POST PURCHASE CONSUMER REGRET

Abstract
In this world of technology, every other day there are new product offerings in the market and there are
thousands of transactions every day. It is quite natural that not everybody is satisfied with what they have
purchased and there are multiple reasons behind that dissatisfaction. The research was carried out
through distribution of questionnaires among the university students. The motive behind this research is
to evaluate the possible reasons that result in the greatest regret. There are mainly two types of regret;
outcome regret and process regret. Outcome regret is divides into two dimensions: regret due to foregone
alternatives and regret due to a change in significance. In terms of process regret, we expect regret due
to both under and over-consideration during decision-making. Most of the people responded that they
feel regretful due to the outcome of their purchase within one month. We finish by pointing out potential
new research opportunities in this area, explaining the need for more research to be done on the topic of
consumer regret.

Introduction
We conceptualize and operationalize a new definition of post-purchase consumer regret. Consumers
can regret both the outcome and the process of their purchase (Seung Hwan Lee and June Cotte (2009).

This has become major problem, leading to dissatisfaction of many people, letting companies to lose
many customers. There is not much exploration of how outcome regret and process regret are
experienced in a consumer context. Discussing the outcome regret, we mainly have two dimensions:
regret due to foregone alternatives and regret due to a change in significance; these mostly have an
impact on the consumers. In the case of process regret, we suffer regret due to both under- and over-
consideration during our purchase decisions.

Questions:

How frequently do you purchase phones?

When did you purchase your last phone?

This research will help out to know the reasons of regret. Will help out to know university students
attitude towards regret, what can companies do to minimize regret.
 Literature Review
Regret is a feeling that the buyers experience when they carry out a product purchase transaction.
However, regret is considered to be a painful sensation that arises as a result of thinking that ‘what is’
versus ‘what might have been’ (Inman, Dyer, and Jia 1997). According to Landman (1993), regret is defined
as “...a more or less painful judgment and state of feeling sorry for misfortunes, limitations, losses,
shortcomings, transgressions, or mistakes”. Moreover, regret develops when the attained outcome when
compared unfavorably with an outcome that could have been better had the buyer made a different
decision. Our research is considered with the purchase regret in the university students of Karachi
regarding their mobile phone purchase. For the regret to develop one must think repetitively regarding
his purchase.

There are two types of regrets identified after careful research. The first is Outcome Regret “when one is
not satisfied with the product” and the second on is the Process regret “when an individual compares
their inferior decision process to a better alternative decision process” (Zeelenberg and Pieter 2006).

When individuals regret due to process, they usually feel that they would have made a better decision if
they had invested sufficient time in the purchase process. These two elements of regret can occur
without one another, which mean that an individual can still face the regret, even if his purchase has a
positive and favorable outcome. Researchers often conclude that individuals face regret when they
evaluate the outcomes, and also because when an unjustified decision is made on their part.

They say that the total amount of regret experienced is the sum of regret experienced as a result of an
outcome which is less favorable than the one that they rejected, plus the feeling of blaming oneself for
the poor decision making procedure.

OUTCOME REGRET
Outcome regret involves two factors that cause the most regret. Firstly, regret due to foregone
alternatives that is the buyer feels that he preferred one product over the other but it didn’t went well
(Sugden 1985). According to (Zeithaml 1988), the second one is the regret due to change in significance
that is when an individual feels that the purchase that he made earlier, now does has the same
specification and features as he assumed or it does not fulfill the purpose of the purchase.

PROCESS REGRET
There are two major dynamics regarding the process regret, Researchers pointed out impartial of
outcomes, the satisfactory of the choice process itself can also engender regret (Connolly and Zeelenberg
2002; Zeelenberg and Pieters 2006).
This is the regret that the purchaser feels when he does not pay attention and time to the purchase
process and that leads to unwanted outcome. It involves two elements, regret due to under-consideration
and regret due to over-consideration. Consumers feel regret due to under-consideration, Regardless of
the purchase outcome the consumers are in a doubt regarding the processing that led them to the
purchase (Janis and Mann 1977).

The methodology of all the researchers is somewhat the same; all developed questionnaires and
distributed them according to their availability. However, there were visible differences in the sample size
of each research. The targets of the researchers were the university students mostly.

Hypotheses
 H1: Is there a post purchase regret among university students due to foregone alternatives or
not.
 H2: Does the students regret their purchase due to change in the significance of the product or
not.
 H3: Is there a post purchase regret in students due to under-consideration or not.
 H4: Does the students regret their purchase due to over-consideration or not.

