CHILDREN’S INFLUENCE

ON

FAMILY BUYING DECISIONS

Bunu Shrestha

Exam Roll No: 18570046

P.U. Registration No: 2018-2-57-0046

A Graduate Research Project Report Submitted To

Ace Institute of Management

Pokhara University

Submitted for the Degree of

Master’s in Business Administration (MBA)

Kathmandu
Jan 2023
Contents
CHAPTER I..........................................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................1

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY..................................................................................1

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM.................................................................................3

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS.............................................................................................4

1.4 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY.......................................................................................5

1.5 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS...........................................................................................5

1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY..................................................................................6

1.7 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY....................................................................................7

1.8 ORGANIZATION OF STUDY.......................................................................................7

CHAPTER II.........................................................................................................................9
LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK......................................9

2.1 FAMILY DECISION MAKING.....................................................................................9

2.2 CHILDREN INFLUENCE............................................................................................10

2.3 ROLE OF CHILDREN IN FAMILY BUYING DECISIONS.............................................11

2.3.1 Aggressive Influence Strategies......................................................................12

2.3.2 Persuasion Strategies.......................................................................................12

2.3.3 Rational Strategies...........................................................................................13

2.3.4 Knowledge Strategies......................................................................................13

2.3.5 Emotional Strategies........................................................................................13

2.4 SOCIO DEMOGRAPHICS STATUS.............................................................................13

2.4.1 Parenthood.......................................................................................................13

2.4.2 Age of the Child..............................................................................................14

2.4.3 Gender of the Child.........................................................................................15

i
 2.4.4 Type of Family................................................................................................16

2.5 SOCIO ECONOMIC STATUS.....................................................................................16

2.5.1 Household Income...........................................................................................17

2.5.2 Mother’s Employment Status..........................................................................17

2.6 TYPE OF PRODUCT.................................................................................................19

2.7 EXPOSURE TOWARDS INFORMATION.....................................................................20

2.7.1 Socialization....................................................................................................21

2.7.2 Advertisement.................................................................................................22

2.8 RELATION BETWEEN PARENTHOOD AND CHILDREN INFLUENCE IN FAMILY

BUYING DECISION..................................................................................................23

2.9 RELATION BETWEEN CHILDREN’S AGE AND THEIR INFLUENCE IN FAMILY BUYING
DECISION................................................................................................................24

2.10 RELATION BETWEEN CHILDREN’S GENDER AND THEIR INFLUENCE IN FAMILY

BUYING DECISIONS................................................................................................25

2.11 RELATION BETWEEN TYPE OF FAMILY AND ITS INFLUENCE IN FAMILY BUYING
DECISIONS..............................................................................................................26

2.12 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND FAMILY BUYING DECISIONS

26

2.13 RELATION BETWEEN MOTHER’S EMPLOYMENT STATUS AND FAMILY BUYING

DECISION................................................................................................................27

2.14 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PARENTAL STYLE AND FAMILY BUYING DECISIONS....28

2.15 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TYPE OF PRODUCT AND FAMILY BUYING DECISIONS...29

2.16 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOCIALIZATION AND FAMILY BUYING DECISIONS........30

2.17 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ADVERTISEMENT AND FAMILY BUYING DECISIONS.....31

2.18 RESEARCH GAP......................................................................................................32

2.19 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK....................................................................................33

CHAPTER III......................................................................................................................36
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY...............................................................36

ii
3.1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................36

3.2 RESEARCH PLAN AND DESIGN...................................................................................36

3.3 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION................................................................................................37

3.3.1 POPULATION............................................................................................................37

3.3.2 SAMPLE SIZE...........................................................................................................37

3.4 SOURCES OF DATA AND DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE.........................................37

3.4.1 PRIMARY DATA.......................................................................................................37

3.4.2 SECONDARY DATA..................................................................................................38

3.5 INSTRUMENTATION OF DATA.....................................................................................38

3.6 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE................................................................................39

3.7 RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY......................................................................................39

3.8 DATA ANALYSIS PLAN AND TOOLS USED.................................................................40

iii
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study

In the context of increasing competition and changing social and economic environment, it
becomes essential for the marketers to be customer oriented. Buying behavior of
customers in a marketplace plays a significant role in the strategic marketing planning.
The importance of understanding consumer behavior has introduced many new
dimensions in the marketing philosophy and practices. Consumer behavior is defined as
“the dynamic interaction of affect and cognition, behavior and environmental events by
which human beings conduct the exchange aspects of their lives”. It blends elements from
psychology, sociology, social anthropology and economics. It is both, relevant and
important for every business enterprise to know its customers and understand their buying
behavior.

The family as a consuming and decision-making unit has been identified as fundamental
and significant phenomenon in marketing and consumer behavior (Solomon, 2011; Lee &
Beatty, 2002; Assael, 1998). As a major buying and consumption unit, the family is
believed to have the largest influence and it is a prime target for most marketing
organizations in recent years. The involvement of each family member in the purchasing
of certain products & services and the ones that is utilizing the benefit out of that product
or service is an important piece of information for marketers and researchers. The
emerging conditions of today have dramatically affected the structures of the family as
well as their areas of responsibilities. Generally, the demographical and the social shifting
have led to decrease in the influences of parents and it has rather passed on to their
children. It is believed that the norm tradition and rules of parents deciding in the family
have begun to disappear. Communication in the family has become more open and
democratic. Consequently, children achieve more influence on family decision making.

Children constitute three different markets: the primary, the influencer, and the future
market. Certain products are simply children’s products for which they are the primary
users/buyers. They sometimes either purchase a product themselves or select the product
before it is purchased by the parents, so they are primary market. For other products, such

1
as ones which are used by the entire family unit, they may influence purchases made by
the parents. There are some products where children wield direct influence by overtly
specifying their preferences and voicing them aloud. After years of direct or indirect
observation of parental behavior in the marketplace, they gradually acquire relevant
consumer skills from their parents and act as a consumer themselves. Hence children are
also considered as future market.

According to CIA, the population of children under the age of 14 in Nepal in 2020 is
28.81% of the entire population, which constitute a significant segment for effective
marketing practice in the country. It is observed across the globe that there has been
increased interest in the study of children’s market segment especially, with the shift in the
family structures, power as well as role of women in the family. These changing
compositions of families and cultures in contemporary times seem to have changed the
role of children in family buying decisions.

Traditionally, the views of children and even women were hardly considered in most
South Asian cultures when major decisions are taken including family buying decisions. In
such situations, the views of adult male members of the family dominate and relegates to
the feelings and voices of the children in such families. However, with the increasing
education, acculturation and globalization of communications, this traditional view seems
to be shifting, giving way to a family structure where children can voice their feelings.

Today children have more freedom to choose instead of things being chosen by the parents
on what they eat, wear, or buy. The freedom of children’s will and desire has brought
benefit to the food market and other children’s industries. Based upon a review of previous
studies, children’s influence in family purchases and consumer decision making varied by
products and decision-related factors, as well as the socio-economic and demographic
factors of the family. Higher family income and more women in the workplace have been
debated as some of the factors that cause the greater influence of children in the family.
Therefore, children represent an important target market segment and gain respective
attention from the marketing point of view. As the children’s role in family decisions
increases, the research and studies concerning this matter have also become more
remarkable and more interesting, especially for marketers and food industries. The

2
previous and recent studies have discussed both perceptions from parents and children;
most have merely obtained the data on the amount or type of influence that children
applied. Children’s influence in family buying decisions has also generally been
investigated in a more specific context, focusing mainly on the products that are primarily
used by children.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

It has taken a long time for consumer decision-making research to acknowledge children
as important actors in the family’s decision-making process. The focus of previous studies
was centered on the role of husbands and wives, who have been considered the relevant
decision-making unit in the family; whereas the children’s role in the family was ignored,
overlooked, and neglected (Mangleburg 1990; Lee 1994). The influence of spouses on the
family decision-making process, who influenced whom, what conflicts appeared between
spouses during the decision process, and also how the spouses perceive the products and
how they value others’ judgments were the focus of attention from researchers. However,
later on researchers discovered that a greater importance in the family decision-making
process is now being placed on children. There is an increasing recognition of the child’s
importance in the family purchase decisions. Not only are children important players in
the family decision-making process, but they are also the significant influencers in
situations where influence is exercised indirectly through the structure of agreement within
the family members (LEE 1994).

