Teens' Mall Shopping Motivations
Teens' Mall Shopping Motivations
Teens' Mall Shopping Motivations
177/1077727X03258701
FAMILY
Kim
et al.AND
/ TEENS
CONSUMER
MALL SHOPPING
SCIENCESMOTIV
RESEARCH
ATIONS
JOURNAL
ARTICLE
The shopping mall can serve as a venue through which teens can fulfill their needs by socializing
with friends, enjoying entertainment, or simply visiting the site. This study tested whether and
how mall shopping motivations were related to loneliness and media usage among teen consumers. Data were collected via a mall intercept survey from 531 teens in four large shopping malls
in the United States. Findings indicated that mall shopping motivations consisted of five dimensions: service motivation, economic motivation, diversion motivation, eating-out motivation,
and social motivation. Results suggest directions for marketers and educators to follow in establishing positive programs to provide social support for teens.
Keywords:
Authors Note: This project was funded by the International Council of Shopping Centers Educational Foundation.
Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, Vol. 32, No. 2, December 2003 140-167
2003 American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences
140
141
142
fulfill their unique needs seems to be a shopping mall where they can
socialize with friends, enjoy entertainment, or solve their loneliness
or other psychological stresses (Bloch et al., 1994; Omelia, 1998).
Given the role the mall plays in meeting teens multiple needs, it
seems critical that educators and marketers understand why and how
teens exhibit certain consumption behavior in malls. As the first step,
this study examined how teens vary in the motivations that bring
them to the mall. Next, it assessed how teens various mall shopping
motivations are associated with their level of loneliness and media
usage, which entailed using the structural model to investigate the
causal relationships among these three variables. This study provides
useful information for educators to incorporate teens mall shopping
motivations into their educational programs. Retailers who develop
strategies based on teens special needs for shopping will create a
strong relationship with this younger group providing long-term
results.
RESEARCH BACKGROUND
Mall Shopping Motivations
143
(1977) identified two mall shopping groups based on shopping orientations. Recreational shoppers enjoy shopping as a leisure-time activity. Convenience or economic shoppers approach mall shopping from
a time- or money-saving point of view. In Roys (1994) study, mall
shopping motivation consisted of three dimensions: functional economic motivation, deal proneness, and recreational shopping motivation. They found that deal-proneness motivation was negatively
correlated with visit frequency, which implies that price-sensitive
consumers might wait for special sales before mall visits and thus
may become relatively infrequent patrons of shopping malls. On the
other hand, the degree of recreational shopping motivation was positively correlated with visit frequency, suggesting that people who
want to satisfy the needs for affiliation, power, and stimulation visit
malls relatively often.
Bloch et al. (1994) identified distinct patterns of the mall habitat.
The six patterns captured were
mall enthusiasts, engaging in a wide range of behaviors that include a
high level of purchasing, enjoyment of the mall aesthetics (e.g., physical
design, appearance), and experiential consumption
escape, representing sensory stimulation, a relief from boredom, and an
escape from routine
exploration, tapping consumers desires for variety or novelty and
enjoyment of exploring new products or stores while in the mall
flow, reflecting a pleasurable absorption that is associated with losing
track of time
knowledge or epistemic, referring to obtaining information about new
stores and new products
social affiliation, addressing the enjoyment of communicating and
socializing with others
Kang et al. (1996) identified six motivation factors of mall shoppers: aesthetic ambience, economic incentives, diversion/browsing,
social experience, convenient service availability, and consumption
of meal/snack. These researchers found that mall shopping motivations vary significantly according to age group. The teen consumer
group, compared to the other age groups (ages 20 to 49 and 50 and
older), had stronger diversion/browsing and social experience
shopping motivations.
Early research into teens concentrated on understanding the role of
consumer socialization agents, such as family, peer, and media in consumer behavior (Moore & Schultz, 1983; Moschis & Churchill, 1979;
144
Moschis & Moore, 1979). Subsequent research combined these variables with shopping orientations (Shim & Gehrt, 1996), clothing or
brand choice (Taylor & Cosenza, 2002; Wilson & MacGillivray, 1998),
and shopping experience as entertainment (Baker & Haytko, 2000).
Nevertheless, related literature reveals that except for Kang et al.