The research is organized in the following manner. It starts with a short review of consumer regret as it is
the main theoretical point of this research and main factors behind it. Conceptual framework is present and
explained. The model and its variables are then tested through adequate research. Finally, the implications
of the regret model are discussed along with recommendations for potential future research.

Theoretical Framework
 Methodology
Research Design
There are two types of research designs, namely qualitative and quantitative, and we will be using
Quantitative method. Quantitative is more explanatory on subjects where more research has been
conducted. Here the research designs are experimental, quasi-experimental, or surveys with Likert or
Guttmann scales using quantifiers for measurement. I personally prefer quantitative research but that
does not preclude me from collaborating on a qualitative project. I am willing to collaborate on many
different genres of research. (Reagan Lorraine Lavorata - 2015)
Deduction approach will be applied throughout the research process. Deductive reasoning commences
with generalizations, and seeks to see if these generalizations apply to s pecific instances (Kenneth
F. Hyde – 2000).

The research is following Positivism approach. It is the theory that laws and their operation derive
validity from the fact of having been enacted by authority or of deriving logically from existing decisions,
rather than from any moral considerations. It is a neutral point of view and no bias is involved.
Sampling
The respondents of our research are the students of different universities. Sample size calculation is part
of the early stages of conducting a research. In the preparation of the paper, there are ethical and
methodological indications for its use. Two investigations conducted with the same methodology and
achieving equivalent results, but different only in terms of sample size, may point the researcher in
different directions when it comes to making decisions. Therefore samples should not be small and,
contrary to what one might think, should not be excessive. (Jorge Faber and Lilian Martins Fonseca 2014)

Researchers have become increasingly interested in multi-level constructs – that is, constructs that
are meaningful at multiple levels of analysis. However, despite the plethora of theoretical and
empirical work on multi-level topics, explicit frameworks for validation of multi-level constructs have
yet to be fully developed. Moreover, available principles for conducting construct validation assume
that the construct resides at a single level of analysis. We propose a five-step framework for
conceptualizing and testing multi-level constructs by integrating principles of construct validation
with recent advancements in multi-level theory, research, and methodology.(Gilad Chen – 2006)

The sampling design is Probabilistic as the data or information is easily and readily available. The provision
of probabilistic information about the likelihood that events will occur is typically viewed as a way to
influence judgments by grounding them in objective information. Yet probabilistic information may be
perceived differently when people are motivated to arrive at a particular conclusion, enabling the
desirability bias. The present investigation explored how probabilistic information is used and perceived
when people are motivated. In a game of chance, desirability bias was present for judgments about the
likelihood of outcomes occurring to the self but not an unaffiliated other despite equal probabilities.
(Heather C Lench – 2014)

Convenience sampling technique is being used. Convenience sampling is a type of nonprobability sampling
in which people are sampled simply because they are "convenient" sources of data for researchers. (Paul
J Lavrakas – 2008)

The location of our research would be different universities located in the city of Karachi, Pakistan. The
reason behind selecting this location is that it would be convenient to gather data and relevant and
sufficient data could be collected.

Statistical Technique
Partial Least Square – Structural Equation Model will be used and help of Smart PLS will be taken to
statistically analyze the data. Structural equation modeling (SEM) depicts one of the most salient
research methods across a variety of disciplines, including hospitality management. Although for
many researchers, SEM is equivalent to carrying out covariance-based SEM, recent research
advocates the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS -SEM) as an attractive
alternative. (Faizan Ali – 2016)
Measures
ITEM ITEM CODE CITATION
I should have chosen some REGRET DUE TO FOREGONE Seung Hwan Lee and June
other phone than the one I ALTERNATIVES Cotte (2009)
bought.
If I were to go back in time, I REGRET DUE TO FOREGONE Seung Hwan Lee and June
would choose a different phone ALTERNATIVES Cotte (2009)
to buy.
I now realize how much better REGRET DUE TO FOREGONE Seung Hwan Lee and June
my other phone choices were. ALTERNATIVES Cotte (2009)

