IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rnd/arimbr/v2y2011i4p162-172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Brand Categorization Process for Staple Goods: Comparison between Rural and Urban Customers

Author

Listed:
  • Manash Pratim Kashyap

Abstract

The main purpose of the paper is to measure and compare the awareness set, consideration set and choice set of rural and urban population. The brand categorization process in an important aspect of consumer behavior and is useful in understanding how a consumer chooses a particular brand. The focus of this work is to compare the brand categorization process of rural and urban consumers. The consumer’s choice process, on some selected staple goods viz. rice, salt, edible oil and tea for rural and urban customers are considered. The study reaches the conclusion that the awareness set size and the consideration set size does not differ significantly for urban and rural consumers but the choice set size differs for rice. For salt and edible oil the rural customers seems to be more aware though there consideration set size and choice set size do not show any significant difference. However, for tea the urban folk have a bigger consideration set and choice set compared to the rural population.

Suggested Citation

  • Manash Pratim Kashyap, 2011. "Brand Categorization Process for Staple Goods: Comparison between Rural and Urban Customers," Information Management and Business Review, AMH International, vol. 2(4), pages 162-172.
    • Handle: RePEc:rnd:arimbr:v:2:y:2011:i:4:p:162-172
    DOI: 10.22610/imbr.v2i4.895
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ojs.amhinternational.com/index.php/imbr/article/view/895/895
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ojs.amhinternational.com/index.php/imbr/article/view/895
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22610/imbr.v2i4.895?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nedungadi, Prakash, 1990. "Recall and Consumer Consideration Sets: Influencing Choice without Altering Brand Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 17(3), pages 263-276, December.
    2. Vroomen, Bjorn & Hans Franses, Philip & van Nierop, Erjen, 2004. "Modeling consideration sets and brand choice using artificial neural networks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(1), pages 206-217, April.
    3. Nitin Mehta & Surendra Rajiv & Kannan Srinivasan, 2003. "Price Uncertainty and Consumer Search: A Structural Model of Consideration Set Formation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 58-84, June.
    4. Wayne S. Desarbo & Kamel Jedidi, 1995. "The Spatial Representation of Heterogeneous Consideration Sets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 326-342.
    5. Kardes, Frank R, et al, 1993. "Brand Retrieval, Consideration Set Composition, Consumer Choice, and the Pioneering Advantage," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(1), pages 62-75, June.
    6. Church, Nancy J. & Laroche, Michel & Blatt, Jerry A. Rosen, 1985. "Consumer brand categorization for durables with limited problem solving: An empirical test and proposed extension of the Brisoux-Laroche model," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 231-253, September.
    7. Desai, Kalpesh Kaushik & Hoyer, Wayne D, 2000. "Descriptive Characteristics of Memory-Based Consideration Sets: Influence of Usage Occasion Frequency and Usage Location Familiarity," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(3), pages 309-323, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tammo H.A. Bijmolt & Michel Wedel & Wayne S. DeSarbo, 2021. "Adaptive Multidimensional Scaling: Brand Positioning Based on Decision Sets and Dissimilarity Judgments," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Chadwick J. Miller & Daniel C. Brannon & Jim Salas & Martha Troncoza, 2021. "Advertising, incentives, and the upsell: how advertising differentially moderates customer- vs. retailer-directed price incentives’ impact on consumers’ preferences for premium products," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 1043-1064, November.
    3. Hauser, John R., 2014. "Consideration-set heuristics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1688-1699.
    4. Anocha Aribarg & Thomas Otter & Daniel Zantedeschi & Greg M. Allenby & Taylor Bentley & David J. Curry & Marc Dotson & Ty Henderson & Elisabeth Honka & Rajeev Kohli & Kamel Jedidi & Stephan Seiler & X, 2018. "Advancing Non-compensatory Choice Models in Marketing," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 82-92, March.
    5. Desmichel, Perrine & Kocher, Bruno, 2020. "Luxury Single- versus Multi-Brand Stores: The Effect of Consumers’ Hedonic Goals on Brand Comparisons," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 203-219.
    6. Bijmolt, T.H.A. & Wedel, M. & DeSarbo, W.S., 2002. "Adaptive Multidimensional Scaling : The Spatial Representation of Brand Consideration and Dissimilarity Judgments," Other publications TiSEM 26b65f04-0d5f-42d6-8a85-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Vishal Bindroo & Xin He & Raj Echambadi, 2016. "Satisfaction—Repurchase Intentions Relationship: Exploring the Contingent Roles of Consideration Set Size and Price Consciousness," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 3(3), pages 115-125, December.
    8. Tobias Reckmann, 2017. "Verwendung von Word of Mouth-Daten zur Identifikation von Asymmetrie im Wettbewerb: Eine textbasierte Analyse am Beispiel deutscher Automobilmarken [Identification of asymmetric competition by usin," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 69(2), pages 173-201, June.
    9. Pilli, Luis & Swait, Joffre & Mazzon, José Afonso, 2022. "Jeopardizing brand profitability by misattributing process heterogeneity to preference heterogeneity," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    10. Bijmolt, T.H.A. & Wedel, M. & DeSarbo, W.S., 2002. "Adaptive Multidimensional Scaling : The Spatial Representation of Brand Consideration and Dissimilarity Judgments," Discussion Paper 2002-82, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    11. Davies, Antony & Cline, Thomas W., 2005. "A consumer behavior approach to modeling monopolistic competition," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 797-826, December.
    12. Nitin Mehta & Surendra Rajiv & Kannan Srinivasan, 2004. "Role of Forgetting in Memory-Based Choice Decisions: A Structural Model," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 107-140, June.
    13. Michael J. Barone & Alexander Fedorikhin & David E. Hansen, 2017. "The influence of positive affect on consideration set formation in memory-based choice," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 59-69, March.
    14. Nenycz-Thiel, Magda & Sharp, Byron & Dawes, John & Romaniuk, Jenni, 2010. "Competition for memory retrieval between private label and national brands," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(11), pages 1142-1147, November.
    15. Catherine Viot, 2012. "Subjective knowledge, product attributes and consideration set : the wine case," Post-Print hal-01803724, HAL.
    16. Draganska, Michaela & Klapper, Daniel, 2010. "Choice Set Heterogeneity and the Role of Advertising: An Analysis with Micro and Macro Data," Research Papers 2063, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    17. Elisabeth Honka & Pradeep Chintagunta, 2017. "Simultaneous or Sequential? Search Strategies in the U.S. Auto Insurance Industry," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(1), pages 21-42, January.
    18. Jooa Baek & Jaeseok Lee, 2021. "A Conceptual Framework on Reconceptualizing Customer Share of Wallet (SOW): As a Perspective of Dynamic Process in the Hospitality Consumption Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-11, January.
    19. Jianan Wu & Arvind Rangaswamy, 2003. "A Fuzzy Set Model of Search and Consideration with an Application to an Online Market," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 411-434, March.
    20. Romaniuk, Jenni, 2013. "Modeling mental market share," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 188-195.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rnd:arimbr:v:2:y:2011:i:4:p:162-172. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Muhammad Tayyab (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ojs.amhinternational.com/index.php/imbr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.