(1996), a lack of empirical research is focused on teen consumer
behavior as it relates to mall shopping motivation. Limited studies
reported that, compared to adult consumers, teen consumers are
more likely to be motivated to shop for the hedonic needs of diversion, enjoying the crowds, and entertainment, such as enjoying the
food court or interior of malls, than for utilitarian needs (Cebrzynski,
1999; The Survey Says: Teen-agers Want to Shop til They Drop,
1994). Lack of research focus on this population group, combined
with their number and purchasing power, underscores the need to
understand how teens mall shopping motivation relates to their
needs in retail environments.
Loneliness and Mall Shopping Motivations
145
individuals who do not have friends may not feel lonely or that those
individuals who have friends can be lonely. The subjective experience
of loneliness is supported by McWhirters (1997) study that through
factor analysis of the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale, two distinct
types of loneliness were revealed: intimate loneliness and social
loneliness.
As a strategy to cope with and solve their feelings of loneliness,
teens make an effort to find more satisfying friendships and social
contacts. However, these efforts may result in sensually oriented solutions, such as drinking or taking drugs, or diversionary activities,
such as keeping busy, working, or reading. Shopping malls can function as a positive venue for teens to alleviate their loneliness via multiple means such as socializing, browsing, entertaining, or simply buying what they want. Bloch et al. (1991) noted that shopping malls are
also hospitable to people who are alone by providing social contacts
(p. 446).
Literature has provided much evidence to support the role of a
retail setting as an outlet for social stimulation and support for certain
individuals. Stone (1954) identified four types of women shoppers:
economic shoppers, personalizing shoppers, ethical shoppers, and
apathetic shoppers. Among these four groups, personalizing shoppers form strong personal attachments to store employees as a substitute for social contact. According to Tauber (1972), shopping can meet
social motives (e.g., social experiences outside the home, communication with others having a similar interest, status and authority, and
the pleasure of bargaining) as well as personal motives (e.g., diversion, browsing, self-gratification, learning about new trends). Tauber
argued that an individual may visit a retailer in search of diversion or
social contact when he or she feels bored, lonely, or depressed.
Rubenstein and Shaver (1980) posed the research question, When
you feel lonely, what do you usually do about it? Results yielded
four factors including going shopping, social contact (e.g., calling or
visiting a family and friend), sad passivity (e.g., doing nothing, sleeping, thinking), and active solitude (e.g., writing, exercising, working
on a hobby). Finding two separate factors of going shopping and
social contact suggests that going to a store or mall may represent a
means to fill a social void apart from the more intimate social contacts
that may or may not be available. Forman and Sriram (1991) suggested a negative attitude toward depersonalized retailing (e.g., selfservice stores) existed among lonely consumers. It is contended that
146
147
newspaper) can be another activity that teens may use to reduce their
level of loneliness. Although no study examined teens loneliness in
relation to media usage, it can be speculated that teens who feel lonely
engage in heavier use of media. Thus, the following hypothesis is
posed:
Hypothesis 2: Teens intimate loneliness and social loneliness will increase
their media usage.
Media Usage and Mall Shopping Motivations
148
149
METHOD
Measures
Measures consisted of three main constructs: shopping motivations, media usage, and loneliness. Revision of the initially developed
questionnaire was based on a pretest of a small convenience sample
(n = 20). Inputs from the respondents led to several minor revisions in
the final questionnaires wording, instructions, or formats.
Shopping motivations. Initially, a list of 16 items of shopping motivations was drawn from the literature encompassing utilitarian aspects
as well as hedonic aspects of mall shopping (Bellenger et al., 1977;
Bloch et al., 1994; Kang et al., 1996; Roy, 1994; Tauber, 1972). Examples
of shopping motivation items included to hunt for a real bargain
and to simply enjoy the crowds. These shopping motivation items
were measured on a 7-point rating scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 =
strongly agree).
Media usage. Four media usages (e.g., watching television, listening
to radio, reading newspaper, and reading magazine) were measured.
Respondents were asked how often they engage in these activities on
a 7-point rating scale (1 = never, 7 = always).
Loneliness. The measure of loneliness was derived from the Revised
UCLA Loneliness Scale (Russell et al., 1980), a scale shown to have
high internal consistency. The scale consisted of 11 items, which
assessed an individuals self-perceived loneliness. The items were
composed of intimate loneliness such as I feel isolated from others
and No one really knows me well and social loneliness such as
There are people who really understand me and There are people I
can talk to. The items of social loneliness were reverse coded before
scoring to reflect the concept of loneliness.
