Hedonic and utilitarian motivations and their relationship with cultural dimensions, life satisfaction and the attributes of supermarkets: An international study on consumer behavior

Abstract

This research focuses on how consumers behave when they shop in supermarkets. It aims at understanding the relationship between hedonic and utilitarian motivations, cultural dimensions and satisfaction with life in context. Most researchers have studied how motivations and cultural dimensions affect consumer behavior. However, the studies conducted so far do not address the relationship between hedonic and utilitarian motivations, culture, satisfaction with life, and supermarket attributes. This research is mainly exploratory in nature and is based on three samples collected in different continents: Brazil, South Korea and Portugal. Evidence is found that satisfaction with life impacts utilitarian motivation but does not impact hedonic motivation. The study also shows that consumers satisfied with their life tend to be more rational in their purchases. Concerning the cultural dimension, power distance is the unique variable that positively impacts hedonic motivation, while long-term orientation has a negative impact on hedonic motivation. On the other hand, avoiding uncertainty and long-term orientation positively impact utilitarian behavior. Regarding the supermarkets’ attributes, the study puts in evidence the significant positive impact of pricing policy, variety and quality of products, environment, service, and corporate social responsibility in the hedonic motivation.

Keywords:

• Marketing
• buying behavior
• exploratory study
• Brazil
• South Korea
• Portugal

1. Introduction

Traditionally, customer satisfaction is considered the result of the sense of well-acquired products and services. More precisely, satisfaction is regarded as the result of perceptions about the products or services’ performance vis-a-vis consumers’ expectations (J. R. Churchill et al., 2005; Kotler & Keeler, 2014; McCarthy, 1960). Contrasting with this traditional perspective, the paper focuses on the impact of satisfaction with life and culture on the hedonic and utilitarian motivations in terms of consumer behavior, as there are no such studies which address the relationships between these constructs. Given this gap, this research aims to understand the relationship between hedonic and utilitarian motivations, cultural dimensions, and satisfaction with life. This means that the investigation addresses the relationship between satisfaction and the cultural dimensions suggested by Hofstede (2011): collectivism, masculinity, indulgence, power distance, long-term orientation and uncertainty avoidance and the hedonic and utilitarian motivations of consumers. The new model that includes new constructs is likely to have a critical influence on the hedonic and utilitarian motivations of the consumers in the supermarket sector: satisfaction with life and cultural dimensions. Because of the complexity of consumer behavior in supermarkets, the research problem is: What is the impact of satisfaction with life in the utilitarian and hedonic motivations in different cultures in the context of shopping in supermarkets?

This raises three relevant research questions: What is the impact of cultural issues on utilitarian and hedonic motivations? What is the influence of life satisfaction on utilitarian and hedonic motivations? Finally, what is the effect of supermarket attributes on utilitarian and hedonic motivations?

To answer these questions, the paper is structured in six sections. After this introduction, section 2 elaborates on the theoretical background: hedonic and utilitarian motivations, cultural dimensions and satisfaction and raises the hypotheses underlying the research. The following section presents the conceptual model. The fourth section describes and justifies the methodological approach, and section 5 focuses on analyzing the results. Finally, the paper ends with a conclusion, summarizing the main contributions, as well as the limitations of the research and directions for further development.

2. Theoretical background and hypotheses

2.1. The theory of consumer behavior and the influence on hedonic and utilitarian motivations in the supermarket

Consumer behavior as a field of knowledge assumes importance, both academically and for business. Psychologists, sociologists, statisticians, economists, and managers, research the individual and their behavior in pre-purchase moments, as well as purchase and post-purchase (M. J. Baker & Saren, 2010). The theory of consumer behavior emerged in the mid-1960s, coming mainly from economic theory, specifically microeconomics (Schiffman et al., 2013). However, with the evolution of studies and markets in the management field, consumer behavior has been seen not only by economic rationality but also by impulsiveness and internal and external influences, to which individuals are susceptible. Such thinking is reflected in the study of utilitarian motivations (rational and necessary) and hedonic motivations (decisions influenced by pleasure and feelings).

Another important finding is about the actions of consumers based on their attitudes. Attitude is a construct that has aspects that imply user roles (Makanyeza et al., 2021). For the authors, the consumers have favorable or unfavorable attitudes toward brands. The variables, in this case, are beliefs, intentions, and purchase intention. Therefore, the attributes offered by supermarkets influence consumer attitudes.

Nonetheless, this study follows the idea of a rational and emotional purchaser. It targets consumer behavior in the supermarket sector, as it has relevance for the world economy, both in the number of existing supermarkets and in creating jobs, and increasing consumption. It is noteworthy, at first, that in the supermarket sector, managers tend to use rational factors to attract consumers. However, it is observed that the atmosphere of the supermarket, such as lighting, background sound, and colors, also generates unplanned buying behavior, indicating that managers should be concerned with creating an emotional connection with consumers, as this factor influences their decisions (POPAI Europe, 1998).

An example of influence is perceived when consumers change their shopping behavior when meeting another consumer inside the retail store, having their emotional side affected by such a situation (Luck & Benkenstein, 2015). It is worth noting that supermarket consumers are influenced by rational and hedonic factors (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982).

Based on different studies, we can highlight price, variety and quality of products, environment, service and assistance, corporate social responsibility and convenience as important criteria for a consumer’s hedonic and utilitarian behavior as presented below.

Price is one of the most investigated variables when studying consumer behavior and the rational and hedonic factors. Furthermore, in markets with greater product offerings, there is a highly significant direct impact of pricing on hedonic motivation (Bajari et al., 2005; Rosen, 2002). In restaurants in Seoul, South Korea, it was confirmed that customers concerning prices were influenced by hedonic motivation (Yim et al., 2014).

