Without having prior information of a new product or
intention to purchase a certain item, a consumer is exposed to stimuli, suggesting that a need can be
satisfied through the purchase.
Researchers (Abrams, 1996) (Burns, 1992) have suggested that internal states and
environmental/external factors can serve as cues to trigger consumers’ impulse behavior to purchase.
The research on situational influence can be described as examining the relationship among shopper
characteristics and the features of retailing or point-of-purchase situations. Shopper characteristics
might include involvement (Smith & Carsky, 1996), attitude (Reid & Brown, 1996), and ethnicity
(Crispel, 1997), while the retailing features could include outlet size (Owen, 1995), retail format
(Fernie, 1996; Fernie & Fernie, 1997), and store personality.
Researchers (Gardner & Rook, 1988; Rook, 1987; Rook & Gardner, 1993) identify affect of
mood has been known as a variable that influences impulse purchasing. Rook and Gardner (1993)
found that 85 per cent of their survey respondents indicated a positive mood would be more positive
to impulse buying than a negative mood. For instance, the findings of Darden et al.’s (1983) study
showed that consumers’ beliefs about the physical pleasant appearance of a store had a higher
connection with a choice of a store than did merchandise quality, general price level, and other
selection criteria.
129

3. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 4, Issue 6, November - December (2013)
OBJECTIVE OF THE RESEARCH
Leading objective of the research is to study college student’s impulse buying behavior for
branded apparel in Ahmedabad city. While some other secondary objectives are to identify the level
of association between shopping life style and impulse buying behavior of various category college
students shopping in the area of Ahmedabad and to identify the level of association between fashion
involvement and impulse buying behavior of various category college students shopping in the area
of Ahmedabad.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The research design is Descriptive is single cross sectional research design. Sample element
is Male or female, a person who is a college student and resident of Ahmedabad city and buying
branded apparel. Non-probability sampling convenience sampling is used in this Project Study.
Sample size limited to 119 (95per cent significance level and 9per cent probable error). A close
ended interviewer administrated questionnaire has been used for collecting primary data.
INFERENTIAL ANALYSIS
In inferential analysis researchers done cronbach Alpha and Exploratory factor analysis –
1) Reliability analysis – scale (cronbach’s alpha)
Table 1 Cronbach alpha coefficients overall
Measures
Cronbach alpha coefficients
1. Impulse buying behavior for branded apparels
2. Fashion Involvement of college students
0.818
3. Pre-decision process
4. Post-purchase perception
The Cronbach alpha coefficient was calculated in order to check if the items that make up the
Impulse buying behavior for branded apparels, fashion involvement of college students, pre-decision
process and post-purchase perception. Testing the scale for reliability revealed an Impulse buying,
Fashion involvement, pre-decision stage and post-decision stage Cronbach alpha coefficient of
0.818. Therefore, this scale is considered reliable.
2) Exploratory factor analysis (EFA): to identify sources underlying the buying behavior for branded
apparels of college students, an exploratory factor analysis was carried out.
Table 2 KMO, Bartlett’s test of Sphericity and significant level
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy
0.725
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity
Approx. Chi-Square
226.429
Df
36
Sig.
.000*
*significant at 0.001 level
130

4. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 4, Issue 6, November - December (2013)
The factors, their respective items with the numbers and their corresponding factor loading are given
in bellow tables.
Table 3 Description of factors
Pattern of
purchase
Description
% of
Variance
% of
Cumulative
variance
22.543
Factors
22.543
There are three types of pattern of purchase
feel, planning and inattentive
Spot purchase
Spot purchase lead to the purchase of
unplanned and unneeded apparels
22.277
44.820
Buying habits
Buying habits
lead to the purchase of unintentional apparels
17.731
62.551
In total, there were nine (9) variables in the data. Varimax rotation method was used with
factors extraction with Eigen value over 1. It resulted into extraction of three factors, which
explained 62.551 per cent of variance. The minimum factor loading observed was 0.598 and the
maximum loading was seen to be 0.794.