There is a need to investigate the research with regard to children’s influence in family
decision making because children’s influence in family purchase decisions has generally
been evaluated in a limited context, focusing only on certain children’s products (e.g. toys
or cereals). Most studies were conducted in developed countries, such as in the USA and
Europe, and very few in other countries, such as Indonesia and India. Varying with
different cultures, norms, and religions, the previous studies might not be applicable
worldwide, and there is a need for further research in other countries in order to define the
problems and compare the results respectively. Many past researches have been conducted
on this topic, therefore the researcher is verifying this existing knowledge in the context of

3
Kathmandu, the capital of Nepal which is the emerging city in term of rapid changes in
culture and living standards.

Given the inadequacy of or problems from previous studies and the present changes in
family buying decisions, there is a need to investigate the research regarding children’s
influence during the family decision-making process further. The study of children’s
influence in Kathmandu will present the role and involvement of children in the family
decision-making process. The socio-economic and demographic background of the family
will also be examined, since they play an important role in analyzing the influence of
children in the family.

In this research, the theories with regard to children’s influence together with the empirical
approach are applied in order to define and analyze the children’s influence in the family
decision-making process. According to previous researches, children have influences on
the family buying process, especially on purchasing the food items that relate to children’s
preference. Based on previous studies conducted in India, children had more impact on the
selection of children specific products (lays, local chocolate and shoes) than the products
for family use. And also gender and age of the children was found to have an impact on
parent’s product selection. Such researches have expressed that children constitute a major
consumer market, with direct purchasing power for snacks and sweets, and indirect
purchase influence while shopping for high involvement products. Hence study of
influence of children on family buying decisions is very important. The findings of this
research can be helpful to the academicians as well as marketers to understand how
children’s plays a vital role in influencing their family purchases.

1.3 Research Questions

 Can socio-demographic and socio-economic status affect the children’s influence
in the family decision making?
 What is the relationship between parental styles and children’s influence in
decision making?
 How does the difference in the significance of product to children affect their
influence in family buying decisions?

4
  How does the level of children’s exposure towards information affect these
relationships?

1.4 Objective of the Study

The main aim of the study is to identify the extent of influence of children on family
buying decision-making and factors that has an impact on this influence . The specific
objectives of this study include:

 To analyze the impact of socio- economic and demographic status of family on

children’s influence on family purchase decision making.
 To examine the role of children in family buying decisions with respect to family
related products.
 To analyze the dimensions of child’s exposure towards information through
socialization and advertisement affecting child's influence in family buying
process.

1.5 Research Hypothesis

Based upon a review of the literature, children's influence in family purchase decisions
was found to vary by product and decision related factors, as well as by parental, child and
family characteristics. Several problems associated with previous research were also
identified, including problems with construct validity, over reliance on the survey method,
and lack of theoretical explanations for observed patterns of influence. The purposes of
this paper are to review previous research on children's influence in purchase decisions,
and to evaluate the existing state of knowledge in this domain. The alternative hypotheses
of this study are:

 H11: There is significant relationship between parenthood and children influence

on family buying decision.
 H12: There is significant relationship between type of family and children
influence on family buying decision.
 H13: There is significant relationship between household income and children
influence on family buying decision.

5
  H14: There is significant relationship between gender of child and children
influence on family buying decision.
 H15: There is significant relationship between age of child and children influence
on family buying decision.
 H16: There is significant relationship between parental style and children influence
on family buying decision.
 H17: There is significant relationship between socialization and children influence
on family buying decision.
 H18: There is significant relationship between advertisement and children influence
on family buying decision.

1.6 Significance of the Study

In the Scenario of today’s increased competition and the rapid changes in the socio-
economic environment, it is becoming increasingly crucial especially for marketers to
become consumer oriented i.e., focusing more on what consumers wants. Generally, the
purchasing behavior of consumer plays an important role in the strategic market
scheduling especially for the marketers and researchers. In the recent years there was quite
an increase in the consumer behavior, which has resulted in the development of new
dimensions and increased knowledge scope of marketers and researchers. Keeping this in
view, it is very much important for the entrepreneurs to know about the insights of the
consumers’ and to gauge those elements which result in the way in which the consumers
respond towards any product or service.

Hence in order to gauge the rapid shifts in the cultural and social class aspect, this research
will intend to identify and explain and likely changes that they have led the children to
become immediate consumers of the product and in some cases have become major
influencer in the purchase decision within the family. This research will help the marketers
in understanding how influential role of children largely affects parents’ buying decision
within a family. Moreover, it would help to analyze how the influence and dominance of
children varies based on socio-demographic and socio-economic variables. Marketers will
also have an idea of how children’s influence varies with the child related and family

6
related products and how level of socialization and advertisement have caused rapid
changes in the purchase influence of children within a family.

1.7 Limitations of the Study

Although the study applied a wide variety of perception but there are some limitations to
it. The limitations are as follows:

 Within this research, parents are used as the key respondent and hence it will help
to get their perception on children’s influence. This accuracy of the perception may
or may not be true.
 Children opinion has not been collected for the purpose of this research hence there
may be difference between the parent’s perception and actual influence by
children.
 The study relies on the primary information that is collected from self-
administered questionnaire.

1.8 Organization of Study

The study has been classified into five different chapters. Each chapter shows different
aspects of the entire report. These chapters include topics like introduction, review of
literature, research methodology, presentation and analysis of data and summary,
conclusion and recommendations.

Chapter I: Introduction

The first chapter deals with the brief outline of the topic of the study. It describes what the
research is all about and why project is worth undertaking. This chapter contains the
general background, statement of problem, objectives of the study, significance of the
study, research questions and hypothesis, definition of key terms and organization of the
study.

7
Chapter II: Literature Review and Conceptual Framework

The second chapter is a literature review and conceptual framework, which deals with
major findings of the earlier research studies and other precious writings relevant to the
subject matter of the present study.

Chapter III: Research Design and Methodology

The third chapter deals with the research design and methodology. This chapter includes
various techniques and methods employed to conduct the research. It basically defines
what research design was used for the research, what is the population and sample of the
study, how the sample was selected, what methods were used to gather data from the
respondents and what is the data processing and analysis procedure.

Chapter IV: Results and Discussion

The fourth chapter includes the presentation of data so collected from primary sources. It
deals with presentation and analysis of relevant data through definite courses of research
methodology with proper statistical tools and analysis.

Chapter V: Summary and Conclusion

The fifth chapter summarizes the whole research findings, and the appropriate
recommendations are forwarded on the basis of the conclusion of the research.

8
 CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 Family Decision Making

A family is defined as two or more persons related by marriage, or adoption who reside
together. In a more dynamic sense, the individuals who constitute a family might be
described as members of the most social group who live and interact to satisfy their
personal and mutual needs (Schiffman & Kaunak, 2007). “Family as a consuming and
decision-making unit is a central phenomenon in marketing and consumer behavior”
(Commuri & Gentry, 2000).Family always plays a very important mediating function. It
combines the individual with a larger society, where the person learns various roles
suitable for an adult life (Foxall, 1977). Family as a primary decision-making unit of
society have a significant role in purchase decision making processes of individuals.
Family decision making is different from individual decision making and is more complex
because of the likelihood of joint decisions and different role specifications from members
(Assael). Family members can also strongly influence buyer behavior. (Kiriinya, 2014)
has stated that marketers should be interested in the roles and influence of the husband,
wife, and children on the purchase of different products and services and buying roles
change with evolving consumer lifestyles.