Sampling and Data Collection
150
151
152
Factor Items
Factor
Loading ( ij)
Service motivation
to visit medical/dental/vision
care offices
to use banking services
to look at the interior design
of malls
Economic motivation
to find good prices
to hunt for a real bargain
to comparison shop to find
the best for my money
Diversion motivation
just so that I can get out of
the house
when Im bored
just to browse
Eating-out motivation
when I want to get a snack
to have a meal at the food court
Social motivation
to watch people
to simply enjoy the crowds
Goodness of Fit Statistics
2
= 89.47 (df = 54,
p = .0017)
GFI = 0.97
AGFI = 0.96
RMSEA = 0.036
t Value
Reliability
0.73
0.75
0.72
14.51
15.06
0.71
13.56
17.26
14.47
0.68
14.63
0.71
0.69
0.69
0.63
14.15
14.10
12.94
0.76
0.65
14.51
12.96
0.71
0.63
12.08
11.27
2.57
2.51 (1.99)
2.61 (1.88)
0.76
0.80
0.67
M (SD)
0.66
0.62
2.70 (1.87)
5.09
5.14 (1.77)
5.20 (1.88)
4.93 (1.77)
4.79
4.90 (1.96)
4.64 (1.97)
4.82 (1.84)
3.44
3.18 (1.96)
3.70 (1.86)
3.65
3.60 (2.17)
3.70 (2.07)
NOTE: GFI = goodness of fit index; AGFI = adjusted goodness of fit index; RMSEA = root
mean square error of approximation.
The third factor, diversion motivation, contained three items characterized by nonpurchase shopping activities: just so that I can get out
of the house, when I am bored, and just to browse. This factor received
the second highest shopping motivation mean score (M = 4.79). The
importance of diversion as a shopping motivation is consistent with
previous findings concerning why people shop in general (Bloch
et al., 1994; Kang et al., 1996; Tauber, 1972).
The fourth factor, eating-out motivation, included such motivations as to get a snack and to have a meal at the food court and resulted
153
154
Standardized
Coefficients ( ij)
t Value
Reliability
0.80
0.82
0.77
0.68
19.88
18.34
15.95
0.88
0.82
0.77
23.65
21.67
19.94
0.85
0.86
20.88
21.00
0.83
0.82
19.42
14.70
0.68
0.77
0.63
14.70
16.44
13.65
0.83
0.65
0.67
17.78
14.33
14.70
0.87
0.85
0.81
0.73
0.76
M (SD)
3.13 (1.62)
2.81 (1.84)
3.24 (1.95)
3.31 (1.99)
2.87 (1.62)
2.87 (1.82)
2.88 (1.77)
2.86 (1.87)
5.41(1.54)
5.35(1.68)
5.47(1.63)
4.98(1.63)
4.84(1.84)
5.11(1.71)
2.57 (1.70)
2.51 (1.99)
2.61 (1.88)
2.70 (1.87)
5.09 (1.48)
5.13 (1.77)
5.20 (1.88)
4.93 (1.77)
0.71
0.69
0.70
0.63
14.15
14.34
13.14
0.75
0.67
10.81
11.18
0.54
0.83
8.27
7.85
0.66
0.62
4.79 (1.53)
4.90 (1.96)
4.64 (1.96)
4.82 (1.84)
3.44 (1.65)
3.18 (1.96)
3.70 (1.86)
3.65 (1.81)
3.70 (2.07)
3.60 (2.17)
155
156
157
158
Loneliness
Media Usage
Service
Motivation
(3)
31= .42***
Intimate
Loneliness
(1)
Audiovisual
Media
(1)
21= .62***
12 = -.17**
22 = -.16**
Social
Loneliness
(2)
31 = -.26***
61 = .18*
41 = .15*
Eating-out
Motivation
(6)
62 = -.24**
51 = .18*
32 = .21**
Printed
Media
(2)
63 = .67***
Economic
Motivation
(4)
Diversion
Motivation
(5)
42 = -.19***
75 = .35***
52 = -.17**
71= .17**
Social
Motivation
(7)
et al., 1994; Roy, 1994). Thus, finally, the path (75) from diversion
motivation (5) to social motivation (7) was added in the model. The
fit of Model D in Table 3 provided a decreased 2 value of 414.55 (df =
202, p < .001) and a decreased bic statistic of 134.89. The difference
between Model C and D was significant (2C-D = 32.15, df = 1, p < .001),
which implies that the final modified Model D was acceptable. In
addition, other indexes were within ranges for accepting the model
(GFI = 0.94; AGFI = 0.91), which exceeded the 0.90 standard for model
fit (Kelley, Longfellow, & Malehorn, 1996). The RMSEA was also
159
Model
A. Proposed model
B. Model A + 21
C. Model B + 63
D. Model C + 75
df
706.85*
537.77*
446.70*
414.55*
205
204
203
202
Bic
149.25
17.11
105.46
134.89
GFI
AGFI
RMSEA
0.90
0.92
0.93
0.94
0.86
0.89
0.91
0.91
0.068
0.056
0.048
0.045
NOTE: Bic = statistics based on Bayesian theory for posteriori tests; GFI = goodness of
fit index; AGFI = adjusted goodness of fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of
approximation.