H1.

The price policy has a direct positive impact on hedonic motivation.

Hedonic prices can be considered as the implicit prices of attributes, which companies even see from the observed prices of differentiated products and the specific quantities of characteristics associated with them (Rosen, 2002). The price is also verified as having a direct positive factor in the utilitarian motivation, pointing to a more rational view of the consumer, as seen in a study in retail stores in the United States, where it was found that the price has a positive impact on the utilitarian motivation (Bardhi & Arnould, 2005). The authors cite the term economic purchases, which occurs when there is a need for customer purchases.

H2.

The pricing policy has a direct positive impact on utilitarian motivation.

Another factor in the choice of the supermarket is the variety of products. Retail with a great assortment and variety of products decreases the time-consuming research per product, and it increases the chance to sell their goods to the consumers (Soares et al., 2016). The quality of products can interfere with hedonic behavior when the consumer is involved beyond the tangible aspect (J. Kim et al., 2002). This raises the following hypothesis:

H3.

The variety and quality of products have a direct positive impact on hedonic motivation.

The rational approach to consumption is characterized by searching for the lowest price and highest quality, thus being the products’ variety and quality factors impacting utilitarian motivation (Andersson & Engelberg, 2006). The authors admit that purchasing behavior can sometimes be rational and sometimes affectionate in research carried out in Sweden. The variety of products influences quality, which influences utilitarian motivation, mainly concerning food consumption in retail stores (Kahn & Wansink, 2004). This raises the following hypothesis:

H4.

The variety and quality of products have a direct positive impact on utilitarian motivation.

Another influential aspect of supermarkets is the environment. For retailers, investing in a pleasant physical environment like comfort, including ventilation, adequate and functional equipment, will influence utilitarian and hedonic values (Diamond & Diamond, 1999; Parente, 2009). It is identified that the impulse purchase was generated by the environment (Jin & Kim, 2003; Zeithaml et al., 2013). The images inside the patches, such as photographs and visual identity, are environmental aspects that arouse a desire to touch or even observe products, and on impulse, buy them (Bitner, 1992). Then the following hypothesis arises:

H5.

The environment has a direct positive impact on hedonic motivation.

The functional characteristics create an atmosphere conducive to rational purchasing, as seen in information from the sections or departments, which are visually signaled (Garcia et al., 2010; Parente, 2009). This raises the following hypothesis:

H6.

The environment has a direct positive impact on utilitarian motivation.

Another factor cited in theory as crucial for retail success is services such as delivery and warranties transmit to the customer a positive impact on hedonic motivation by providing a sense of security in the purchase (Sehgal & Khanna, 2017). This raises another hypothesis:

H7.

The service and assistance have a direct positive impact on hedonic motivation.

The service complements the product, so companies recognize that customers have a positive perception when communication strategies inform about the services provided, such as clarifying doubts, different delivery and return options and support to locate a product (Bitner, 1992; Sehgal & Khanna, 2017). For the authors, assistance interferes with utilitarian motivation as it helps the consumer choose products, facilitating the purchase process. This raises another hypothesis:

H8.

The service and assistance have a direct positive impact on utilitarian motivation.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is also highlighted when choosing a supermarket. The feeling of guilt does not occur when a consumer purchases a product from a socially responsible retailer (Okada, 2005; Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001). The authors carried out a case study to verify whether CSR does interfere in the purchase of products. The authors mention that CSR has elements to influence the positive view of the product, image, work relations, and respect for the employee. The following hypothesis arises:

H9.

Corporate social responsibility has a direct positive impact on hedonic motivation.

Regarding utilitarian motivation, the researchers point out that CSR impacts consumer behavior, but this impact will depend on consumer awareness. A company that promotes CSR has more impact on utilitarian motivation than companies that do not do it (Hanaysha, 2018; Santos et al., 2018). This gives rise to the following hypothesis:

H10.

Corporate social responsibility has a direct positive impact on utilitarian motivation.

The last attribute is convenience. Research on the placement of products on supermarket shelves and gondolas in Brazil has found that the convenience of walking in retail impacts hedonic motivation (Cesarino & Caixeta Filho, 2002). This gives rise to this hypothesis:

H11.

The convenience has a direct positive impact on hedonic motivation.

According to (Rossoni, 2002) in their study on the evaluation of the quality of services offered in supermarkets, it was identified that 58% of customers mention that convenience has a positive impact on utilitarian motivation, as it provides a feeling of comfort and ease of movement in the retail. Other researchers also point out that convenience is linked to the time spent looking for the product in the supermarket (Parente, 2009). This gives rise to the following hypothesis:

H12.

The convenience has a direct positive impact on utilitarian motivation.

2.2. Culture as an influence on hedonic and utilitarian motivations

Consumer behavior studies follow different philosophical trends, such as positivism, interpretivism, and postmodernism relativism (Arnould & Thompson, 2005). Based on the understanding of multiple philosophies, Arnould and Thompson (2005) developed the Consumer Culture Theory as an option, which introduces a dynamic relationship between consumption, market, and culture, emphasizing the complexity of the cultural element in consumer behavior. In the study about culture and consumption, the dimensions presented by Hofstede (2011) are indicated as a good instrument to understand the cultural patterns of consumers, as mentioned in studies that such dimensions are widely used in marketing by several scholars due to their robustness and relevance, both theoretical and empirical (Henseler et al., 2010).