Research on family decision making has been largely confined to spouses, who have been
considered as the relevant decision-making unit in a family. Most of the authors tend to
examine family decision making from a gender point of view, hence they try to explain the
relative influence of family members in the decision-making process. The level of
influence within the spouses depends on their contribution to household and type of
cultural background the family comes from. However, the role of third-party influences,
such as children, on decision making strategies and negotiations is essential to taking a
broader view of the relevant unit of analysis. Family has a significant role in consumer
socialization and in the process how children become consumers. It is a frame, within
what children learn to behave as consumers, acquire all competencies concerning to
purchase and consumption, and hence become competent to other consumers (Polya,
2012). Traditionally, women were seen to be the purchasing agents for the family.
Nonetheless, increasing participation of women in the workforce has prompted a shift in
this role as children are increasingly the “buyers” for the entire family. Even in families

9
where women do not work, children are observed to share this role with their mothers.
Children enjoy greater discretion not only in making routine consumption decisions for the
family but also in pestering their parents to buy other products desired by them.
Contemporary researchers express that children constitute a major consumer market, with
direct purchasing power for snacks and sweets, and indirect purchase influence while
shopping for big-ticket items (Kaur & Singh, 2006).

2.2 Children Influence

When one person acts in such a way as to change the behavior of another person in some
intended manner, influence has occurred (Cartwright 1959). Thus, influence can be
applied to purchase decisions when the child has in some way affected their parents’
consumption behavior. According to McNeal (1992) children’s purchasing power can be
direct, money controlled by the child, or indirect, relating to parental purchases that the
child initiates or influences. Perceived influence occurs when one family member believes
another member has affected a purchase decision. Several studies have found differences
in parental influence from families of different countries (Ogden, Ogden, & Ramzy).

Moreover Mikkelsen (2006) defines influence as “Children’s active and passive attempts
to achieve parent’s permission to participate in family decision-making thereby achieving
specific results.” Active influence is also called direct influence, where children exert
direct influence over parental spending when they request specific products and brands.
Direct influence also refers to joint decision making, actively participating with family
members to make a purchase or suggesting that other family members select or choose a
product or certain brands of the products (Blackwell 2006; Mc Neal1992).

Passive influence is also called indirect influence, where parents are aware of what the
child wants and try to comply without direct interaction with the child (Mikkelsen 2006),
and it occurs when parents buy products and brands that they know their children prefer,
without being asked or told to make that specific purchase (Blackwell 2006). The prior
knowledge that the parents have about the taste and preferences of the children creates the
passive buying patterns of the children.

10
Children play an important role in the consumer market by influencing their parents’
purchases either for the product used in the household or for themselves. More than 50%
of parents in some Asian countries (India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Philippines, and
South Korea) declared that their children are the important factor when it comes to
purchase decisions. They even mentioned that “a child’s demand” is the primary reason
for buying the products as cited by Dr.oec.troph. (2011). As per the findings of
Dr.oec.troph. (2011), there are several reasons of why children are becoming very
important in parent’s purchase decisions as per the findings of. First, nowadays parents are
having fewer children, and for this reason, they tend to give each child more possessions
and more allowances in buying things. Second, there are an increasing number of one-
parent households in which the child is expected to be more involved in the household
decision making. Third, having children is often postponed until later in life when parents‟
careers are well established. With this condition, children could participate more in
planning the purchases. Finally, in almost 70 percent of the households where both of the
parents are working, children are empowered to contribute more to purchase decisions
(Mc Neal1992).

2.3 Role of Children in Family Buying Decisions

Today children are not only passive observers, but they have taken a considerable place in
the families and have a significant influence on parental buying decisions. Children
exercise various methods to influence their parent’s decision of buying. Children influence
on parents buying decision making varies by product type, child, parent and family
characteristics etc. Most of the studies have shown that children yield more influence in
purchase decisions for children related products like toys, cereals, snacks, children wear,
as cited by Kaur & Singh 2006. Children have also been pragmatic to yield their influence
for family related products like vacations, family eating out decisions and movies as cited
by Ali & Batra, 2011. Children’s influence also depends on the education of the parents,
their profession, income, whether the parent is single and working, or both parents work
and also the family type, types of product (high, low and child centric product) among
others (Kumar, 2013). Nowadays, children play very decisive role in family buying
decision. They have the ability to induce every member of the family. Their convincing

11
power cannot be overlooked in this modern world where they come in touch with every
new market trends (Jain & Dave, 2015).

A complete set of tactics and strategies are in the little minds. Children use many different
techniques to influence the decision making for example but not limited to, asking,
bargaining, persisting, using force, telling, being demonstrative, threatening, and using
pity (Atkin, 1978). Children use a number of strategies like; offering to pay part of the
cost, doing extra chores and the aggressive one that is, keeping on asking (Soni &
Upadhyaya, 2007). Girls use nonaggressive strategies while boy tend to do the opposite
when influencing their mothers. Similarly, girls have a lesser persuasion power then boys
and the mothers tend to encourage autonomy in boys as compared to girls (Cowan &
Avants, 1988).

The issue of measuring the amount of direct influence attempts from children to wards
parents has seven dimensions namely; asking nicely, just asking, bargaining, showing
affection, displaying anger, begging and pleading, and conning (Williams & Burns, 2000).
Research findings suggests at least 3 attitudinal dimensions affect the degree to which
mothers said the children to be influential i.e. health-related, economic and liberal versus
conservative (Roberts, Wortzel & Berkeley, 1981).

The various influence tactics children use as per the research findings by Monica
Chaudhary in her article, “Role of children in the family buying process” published in2013
are as follows:

2.3.1 Aggressive Influence Strategies

These strategies are those in which the child displays some form of verbal or nonverbal
aggression to parents. Tactics like not eating, showing anger and acting stubbornly
belonged to Aggressive Strategies.

2.3.2 Persuasion Strategies

These strategies are those in which a child attempt to move parents by argument on appeal
to a belief, position, or course of action. It includes tactics like child’s expression of

12
opinion on product, insisting that this is what he/she wants, begging by the child, nagging,
whining and pretending illness to make parents sympathize.

2.3.3 Rational Strategies

Under rational strategies, child brings some logical explanation of his/her demand into
conversation like offering deals (example: clean room in return of a chocolate), bringing
some external reason, propose fair competition (example: coin toss) and mischief like
hiding things in the shopping trolley.

2.3.4 Knowledge Strategies

Knowledge strategies are tactics in which child displays his/her knowledge about the
product or brand. Child persuades parents by telling about the TV ad he/she saw about
product or the fact that this particular brand is famous.

2.3.5 Emotional Strategies

Last one is the Emotional Strategies in which the child acts affectionately in verbal
expression or behavior. Children are unnaturally nice to parents or they emotionally
blackmail that their all friends have it and so they also want it.

2.4 Socio Demographics Status

Demographic parameters like age, gender, income of their parents, family size and family
structure are crucial parameters to understand children and their retail requirements.
Children across different age groups differs in their cognitive development, henceforth it is
important to establish a relationship between the demographic characteristics of children
and their influence on the purchase decisions of their parents with respect to the level of
involvement with the product(Tomar, 2015).

2.4.1 Parenthood

Parenthood is a long and difficult journey where one does not simply bring a new human
life into the world but leads them on a journey to adulthood. The calling of a parent is to
take an infant who is completely dependent on other people physically and emotionally,

13
then nurture and raise them to be a completely independent adult. Parenthood requires a
great deal of energy, effort, resolve, courage and patience to succeed in. In the past, there
used to be a lot more support from tribal elders and community leaders to assist people in
being successful parents. However, society has changed a great deal and many people face
the difficult prospect of raising children either alone or without family or community
support.

Parenthood is about accepting that you are primarily responsible for your child’s
education, well-being, safety, emotional maturity and eventual attainment of adulthood. A
single-parent household or single-parent family means that either the mother or the father
has the responsibility of managing the household alone, including raising the children and
purchasing food. On the other hand, a dual-parent household is described as a full role
scheme where both parents share the burden and responsibilities in raising the children and
managing the household together (Sanik, 1986).. Darley &Lim, 1986 stated that the
importance of children in single parent families is relatively more than dual parent
families. This could be due to independent purchasing habits and household
responsibilities. Nelson (1978) identifies that such children are more likely to be involved
in purchase decisions.