*p < .001
160
were less likely to visit the mall for searching for good prices, hunting
for bargains, and comparison shopping. This finding somewhat supports the literature that teen consumers who had many friends
tended to be well informed and sophisticated because their friends or
peers were primary sources of shopping information or knowledge
(Lewis et al., 1995; Moschis & Moore, 1979). The finding that socially
lonely teens who feel a lack of social networks were less likely to shop
for diversion reflects Hirschmans (1984) argument that a person who
feels socially isolated participates in forbidden forms of consumption
to meet his or her sensory desires (e.g., uninhibited parties, drug and
alcohol experimentation).
Conclusively, for teens, the two dimensions of loneliness
intimate loneliness and social lonelinessplay important roles as
antecedents of different mall shopping motivations. The effects of
intimate loneliness and social loneliness on mall shopping motivations were opposite in direction, that is, positive and negative,
respectively.
Hypothesis 2. With respect to the relationship between loneliness
and media usage, intimate loneliness was not significantly related to
media usage, whereas social loneliness was significantly related to
media usage. Teens who feel isolated from others may not benefit
from media usage as an effective venue to alleviate their loneliness. To
the contrary, social loneliness negatively influenced both types of
media usage: audiovisual media (12 = .17, p < .01) and printed media
(22 = .16, p < .01). As teens feel more socially isolated, media uses
(i.e., television, radio, magazine, and newspaper) decrease. It may be
that socially isolated teens use the Internet for social stimulation via
interactive Web sites, such as chat rooms or e-mail (Ferle et al., 2000;
Fetto, 2002). Therefore, Hypothesis 2, stating that teens selfperceived loneliness will increase media usage, is not supported.
Hypothesis 3. Media usage is significantly related to four shopping
motivations: service motivation, economic motivation, diversion
motivation, and eating-out motivation. More specifically, audiovisual media usage resulted in a negative effect on service motivation
(31 = .26, p < .001); however, it had positive effects on economic motivation (41 = 0.15, p < .05), diversion motivation (51 = 0.18, p < .05), and
eating-out motivation (61 = 0.18, p < .05). The positive effects of
audiovisual media on economic motivation and eating-out motivation suggest that as teen exposure to television and radio commercials
161
162
163
164
REFERENCES
Anderson, C. (2000). Survey: The young: Youth, Inc. The Economist, 357(8202), S9-S10.
Arnett, J. J. (1995). Adolescents uses of media for self-socialization. Journal of Youth &
Adolescence, 24(5), 519-533.
Arnett, J. J., Larson, R., & Offer, D. (1995). Beyond effects: Adolescents as active media
users. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 24(5), 511-518.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1989). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94.
Baker, J., & Haytko, D. (2000). The mall as entertainment: Exploring teen girls total
shopping experiences. Journal of Shopping Center Research, 7(1), 29-58.
Barbin, B., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic
and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 644-656.
Bellenger, D. N., & Korgaonkar, P. K. (1980). Profiling the recreational shopper. Journal of
Retailing, 56(3), 77-92.
Bellenger, D. N., Robertson, D. H., & Greenberg, B. A. (1977). Shopping center patronage motives. Journal of Retailing, 53(2), 29-38.
Berndt, T. J., & Das, R. (1987). Effects of popularity and friendship on perceptions of the
personality and social behavior of peers. Journal of Early Adolescence, 7, 429-439.
Bloch, P., Ridgway, N. M., & Dawson, S. A. (1994). The shopping mall as consumer habitat. Journal of Retailing, 70(1), 23-42.
Bloch, P., Ridgway, N., & Nelson, J. (1991). Leisure and the shopping mall. Advances in
Consumer Research, 18(1), 445-452.
Brennan, T., & Auslander, N. (1979). Adolescent loneliness: An exploratory study of social
and psychological pre-dispositions and theory. Unpublished manuscript. Boulder, CO:
Behavioral Research Institute.
