Fractional antedating goal response hull
I will then argue the necessity of a combined perspective for the theoretical paradigm of consumer behaviour and show how this might be achieved.
THE COGNITIVE PERSPECTIVE By "cognitive I mean beliefs of various kinds.
We will meet an important class of these, discussed below in the behaviourist perspective, when considering the question of whether behaviour 1 can directly cause behaviour 2.
There is also an important criticism of the entire cognitive perspective that I would like to express here (although I am certainly not the first to voice this criticism). In the first place, cognitive theorists are too eager to invent extra and superfluous mental constructs.
Cognitive theorists are notoriously bad at providing functional explanations of the relationships between the variables and many theorists, consumer researchers especially, do not seem to think it necessary to do so.
Symptomatic of this is the popularity of the verb "impact to describe the hypothesised effect of one variable upon another.
I detect a similar tendency in contemporary models of consumer behaviour to simply throw extra variables into the "black box" because it is so easy to do so. It is easy to draw arrows between variables or, worse, between boxes of variables and think that you therefore have a causal theory.
The third topic, the one I have chosen, is certainly a big topic and one that has been on my mind for some time, and that is: which theoretical perspective is best for studying and doing research in consumer behaviour?
The title refers to three forms of behaviourismcognitive, emotional, and hard-core.
And, as an example of the absolutely current influence of the beliefs approach, one has only to glance through the special issue of Marketing Letters in 1999 devoted to consumer choice behaviour.
Every author in that issue, and every article, takes a beliefs perspective as the theoretical paradigm.