eater in number for the latter. The third hypothesis which was challenged by this replication of study was that there is no difference between women at different life cycle stage when it comes to shopping for groceries, which however is not true, since women over 40 tended to shop more than younger women, plus the presence of children also increased shopping trips for housewives. The fourth and last hypothesis stated that there is no difference in classes with respect to acquaintances on shopping habits. The study showed that lower class seemed to discuss their purchases with their husbands and other family members compared to middle class women who mainly shopped on their own. This paper thus concludes that there may be a lot of reasons that caused this diversity in results, like the area where the research was conducted, the definition of class and the products that were different from one another. Both researches thus had their limitations, its thus obvious that these researches cannot be generalized to all products and all kinds of consumers, however in their area of focus they may provide insight for firms dealing in that product and area.
研究人员还从家庭决策中引入了与消费者购买行为相关的不同理论，所有这些理论都由文化、社会、个人和生理等不同因素组成。社会因素被认为是影响消费者行为的最重要因素之一。在一篇题为“消费者选择中的社会因素：复制和扩展”的研究论文中，Rich和Jain的研究受到了挑战，他们得出结论，生命周期阶段和社会阶层可能不像许多研究所指出的那样与消费者行为有直接关系。本文采用实证方法来反对一般假设；使用随机步行抽样方法生成样本，主要目的是复制Rich和Jain的方法，但将产品类别从时尚扩展到食品和家用电器。Rich和Jain使用了独立变量、社会阶层和家庭生活周期等因变量，如对时尚的不同兴趣、他们在哪里获得购物影响和人际影响，纽卡斯尔的研究使用了购买前信息、人们进行的购物旅行和不同的人际行为模式。两个实验的原产国也不同。Rich和Jain的第一个假设是，不同的社会阶层对家用电器的预购决定没有差异，似乎存在差异。与高比例的上层阶级相比，极少数的下层和中产阶级使用报纸作为信息来源。这种差异可能是因为两项研究中使用的产品不同。第二个假设指出，在购物旅行方面，阶层之间存在差异，这一假设被驳斥，因为百分比表明，中低阶层之间存在着差异，因为后者的购物旅行次数更多。第三个被这项重复研究所质疑的假设是，处于不同生命周期阶段的女性在购买食品杂货方面没有差异，但事实并非如此，因为40岁以上的女性往往比年轻女性购物更多，加上孩子的存在也增加了家庭主妇的购物行程。第四个也是最后一个假设表明，在购物习惯上，与熟人相比，阶级之间没有差异。研究表明，与主要靠自己购物的中产阶级女性相比，下层阶级似乎会与丈夫和其他家庭成员讨论自己的购物。因此，本文得出结论，可能有很多原因导致了结果的多样性，比如研究的领域、类别的定义以及彼此不同的产品。因此，这两项研究都有其局限性，因此很明显，这些研究不能推广到所有产品和所有类型的消费者，但在其关注的领域，它们可以为从事该产品和领域的公司提供洞察力。
“Social Class and Income as Indicators of Consumer Credit Behavior” (John, 1970) is another study which further tested social class as a main factor influencing consumer behavior in the credit card market compared to another important factor, income. The researcher said that the consumer would go for installments if they differ in different social classes. Although social class is considered as a very significant factor while segmenting consumers, and the hypothesis stated that being involved in a social class above their income standing would result in greater use of credit card. A questionnaire was sent out to 25000 credit card holders which used occupation and educational level as variables that comprise social class. The survey helped conclude that consumer’s attitudes can be understood by income and social class. This study is limited to credit card users, however it helps identify income as another important factor which can be used to segment consumers and identify their differing buying habits. According to the communication note (Gordon, 1975) social class was the main reason why consumer buying habits changed, but in this paper, it is income which may be a reason why the use of credit cards differs. This study is again not all encompassing, as it cannot go on and explain the correlation of income and social class.
“社会阶层和收入作为消费者信用行为的指标”是另一项研究，与另一个重要因素收入相比，该研究进一步测试了社会阶层作为影响信用卡市场消费者行为的主要因素。研究人员表示，如果消费者在不同的社会阶层不同，他们会分期付款。尽管在细分消费者时，社会阶层被认为是一个非常重要的因素，并且该假设表明，参与高于其收入水平的社会阶层将导致更多的信用卡使用。向25000名信用卡持卡人发出了一份问卷，其中使用职业和教育水平作为构成社会阶层的变量。这项调查有助于得出结论，收入和社会阶层可以理解消费者的态度。这项研究仅限于信用卡用户，但它有助于确定收入是另一个重要因素，可用于细分消费者并确定他们不同的购买习惯。根据通讯笔记，社会阶层是消费者购买习惯改变的主要原因，但在本文中，收入可能是信用卡使用不同的原因。这项研究也不是包罗万象的，因为它无法继续解释收入和社会阶层的相关性。
Social factors are important but they need to be persistent with the marketing and advertising so the marketers can gain some understanding of their target groups. In a study of “Coca-Cola or Pepsi; that is the Question” ( Andersson, and Arvidsson ,2006) the researcher have studied t
