Attitude theory has been suggested by some researchers as a basis for retail image formation, due to parallels between the image and attitude concepts. Some
researchers have considered retail image as an attitude (e.g. Doyle and Fenwick, 1974; James, Durand and Dreves, 1976), with Steenkamp and Wedel (1991)
describing image as “the overall attitude toward the store based upon the perceptions of relevant store attributes” (p. 301). Gartner (1993) proposed attitude theory as an explanation for image formation in the context of a tourist destination. Similar to image, attitudes are believed to be important predictors of consumer behaviour (Korgaonkar, Lund and Price, 1985).
Classical attitude theory has been established for many years and proposes that the formation of a consumer‟s attitude operates through three distinct but inter-related processes: cognitive, affective and conative (Bagozzi and Burnkrant, 1980;
Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982; Petty, Fabrigar and Wegener, 2003). The cognitive component refers to the beliefs a consumer holds about an attitude object; affect represents the way a consumer feels about the object; while the conative component represents behaviour towards the object (Solomon, 2002). According to Gartner (1993) these three components are responsible for the formation of tourist destination image. However, the same theory could equally apply to a town centre shopping destination. Retail tourism is an important reason for consumer choice of tourist destination (Turner and Reisinger, 2001), and a town centre can be considered a specific case of destination image.
3.2.1 Cognitive component of attitude
Within image research, the cognitive attitude component is defined as “the sum of beliefs and attitudes of an object leading to some internally accepted picture of its
61 attributes” (Gartner, 1993, p. 193). Attitude theory indicates that attitudes are formed as a result of distinct thought processes through consideration of tangible objects as stimuli which transmit information to the consumer (Ajzen and Fishbein, 2000; Cohen and Reed, 2006). Consumers base their cognitive deliberations around attributes belonging to the object which are experienced either directly through personal
experience or indirectly, for example, through the imagination, as in the selection of a shopping destination not previously experienced (Tasci and Gartner, 2007).
This information is perceived as factual content which consumers critically analyse for credibility and relevance, in the process of which relevant stimuli from the attitude object are selected, and cognitive responses or beliefs are formed (Cohen and Reed, 2006; Holbrook, 1978; Wright, 1973). Beliefs relating to each attribute are weighted according to their strength and salience, depending on the importance or utility of each attribute for the consumer (Cohen and Reed, 2006; Holbrook, 1978; Mitchell and Olson, 1981). The resulting belief-based or cognitive component of attitude is formed as an aggregation of these salient beliefs (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980; Cohen and Reed, 2006).
In the case of an attitude object such as a tourist or shopping destination, the
cognitive component is formed from the intellectual consideration of the physical and factual attributes of the location (Gartner, 1993). Cognitive elements are the
perceptions, beliefs and knowledge a consumer has of the environment, which is external to the perceiver (Baloglu and MacCleary, 1999; Beerli and Martin, 2004;
Stern, Zinkhan and Jaju, 2001). Hence the cognitive dimension relates to a conscious understanding of the factual elements of the environment.
3.2.2 Affective component of attitude
The affective attitude component is related to positive or negative feelings and
emotions which are associated with the attitude object (Petty, Fabrigar and Wegener, 2003). Affect represents an internal subjective component created by the perceiver of the attitude object. According to attitude theory, affective elements are formed during
62 the consumer‟s evaluation of the cognitive attributes, in the process of which the consumer activates an emotional response to each of the stimuli (Gartner, 1993; Um and Crompton, 1990). A consumer responds to the attributes, processes them cognitively and makes judgements about them, during which their emotional responses become activated (Anand, Holbrook and Stephens, 1988; Dobni and Zinkhan, 1990). Salient attributes are selected by the consumer on the basis of the strongest affective responses to stimuli (Cohen, 1982). Evaluative judgements involve favourability (positive or negative preferences) and are believed to arise
spontaneously and without conscious effort, as a result of the consideration of cognitive beliefs (Ajzen, 2001).
Two distinct affective processes have been identified in attitude research: evaluation and emotion (Petty, Fabrigar and Wegener, 2003). Earlier conceptualisations of attitude considered that affect was based solely on evaluation of the individual attributes (Bagozzi and Burnkrant, 1980; Eagly and Chaiken, 1993). From this perspective, evaluation is a simple response along the lines of “I like/ dislike it”.
Subsequent research has suggested that attitude formation is additionally influenced by emotion, which is believed to operate independently of the evaluative function (Ajzen and Fishbein, 2000). Emotion-related affective attitude has been proposed as generalised moods, emotions and sensations (for example happiness, sadness, anger, fear and pride) which are experienced during the consideration of the attributes of the attitude object (Ajzen and Fishbein, 2000; Dube, Cervellon and Jingyuan, 2003).
There is some debate as to the relative importance of cognitive and affective
components in the formation of attitude and resulting behaviours (Ajzen, 2001). Some studies (Bagozzi and Burnkrant, 1980; Batra and Ray, 1985) have suggested that cognition has more influence than affect on the behavioural component of attitude.