2.4.2 Age of the Child

Age is another factor which cannot be ignored. The age of the child also influenced a
parent’s perception of influence. The older the child the more influence he/she is
perceived to have. As children get older parents become more confident in their decision-
making abilities is explained by Ogden & Ramzy in their report. A child’s age is the most
commonly researched variable in research involving purchase decision influence. The
influence that children have on parental purchase decisions appears to increase with age
(Ward &Wackman 1972Atkin 1978). Children get more influential as they reach at
adolescent level using their own developing skills as they grow (Moschis & Moore, 1979).

A child’s birth order could be related to their participation in decision making, with first-
born children exerting greater input and influence in the search, decision to purchase and
actual purchase of family products (Flurry, 2007; Churchill & Moschis, 1979). Parents

14
also perceive their older children to demonstrate more advanced understanding of
economic concepts and to have higher consumer skills than younger children(Beneke,
Silverstone, Woods, & Schneider, 2011).According to previous studies, the older the
children, the more influence they have in the family in terms of food consumption.

2.4.3 Gender of the Child

Gender differences and its effect on influence of children on family purchase decisions
have been studied in various previous studies. Three females within a family were found
to be more influential than three males acting together. Female children had more
influence in family decisions than male children (Lee & Collins, 2000). Gender difference
was also highlighted in another study which said that female adolescents are more likely to
perform socially desirable consumer behavior than male adolescents. However male
adolescents appeared to know more about consumer matters (Moschis & Churchill, 1978).
Whereas study conducted by Sharma & Sonwaney, 2014 reveals that the opinion of girls is
as valued as that of boys and hence concludes that gender would not affect the influence. It
might only affect the areas of influence.

Hansen & Halling (2002) do not find any significant differences in girls’ and boys’
purchase influence on groceries, beverages, and candy. (Martensen & Grønholdt, 2008)
only found significant differences for products clearly aimed at either girls or boys such as
perfume, hair styling products, hair color, sanitary napkins, and shaving products. Gender
differences dictating the level of influence have also been observed in many research.

Beneke, Silverstone, Woods, & Schneider( 2011), it is noted in various studies that the
moderating effect of gender may no longer be effective due to changes in the
contemporary family, such as delayed child-bearing and decreases in household size.
Today it is mostly found that many parents do not differentiate among their sons and
daughters and they socialize their children equally in terms of disciplining, communicating
and the amount of time spent with them.

15
2.4.4 Type of Family

Role of family as one of the most important socialization agents for children has been
emphasized time and again. Type of family a children is born and brought up in plays a
significant role in the level of influence children have in their families purchase decisions.
On the basis of type of family Nepalese society has been divided into two types: joint
family and nuclear family. Joint family is a type of extended family composed of parents,
their children, and the children’s spouses and offspring in one household. It may also be
defined as families where along with parents and children, other family members also stay
together. Whereas nuclear family is a family unit consisting of a child or children living
with two parents who are married to each other, especially when all live under the same
roof. Joint families are more prevalent in Nepal. However, nuclear families in the past
decade have increased in urban areas of Nepal.

In a nuclear family a child experiences socialization earlier than a child in a joint family.
This is because in a nuclear family possibility of parents to leave the child at home alone is
less while in a joint family possibility of leaving the child at home with grandparents is
more. This increases the exposure of child in nuclear family to consumerism much earlier
than a child in a joint family. Also in a nuclear family as number of family members is
less, the interaction between the members is more. It is assumed that this allows the
children a greater share in decision making (Sharma & Sonwaney, 2013).The changes in
the structure of the traditional family have been found to elevate children’s decision
making status (Flurry, 2007). Thus, the influence that adolescents have on the decision
making in their family may vary across different types of families, particularly in an
emerging market context (Alam & Khalifah, 2009).

2.5 Socio Economic Status

Socio economic status of a family affects the influence of family on children. Previous
studies have shown that socio-economic factors help explain the extent to which children
influence family purchase decision making. Specifically, the social status shows some
insights into how obviously and actively the children attempt to participate in family
decision making. Sharma & Sonwaney (2013) proposed that the family’s socio economic
status affects the socialization of children and at the same time also affects their influence

16
on family. Thus, adolescents from higher socio economic status were found to socialize
faster (Moschis & Churchill, 1978). As these children socialize faster, their knowledge
about market increases and this in turn allows them to influence their parents. The
influence of children on family purchase decisions from higher socio economic families
has been found to be more intensive than the influence of children from lower socio
economic family (Sharma & Sonwaney, 2014).

2.5.1 Household Income

Children whose parents have high income are most likely to have a high influence on the
process of family decision making, because the parents can afford to accommodate the
children’s preferences. It seems that perceptive children will have more influence in higher
income families, given that such families are likely to make more purchases than lower
class families (Dr.oec.troph.,2011).

As per the research findings by Jain & Dave, 2015, families that come in 25,000-50,000
income level consider kids’ influence in buying decisions. In a nutshell, kids’ influence do
exists and cannot be ignored in making purchase decisions. Poor families may priorities
the consumption of visible, public goods, such as brand name clothing, over the invisible,
private goods, such as food and other goods consumed in the home (Hamilton & Catterall,
2006). Verma & Kapoor (2004) stated that family income influences parent’s choice of
responses on their children purchase request. Also, increase in family income decreases
the chances of parent’s refusal for the purchase. Atkin (1978), Moschis & Mitchell (1986)
& Nelson (1978) states that children from higher family income groups as well as higher
class have more influence in purchasing decisions, than low income and low social class
families (Tomar, 2015).

2.5.2 Mother’s Employment Status

Employment status plans to have imperative impact in the lives of the youngsters. Mother
is generally considered to be the most noteworthy part in the socialization process of their
kids, and this has been emphasized in various researches. The effect of mother's
association on Socialization of youngsters was highlighted and moms were delegated
every regular. However the position of Fathers is by all accounts exceptionally lower

17
when contrasted with the mother in general family correspondence's example. At the
interim study show that working moms have a incline of disgrace of not possessed the
capacity to giving much time to her youngsters. Mothers generally compensate in a way
that they tend to spend money and giveaways to their children. Furthermore mother's
unlucky deficiency has extended the large portion of choices making taken by kids. For
this reason it has affected / expanded the influence of the children through a greater extent
(Ahmed, Ameen, Shaikh, & Memon, 2015).

Prominent role of mother in consumer socialization of children has been central in many
studies. The influence of mother’s interaction on consumer socialization of children was
highlighted and mothers classified as per common traits (Carlson & Grossbart, 1988;
Neeley & Coffey, 2007). Father’s role appeared to be very less than mother in family
communication pattern. Children of full time employed mothers shopped for their clothing
more often than children of mothers with part time/ no employment (Haynes et al, 1993).
Mothers concept oriented communication was positively linked to children’s use of
utilitarian, social, conspicuous decision making styles while mothers socio oriented
communication was positively linked to children’s use of undesirable decision making
style and negatively to children’s influence in family purchase decisions (Lim, Lee &
Tomuik, 2009). Parental Style

A parenting style is a psychological construct representing standard strategies that parents

use in their child rearing. The type of discipline parent use can have a dramatic effect on
their child’s development. Parental discipline strategies can have a big impact on the type
of relationship parents will have with their children. They are basically four types of
parenting styles; authoritarian, authoritative, permissive and uninvolved parenting.

Authoritarian parenting is where parents establish the rules and expect that children will
follow them without exception. Children have little to no involvement in problem-
solving challenges or obstacles. Instead, parents expect that children will follow all of the
rules all the time. Authoritative parents also have rules that children are expected to
follow, however, they allow some exceptions to the rule. They often tell children the
reasons for the rules and they are more willing to consider a child’s feelings when setting
limits. Authoritative parents tend to use consequences instead of punishments. Permissive

18
parents don't offer much discipline. They tend to be lenient and may only step in when
there is a serious problem. Permissive parents may take on more of a friend role than a
parent role. They may encourage their children to talk with them about their problems but
may not discourage a lot of bad behaviors. Uninvolved parents tend to be neglectful. They
often do not meet their children’s basic needs and may expect children to raise themselves.
Sometimes this is due to a parent’s mental health issues or substance abuse problems.
They may also lack knowledge about parenting and child development or may feel
overwhelmed by life’s other problems.