I regret the phone choice that I REGRET DUE TO FOREGONE Seung Hwan Lee and June
made. ALTERNATIVES Cotte (2009)
I regret getting the phone REGRET DUE TO CHANGE IN Seung Hwan Lee and June
because it was not as SIGNIFICANCE Cotte (2009)
important to me as I thought it
would be.
I regret my purchase because I REGRET DUE TO CHANGE IN Seung Hwan Lee and June
did not need the phone. SIGNIFICANCE Cotte (2009)

I regret my purchase because REGRET DUE TO CHANGE IN Seung Hwan Lee and June
the phone never served its SIGNIFICANCE Cotte (2009)
purpose.
I wish I hadn’t bought this REGRET DUE TO CHANGE IN Seung Hwan Lee and June
phone because it is now useless SIGNIFICANCE Cotte (2009)
to me.
With more information, I feel REGRET DUE TO UNDER- Seung Hwan Lee and June
that I could have made a better CONSIDERATION Cotte (2009)
decision.
I regret not putting enough REGRET DUE TO UNDER- Seung Hwan Lee and June
thought into my decision. CONSIDERATION Cotte (2009)

With more effort, I feel that I REGRET DUE TO UNDER- Seung Hwan Lee and June
could have made a better CONSIDERATION Cotte (2009)
decision.
I feel that I did not put enough REGRET DUE TO UNDER- Seung Hwan Lee and June
consideration into buying the CONSIDERATION Cotte (2009)
phone.
I expended too much effort in REGRET DUE TO OVER- Seung Hwan Lee and June
making my decision. CONSIDERATION Cotte (2009)
I think I put too much thought REGRET DUE TO OVER- Seung Hwan Lee and June
in the buying process. CONSIDERATION Cotte (2009)
I feel that too much time was REGRET DUE TO OVER- Seung Hwan Lee and June
invested in getting this phone. CONSIDERATION Cotte (2009)
I wasted too much time in REGRET DUE TO OVER- Seung Hwan Lee and June
making my decision. CONSIDERATION Cotte (2009)
 Conclusion
Whenever a transaction takes place, there exits some element of regret. Regret can be due to
several reasons which include regret due to outcome and process regret. It enables the
consumers to keep the factors in mind that made them feel regretful of their last purchase
which prevents them from further regret. Regret has a huge impact on the future purchase
decisions of the consumers. Thus, the role of regret has important implications for marketers
who are interested in creating brand loyalty, as well as for those managers looking to
reconstruct relationships among consumers that have had negative experiences with a
particular brand.
Responses were found to vary significantly depending on gender, marital status, age and level
of education of the consumers. Besides, it is generally seen that a consumer who experiences
regret consults to such solutions as changing or returning a product. However, if their requests
of change or return are not accepted, they tend to conceal their sadness resulting from regret
and continue using that product.
The results show that the youth of today has a very prominent role and importance of smart
phones in their lives and daily routine. They put much emphasis while purchasing their phones
and put sufficient effort for favorable outcomes. Overall, the findings of the research conclude
that around 43% of the respondents are dissatisfied with their phone purchases, while around
40% respondents were satisfied with what they purchased.
As soon as the consumers face regret due to their purchase, they start to think about the
products that they left and could have purchased and assume that then they would not have
faced this feeling of regret. Moreover, the consumers responded that in the case of regret they
would prefer to buy some other phone if they are given the chance to do so. Most of the
respondents said that if they had more information and if they would have made a little more
effort they would have made a better decision regarding their purchase and would have been
saved from the feelings of regret.

Results and Discussions

Our respondents were mostly among the age group of 21-23 with 55.4%, and the second most popular
age group was 18-20 with 34.7%. Due to less reach to students of older age, we got only 8.9% responses
from the age group of 24-27. We got the least responses from the age bracket of 27-29 with only 1% and
got no responses from 30-32 groups.

The gender distribution of our respondents is pretty clear as 50.5% of our respondents are male and
49.5% respondents are females.
51% of our respondents are studying in IoBM, while second most responses were from IBA about 14%,
followed by Bahria University with 16% and SZABIST with 10%.

100% of our responses were from Karachi.

Out of 99 respondents, 55 respondents purchased their phones after more than 1 year, while 24
respondents purchased a new phone annually, followed by purchasing a new phone bi-monthly and
quarterly.

30.7% of our respondents purchased their phones last year, while 28.7% respondents purchased their
phones this year. Surprisingly, 19.8% respondents made the phone purchase last week, and in the end
17.8% respondents changed their phone few months ago.
Majority of the people agreed that they are satisfied with their recent phones with 37.6%, while 25.7%
respondents expressed dissatisfaction with their current phone due to numerous reasons mentioned in
following questions. 18.8% of the respondents expressed complete satisfaction with their phone
followed by 11.9% respondents who remained neutral on the question.