DATA ANALYSIS & FINDINGS
Visual merchandizing has a great power to attract the costumers. Impulse is totally based on
visual merchandizing. The attractive store fronts, window displays, lightings, signages attract the
college students to buy the branded apparels. Today’s college students are more conscious about the
latest fashion, status, life style, which makes them to buy the branded apparels.
A. Gender Vs Impulse Buying Behavior: H1: Rejected: An independent-samples t-test is
conducted to compare significant difference among male and female students for their level of
fashion involvement. There is no significant difference in the scores for level of fashion involvement
among male (M=2.73, SD=0.74) and female (M=2.69, SD=0.68) conditions; t (117) =0.164, p =
0.870. H2: Rejected: An independent-samples t-test is conducted to compare significant difference
in male and female student’s Pre-decision process for buying branded apparels. There is no
significant difference in the scores for Pre-decision process for buying branded apparels in male
(M=2.91, SD=0.65) and female (M=2.73, SD=0.72) conditions; t (117) = 1.40, p = 0.163. H3:
Rejected: An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare significant difference in male
and female student’s Post-purchase perception for buying branded apparels. There is no significant
difference in the scores for Post-purchase perception for buying branded apparels in male (M=2.72,
SD=0.60) and female (M=2.68, SD=0.52) conditions; t (117) = 0.297, p = 0.767.
B. Education Vs Impulse Buying Behavior: H4: Rejected: An independent-samples t-test is
conducted to compare significant difference among Graduate and Post-graduate students for their
level of fashion involvement. There is no significant difference in the scores for level of fashion
involvement among Graduate (M=2.63, SD=0.57) and Post-graduate (M=2.73, SD=0.78) conditions;
t (117) = 0.249, p = 0.803. H5: Rejected: An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare
131

5. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 4, Issue 6, November - December (2013)
significant difference in Graduate and Post-graduate students’ Pre-decision process for buying
branded apparels. There is no significant difference in the scores for Pre-decision process for buying
branded apparels in Graduate (M=2.80, SD=0.67) and Post-graduate (M=2.85, SD=0.69) conditions;
t (117) = 0.354, p = 0.724. H6: Rejected: An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare
significant difference in Graduate and Post-graduate students’ Post-purchase perception for buying
branded apparels. There is no significant difference in the scores for Post-purchase perception for
buying branded apparels in Graduate (M=2.81, SD=0.62) and Post-graduate (M=2.69, SD=0.58)
conditions; t (117) = 0.973, p = 0.332.
C. Family Structure Vs Impulse Buying Behavior: H7: Rejected: An independent-samples t-test
is conducted to compare significant difference among Nuclear family and Joint family students for
their level of fashion involvement. There is no significant difference in the scores for level of fashion
involvement among Nuclear family (M=2.78, SD=0.70) and Joint family (M=2.62, SD=0.78)
conditions; t (117) = 1.20, p = 0.233. H8: Rejected: An independent-samples t-test was conducted
to compare significant difference in Graduate and Post-graduate students’ Pre-decision process for
buying branded apparels. There is no significant difference in the scores for Pre-decision process for
buying branded apparels in Graduate (M=2.80, SD=0.67) and Post-graduate (M=2.85, SD=0.69)
conditions; t
(117) = 0.354, p = 0.724. H9: Rejected: An independent-samples t-test was
conducted to compare significant difference in Nuclear family and Joint family students’ Postpurchase perception for buying branded apparels. There is no significant difference in the scores for
Post-purchase perception for buying branded apparels in Nuclear family (M=2.77, SD=0.53) and
Joint family (M=2.63, SD=0.67) conditions; t (117) = 1.25, p = 0.213.