Another important point is to choose the cultural dimensions because they are more appropriate to measure the individual’s consumption. (Wen et al., 2018). Thus, the six cultural dimensions are presented: (i) Power distance, related to the different solutions to the fundamental problem of inequality; (ii) Uncertainty avoidance, related to the level of stress in a society facing an unknown future; (iii) Individualism versus collectivism, related to the integration of individuals in primary groups; (iv) Masculinity versus Femininity, related to the division of emotional roles between women and men; (v) Long-term versus short-term orientation, related to the choice of focus for people’s efforts: the future or the present and the past; and (vi) Indulgence versus Restraint, related to gratification versus control of human desires related to enjoying life (Hofstede, 2011, 2018).

The dimensions are independent of each other, making it possible to analyze the effect on consumer behavior (Hofstede, 2011). In addition to mentioning that each dimension can influence individuals’ behavior, it appears that consumers can present similar or different behaviors, depending on the degree of influence of each dimension in their lives. Thus, consumers are influenced by their values and degree of cultural dimensions. Thus, the indulgence dimension is linked to the individuals’ perceptions about pleasure and fun, and in societies with a high degree of indulgence, fun and pleasure are more accepted and therefore promoted more (Hofstede, 2011). Cultures with a high level of indulgence, fun and pleasure are encouraged; therefore, there may be a positive relationship between the high level of indulgence and pleasure (J. Kim et al., 2002), a factor that may indicate that indulgence encourages hedonic consumption (Babin et al., 1994). Based on it we build the hypothesis:

H13.

The indulgence dimension has a direct positive impact on hedonic motivation.

Consumers influenced by more controlling nations (Mooij, 2015), with a low level of indulgence, may consume only the utility, this value being one of the characteristics of the utilitarian motivation, as the consumer goes shopping with specific objectives to purchase the necessary items, not being motivated by pleasure as the main component (Babin et al., 1994). This gives rise to the following hypothesis:

H14.

The indulgence dimension has a direct negative impact on utilitarian motivation.

However, collective societies tend to inhibit impulse buying (Kacen & Lee, 2002). In less collectivist societies, this feeling does not occur because individuals are more focused on the benefits they will receive more than on the groups’ common interests (Leng & Botelho, 2010). Because in more individualistic societies, utilitarian values slightly lose their importance (Garcia et al., 2010). In this context, the following hypothesis is:

H15.

The collectivism dimension has a direct negative impact on hedonic motivation.

Utilitarian values appear when the consumers seek social approval and avoid actions that may generate punishment for other members of the society (Bearden et al., 1989). One of the characteristics of collectivist societies is the search for social acceptance (Hofstede, 2011). Collectivist societies are more oriented towards utilitarian characteristics and that individualistic societies have a positive relationship with hedonic characteristics (Sharma et al., 2010). So, the hypothesis is:

H16.

The collectivism dimension has a direct positive impact on utilitarian motivation.

In relation to the power distance, it tends to differentiate cultures due to their level of impact on nations, mainly in relation to responses, hierarchies, and inequality between society members (Hofstede, 2011). Such respect, related to control in societies with a high level of power differences, influences impulsive purchases, something that does not occur in societies with a low level of power distance (Zhang et al., 2010). Impulse buying is a complex type of hedonic behavior (Sharma et al., 2010). Due to these studies, we came to the following hypothesis:

H17.

The power distance dimension has a direct negative impact on hedonic motivation.

The utility purchase is based on a different consumption process, which is characterized by planning and rational thinking, not being an impulsive behavior (Hirschman & Holbrook, 1982). Following their idea we have developed the eighteens hypothesis:

H18.

The power distance dimension has a direct positive impact on utilitarian motivation.

On the other hand, consumers with a high degree of uncertainty avoidance look for precise information about product quality and warrantee (Mooij and Hofstede, 2011). Consumers that live in cultures with a high degree of uncertainty avoidance tend to imitate other individuals’ actions, thus reducing the uncertainty of certain choices and actions (Allison, 2009). Impulsive consumption is related to the dimension of uncertainty, which directly impacts consumer behavior (Hofstede and Mooij, 2011). The authors explain that impulse buying, which is one characteristic of hedonic behavior as the consumers’ aimed pleasure, is seen more in nations that have an easier time dealing with uncertainty which conclude that:

H19.

The uncertainty avoidance dimension has a direct negative impact on hedonic motivation.

Utilitarian values arise in situations where consumers prioritize the opinion of society (Bearden et al., 1989). The search for avoiding the uncertainty generates in the consumer to search for rational aspects to purchase a product (Mooij and Hofstede, 2011) generated the:

H20.

The uncertainty avoidance dimension has a direct positive impact on utilitarian motivation.

In the dimension masculinity (Hofstede, 2011). Kyung-Sup (2014) evaluated individuals with different degrees of masculinity and found that utilitarian aspects are valued more in masculinity societies and hedonic values are valued more in femininity societies. However, the authors add that both utilitarian and hedonic values are essential for both societies. Utilitarian and hedonic values are important in societies with different degrees of masculinity (Hur et al., 2015) indicated the following hypotheses

H21.

The masculinity dimension has a direct positive impact on hedonic motivation.

H22.

The masculinity dimension has a direct positive impact on utilitarian motivation.

Regarding the long-term dimension, Hofstede (2011) explains that the relationship between individuals is highly valued in societies with long-term orientations. Such interaction is based on the economic and social status of the members. Due to the different impact of the long and short-term orientation dimensions, societies tend to become more hedonic or utilitarian (Sharma et al., 2010). Companies with a high degree of long-term orientation tend to be more utilitarian in their purchases. However, countries with a lower degree of long-term orientation are more hedonic (Sharma et al., 2010). We hypothesize that:

H23.

The long-term orientation dimension has a direct negative impact on hedonic motivation.

H24.

The long-term orientation dimension has a direct positive impact on utilitarian motivation

Such aspects occur because consumers of societies with long-term orientation can control their actions more rationally; consumers of cultures that are less focused on the long term, on the other hand, try to seek pleasure without worrying about maintaining rationality (Sharma et al., 2010).