Carlson, L., Walsh, A., Laczniak, R. L., & Grossbart, S. (1994). Family communication
patterns and marketplace motivations, attitudes, and behaviors of children and
mothers. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 28(1), 25-53.
Cebrzynski, G. (1999, March 8). Restaurants may want to get wired to reach Generation
Y youths. Nations Restaurant News, 33(10), 14.
Chatzky, J. (2002, June 17). A guide for silver spoon parents. Time, 159(24), 82.
Churchill, G. A. Jr., & Moschis, G. P. (1979). Television and interpersonal influences on
adolescent consumer learning. Journal of Consumer Research, 6(1), 23-35.
Cuneo, A. Z. (2000). Malls move to capture sales lost to the Net. Advertising Age, 71(32),
38-46.
Darley, W. K. (1999). The relationship of antecedents of search and self-esteem to adolescent search effort and perceived product knowledge. Psychology & Marketing,
16(5), 409-427.
Ebenkamp, B. (2000, February 28). Teen-Y shoppers. Bandweek, 41(9), 28.
Eronen, S., & Nurmi, J. E. (2001). Sociometric status of young adults: Behavioral correlates, and cognitive-motivational antecedents and consequences. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25(3), 203-213.
Ferle, C. L., Edwards, S. M., & Lee, W. (2000). Teens use of traditional media and the
Internet. Journal of Advertising Research, 40(3), 55-65.
Fetto, J. (2002). Teen chatter. American Demographics, 24(4), 14.
Forman, A. M., & Sriram, V. (1991). The depersonalization of retailing: Its impact on the
lonely consumer. Journal of Retailing, 67(2), 226-243.
165
Freeman, L. (1999, April 28). Teen-agers turn heartthrobs for eager publishers. Advertising Age, 70(18), S8.
Goff, L. (1999). Dont miss the bus! American Demographics, 21(8), 48-54.
Graham, E. (1988, May 13). The call of the mall. The Wall Street Journal, p. 7R.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis
(4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hauser, R. M., & Wong, S. (1989). Sibling resemblance and intersibling effects in educational attainment. Sociology of Education, 62(3), 149-171.
Hauser, S. T., & Bowlds, M. K. (1990). Stress, coping, and adaptation. In S. S. Feldman &
G. R. Elliott (Eds.), At the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 388-413). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hirschman, E. C. (1984). Experience seeking: A subjectivist perspective of consumption. Journal of Business Research, 12(1), 115-136.
Huston, A. C., & Alvarez, M. M. (1990). The socialization context of gender role development in early adolescence. In R. Montemayor, G. Adams, & T. Gullotta (Eds.),
From childhood to adolescence: A transitional period? (pp. 156-182). Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Jreskog, K. G., & Srbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7: A guide to the program and applications
(2nd ed.). Chicago: JRESKOG and SRBOM/SPSS Inc.
Jreskog, K. G., & Srbom, D. (1993). Windows LISREL 8.12a. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
Kang, J., Kim, Y., & Tuan, W. (1996). Motivational factors of mall shoppers: Effects of ethnicity and age. Journal of Shopping Center Research, 3(1), 7-31.
Kelly, S. W., Longfellow, T., & Malehorn, J. (1996). Organizational determinants of service employees exercise of routine, creative, and deviant discretion. Journal of
Retailing, 72(2), 135-157.
Kim, Y., & Kang, J. (1997). Consumer perception of shopping costs and its relationship
with retail trends. Journal of Shopping Center Research, 4(2), 27-62.
Kostelecky, K. L., & Lempers, J. D. (1998). Stress, family social support, distress, and
well-being in high school seniors. Family & Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 27(2),
125-145.
Kurdek, L. (1987). Gender differences in the psychological symptomatology and coping strategies of young adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 7, 395-410.
Lee, S., Lennon, S., & Rudd, N. (2000). Compulsive consumption tendencies among
television shoppers. Family & Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 28(4), 463-488.
Lewis, M., Dyer, C. L., & Moran, J. D. (1995). Parental and peer influences on the clothing purchases of female adolescent consumers as a function of discretionary
income. Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences, 87, 15-20.