D. Age Group Vs Impulse Buying Behavior:H10: Rejected: A one-way was conducted to
compare the significance difference among students of various age groups about their level of
fashion involvement. There is no significant effect of Customers Various Age groups on their level
of fashion involvement. At the p<0.05 level for three conditions [F (12,106) =0.551, p=0.876] H11:
Rejected: A one-way was conducted to compare the significance difference among students of
various age groups about their level of fashion involvement. There is no significant effect of
Customers Various Age groups on their Pre-decision process for buying branded apparels. At the
p<0.05 level for three conditions [F (12,106) =1.131, p=0.343]H12: Rejected: A one-way was
conducted to compare the significance difference among students of various age groups about their
level of fashion involvement. There is no significant effect of Customers Various Age groups on
their Post-purchase perception for buying branded apparels. At the p<0.05 level for three conditions
[F (15,103) =1.120, p=0.348]
E. Family Income Vs Impulse Buying Behavior: H13: Rejected: A one-way was conducted to
compare the significance difference among students of various Income groups about their level of
fashion involvement. There is no significant effect of Customers Various Income groups on their
level of fashion involvement. At the p<0.05 level for three conditions [F (12,106) =1.474, p=0.145]
H14: Rejected: A one-way was conducted to compare the significance difference among students of
various Income groups about their level of fashion involvement. There is no significant effect of
Customers Various Income groups on their Pre-decision process for buying branded apparels. At the
p<0.05 level for three conditions [F (12,106) =1.725, p=0.071] H15: Accepted: A one-way was
conducted to compare the significance difference among students of various Income groups about
their level of fashion involvement. There is significant effect of Customers Various Income groups
on their Post-purchase perception for buying branded apparels. At the p<0.05 level for three
conditions [F (15,103) =1.921, p=0.029]
132

6. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 4, Issue 6, November - December (2013)
CONCLUSION
According to (Rock, 1987) Impulse buying is a sudden and immediate purchase with no preshopping intentions either to buy the specific product or to fulfill a specific buying task. Researchers
try to attempt to determine if college students’ who frequently engage in impulse buying behavior for
branded apparels have some common personality traits. This study also investigated some outside
factors that influence impulse buying behavior for branded apparels. In the efforts to inspect this
relationship, this study mainly tried to explain the relationship between college students’ impulse
buying behavior and various types branded apparels. One of the significant finding of this study was
that impulse buying behavior certainly influences college students’ to purchase branded apparels.
The result shows that there were significant relationships between college students’ buying behavior
and impulse buying behavior for branded apparels. The window display and floor merchandising
(visual merchandizing) are significantly correlated with impulse buying behavior for branded
apparels. When consumers (college students) are exposed to these visual stimuli they are likely to
make purchase decisions on impulse basis.
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Abrahams, B. (1997, March 27). It’s all in the mind. Marketing , 31-33.
Abratt, R., & Goodey, S. D. (1990). Unplanned buying and in store stimuli in supermarket.
Managerial and decision Economics , 11 (2), 111-121.
Anglin, L., Morgan, F., & Stoltman, J. (1999). An investigation of retail shopping situation.
International journal of retail and manegement , 27 (4), 145-153.
Babin, B., Darden, W., & Griffin, M. (1994, March 20). Work and /or fun: Measuring hedonic
and utiliterian shoping value. Journal of consumer resrearch , 644-656.
Beatty, S. E., & Ferrell, M. (1998). Impulse buying: modeling its precursors. Journal of
Retailing , 74 (2), 169-191.
Belk, R. (1975). Situational variables and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research,
2(3),157-164.
Bowers, K. (1973). Situationism in psychology: an analysis and critique. Psychology review,
307-36.
Churchill, G., & peter, J. (1998). Marketing: Creating value for customers. Boston:
Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
Cobb, C. J., & Hoyer, W. (1986). Planned Versus Impulse Purchase Behavior. Journal of
Retailing , 62 (4), 384-409.
Darden, W., Erdem, O., & Darden, D. (1983). A comparison and test of three casual models of
petronage intentions. Patronage behavior and Retail manegement .