There was a neck to neck competition between the option of phone and computer with 29.9% and
28.9% in the question of last purchase that made them feel regretful. 16.5% of the respondents
answered that the purchase of their headphones made them feel regretful.
When questioned regarding the duration after which the buyers start feeling regretful of their purchase,
40.4% respondents said that they feel regretful of their purchase after 1 month, while 38.4% said that
the feeling of regret upraises after 1 week of the purchase, followed by right after the purchase and 1
day.

Most of the respondents strongly agreed that price does play a major role in making them regretful of
their purchase, while only a small proportion of the respondents disagreed with this question.
The majority regret about their initial purchase with 32.7% while 28.7% are satisfied with their phone
choice. Some don’t feel any difference and feel it neutral on their purchase with 11.9%, on the other
hand there are 22.8% strongly agree with the statement.

The majority doesn’t regret about their initial purchase with 36.6% while 19.8% regret their phone
choice. Some don’t feel any difference and feel it neutral on their purchase with 15.8%, on the other
hand there are 24.8% strongly agree with the statement.
The majority regret about their purchase decision with 31.7% while 29.7% are satisfied with their phone
choice. Some don’t feel any difference and feel it neutral on their purchase decision with 17.8%, on the
other hand there are 18.8% strongly agree with the statement.

The majority regret about their purchase decision with 30.7% while 16.8% are satisfied with their phone
choice. Some don’t feel any difference and feel it neutral on their purchase decision with 19.8%, on the
other hand there are 28.7% strongly agree with the statement.
The majority doesn’t regret about their purchase decision with 35.6% while 34.7% regret with their
phone choice. Some don’t feel any difference and feel it neutral on their purchase decision with 18.8%,
on the other hand there is small ratio of individual strongly agree with the statement.

The majority doesn’t regret about their purchase decision with 43.6% while 17.8% regret with their
phone choice. Some don’t feel any difference and feel it neutral on their purchase decision with 22.8%,
on the other hand there is small ratio of individual strongly disagree with 10.9%.
The majority doesn’t regret about their purchase decision with 32.7% while 25.7% regret with their
phone choice. Some don’t feel any difference and feel it neutral on their purchase decision with 17.8%,
on the other hand there is small ratio of individual strongly agree and strongly disagree with 15.8% and
7.9% respectively.

The majority strongly disagree about their purchase decision with 34.7% while 30.7% doesn’t regret with
their phone choice. Some don’t feel any difference and feel it neutral on their purchase decision with
13.9%, on the other hand there is small ratio of individual agree with 13.9%.
The respondents in majority strongly agreed to the claim that with more information, they felt
that they could have made a better decision with regard to their purchase.

In the following chart, the respondents agreed to the statement that they did not put enough
consideration into buying the phone while making the purchase.
The respondents with regard to the following question believed and agreed that with excessive
effort they would have turned their current buying decision into a better one.

40% of the respondents agreed that they regret not putting enough of thought while making
their buying decision, majority of them realized that they could have put a little thought while
making their purchase.
  46.5% of 101 respondents agreed to the point that they felt that too much time was
invested in getting their phone. While 20.8% disagreed to this view.

Majority of the respondents disagreed to the viewpoint that they wasted too much time in
making the buying decision. Making it clear that not too much time was wasted. However
24.8% agreed.
45.5% of the 101 participants agreed that they put too much thought in the buying process.
However 22.8% were neutral.

Most of the respondents feel that they invested sufficient time in purchasing their phones around
46.5%, while around 20% respondents said that they regret not putting enough time in purchasing their
phones.