Family parental style is expected to affect children’s influence in family decision making
through the power distribution in the family. Children’s power in the family can affect
their choice of influence strategy and their degree of influence. By applying different
parental style, the parents can influence the power distribution in the family and children’s
influence strategies in the decision making process (Bao et al. 2007). Therefore, the
parental style is an important factor affecting children’s influence in family purchasing
decision (Wang, 2000).

Socialization of children is a function of parental style. Parental style is a “constellation of

attitudes toward the child that are communicated to the child and that, taken together,
create an emotional climate in which the parent’s behaviors are expressed” (Darling &
Steinberg, 1993, p. 488). Differences in parental styles account for differences as regards
to the way parents attempt to control children’s behavior through use of emotions, use of
authority, etc. at the time of socializing them.

2.6 Type of Product

Studies have reported that child’s influence on family purchase decisions varies by
product characteristics. The importance of the product for the child and knowledge of the
child about the product has an effect on his or her influence. As cited by Martensen &
Gronholdt, 2008 the degree of influence exerted by children depends on how interested or
involved the children are in the product or purchase. Products for the children’s own use
are likely to be perceived as the most personally relevant. Hence the child is expected to
have the strongest influence on decisions for products which they are directly involved in

19
consuming (Foxman et al., 1989; John, 1999). In contrast, children are expected to have
significantly less influence when purchases are not for self-use or have low personal
relevance for the child; the child may not be motivated to influence these decisions, and
thereby a moderate influence is assumed.

Children’s influence is also expected to be lower for family products that involve
substantial financial outlays such as TVs and cars. Due to the financial risk associated with
these family products, parents will more likely prefer to make these decisions without
permitting the child to influence them to any appreciable degree. Children are thus
assumed to have least influence on durable and expensive products. However, past
research indicates mixed results. Results that support these a priori hypotheses include
Szybillo et al. (1977), Hansen & Halling (2002), Lackman & Lanasa (1993). Results that
contradict the a priori hypotheses show that children not only influence the purchase of
products that are directly consumed only by them, but a much wider range of products for
use by the entire family (Foxman et al., 1989; Kim et al., 1991). More recent studies even
indicate that children’s influence is not insignificant even on expensive and durable
consumer goods as well as more technical products (Verma & Kapoor, 2003; Lackman &
Lanasa, 1993).

The research noted that across stages of product adoption awareness, knowledge,
preference, conviction, and adoption for durables, Fast Moving Consumer Goods
(FMCGs), and services, children were previously inactive in all stages of adoption except
for the actual adoption stage. However, today, children are active in all the five stages of
adoption of durables as well as FMCGs. He reported that in the new urban Indian family,
children were influencers/co-deciders at the time of purchase of personal products,
consumables, financial products, vacations, educational products, and family automobiles
while they were buyers of family toiletries and initiators or gatekeepers for purchases of
household durables (Kaur & Singh, 2006).

2.7 Exposure Towards Information

Generally, there is a flood of information about the various range of product and services
and simultaneously huge range of option, choice and alternatives available together

20
endless discount and promotional offers. Confused consumers are more faced towards
deceptive practices of marketing and thus are not able to process the information in a
logical manner (Mitchell & Papvassiliou, 2005). Advertisement in this case plays a major
role in creating confusion to consumers. Huge concern about children is present in this
regard, since children as viewers of advertisement are exposed to lot of commercials.
Research shows confused consumers tends to involve another person in the purchase
decision making and even sometimes involve them completely (Mitchell & Papvassiliou,
2005). Generally a decrease in the disposable income and increased confusion level, have
led parents to include children in the process of purchase decisions. They have indeed
started passively delegating their children with the decision making responsibilities.
Around 80% of all the advertisement are targeted towards the children which lies under
basic four categories i.e., cereals, toys, candies and restaurants (Kunkel & Gants, 1992).

2.7.1 Socialization

Socialization has been defined as the process by which people acquire skills, knowledge
and attitudes relevant to their functioning as consumers in marketplace. A subset of
socialization is consumer socialization, defined as the process by which people develop
consumer-related skills, knowledge and attitudes (Moschis & Churchill 1978a).

According to Ward, 1974, consumer socialization is defined as “processes by which young

people acquire skills, knowledge, and attitudes relevant to their functioning as consumers
in the marketplace.” Family has been found to play a pivotal role in socialization of
children. The findings by Sharma & Sonwaney, 2014 traces that now children are
influencing the family purchase decisions and in the process, parents are once again
learning, acquiring skills knowledge and attitudes, only this time from children. The result
is re-socialization of parents.

Consumer socialization occurs in the perspective of significant cognitive changes and

social developments, which take place in a progression of stages as children become
socialized into their role as consumers. These changes take place as children move through
three stages of consumer socialization, which are introduced from the perceptual stage
(age 3-7) to the analytical stage (age 7-11), then to the reflective stage (age 11-16).

21
Children in the perceptual stage have limited awareness of information sources, whereas
children in the analytical stage have an increased awareness of personal and mass media
sources. Children in the reflective stage have contingent use of different information
sources depending on the product or situation.

The process of consumer socialization begins with infants, who accompany their parents
to stores, where they are initially exposed to marketing stimuli. Within the first two years,
children begin to make requests for desired products. As kids learn to walk, they also tend
to make their own selections when they are in stores. With refer to Solomon, 2003, by
around the age of five, most kids are making purchases with the help of parents and
grandparents, and by eight most are making independent purchases and have become full-
fledged consumers.

2.7.2 Advertisement

The best tool for spreading out awareness is considered to be the media which is very true
and advertising is its integral part. Advertisements affect the opinions, attitudes and
behaviors of children and thus creating awareness (Nasir & Jalbani, 2009). From the
massive media blast, now children know ahead of time what actually they want, and most
of them make rapid decisions regarding the purchase (Atkin, 1978).

Marketers use television as a medium of communication since it affords access to children

at much earlier ages than print media can accomplish, largely because textual literacy does
not develop until many years after children have become regular television viewers.
Approximately, 80% of all advertising targeted to children falls within four product
categories: toys, cereals, candies, and fast-food restaurants (Kunkel & Gantz, 1992).
Young children are able to differentiate between a TV program and a commercial but are
unable to understand the intent of an advertisement until they are 8-10 years of age
(Goldberg et al, 1978).

With increasing age, children’s attitude towards ads changes from being positive to
negative and further as children step into adolescence, they become skeptical of
advertising. Boush et al. (1994) concluded that children in young adolescence even

22
exhibited mistrustful predispositions towards advertising. In adolescents, knowledge about
advertiser tactics increased with age. Higher levels of knowledge of advertiser tactics and
certain personality variables were positively related to adolescents’ skepticism towards
advertising. Moschis & Churchill (1979) and Moschis (1987) also found that older
adolescents tended to 1) develop resistance to persuasive advertising, 2) understand better
the marketing strategies related to the pricing of products, and 3) generally become more
sophisticated as consumers.

Celebrities and cartoon characters are commonly used by marketers, as children’s views of
advertising appeals are largely influenced by them. The practice is largely witnessed in
restaurants giving small toys as a token of remembrance to children such as McDonalds
(Williams & Veeck, 1998), or associating a cartoon character with a cereal.

2.8 Relation between Parenthood and Children Influence in Family Buying Decision

Dimensions of family authority are likely to be affected by family structures such as single
parent, step-parent or intact families (Mangleburg et al., 1999) and are expected to affect
children’s influence on family and child-related purchase decisions (Kaur & Singh, 2006).
Adolescents in single-parent families appear to have greater influence than adolescents in
step and intact families (Kaur & Singh, 2006; Mangleburg et al., 1999). Ahuja & Stinson
(1993) found that children in single parent households are three times more likely to shop
with their family as well as shop alone for their family. These findings are due to
differences in socialization with respect to family authority relations and the child
assuming greater independence and responsibilities than those who live in dual-parent
households (Kaur &Singh, 2006; Flurry, 2007).