2.3. Satisfaction as an influencer of hedonic and utilitarian motivations

In studies on consumer behavior, research highlights the influence of psychological aspects involved in consumption. Individuals analyze their achievements and failures according to the ideal situation established by them, and the result of this analysis generates a subjective perception of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with life. Purchasing motivations can be positive when a person seeks something more for their life and negative when individuals aim to leave a determined situation that causes disgust (Schiffman & Kanuk, 2000). Conclusions that follow other researchers point out that life satisfaction is linked to the moments that an individual goes through during their life, whether in childhood, adolescence, adulthood, or old age (Diener et al., 1999). The authors argue that happy moments can generate a feeling of satisfaction with life.

The satisfaction with the product was already pointed out in many marketing studies. Therefore, we have decided to go further when researching satisfaction with life, as an essential construct to explain the hedonic and utilitarian motivations. For example, there is a study that explains that materialism is related to life satisfaction which shows the relationship between consumption and satisfaction with life (A. M. Baker et al., 2013). In addition to this aspect, the purchase process also ends up being influenced by life satisfaction (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982). The authors state that the purchase stages involve the previous period, during and after consumption, and these stages are necessary for companies and governments when considering the development of economic and market strategies and policies because, for the authors, the experiences lived through consumption have a significant influence on the lives of individuals.

Factors that change the degree of satisfaction, such as depression, anxiety and euphoria, for example, will influence the search for satisfaction through materialism, since the level of satisfaction with life is a variable influenced by self-reward, by demographic factors, genetics, among others (Dhurup, 2014; Diener et al., 1985; Pavot & Diener, 2009). Based on these ideas, we develop the following hypothesis:

H25.

Satisfaction with life has a direct negative impact on hedonic motivation.

On the other hand, there is a negative relationship between materialism and life satisfaction, indicating that consumers are more rational in their purchases (A. M. Baker et al., 2013).). As materialism has a relationship with hedonic motivation, we raise the following hypothesis:

H26.

Satisfaction with Life has a direct positive impact on utilitarian motivation.

3. Conceptual model of analysis

Following the literature review conducted in the previous section, we have developed a conceptual model. This involves a set of relationships which aim, a priori, to point out a previous explanation of the phenomena (Hair et al., 2017). Based on the theoretical background, 26 hypotheses were developed. This number of hypotheses was due to the investigation’s complexity in terms of gathering and relating, in an unprecedented way, the constructs. To better understand the model, it was decided to present the hypothetical structural model with direct effects between the constructs (Figure 1). In the hypothetical structural model with direct effects between the constructs, 26 relationships and respective hypotheses are observed. The addition of satisfaction with life and cultural dimensions in the same model to understand hedonic and utilitarian motivation brings new insights for understanding consumer behavior. For example, Diener and Scollon (2014) and Frank and Enkawa (2009), argue that, despite the existence of a relationship between happiness, and life satisfaction, it is a field that has not yet been explored and has the potential for new research. For those authors, it is still not clear how satisfaction with life is related to consumption.

Figure 1. Hypothetical structural conceptual model.

4. Methodology

This research follows an exploratory and descriptive approach. It is exploratory because it presents in an unprecedented way the influence of satisfaction with life constructs, cultural dimensions, and hedonic and utilitarian motivations in supermarkets. Exploratory research aims to increase familiarity with relatively little-known phenomena (Sampieri et al., 2018). Also, it seeks information that will make it possible to carry out more complete investigations. On the other hand, this research takes on a descriptive nature because one of its purposes is to observe phenomena, trying to describe and interpret them (G. A. Churchill, 2018). The present investigation can also be considered descriptive because it presents and describes the variables according to a phenomenon: consumers’ behavior in supermarkets (Hair et al., 2010).

To apply the quantitative method, we used descriptive and multivariate statistics. The hypotheses and the respective analyses were carried out with descriptive statistics and exploratory data analysis, ending with the modeling of structural equations, which helps to answer the research problem to evaluate whether the factors presented in the models (Figure 1) influence hedonic and utilitarian motivations. Thus, it was decided to conduct a survey containing individuals from three countries: Brazil, South Korea and Portugal. It is important to emphasize that the cultural dimensions are independent, which makes it possible to study individuals from different countries as they will have similar consumption behavior depending on the influence of each cultural dimension on their motivations (Hofstede, 2011).

For elaborating the structured questionnaire, we chose variables that were presented and validated in other studies. It was possible to use already tested scales. We did the reverse translation, which makes the questionnaire more reliable and of better quality (Malhotra, 2006). After performing a pre-test and making the necessary adjustments, the structured questionnaire was made available online for respondents through e-mails with links directed by social media Facebook®. When accessing the link, the respondent received information about the purpose of the investigation and ethical conduct. The survey was conducted from 2018 to 2020. Most of the respondents were university students from Daejeon (South Korea), Juiz de Fora (Brazil) and Porto (Portugal).

The questionnaire consisted of three types of question groups. The first group was filter questions; these were: (1) people born before May 2000, (2) people who had bought something in a supermarket in the last 60 days, (3) people who have been residing in Brazil, Portugal, or in South Korea for more than ten years and (4) be of Brazilian, Portuguese or South Korean nationality. If the respondent did not answer yes to any filter question, the questionnaire automatically issued a thank-you note and closed the questions. The second group included seventy-three Likert scale seven point questions related to constructs (Pricing policy, Variety and quality of products, environment, Service and Support, Corporate social responsibility, Convenience, Hedonic Motivation, Utilitarian Motivation, Satisfaction with life, Indulgence, Collectivism, Power Distance, Avoid uncertainty, Masculinity, and Long-term orientation). The third group had four demographic questions (income, gender, education, among others).