References
 Seung Hwan Lee and June Cotte (2009) ,"Post-Purchase Consumer Regret: Conceptualization and
Development of the Ppcr Scale", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 36, eds. Ann L.
McGill and Sharon Shavitt, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 456-462.
 Bearden, William O., Richard G. Netemeyer, Jesse E. Teel (1989), “Measurement of Consumer
Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence,” Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (March), 473-81.
 Bell, David E. (1982), “Regret in Decision-making under Uncertainty,” Operations Research, 30
(September-October), 961-81. (1985), “Disappointment in Decision-making under Uncertainty,”
Operations Research, 33, 1-27.
 Churchill, Gilbert A. Jr. (1979), “A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing
Constructs,” Journal of Marketing Research, 16 (February), 64-73.
 Connolly, Terry, and Marcel Zeelenberg (2002), “Regret in Decision-making,” Current Directions
in Psychological Science, 11, 212-16.
 Crawford, Matthew T., Allen R. McConnell, Amy C. Lewis, and Steven J. Sherman (2002),
“Reactance, Compliance, and Anticipated Regret,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38,
56-63.
 Creyer, H. Elizabeth and William T. Ross Jr. (1999), “The Development and Use of a Regret
Experience Measure to Examine the Effects of Outcome Feedback on Regret and Subsequent
Choice,” Marketing Letters, 10 (4), 373-86.
 Gilovich, Thomas and Victoria H. Medvec (1994), “The Temporal Pattern to the Experience of
Regret,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67 (3), 357-65.
 Inman, J. Jeffrey, James S. Dyer, and Jianmin Jia (1997), “A Generalized Utility Model of
Disappointment and Regret Effects on Post-Choice Valuation,” Marketing Science, 16 (2), 97-111.
 Janis, Irving L. and Leon Mann (1977), Decision-making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict,
Choice, and Commitment, New York, NY: The Free Press.
 Kahneman, Daniel, and Dale T. Miller (1986), “Norm Theory: Comparing Reality to Its
Alternatives,” Psychological Review, 92 (April), 136-53.
 Landman, Janet (1993), Regret: The Persistence of the Possible, New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.Pieters, Rik and Bas Verplanken (1995), “Intention-Behavior Consistency: Effects of
Consideration Set Size, Involvement and Need for Cognition,” European Journal of Social
Psychology, 25, 531-43.
 Pieters, Rik and Marcel Zeelenberg (2005), “On Bad Decisions and Deciding Badly: When Intention
Behavior Inconsistency is Regrettable,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
97 (March), 18-30.
 Ritov, Ilana and Jonathan Baron (1995), “Outcome Knowledge, Regret, and Omission Bias,”
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 64 (November), 119-27.
 Ruekert, Robert W. and Gilbert A. Churchill, Jr. (1984), “Reliability and Validity of Alternative
Measures of Channel Member Satisfaction,” Journal of Marketing Research, 21 (May), 226-33.
 Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E.M. and Hans C.M. van Trijp (1991), “The Use of Lisrel in Validating
Marketing Constructs,”International Journal of Research in Marketing, 8 (4), 283-99.
 Sugden, Robert (1985), “Regret, Recrimination, and Rationality,” Theory and Decision, 19, 77-99.
Tsiros, Michael and Vikas Mittal (2000), “Regret: A Model of Its Antecedents and Consequences
in Consumer Decision making,”
 Martin, L.L. and Tesser, A. (2006), “Extending the goal progress theory of rumination: goal
evaluation and growth”, in Sanna, L.J. and Change, E.C. (Eds), Judgment over Time: The Interplay
of Thoughts, Feelings, and Behaviors, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 145-62.
 Medvec, V.H., Madey, S.F. and Gilovich, T. (1995), “When less is more: counterfactual thinking
and satisfaction among Olympic medalists”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 69,
pp. 603-10.
 Menon, K. and Dube, L. (2007), “The effect of emotional provider support on angry versus anxious
consumers”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 24, p. 268.
 Nolen-Hoeksema, S. and Morrow, J. (1991), “A prospective study of depression and post-
traumatic stress symptoms after a natural disaster: the 1989 Loma Prieta.
 Earthquake”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 61, pp. 115-21. Oliver, R.L. (1997),
Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer, Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA.
 Panksepp, J. (1998), Affective Neuroscience: The Foundations of Human and Animal Emotions,
Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
 Patrick, V.M., Lancellotti, M. and Hagtvedt, H. (2009), “Getting a second chance: the role of
imagery in the influence of inaction regret on behavioral intent”, Academy of Marketing Science
Journal, Vol. 37, p. 181.
 Pearlin, L.I. and Schooler, C. (1978), “The structure of coping”, Journal of Health and Social
Behavior, Vol. 9, pp. 3-21.
 Potter, R.F., LaTour, M.S., Braun-LaTour, K.A. and Reichert, T. (2006), “The impact of program
context on motivational system activation and subsequent effects on processing: a fear appeal”,
Journal of Advertising, Vol. 35 No. 3, p. 67.
 Pyszczynski, T. and Greenberg, J. (1987), “Self-regulatory perseveration and the depressive self-
focusing style: a self-awareness theory of reactive depression”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 102
No. 1, pp. 122-38.