Mangleburg et al. (1999) proposed that in some families, children are treated more as
equals by parents, whereas, in others, children are viewed as subordinate to parents’
authority. These dimensions of family authority or parent-child authoritarianism are likely
to be affected by family type, that is, single-parent, step-parent, or intact families. Parental
coalition formation is seen as a means to reinforce the decisions made by one spouse and
limit children’s influence. Family type is expected to be related to parental coalition
formation and parent-child authoritarianism. These two dimensions are expected to affect

23
children’s influence in family- and child-related purchase decisions. The study by Kaur &
Singh (2006) revealed that adolescents in single-parent families had greater influence than
their counterparts in step and intact families, probably due to differences in socialization
with respect to family authority relations. Kourilsky & Murray (1981) examined the effect
of economic reasoning on satisfaction within the family and found that single-parent
families exhibited a higher level of economic reasoning and satisfaction as compared to
two-parent families. More recently, Shoham, Rose & Bakir (2004) found that children of
pluralistic parents seem to have more influence than children of laissez-faire parents for
durable goods and more influence than protective parents for non-durables.

2.9 Relation between Children’s Age and their Influence in Family Buying Decision

The influence of children increases with age (Atkin, 1978; Moschis & Mitchell, 1986) and
the ability to comprehend the content of advertising messages also increases with age. As
concluded by Kaur & Singh (2006) age was related to the number of information sources
preferred, and there was also an increase with age in the propensity to prefer friends as a
source of information. Similarly, the tendency to rely on parents for information and
advice decreased with age. It was also found that as the ages of children increased, they
preferred to shop without their parents. Moschis & Churchill (1978) found positive
relationships between the consumption ability of adolescents and social class and age.

Age influences the level of consumer involvement (Slama & Tashchin 1985; Jain and
Sharma 2002). Age and involvement levels also, when 'combined, give implications of
significant importance to the marketers. In the research by Tomar (2015) age of the
children was divided into two groups – 2-7 years and 8-12 years. First age group was
preoperational (2-7 years), in this age group child develops use of language and his ability
to think in symbol. At this stage child also develops his ability to think operationally in
one direction though he is uncomfortable in understanding another person’s point of view.
Second age group is concrete operational (8-12) years, in this stage child is able to solve
hands on problem logically. He is able to manage and conserve the things around him. It
was found that there is a significant difference in the age groups as far as children
influence parents buying decision is concern for high involvement products. Whereas
there is no difference in two age groups as far as children influence on parents buying

24
decision is concern for low involvement products. (Tomar, 2015). Those children who
are5-11 years old are consulted by their parents directly for their interests of toys, foods or
the colors where the teenagers use some strategies to show there inters like emotional
feeling, begging or influencing again and again about cloths shoes playing instrument etc.
(Palan &Wilkes, 1997).

According to the research by Ogden, Ogden & Ramzy it was concluded that the age of the
child also influenced a parent’s perception of influence. The older the child the more
influence he/she is perceived to have. As children get older parents become more
confident in their decision making abilities. It appears that children are becoming more
influential at a younger age. This is also supported by the study by Ali & Batra (2011) as it
stated that as the children grow older, their impact on parent’s selection of various items
increases. Another study by Sharma & Sonwaney (2013) revealed that older children will
have more influence in family purchase decision in comparison to that of younger
children.

2.10 Relation between Children’s Gender and their Influence in Family Buying
Decisions

Lee & Beatty (2002) stated that gender based differences are also found with respect to
influential position in the household. Further parents yield in more to the request made by
the girls than those by the boys (Atkin, 1978; Moschis & Mitchell 1986). Perhaps girls
communicate overtly as compared to boys about consumption (Moschis, Moore, &
Stephens, 1977). Therefore, female children are slightly more successful in influencing
parents than male children (Lee & Beatty, 2002). In another study conducted in India
stated that girls have more freedom in prioritizing their daily activities than boys. Tinson
& Nancarrow (2005) conducted a study including factors like access to media and retail
outlet, presence and absence of different members during purchase decision making, they
found a significant difference in the influence of boys and girls in family purchases. Also,
there are differences in the involvement levels for various products between men and
women and the way they process and evaluate process is also different (Slama &
Tashchian, 1985; Jain & Sharma, 2002).

25
Gender differences were also observed as male adolescents displayed more favorable
attitudes towards stores, greater consumer affairs knowledge, more materialistic values,
and stronger social motivations for consumption. On the other hand, females showed more
favorable attitudes towards advertising and scored significantly higher on information
seeking and cognitive differentiation measures. In general, female children have stronger
influence in family purchase decisions (Atkin, 1978; Lee & Collins, 1999; Moschis &
Mitchell, 1986) and use influence strategies such as reasoning, asking, and persuading
more frequently do boys (Lacznaik &Palan, 2004). Sundberg et al. (1969) reported that
Indian girls perceived their families as significantly more cohesive than Indian boys;
however, the absolute difference was not great. Sex differences in decision making were
also found to be stronger in India than in America.

2.11 Relation between Type of Family and its Influence in Family Buying Decisions

Rindfleisch & Burroughs (1996) suggest that the changing structure of the family may
have implications for consumer research. However, Geuens, Mast & De Pelsmacker
(2002) found that contemporary family structures, such as single parent families and
smaller families, have only a minor impact on children’s influence on decision making.
Other studies have highlighted the importance of family dynamics and communication
patterns.

Mangleburg (1992) investigated the effect of family type, family hierarchy, and parental
style on children’s influence in family consumption decisions. She proposed a
meditational model for the effect of family type on children’s influence. Specifically,
family type (single parent vs. reconstituted vs. intact families ) was proposed to directly
affect five socialization factors, including pureness between parents and children,
children’s household responsibility, parental coalition formation, parental restrictiveness,
and parental nurturance.

2.12 Relationship between Household Income and Family Buying Decisions

Moschis & Moore (1979) found that a significant positive relationship exists between
adolescents’ socio-economic background and the extent of brand preferences for various
products. Researchers found that children exert more influence in higher income and

26
larger families (Foxman et al., 1989; Szybillo, Sosanie, & Tenenbein, 1977; Ward &
Wackman, 1972). Studies conducted by Jenkins (1979) and Atkin (1978) confirmed that
children influence higher in high income families or economically sound families.
Prahalad & Lieberthal (2003) studied the development of low income market around the
world and revealed price sensitivity in the consumers of such markets. Therefore, the
values can be passed to children too, which makes the children of such low income
markets price sensitive.

Word (1974), Moschis & Churchill (1978) and R.L. Moore & Moschis (1979) suggested
that in high income families more parent–child interactions take place related to purchase
decisions making, because they have more exposure to economic world than low income
families. Beauty & Talpade (1994) verified that children in high income families will have
more influence on family purchase decisions, what can be explained due to accessibility of
funds. However, the studies of Atkin (1978) and Ward & Wackman (1972) did not found
any impact of socioeconomic status on children’s influence attempts. It was also revealed
in their study that parents in low income families take their children to several buying
trips, because they don’t have any one to take care of them, hence spend more time in
shopping environment. As cited by Ali & Batra (2011) it was found that children in low
income families make more purchase requests because they are more frequently exposed
to advertising than children of high income families. It also studied that parents in low
income families valued the children’s purchase requests more as compared to high income
families and hence children in such families influenced the family purchase decisions
more than high income families. Singh (1992) studied in India a positive relationship
between family income and children’s influence. Children belonging to families who were
economically sound exhibited more influence than those who were not. These findings
were also supported by report of Ali & Batra (2011) which concluded that the effect of
family’s monthly income was seen to have a significant impact on children’s influence on
parent’s product selection.