The sampling technique was non-probabilistic per convenience, which, as a technique, seeks to “obtain a sample of convenient elements” (Malhotra, 2006, p. 326). Data collection was carried out based on a structured questionnaire, of the transversal survey type, using the Survey Monkey® software, and for data treatment, the SPSS® software (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) for Windows 17 and the Microsoft Excel® 2007, this software being specific for performing statistics. Finally, SmartPLS® 3.0 was used to calculate structural equation models (Hair et al., 2010).

5. Data analysis

The final sample consisted of 1009 respondents, 332 Brazilians, 345 Portuguese and 332 South Koreans. It was found that 56% are female and 44% male. Regarding the interviewees’ level of education, 38% have taken or are taking an undergraduate degree, and 42% have a master’s degree. Almost 50% of respondents receive between 1 and 6 minimum wages. The female gender also has a lower family income than the male gender.

Regarding the study, the validity of the constructs was performed, starting with the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) to verify their unidimensionality. Then, it followed for convergent and discriminant validity, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Structural Equation Model (Hair et al., 2009). Thus, an individual EFA was carried out for each of the research constructs. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measurements and Bartlett’s Sphericity Test (BST) were performed for all constructs for the final EFA. All KMOs are greater than 0.500 and BSTs were significant (Table 1).

Table 1. Commonality of variables for all constructs and samples

Construct	Variables	Results
Q05-Pricing policy	5.1 the prices are low compared to the major competitors.	0,722
	5.2 the price-quality relationship is very good.	0,538
	5.3 the prices are very good.	0,785
	5.4 the supermarket also sells products in the lower price range.	0,559
	5.6 the supermarket frequently offers products on sale.	0,598
Q06-Variety and quality of products	6.2 of the wide range of brand availability.	0,691
	6.3 of the different types of new products available.	0,842
	6.5 new products are always sold in this supermarket	0,720
Q07-Environment	7.1 the interior design and décor of the supermarket.	0,614
	7.2 the cleanliness and efficient ventilation system of the supermarket.	0,697
	7.3 the display and excellent presentation of the products.	0,756
Q08-Service and Support	8.1 overall quality of services provided by personnel that the customer interacts with.	0,754
	8.2 quality of services provided by cashiers and baggers.	0,786
	8.3 quality of services provided by the customer service desk.	0,776
	8.4 quality of services provided by the supermarket manager.	0,695
	8.5 friendly and responsive service by the supermarket.	0,768
Q09-Corporate social responsibility	9.1 is committed to improving the welfare of the communities in which it operates.	0,770
	9.2 is very concerned with environmental protection.	0,921
	9.3 seems to be responsible towards the environment.	0,924
	9.4 is careful to protect the environment.	0,925
	9.5 is willing to abdicate part of its profit to ensure a clean environment.	0,814
Q10-Convenience	10.1 the ease at which merchandise can be found in the store.	0,881
	10.2 the ease of movement there.	0,881
Q11-Hedonic Motivation	11.1 Shopping is truly a joy.	0,662
	11.2 Compared to other things the time spend shopping is truly enjoyable.	0,774
	11.3 Shopping truly feels like an escape.	0,785
	11.4 I enjoy shopping for its own sake, not just for the items I may purchase.	0,769
	11.5 I continue to shop, not only because I have to, but also because I want to.	0,668
	11.6 While shopping, I am able to forget my problems.	0,659
	11.7 When shopping, I feel a sense of adventure.	0,589
Q12- Utilitarian Motivation	12.1 While shopping, I usually accomplish just what I want to.	0,770
	12.2. I usually go shopping to buy what I need.	0,776
Q13-Satisfaction with life	13.1 In most ways my life is close to my ideal.	0,707
	13.2 The conditions of my life are excellent.	0,571
	13.3 I am satisfied with my life.	0,767
	13.4 So far I have gotten the important things I want in life.	0,637
	13.5 If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing.	0,536
Q14-Indulgence	14.1 People should be happy in everyday life.	0,608
	14.2 People should have fun.	0,724
	14.3 People should have freedom of Speech.	0,447
Q15-Collectivism	15.1 Individuals should sacrifice self-interest for the group.	0,620
	15.2 Individuals should stick with the group even through difficulties.	0,594
	15.3 Group welfare is more important than individual rewards.	0,796
	15.4 Group success is more important than individual success.	0,779
	15.5 Individuals should only pursue their goals after considering the welfare of the group.	0,673
	15.6 Group loyalty should be encouraged even if individual goals suffer.	0,654
Q16-Power Distance	16.1 People in higher positions should make most decisions without consulting people in lower positions.	0,551
	16.2 People in higher positions should not ask the opinions of people in lower positions too frequently.	0,689
	16.3 People in higher positions should avoid social interaction with people in lower positions.	0,655
	16.4 People in lower positions should not disagree with decisions by people in higher positions.	0,584
	16.5 People in higher positions should not delegate important tasks to people in lower positions.	0,538
Q17-Avoid uncertainty	17.1 It is important to have instructions spelled out in detail so that I always know what I’m expected to do.	0,581
	17.2 It is important to closely follow instructions and procedures.	0,673
	17.3 Rules and regulations are important because they inform me of what is expected of me.	0,756
	17.4 Standardized work procedures are helpful.	0,616
	17.5 Instructions for operations are important.	0,702
Q18-Masculinity	18.1 Men usually solve problems with logical analysis; women usually solve problems with intuition.	0,624
	18.2 There are some jobs that a man can always do better than a woman.	0,546
	18.3 It is more important for men to have a professional career than it is for women.	0,618
	18.4 Men usually solve problems with logical analysis; women usually solve problems with intuition.	0,723
Q19-Long-term orientation	19.1 Careful management of money (Thrift).	0,576
	19.2 Going on resolutely in spite of opposition (Persistence).	0,583
	19.3 Personal steadiness and stability.	0,660
	19.4 Long-term planning.	0,531

Regarding the factorial load of the variables, all of them presented results superior to 0.400. After carrying out an exploratory analysis of the database and verifying the constructs’ unidimensionality, the Structural Equations Method (SEM) was used to test the hypotheses. We opted for the use of Partial Least Square—partial least squares - (PLS-SEM), since this technique presents itself as a robust method in the absence of normality (Fornell & Bookstein, 1982; Haenlein and Kaplan, 2004; Henseler et al., 2009).