Marcoen, A., & Goossens, L. (1993). Loneliness, attitudes aloneness, and solitude: Age
differences and developmental significance during adolescence. In S. Jackson &
H. Rodriguez-Tome (Eds.), Adolescence and its social worlds (pp. 197-228). New York:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
McCord, J. (1990). Problem behaviors. In S. S. Feldman & G. R. Elliott (Eds.), At the
threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 414-430). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
McGrath, C. (1998). Busy teenagers. American Demographics, 20(7), 37-38.
McWhirter, B. T. (1997). Loneliness, learned resourcefulness, and self-esteem in college
students. Journal of Counseling & Development, 75(6), 460-469.
166
Moore, D., & Schultz, N. R. (1983). Loneliness at adolescence: Correlates, attributes and
coping. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 12, 1-8.
Moore, R. L., & Moschis, G. P. (1981). The impact of newspaper reading on adolescent
consumers. Newspaper Research Journal, 2(4), 1-8.
Moschis, G. P. (1976). Shopping orientations and consumer uses of information. Journal
of Retailing, 52(2), 61-70.
Moschis, G. P. (1987). Consumer socialization. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Moschis, G. P., & Churchill, G. A. (1979). An analysis of the adolescent consumer. Journal
of Marketing, 43(3), 40-48.
Moschis, G. P., & Moore, R. L. (1979). Decision making among the young: A socialization perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 6, 101-112.
Moschis, G. P., & Moore, R. L. (1982). A longitudinal study of television advertising
effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 279-286.
Mowen, J. C. (1995). Consumer behavior (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Nerviano, V. J., & Gross, W. F. (1976). Loneliness and locus of control for alcoholic males:
Validity against Murray need and Cattell trait dimensions. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 32, 479-484.
Omelia, J. (1998). Understanding generation Y: A look at the next wave of U.S. consumers. Drug & Cosmetic Industry, 163(6), 90-92.
Perlman, D. (1988). Loneliness: A life-span, family perspective. In R. Milardo (Ed.),
Families and social networks (pp. 190-220). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Richardson, L. (1993, August). Consumers in the 1990s: No time or money to burn.
Chain Store Age Executive, pp. 15A-17A.
Roe, K. (1995). Adolescents use of socially disvalued media: Toward a theory of media
delinquency. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 24(5), 617-631.
Rokach, A. (2001). Strategies of coping with loneliness throughout the lifespan. Current
Psychology: Development, Learning, Personality, Social, 20(1), 3-18.
Roy, A. (1994). Correlates of mall visit frequency. Journal of Retailing, 70(2), 139-161.
Rubenstein, C., & Shaver, P. (1980). Loneliness: A sourcebook of current theory, research and
therapy. New York: John Wiley.
Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Cutrona, C. E. (1980). The revised UCLA Loneliness Scale:
Concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 39(3), 472-480.
Saelens, E. (1998, March 27). Bill may limit mall-goers. The State News. Retrieved from
www.statenews.com/editionsspring98/032798/ci_mall.html
Shim, S. (1996). Adolescent consumer decision-making styles: The consumer socialization perspective. Psychology & Marketing, 13(6), 547-569.
Shim, S., & Gehrt, K. C. (1996). Hispanic and Native American adolescents: An exploratory study of their approach to shopping. Journal of Retailing, 72(3), 307-324.
Stone, G. P. (1954). City shoppers and urban identification: Observations on the social
psychology of city life. American Journal of Sociology, 60, 36-45.
The survey says: Teen-agers want to shop til they drop. (1994, November). Chain
Store Age Executive, pp. 91-96.
Tauber, E. M. (1972). Why do people shop? Journal of Marketing, 36, 46-49.
Taylor, S. L., & Cosenza, R. M. (2002). Profiling later aged female teens: Mall shopping
behavior and clothing choice. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 19(5), 393-408.
Terlep, S. (1997, June 12). Senate mulls letting malls limit teen-agers. The State News.
Retrieved from www.statenews.com/editionssummer97/061297/nw_mall.html
167
Ward, S., Wackman, D. B., & Wartella, E. (1977). How children learn to buy: The development
of consumer information-processing skills. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Weiss, R. (1974). The provisions of social relationships. In Z. Rubin (Ed.), Doing unto others (pp. 17-26). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Wenz, F. Z. (1977). Seasonal suicide attempts and forms of loneliness. Psychological
Report, 40, 807-810.
Wilson, J., & MacGillivray, M. (1998). Self-perceived influences of family, friends, and
media on adolescent clothing choice. Family & Consumer Sciences Research Journal,
26(4), 425-443.
Zollo, P. (1995). Talking to teens. American Demographics, 17(11), 22-28.