 Reynolds, K.E., Folse, J.A.G. and Jones, M.A. (2006), “Search regret: antecedents and
consequences”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 82, p. 339. Richins, M.L. (1997), “Measuring emotions in
the consumption experience”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24 No. 2, p. 127.
 Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatum, R. and Black, W. (1998), Multivariate Data Analysis,
 Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
 Heitmann, M., Lehmann, D.R. and Herrmann, A. (2007), “Choice goal attainment and decision
and consumption satisfaction”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 44, p. 234.
 Hetts, J., Boninger, D., Armor, D., Gleicher, F. and Nathanson, A. (2000), “Influence of anticipated
counterfactual regret on behavior”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 345-68.
 Holmbeck, G.N. (1997), “Toward terminological, conceptual, and statistical clarity in the study of
mediators and moderators: examples from child-clinical and pediatric psychology literatures”,
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 65 No. 4, pp. 599-610.
 Hu, L. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), “Cut-off criteria for fit indices in covariance structural analysis:
conventional criteria versus new alternatives”, Structural Equation Modeling, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-
55.
 Akerlof, G.A. and Dickens, W.T. (1982) ‘The economic consequences of cognitive dissonance’, The
American Economic Review, Vol. 72, No. 3, pp.307–319.
 Bawa, A. and Kansal, P. (2008) ‘Cognitive dissonance and the marketing of services: some issues’,
Journal of Services Research, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp.31–51.
 Bearden, W.O. and Etzel, M.J. (1982) ‘Reference group influence on product and brand purchase
decisions’, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp.183–194.
 Berthon, P. and Pitt, L. (2005) ‘The paradox of advertising’, International Journal of Advertising,
Vol. 24, No. 4, pp.539–546.
 Cohen, J.B. and Goldberg, M.E. (1970) ‘The dissonance model in post-decision product
evaluation’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp.315–321.
Appendices
REGRET DUE TO FOREGONE
ALTERNATIVES
I should have chosen some other phone
than the one I bought.
I regret the phone choice that I made
I now realize how much better my other
phone choices were
If I were to go back in time, I would choose
a different phone to buy.
REGRET DUE TO CHANGE IN
SIGNIFICANCE
I regret getting the phone because it was
not as important to me as I thought it
would be.
I wish I hadn’t bought this phone because it
is now useless to me.
I regret my purchase because the phone
never served its purpose.
I regret my purchase because I did not need
the phone.
REGRET DUE TO UNDER-
CONSIDERATION
With more information, I feel that I could
have made a better decision.
I feel that I did not put enough
consideration into buying the phone.
With more effort, I feel that I could have
made a better decision.
I regret not putting enough thought into my
decision.
REGRET DUE TO OVER-CONSIDERATION
I expended too much effort in making my
decision.
I wasted too much time in making my
decision.
I think I put too much thought in the buying
process.
I feel that too much time was invested in
getting this phone.

Limitations
Since the study is exploratory, some limitations should be noted.

 Firstly, students from only the Universities of Karachi were selected as a sample and mostly
belonged to elite families. This might restrict the generalizability of the study. However, the
students cover a major proportion of customers in the mobile phone industry.
 The number of samples in this study was not large enough to contribute meaningful results to the
research community. A much wider range of samples is required in future research to provide
much more accurate results for the research community.
 There were time constraints.
 The researchers did not have any experience of the research process and its difficulties, so we
faced several problems
 Simple random sampling technique was used while the selection of students, which calls into
question how representative the results are.
 The results of the research only present the opinions of Pakistani students. Future research should
employ other probability sampling techniques to ensure that results are more representative.

Moreover, future studies must include respondents of different ages that might depict different
results which would be helpful to mobile phone manufacturers and operators in developing marketing
strategies and delivering adequate information to consumers. Therefore, the findings discussed in this
study should be interpreted in light of these limitations.
Contents
Abstract ..........................................................................2
Introduction ....................................................................2
Literature Review ..............................................................3
Methodology.....................................................................3
Conclusion.........................................................................4
Results and Discussion ......................................................5
References ......................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendices .......................................................................5
Limitations…………………………………………………………………….7