Significance is tested through bootstrapping, as used in convergent validation of variables. Standardized loads vary from −1 to 1, closer to one of the extremes, the more significant the impact is (Henseler et al., 2009).

To verify the explanatory power of an exogenous variable, f² is used. Values of 0.02, 0.15 and 0.35 are considered, respectively, as a small, moderate or large effect (Hair et al., 2011).

To verify the predictive power of the model, R² must be checked at first. This measure ranges from 0% to 100%, and the closer to 100%, the better the model’s explanatory power. In academic research in the marketing area, an R² of 75%, 50% and 25% for the endogenous variable can be considered substantial, moderate or weak (Hair et al., 2011, 2017; Henseler et al., 2009). Based on the variables that were validated in the EFA, the measurement model was tested (Table 2).

Table 2. Result of the tested hypotheses about the direct relations between the exogenous and endogenous constructs

Tested relationships	Model
	Weight	f^2
R^2 adjusted - Q11-Hedonic Motivation	16%
Q05-Pricing policy -> Q11	0,114**	0,01*
Q06-Variety and quality of products -> Q11	0,119**	0,01*
Q07-Environment -> Q11	0,113**	0,01
Q08-Service and Support -> Q11	0,158**	0,02*
Q09-Corporate social responsibility -> Q11	−0,026	0,00
Q10-Convenience -> Q11	−0,032	0,00
Q13-Satisfaction with life -> Q11	0,031	0,00
Q14-Indulgence -> Q11	−0,024	0,00
Q15-Collectivism -> Q11	−0,030	0,00
Q16-Power Distance -> Q11	0,200**	0,04**
Q17-Avoid uncertainty -> Q11	0,050	0,00
Q19-Long-term orientation -> Q11	-0,124**	0,01
R^2 adjusted - Q12- Utilitarian Motivation	12%
Q05-Pricing policy -> Q12	−0,002	0,00
Q06-Variety and quality of products -> Q12	-0,136**	0,02*
Q07-Environment-> Q12	−0,050	0,00
Q08-Service and Support -> Q12	−0,024	0,00
Q09-Corporate social responsibility -> Q12	0,095**	0,01
Q10-Convenience -> Q12	0,057	0,00
Q13-Satisfaction with life -> Q12	0,073*	0,01
Q14-Indulgence -> Q12	0,03	0,00
Q15-Collectivism -> Q12	0,049	0,00
Q16-Power Distance -> Q12	0,028	0,00
Q17-Avoid uncertainty -> Q12	0,176**	0,03*
Q19-Long-term orientation -> Q12	0,144**	0,02*

Note: *sig. a 5%; ** sig. a 1%.

Two indicators of the models’ predictive validity: the adjusted R2 and the Stone-Geisser Q² measure (Table 3). It is possible to observe through the adjusted R² that the Q11-Hedonic motivation was better explained than the Q12- Utilitarian motivation.

Table 3. Predictive validity of the model for the tested samples

Endogenous construct	Measure	Model
Q11-Hedonic Motivation	R^2 adjusted	16%
	Q^2	0,108
Q12- Utilitarian Motivation	R^2 adjusted	12%
	Q^2	0,080

The model results (Table 3). In Q11-Hedonic motivation, 16% of its variations are explained by the model’s exogenous constructs. The three constructs that presented significant impacts, but with non-significant effects or significantly less effects than 002 were: Q05-Price policy (weight 0,114** f² 0,01*), Q06-Variety and quality of products (weight 0,119** f² 0,01*), and Q07-Environment (weight 0,113** f² 0,01).

The constructs that had a significant impact and a significant effect, although small, were: Q08-Service and Support (weight 0,158** f² 0,02*) and Q16-Power distance (weight 0,200** f² 0,04**). In addition, the Q19-Orientation long term, had a significant and negative impact, as predicted by the hypothesis. The effect of this Q19 (weight −0,124** f² 0,01) in explaining hedonic motivation was not significant.

In the case of utilitarian motivation (Figure 2), 12% of its variations are explained by the model’s exogenous constructs. The construct Q06-Variety and the quality of the products (weight 0,136** f² 0,02*) had a negative significant impact, with small effect.

Figure 2. Model.

The two constructs that presented significant impacts, but with non-significant effects were: Q09-Corporate social responsibility (weight 0,095** f² 0,01) and Q13-Satisfaction with life (weight 0,073* f² 0,01). The two constructs that had a significant positive impact and a significant effect, although small, were: Q17-Uncertainty avoidance (weight 0,176** f² 0,03*) and Q19-Long-term orientation (weight 0,144** f² 0,02*).

6. Discussion of results

Based on the previous analysis, this section encompasses an in-depth discussion of the results. Evidence was found that the variety and quality of the products (H4) had an opposite effect than expected since it has a direct negative impact on the utility motivation in the model. This indicates that the consumers surveyed perceive the variety and quality of the products as something that can influence the planned purchase, causing individuals to waste time on their purchasing process in as much as rational purchase tends to be characterized by consumers’ objectivity, as literature suggests (cf. Zeithaml, 1988). J. Kim et al. (2002) add that consumers are likely to go through a decision conflict when the variety of products is high. Such an argument may indicate the direct negative impact of this variable on utilitarian motivation.

