MT459 Unit 4 Shopper Observation Report Example

Forty-Four Lifted the Bag: An MT459 Unit 4 Consumer Observation Report From a Litter Aisle

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

MT459: Consumer Behavior

Unit 4 Consumer Observation Report

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

Linwood Pet Supply, its aisle and the shoppers' counts are composite; the sources cited are real.

Purpose

This report records how shoppers behave in the cat litter aisle of a Linwood Pet Supply store, a composite neighborhood pet retailer. The question is practical: what do shoppers actually do in the few seconds they spend choosing litter, and does it match what they say matters? Underhill (2009) argues that retailers learn more from watching shoppers than from asking them, because people rarely notice or remember their own behavior in a store.

Method

Observation took place over four sessions: three weekday evenings, each an hour and a half beginning at 5:30, and one Saturday morning of the same length starting at 9:30, about six hours in all. The writer, an employee of the store, observed out of uniform from the end of the aisle, holding a clipboard and appearing to check stock. Only shoppers who entered the litter section and stopped were counted. Seventy-one shoppers were observed.

A coding sheet listed eight behaviors, each defined before the first session so that they could not be counted generously afterward. Lifted a product means picked up a bag or box and held it off the shelf for at least a second, not merely touching it. Took from eye level means the item placed in the cart came from the shelf between about four and five and a half feet from the floor. Used a phone means looked at a phone screen while facing the shelf. Compared two items means held or stood directly before two products and looked from one to the other. Read a back panel means turned a package to read its back. Read a price tag means leaned toward or touched a shelf price label. Asked staff means spoke to any employee about litter. Left empty-handed means left the section without placing litter in the cart. Time in the aisle was measured from stopping to leaving.

Results

Of the 71 shoppers, 44 lifted a product, 38 took their final choice from the eye-level shelf, 27 read a price tag, 15 used a phone, 12 compared two items side by side, 9 read a back panel, 6 asked staff and 8 left empty-handed. Median time in the aisle was 48 seconds, and only 11 shoppers stayed longer than two minutes.

The Exit Question

A separate group of 20 shoppers, approached as they left the store with litter in their carts, was asked one question: "What mattered most when you chose your litter today?" Seven said odor control, five said price, four said what their cat would use, three named a brand they always buy and one said clumping. None mentioned weight. These shoppers were not the same people observed in the aisle, so the two sets of results cannot be matched person by person, and the exit answers are reported separately for that reason.

Interpretation

Counts and their meaning are kept apart so that a reader can trust the counts while questioning the interpretation.

The most frequent behavior, lifting a product, deserves the most attention. Shoppers lifted bags far more often than they read back panels or compared items. Some lifting is simply moving a bag into the cart, but the coding required holding it off the shelf, and many shoppers lifted a bag, set it down and took a lighter one or a smaller size. Lifting appears to be a test of weight: will I be able to carry this to the car, up the stairs, into the house?

Shoppers tested weight with their arms more often than they read any package, and not one named weight as a reason.

The exit answers do not mention weight at all. Nisbett and Wilson (1977) showed that people often cannot report the influences on their own choices, and offer plausible reasons instead. Odor control and price are reasons a shopper can name easily; weight, tested physically in a second, may never become a conscious reason.

The eye-level count suggests that placement does much of the choosing in a 48-second visit. More than half the shoppers took their choice from one shelf height, consistent with the course text's account of how shelf position shapes low-involvement choices (Solomon, 2020).

Limitations

The study covers one store, four sessions and 71 shoppers, so it can suggest patterns but not establish them. Evening and Saturday shoppers may differ from midday shoppers. The observer, though out of uniform, may have been noticed by regular customers who knew her. Lifting may have purposes other than testing weight, such as reading the bottom of the bag. And the exit question, asked of different people, may have drawn different answers from the aisle shoppers.

Ethics

The store manager approved the observation in writing. No names, faces, license plates or other identifying details were recorded, and no photographs or video were taken. Children were not observed. Shoppers approached at the exit were told the question was for a college course and could decline; three did. Because the writer works at the store, observation took place on unpaid time and nothing observed was used to evaluate any employee.

What Would Come Next

The lifting finding should be tested with records. If weight matters, loyalty-card data should show shoppers moving to lighter products after life changes that make carrying harder, such as a move to an upper-floor apartment, which the writer's own Unit 1 experience suggests.

References

Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84(3), 231-259. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.3.231

Solomon, M. R. (2020). Consumer behavior: Buying, having, and being (13th ed.). Pearson.

Underhill, P. (2009). Why we buy: The science of shopping (Updated ed.). Simon & Schuster.