2.13 Relation between Mother’s Employment Status and Family Buying Decision

Researchers observed that children had less influence over purchase decisions when the
mother was considered traditional or conservative and modern mothers get influenced by

27
children if they do not work outside the home; if they work, the impact of children is less.
At the same time studies show that working mothers have a feeling of guilt of not been
able to spend enough time with children. They try to compensate for it by giving and
spending money on them. Also, mother’s absence has increased the number of decisions
taken by children. This has increased the influence of children on purchase making
decisions. Mothers are spending less time with children. Overridden by guilt over
protracted absence, fatigue and work pressure, the parent centered family has changed its
orbit and has become child centered. As cited by Sharma & Sonwaney, 2014, parents who
believe that they do not spend enough time with their children feel guilty and try to
compensate for it by giving and spending more money for their children. Thus, findings
from Sharma & Sonwaney, 2014 has concluded that children of working mothers will
have more influence in the purchase decision making.

2.14 Relationship between Parental Style and Family Buying Decisions

For pluralistic and lassie-faire parental styles, children are encouraged to express their idea
and choose for themselves. Hence, children are expected to have made their own
decisions. The children under pluralistic and lassie-faire parental styles would have more
influence in the family decision making, especially in the information seeking and
evaluation stage. For consensual and protective parental styles, the parents‟ powers are
emphasized. Under the consensual and protective parenting, the children are encouraged to
make their own choice and decision, but their choices are highly correlated with parents‟
preference and less effective in the decision stage. However, the children’s influences in
the decision stage are similar in these four different types of parental styles (Flurry, 2007).
The American families tend to employ the pluralistic and lassie-faire styles of parenting
and giving their children more power in the family given the egalitarian nature. And the
individualism culture encourages the children to speak out their preference and argue for
their own interests. An evidence is that the American children were reported tending to
overstate their influence relative to their parent’s attributions. The conflicts between
children and parents exist commonly in United States (Foxman, Tansuhaj & Ekstrom
1989).

28
In contrast to American families, Flurry (2009) study in Chinese families shows that the
Chinese children often agree with their parents decisions. Although the one child policy
has shifted the power and authority within families from older to younger generation (Yan
2003), children are taught to compromise their own wishes in consideration of parental
needs and wants (Yau, 1993). Relationship between Type of Product and Family Buying
Decisions

Many researchers investigated the child’s influence on purchase of durables, snacks, toys,
holiday/vacations, movies, eating at particular restaurants etc. Hundal (2001) in a study of
rural buying behavior in the Amritsar district of Punjab revealed that while making
purchase decisions for durables including refrigerators, televisions, air coolers, and
washing machines spouses took the decisions together but they were highly influenced by
children also.

Robert et al (1981) claimed that children have relatively lower influence on purchasing
decisions when same are related to finance. Their influence was highest for products that
related directly to the child (Foxman et al, 1989; Mangleburg, 1990; Beatty & Talpade,
1994; Shoham & Dalakas, 2005) Children’s influence was more for snack products and
toys (Ahuja & Stinson, 1993). While one study on Indian children suggested that children
had more impact on selection of children specific products than products for family use,
another contrasted it by highlighting that Indian children have influence in various product
categories used not just by children but by family and household (Ali & Batra, 2011).

Children are expected to have more influence on the products that they use themselves
because of the personal relevance (Foxman, Tansuhaj et al. 1989; Mangleburg 1990;
Beatty & Talpade 1994; John 1999). Conversely, children are expected to have less
influence in products that are more expensive because parents will want to make these
decisions without consideration of the child’s desires. Therefore, children’s influence will
be less with durable products which tend to be more expensive (Foxman, Tansuhaj et al.
1989; Mangleburg 1990; Martensen & Gronholdt 2008). This finding has been
contradicted by findings that children are influential in many products that affect the
family, even in the more expensive durable products (Verma & Kapoor 2003).

29
For almost all product categories, children have an important role (Martensen &
Gronholdt, 2008), whether the product is for the child's own use like toys, snacks, clothes,
etc. or the product is for family use like family vacation or the product is for joint
consumption of the household like rice, food, tea/coffee, children have a very strong
power to influence (Belch et al., 1985). But children influence in family buying process
differs by product category. According to Martensen & Gronholdt, (2008), children seem
to have a significant influence in product decisions for which they will be the primary
consumer, like breakfast cereals, snack foods, toys, children's clothes and school supplies.
According to Kiriinya, 2014 children also influence decisions about family leisure time
activities such as vacations, movie attendance, eating out and cable TV subscriptions,
although their influence is less in these decisions than in decisions for products for their
own use.

2.15 Relationship between Socialization and Family Buying Decisions

Hamilton & Catterall, 2006 Moore, Wilkie & Lutz (2002) examine the power of
intergenerational influence and suggest that the family is the most important socialization
agent. This is consistent with Cotte &Wood (2004) who conclude that parental influence is
stronger than sibling influence on consumer innovativeness. Ward (1974) suggests two
alternative explanations for the socialization of children in poor families. First, children in
poor families, who have less experience of money, may develop fewer consumer skills
than children in higher-income families who have more consumption opportunities.
Second, children from poor families may become highly skilled consumers because of
their experience with the use of scarce resources.

Lackman & Lanasa (1993) contend that increasing child influence is the result of higher
consumer socialization of children, in part due to the socioeconomic changes that have
occurred. Parents are the most important source for children to learn consumer-related
skills (Moschis & Churchill 1978a). Due to the socioeconomic and structural changes,
reciprocal socialization is occurring, a phenomenon where children also influence parents
just as parents influence children. Thus, children are increasingly becoming active
participants in family purchase decisions. (Ogden, Ogden, & Ramzy).

30
Ekstrom, Tansuhaj, & Foxman (1987) took a reciprocal view of consumer socialization of
children and proposed that children contribute to decision outcome through two routes one
by influencing their parents by direct expression of preferences and secondly by
communicating new knowledge to the parents and influencing purchases. They proposed
that children whose family communication pattern is characterized by a high concept-
orientation will influence (socialize) their parents more than children whose family
communication pattern is characterized by a high socio-orientation.

2.16 Relationship between Advertisement and Family Buying Decisions

Besides socialization mass media advertisement also plays vital role in providing
information about products to the children. Singh (1998) in India, like Jensen (1995) in the
U.S., also found that purchase requests by children are strongly stimulated by commercials
or by a friend who has recently purchased a product. Retention of advertisements was high
among children (for age group 5-15 years), but the percentage of final purchases prompted
by exposure to advertisements was low at 30 percent. This was because the most reliable
source for discussion, before buying products, was the family and the child also used his
own intelligence and experience to solve the purchase problem.

Kapoor & Verma (2005) investigated children’s understanding of TV advertising in a

comprehensive study in Delhi. Their findings revealed that child as young as six years
could understand the purpose of TV ads and distinguish between a commercial and a TV
program. With an increase in the age of the child, cognitive understanding of the ad
increased and children above the age of eight years were able to respond to TV ads in a
mature and informed manner. Heavy viewing was positively associated with favorable
attitudes towards TV ads and, conversely, interest in ads declined with age. Children’s
exposure to TV ads was determined to a large extent by parents’ control of their viewing.
Parent-child interaction played an important role in the children’s learning of positive
consumer values and their parents perceiving the influence as positive on their children’s
buying response. Both parents and children noted the impact of TV ads on children’s
purchase requests (Kaur & Singh, 2006).

31
In researches related to communication and advertisement, level of social learning tends to
explain and predicts how consumers are involved in decisions related to purchase
consumption (Moschis & Churchill, 1978). Children often try to copy and develop
behaviors and attitudes of other. These models then become the role model for the children
and that all the decisions related to career objectives, education, and self-views are then
influenced by those role models over the lives of children. The study shows that marketing
to children is no more a kid stuff, and that parents consider that children tend to have more
knowledge related brands, models, trends and hence can make better purchase decisions
compared to them (Halan, 2002 as cited by Ahmed et al., 2015).