Another attribute of the supermarkets that showed to have influence in the utilitarian motivation is corporate social responsibility. The analysis confirmed that, according to H8, it affects consumers’ motivations showing that the participants of this study consider the actions taken by supermarkets to preserve the environment as positive since they tend to increase consumers’ well-being. This is in line with what Hanaysha (2018) has already predicted. On the other hand, the study showed that the consumers do not follow the perspective indicated by Okada (2005) who suggested that corporate social responsibility is an important action by companies to minimize their buyer’s feeling of guilt for spending too much money.

The other attributes of supermarkets had no impact on consumers’ utilitarian motivations in the model. It has been shown that such variables can vary the relationship depending on the sector (Babin et al., 1994). Price had not a significant impact on utilitarian motivation in this study. Furthermore, as suggested by other researchers (cf. Bardhi & Arnould, 2005), it affects utilitarian motivations as consumers can compare the price between products and choose the best option from their perspective.

Concerning cultural dimensions and utilitarian motivation, H20 was confirmed. This hypothesis predicted that uncertainty avoidance generates more utilitarian motivations in consumers (Hofstede and Mooij, 2004; Bearden et al., 1989; Teimourpour & Hanzaee, 2011). This may have occurred due to the individuals’ search for satisfactory experiences, which can also be supported by the rational aspects more linked to functional benefits, as Kotler and Keeler (2014) have suggested. Therefore, we can conclude that risk-averse societies tend to have a more utilitarian behavior, more focused on rational factors presented by retailers.

Another cultural dimension that had a significant impact on utilitarian motivation was long-term dimension (Hofstede, 2011; Sharma et al., 2010). H24 confirms that consumers in societies with long-term orientation tend to be more rational in their decisions. This may occur because such dimensions usually indicate that individuals are concerned about the future and tend to rationally plan their purchases (Hofstede, 2011, 2018).

Another confirmed hypothesis was H26. This predicted that satisfaction with life directly impacts utilitarian motivation which confirms that consumers more satisfied with their lives tend to be more utilitarian (A. M. Baker et al., 2013). This result is also in line with the conclusions of Diener et al. (1985) who point out that the degree of satisfaction with life tends to influence consumer behavior, putting in evidence the existence of a positive relationship between consumption and the life satisfaction variable. Therefore, the results of this study indicate that consumers with high satisfaction with life tend to be more rational in their decision looking for practice and functionality in the supermarket sector.

Regarding hedonic motivation, the hypotheses concerning supermarkets’ attributes were confirmed, as already suggested by the studies of Rosen (2002). This is contrary to rationalism and utilitarianism, or even planned purchase, as pointed out by Bardhi and Arnould (2005) who advocate the preferred economic purchase at the lowest price. However, our study showed that the price policy was more linked to the experience variable. This is justified when the consumers observe the prices in supermarket and feel smarter because they can choose the cheapest product.

Evidence was also found that the variety and quality of products (related to H3) positively impacted hedonic motivation (J. Kim et al., 2002; Soares et al., 2016). This may occur because the variety and quality of products impact hedonic motivation due to the excess of products in retail since consumers may enjoy their time choosing the best options of products offered in the supermarkets. Another reason can be the quality of products having more emotional connotations, such as goods from high reputation leading brands.

H5 indicates the positive relationship between the environment and hedonic motivation (Diamond & Diamond, 1999; Parente, 2009). This shows that the shop layout and decoration influence consumers’ hedonism, which is likely to induce them to spend more time inside the supermarkets which may lead them to buy products that they had not planned. Furthermore, H7, related to service and assistance, confirms its relationship with hedonic motivation (Andrade et al., 2007). It shows that consumers’ experience of using an excellent service before, during or after buying triggers an emotional connection with the supermarket, as suggested in the literature (cf. Kotler & Keeler, 2014).

Regarding cultural dimensions and hedonic motivation (H23), it is confirmed that societies more focused on long-term tend to be less hedonic, as Sharma et al. (2010) had also suggested. The negative effect of the long-term dimension on hedonic motivation can be explained by Mooij (2015) who mentions that the consumption of non-essential goods can be considered waste in such societies. It is also important to mention that the power distance (H17) impacted hedonic motivation, but with the opposite effect that was indicated in the initial model. This can happen due to the high valuation of the brand and symbols in this type of society, making individuals have hedonic motivations in their purchases (cf. Youngseon & Yinlong, 2014). A factor that confirms the arguments of Mooij and Hofstede (2011) explains that this dimension affects the behavior of consumers. Youngseon and Yinlong (2014) explain that in societies with a high degree of power distance, products that promote status are highly valued because they put in evidence the individual status, a characteristic of hedonistic consumption.

Another important point is that the positive relationship between satisfaction with life and hedonic motivation (concerning H25) was not accepted as was proposed in this study. This may happen due to the unit of research: supermarkets. In this context, consumers may not expect any hedonic experiences in the supermarkets due to their product mix. This confirms the theory of Babin et al. (1994) who explain that the degree of hedonism tends to vary due to the products.

It is vital to mention that the supermarket environment generates low interaction with consumers, inhibiting the perception of consumption experiences in this sector. Frey and Stutzer (2002) argue that consumption is only essential to the individual when it brings happiness. Therefore, the results of this study indicate that consumers with high satisfaction with life tend to be more rational in their decision, looking for usefulness and functionality in supermarkets.

