Abstract
The Houston and Rothschild S-O-R consumer involvement paradigm is tested for validity with measures of involvement for a shampoo purchase decision. A multitrait-multimethod matrix approach confirms the convergent and discriminant validity of the measure employed. A causal modeling analysis suggests that enduring involvement may work through situational involvement to influence consumer responses. Marketing implications are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arora, Raj. 1982. “Validation of an S-O-R Model for Situation, Enduring and Response Components of Involvement,”Journal of Marketing Research (November): 505–16.
Assael, Henry. 1981.Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action. Boston, Mass: Kent.
Bagozzi, Richard P. 1978. “The Construct Validity of the Affective, Behavioral and Cognitive Components of Attitudes by Analysis of Covariance Structures.”Multivariate Behavioral Research 13 (January): 9–31
Campbell, Donald T. and Donald W. Fiske. 1959. “Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix.”Psychological Bulletin 56: 81–105.
Clark, R. A. and R. Stewart. 1974. “Latitude of Rejection as a Measure of Ego Involvement.”Speech Monographs 38: 228–34.
Greenwald, Anthony G. 1981. “Ego Task Analysis. An Integration of Research on Ego-Involvement and Self-Awareness.” InCognitive Social Psychology. Eds. A. Hastrof and A. Isen. New York: Elsevier-North Holland.
Helgeson, James G., E. Alan Kluge, Jons Mager and Cheri Taylor. 1984. “Trends in Consumer Behavior Research: A Content Analysis.”Journal of Consumer Research 10 (March): 449–54.
Houston, Michael J. and Michael L. Rothschild. 1977. “A Paradigm for Research on Consumer Involvement.” Unpublished Paper, Graduate School of Business, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Houston, Michael J. and Michael L. Rothschild. 1978. “Conceptual and Methodological Perspectives on Involvement.” InResearch Frontiers in Marketing: Diaglogues and Directions. Ed. Subhash C. Jain, 184–7. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Huper, Nancy T. and David M. Gardner. 1971. “Differential Involvement with Product and Issues: An Exploratory Study.” InProceedings, Association for Consumer Research. Ed. David M. Gardner, 262–70. College Park, MD: Association for Consumer Research.
Joreskog, Karl G. 1971. “Statistical Analysis of Sets of Congeneric Tests.”Psychometrika 36: 109–33.
Joreskog, Karl G. and Dag Sorbom. 1984.LISREL VI: Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships by Maximum Likelihood, Instrumental Variables, and Least Square Methods Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software, Inc.
Kassarjian, Harold H. 1981. “Low Involvement-A Second Look.” inAdvances in Consumer Research: Volume 8. Ed. Kent B. monroe, 31–4. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research.
Lastovicka, John and David Gardner. 1979. “Components of Involvement.” InAttitude Research Plays for High Stakes. Eds. John C. Maloney and Bernard Silverman, 53–73. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Leavitt, Clark, Anthony G. Greenwald, and Carl Obermiller. 1981 “What is Low Involvement Low In?” InAdvances in Consumer Research: Volume 8 Ed. Kent B. Monroe, 15–9. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research.
Lovelock, C. H., R. Stiff, D. Cullwick and I. M. Kaufman. 1976. “An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Drop-off Questionnaire Delivery.”Journal of Marketing Research 13(November): 358–364.
Muncy, James A. and Shelby D. Hunt. 1984. “Consumer Involvement: Definitional Issues and Research Directions.” inAdvances in Consumer Research: Volume 11. Ed. Thomas C. Kinnear, 193–6. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research.
Parkinson, Thomas L. and Carolyn T. Schenk. 1980. “An Empirical Investigation of the S-O-R Paradigm of Consumer Involvement.” InAdvances in Consumer Research: Volume 7. Ed. Jerry C. Olson, 94–111. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research.
Rothschild, Michael L. 1979. “Advertising Strategies for High and Low Involve-ment Situations.” InAttitude Research Plays for High Stakes. Eds. John C. M./ J and Bernard Silverman, 94–111. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Sherif, Muzafer and Hadley Cantril. 1947.The Psychology of Ego Involvement. New York: John Wiley.
Sherif, Muzafer and Carolyn W. Sherif. 1967. “The Own Categories Procedure in Attitude Research.” InReadings in Attitude Theory and Measurement. Ed. Martin Fishbein. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Slama, Mark and Armen Tashchian. 1985. “Involvement as a Consumer Behavior Construct: A Critical Review.” working Paper, College of Business, Utah State University.
Slama, Mark and Armen Tashchian. 1983. “Comparing Methods of Measuring Involvement with Product Classes: A Structural Equations Approach.” InResearch Methods and Causal Modeling in Marketing. Eds. William R. Darden, Kent B. Monroe and William R. Dillon, 66–9. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Slama, Mark and Roobina O. Tashchian. 1983. “The Effects of Product Involvement and Task Definition on Anticipated Consumer Effort: An Extension.” InProceedings, Eds. John P. Dickson and Denis Umstot, 317–9. Tacoma: American Institute of Decision Sciences.
Sudman, Seymour, Andrew Greely and Leonard Pinto. 1965. “The Effectiveness of Self-Administered Questionaires.”Journal of Marketing Research (August): 293–7.
Survey Research Center. 1976.Interviewer’s Manual. Revised Edition. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan.
Zeigarnik, Bhuma V. 1938. “On Finished and Unfinished Tasks.” InA Source Book of Gestalt Psychology. Ed. William D. Ellis. New York: Humanities Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Slama, M.E., Tashchian, A. Validating the S-O-R paradigm for consumer involvement with a convenience good. JAMS 15, 36–45 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02721952
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02721952