Other researchers believe that the affective attitude component has a stronger
influence on behaviour than does the cognitive component (Lavine, Thomsen, Zanna and Borgida, 1998). Again in the area of tourist destination research, Baloglu and
63 McCleary (1999) demonstrated that the affective component of destination image was more influential on overall image perceptions, and hence behaviour, than the
cognitive component. Other studies (Janiszewski, 1988; Zajonc, 1980) have argued that cognition and affect involve separate processes, so that affect is not triggered during cognitive processing of factual stimuli, but occurs spontaneously and independently. However, Anand, Holbrook and Stephens (1988) support the interrelationship between cognitive and affective components in attitude formation.
Ultimately both are important components in attitude formation (Ajzen and Fishbein, 2000).
3.2.3 Conative component of attitude
The third element in the cognitive-affective-conative attitude model is behaviour.
Similar to image, the major focus of attitude research is the prediction of behaviour (Ajzen, 2001; Solomon, 2002), attitudes being described as “residues of past experience that guide future behaviour” (Ajzen and Fishbein, 2000, p. 2). Attitude theory suggests that attitudes in which both cognitive and affective components are positive are likely to result in more favourable tendencies to perform desired
behaviours (Petty, Fabrigar and Wegener, 2003). Therefore, shoppers who perceive or experience the physical elements in the environment and develop positive
emotions towards these elements within the overall town centre are likely to prefer it to other town centres and will demonstrate greater levels of patronage.
A number of studies focus on the impact of attitudes on behavioural intentions rather than the behaviour itself (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980; 2000). Where an attitude is more favourable, it is expected that a consumer‟s intention to perform a certain behaviour will be stronger; subsequently if opportunity arises, that behaviour is more likely to be performed (Ajzen and Fishbein, 2000). In addition, actual behaviour may be predicted where attitudes are measured with respect to highly specific behavioural contexts (Cohen and Reed, 2006). For example, Korgaonkar, Lund and Price (1985) found strong support for a relationship between attitude and patronage behaviour in a retail store setting. Behaviour is also more likely to be predicted from attitude if the three
64 attitude components are consistent, in that favourable evaluations and strong positive emotional responses towards specific cognitive stimuli are in turn congruent with positive behavioural intentions (Ajzen and Fishbein, 2000).
3.2.4 Attitude theory and image
Similarities are therefore apparent between both attitude and the image construct in terms of predicting behaviour. Specifically, the cognitive attitude component parallels the tangible image dimension, while the affective attitude component represents in part the psychological image attributes. Attitudes and image are comparable in that they both simplify the choice process, thereby assisting consumers‟ decision making.
Images are used by shoppers to reduce the complexity of information available (Kotler, Haider and Rein, 1993; Mitchell, 2001). Similarly, a function of attitude is “to specify relatively parsimonious representations of attitude structure by restricting the number of beliefs” that consumers need to include in their determinations (Holbrook, 1978, p. 547). Therefore both constructs act similarly as heuristics which allow
consumers to make use of limited information in the most efficient manner to facilitate the decision making process (Holbrook, 1978).
Nevertheless attitude theory has limitations in explaining the formation of image.
Keller (1993) suggests that attitude is only one part of image, representing only one of several levels of abstraction contained within the image construct. Important
differences between the conceptualisations of image and attitudes may also be observed (Zinkhan and Hirschheim, 1992). One difference is in the stability of the two constructs. Image, once formed, is considered to be relatively slow to change and hence remains stable and consistent (Keaveney and Hunt, 1992; Oxenfeldt, 1974). In contrast, attitudes are prone to variation according to context (Ajzen and Fishbein, 2000), mood (Petty, Fabrigar and Wegener, 2003) and life-cycle (Ajzen, 2001), and therefore are less consistent over time (Cohen and Reed, 2006). A further, and more significant, limitation of attitude theory for image research is that attitudes are
grounded in the cognitive domain of beliefs, based on factual attributes of the attitude
65 object (Dobni and Zinkhan, 1990; Keller, 1993). Conceptualising image as attitude restricts its study to a set of physical characteristics (Dobni and Zinkhan, 1990).
Furthermore, although attitudes incorporate the subjective nature of image processing through the affective component, attitude theory neglects the role of the symbolic nature of image. As noted by Hackett, Foxall and van Raaij (1993) “simply
identify[ing] the retail environment as possessing physical and psychological attributes is insufficient” to understand consumers‟ image perceptions of an
environment (p. 393). While corresponding with existing retail image research based on cognitive and affective components (e.g. Baloglu and McCleary, 1999; Mazursky and Jacoby, 1986), the attitude model therefore does not fully explain image as a symbolic representation of reality. There is thus a need to explore further theory in the wider marketing literature to develop a conceptual framework of image as defined in this thesis.