Eysenck, S. B., & Eysenck, H. J. (1978). Impulsiveness and venturesomeness:Thair position
in dimensional system of personality description. psychological Reports.
Eysenck, S. B., Pearson, P. R., Easting, G., & Allsopp, J. (1985). Age norms for
impulsiveness, venturesomenes s and empathy in adults. personality and individul differences,
613-619.
Fernie, J., & Fernie, S. (1997). The development of a US retail format in Europe: the case of
Factory outlet centers. International journal of retail and disribution management, 25 (11),
342-50.
Gardner, M., & Rook, D. (1988). Effects of impulse purchases on consumers’ affective states.
advances in consumer research, 15, 127-130.
Hoyer, W. (1984, december 11). An examination of consumer decision making for a common
repeat purchase product. Journal of consumer research, 822-9.
133

7. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 4, Issue 6, November - December (2013)
16. Kotler, P. (1973-1974). Atmospherics as a marketing tool. Journal of retailing, 48-64.
17. McConatha, J. T., Lightner, E., & Deaner, S. L. (1994). Culture, age and genderas variables in
the expression of emotion . Journal of Social behavior and personality, 481-488.
18. Puri, R. (1996). Measuring and modifying consumer impulsiveness: A cost-benefit
Framework. Journal of consume psychology , 87-113.
19. Rook, D., & Fisher, R. (1995). Trait and normative aspects of impulsive buying behavior.
Journal of consumer Research., 305-13.
20. Siegel, J. M. (1985). The measurement of anger as a multidimensional construct. 59-62.
21. Smith, D. (1996, February). The joy of candy. National Petroleum News supliment.
22. Solnick, J., Kannenberg, C., Eckerman, D., & Waller, M. (1980). An experimental analysis of
impulsivity and impulse control in humans. Learning and Motivation, 11, 61-77.
23. Stern, H. (1962). The Significance of Impulse Buying Today. Journal of Marketing,
26, 59-62.
24. Underhill, P. (1999). Why we buy: The science of shopping.
25. Weinberg, P., & Gottwald, W. (1982). Impulsive consumer buying as a result of emotion.
Jornal of business research , 43-57.
26. Wood, M. (1998). Socio-economic status, delay of gratification, and impulse buying. journal
of economic psychology , 295-320.
27. Yalch, R., & Spangenberg, E. (1990). Effects of Store Music on Shopping Behavior. journal
of consumer marketing , 55-63.
28. Youn, S., & Faber, R. (2000). Impulse buying: its relation to personality traits and cues.
Advances in consumer research , 27, 179-185.
29. Vijay. R. Kulkarni, “A Study of Impact of Merchandise Variety and Assostment on Shopping
Experience of Customer Sin Convenience Stores in Organized Retail in India”, International
Journal of Management (IJM), Volume 4, Issue 1, 2013, pp. 85 - 94, ISSN Print: 0976-6502,
ISSN Online: 0976-6510.
30. K.Sadasivan, Dr. Jayshree Suresh and S.Rakshana,, “Consumer Involvement Toward Private
Brand’s in Mens Apparel with Reference to Chennai City”, International Journal of
Management (IJM), Volume 2, Issue 2, 2011, pp. 154 - 166, ISSN Print: 0976-6502,
ISSN Online: 0976-6510.
31. Vijay. R. Kulkarni, “A Study of Impact of Music on Customer Buying Behavior in Retail”,
International Journal of Management (IJM), Volume 3, Issue 3, 2012, pp. 152 - 159,
ISSN Print: 0976-6502, ISSN Online: 0976-6510.
32. Dr. Bidyut Jyoti Gogoi, “Antecedents of Customer Satisfaction in a Retail Store Environment
and its Impact on Time Spent and Impulse Buying”, International Journal of Management
(IJM), Volume 4, Issue 6, 2013, pp. 21 - 35, ISSN Print: 0976-6502, ISSN Online: 0976-6510.
134