Finally, it is essential to highlight that the study suggests that collectivism and indulgence do not significantly impact the consumer’s motivation in the supermarket, as it was expected. These results may happen since the consumption in the sector analyzed can be a simple act of transaction in the consumer perception as suggested by Ryu et al. (2010). This perception is likely to disassociate these dimensions as well as hedonic and utilitarian motivations.

7. Conclusions

This research puts in evidence the influence of culture and satisfaction with life in hedonic and utilitarian motivations in the consumer choices in the supermarket sector. Evidence was found of a significant relationship between three cultural dimensions (Power distance, Uncertainty avoidance and Long-term orientation) and motivations. In addition, the study confirms the existence of a important relationship between satisfaction with life and utilitarian motivation.

Regarding the attributes of supermarkets, it was found that only one of the six supermarket attributes does not have a significant association with motivation (convenience). The research reveals that the other five attributes have a substantial relationship with motivation as suggested by previous studies.

In this context, our study has important implications, both theoretical and managerial as we stress in the following paragraphs.

7.1. Conceptual contributions

We would like to stress three important conceptual contributions of our research. The first is the Theory of Consumer Behavior. The introduction of the six cultural dimensions of Hofstede along with the satisfaction with life to explain the hedonic and utilitarian motivations is quite innovative since there is no previous research focusing on the connection between such constructs. Significant relationships were found between cultural dimensions and hedonic and utilitarian motivations. As made clear before, three dimensions are likely to be essential to explain the rational and/or emotional consumer motivations.

The second key theoretical contribution stems from the fact that it has been concluded that satisfaction with life impacts utilitarian motivation in the domain of consumer behavior in supermarkets, since no studies exist relating to satisfaction with life and utilitarian motivation. Being well with life and having more pleasure with what life offers tends to awaken more rational and utilitarian behavior in supermarket shopping.

Thirdly, regarding supermarkets’ attributes, service and assistance have a significant impact on hedonic motivation, indicating that consumers motivated by pleasure tend to value the support received by their supermarket. Moreover, a great variety of products can generate dissatisfaction among the most rational consumers. It is also important to note that except for convenience, the other five attributes tend to have a positive impact on at least one of the motivations.

7.2. Managerial contributions

Side by side with the conceptual contributions, the study has significant contributions to managers and practitioners. These now have more useful tools to support them in terms of the analysis, planning and implementation of strategies in the areas of marketing and sales of supermarkets.

Firstly, managers can assess the degree of influence of the three dimensions that have a substantial impact on consuming motivations to adjust their attributes according to the characteristics of their consumers. Also, concerning how to adapt management to the level of society satisfaction with life it is recommended that supermarket managers analyze the degree of life satisfaction of their existing and potential clients to appropriately explore utilitarian motivations. In fact, people more satisfied with their life tend to value the utilitarian attributes of supermarkets more, such as the social responsibility of the brand. Secondly, this investigation suggests that managers should pay a special attention to price, which proved to be more of an aspect of a hedonic impact than a utilitarian.

In the markets characterized by a strong long-term cultural dimension, managers must be aware of its positive impact on utilitarian motivation. This means that purchasing behavior tends to be more rational in the countries where society is more concerned about the future. Therefore, in these contexts, marketing strategies must promote the functional benefits of the supermarkets with clear information about their products as well as to provide within supermarkets an easy access to departments and sections, guiding consumers with maps and information to facilitate their choices.

7.3. Limitations and suggestions for future research

One of the limitations of this investigation is that it is not based on probabilistic methodological approach. Another limitation results from the fact that it is a transversal study, not a longitudinal one, which raises some constraints regarding the applicability of some conclusions. Another limitation of the study refers to the place of investigation: the supermarket.

In terms of further research, it is necessary to deepen the understanding of the relationship between satisfaction with life, cultural dimensions and hedonic and utilitarian motivation. In this way, we encourage future investigation of these issues through the application of a survey including other retailing contexts. This can be done with more accurate terms of segmenting the respondents, either by age or income.

Correction

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the Woosong University Research Funding 2023.

Notes on contributors

Rodrigo Ribeiro Coimbra

Rodrigo Ribeiro Coimbra He was a professor in Portugal and Brazil. He was Director of marketing at Rampa Marketing and Plugged Marketing in Brazil. Professor at Woosong University: Endicott College of International Studies and SolBridge International School of Business South Korea. He was visiting professor in Tongling University - China. In addition, he was a professor in Portugal and Brazil. He was Director of Marketing at Rampa Marketing and Advertising and Plugged Marketing and Advertising in Brazil. He also provided consulting in Marketing in Portugal and England. Ph.D. at the University of Porto. He has a Master's degree in Marketing, Executive MBA in business management, Specialization in Globalization, Media, and Citizenship.

Carlos Melo Brito

Carlos Melo Brito He has a long career as professor of marketing, mainly at the School of Economics and Porto Business School of the University of Porto. He is also president of the Port Wine Observatory, president of the Portuguese Management Association and member of the board of directors of APCER Brazil. From 2011 to 2018 he served the University of Porto as pro-rector for Innovation and Entrepreneurship and was board member of UPTEC - Science and Technology Park of U.Porto. From 2019 to 2021 he was vice-rector for Research and Internationalization at the University Portucalense (Portugal). His main research interests are related to relationship marketing, branding, innovation and entrepreneurship.

Danilo de Oliveira Sampaio

Danilo de Oliveira Sampaio Brazil where he is the director for MBA in Sales and Business. He has a long career as a professor of marketing and sustainable development. He is also coordinator and leader of the DESCOR research group, which has research projects related to sustainable consumption behavior. He has a post-doctorate in Marketing from the University of Porto, Portugal, and a doctorate from the Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. He was department head and general research coordinator at the Federal University of Juiz de Fora, between 2013 and 2016. His main research interests are related to marketing and consumer behavior, sustainable development and social entrepreneurship.