2.17 Research Gap

There has been wonderful increase in attention paid to children and adolescents as a
distinguished market segment both by the academics and practitioners. This was
somewhat due to worldwide population increase in segment, as well as the fact that
children and adolescents now hold significantly more buying power as compared to
previous decades.

Many studies has been done in various countries by various researcher regarding the
influence of children on family purchasing decision-making. The earlier studies on
influence of children on family purchasing decision-making have been conducted in
developing and developed countries. It is identified that very few research has been carried
out in this topic in least developed countries. But there is no such research conducted in
Nepal.

Most of the literature revealed that children begin to affect family purchasing decisions as
early as they are 5 years old. Although several studies are available in the literature, which
investigates the influence of younger children, they either take parents as sampling units or
use other data collection methods such as observation, rather than surveys (Ward and
Wackman, 1972). Since the cognitive abilities are not developed to evaluate the situation
and answer the questions presented in a questionnaire. Therefore, their parents are
included in the sample of this study

32
2.18 Conceptual Framework

The below model is modified from (Adya sharma, Vandana sonwaney, 2014). This
original model explains that learning is two-way process and that parents tend to learn
even from their children to become consumers. The below model have focused on those
variables which in turn impact the children to influence their parents which results in
overall influence in the family purchase decision. For the research six elements have tested
through quantitative research. The overall impact that these variables tend to have on
children to influence on the overall family purchase decision.

Factors Determining Children’s Influence

Socio-Demographic &
Economic Status

 Parenthood
 Type of family
 Household income

Child Demographics

 Age
 Gender
Family Buying
Decisions
Parental Style

Types of Products

Socialization

Advertisement

Figure2.1: Conceptual Framework

33
Independent variables
For the purpose of this research, various factors influencing children’s influence on family
buying decisions has been studied as independent variable. The independent variables are
described below:

 Socio-Demographic and Socio-Economic Status

Socio-demographic and socio-economic status of the family is regarded as an
important factor that determines the children’s influence in the family. To
determine socio-demographic status parenthood and type of family is studied and
for knowing socio-economic status household income is used.

 Child Demographics
Child demographics such as their age and gender play an important role in
influencing their parents in family buying decisions as per various research
conducted abroad. Hence to see whether child demographics play similar
importance in Nepal, it has been studied as an independent variable.

 Parental Style
There are basically four types of parental styles. But for the purpose of this
research, only two parental styles have been taken under consideration. The
research attempts to study whether the children of authoritarian parents influences
more or those of permissive parents influences more on their family buying
decisions.

 Types of Products
The importance of the product for the child and knowledge of the child about the
product has an effect on his/her influence. The research expects to reveal the
children’s influence on family related and child related products.

 Socialization

Socialization refers to the process by which children develop consumer-related

skills, knowledge and attitudes. Generally, children get marketplace knowledge
through their parents. But today children are exposed towards more information
through interaction with peer groups and internet. Hence, the research attempts to

34
 check whether socialization has significant impact on children’s influence on
family decision or not.

 Advertisement
Advertisements affect the opinions, attitudes and behaviors of children and thus
creating awareness (Nasir & Jalbani, 2009).Children tend to know about lot of
products through advertisements. Thus advertisement has been studied as a
separate independent variable for the purpose of the research.

Dependent Variable

The variable that depends on other factors that are measured is called dependent variable.
These variables are expected to change as a result of an experimental manipulation of the
independent variable or variables. Family purchase decision has been studied as a
dependent variable for the research. Family buying decision is the decision-making
activity involving the purchase of goods and services within a family involving several
family members who plays the variety of role in the process. Family purchase decision
here includes decision regarding purchase of various products from groceries, clothing to
household products.

35
 CHAPTER III
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction

This chapter is devoted to understanding the methodology used for conducting the
empirical study. It basically entails research design, data collection methods employed,
sampling procedure, and the data analysis plan. It is designed to describe the research
methods used to meet the stated objectives of the study. The methodology refers to the
procedural framework within which the research is conducted. This chapter tries to
discover the research process regarding individual and contextual factors. This chapter
also explains the collection procedure of data and the methodology used by the researcher
for analyzing the available data. This study portrays the parents’ perception on children
influence on family buying decisions. This chapter includes sampling, research plan and
design, instrumentation of data, reliability and validity and data analysis plan and tools
used.

3.2 Research Plan and Design

A research design is a master plan for designing the ways to gather and analyze the
information needed. It is a plan developed for designing the ways to gather different data
and analyze the information needed. This study used a causal research design because it
explores the effect of one variable on another. A causal explanation exists when there is a
correlation between an independent variable and a dependent variable (Pant, 2009). The
objective of this research is to study the relationship between family’s socio-economic
status, socio-demographic status, type of product, socialization, advertisement and family
purchase decisions.

This study is descriptive in nature, focused on hypothesis testing. Existing theories and
concepts will be applied in the research process, the research will use quantitative analysis
to meet its objectives. The findings of this research will be based upon the primary survey.
The data will be collected by formulating a set of questionnaire and the questionnaire will
be distributed to the respondents. The questionnaire will be self-administered. The
findings will be totally based in the data and facts provided by sampled respondent. SPSS
will be used to analyze the data and to come to a valid conclusion Microsoft Excel will be

36
used to analyze and interpret the quantitative data. This software is commonly used by
researchers as easily available in business settings. The reliability of scales will be
analyzed using Cronbach’s alpha since this test is best measure for multiple scale items
and it is also the most popular test for the inter-item consistency reliability.

3.3 Sample Description

3.3.1 Population

A population is basically defined as the universe of units from which the sample is to be
selected (Ghauri & Gronhaug, 2005). The target population to assess the parents’
perception on children’s influence on family decisions was parents with children under the
age of thirteen.

3.3.2 Sample Size

One of the challenging steps during the research is to select the sample. In this study
convenience random sampling was used, one of the main types of non-probability
sampling methods. A convenience random sample is made up of people who are easy to
reach. A sample size of 151 respondents was taken, due to the need for a relatively large
sample size while at the same time considering the research costs and time, which
represents the population i.e. parents of children inside the Kathmandu valley. For
variation in the sample, respondents from various schools, offices, banks were collected.
The teachers as well as parents of the students at schools were approached for filling up
the questionnaire. The perceptions of parents were assessed through primary survey.

3.4 Sources of Data and Data Collection Procedure

3.4.1 Primary Data

In the process of colleting the required data for the research, a structured questionnaire
will be designed and distributed among parents with children under thirteen. Primary data
will be collected with questionnaire survey and will be administered to obtain quantitative
data. The questionnaire will include respondents’ profile, demographic questions and
majority of 5 scales Likert scale questions to test the hypothesis.

37
3.4.2 Secondary Data

For the conceptual and literature review various report, article and the thesis of the various
authors are used. With the help of secondary data, researcher came to know about the
research work of various researches relating to similar topic in various other countries.
Conceptual framework of the research was prepared after reviewing various previous
researches on similar topic.

3.5 Instrumentation of Data

Well-structured questionnaire will be prepared as the main instrument of the data

collection for the study. The questionnaire will be classified into two parts that are:

Part I: Demographic

In this part, respondents’ demographic profile, respondents’ socio-demographic and socio-

economic status and respondents’ child demographics will be asked.

Part II: Questions related to variables answered in a five-point Likert scale.

The second part will be comprised of 29 questions to measure the independent variables
and dependent variables. There will be six independent variable which are the factors
determining children’s influence. The independent variables are socio-demographic and
socio-economic status, child demographics, parental style, type of product, socialization,
advertisement. The dependent variable for the research is family purchase decision.

Likert scale will be used in the study to generate statistical measurements of people’s
attitude and opinion. A Likert scale is a scale commonly used in questionnaire, and is most
widely used scale in survey research. Respondents will be specify their level of agreement
to a statement when responding to a Likert questionnaire item. Likert scale is a direct
measure of attitudes developed by Rensis Likert. The advantage of using Likert scale is

38
that it is the most universal method for survey collection and it is easy to understand. The
responses are easily quantifiable and subjective to computation of some mathematical
analysis. Since it does not require the participant to provide a simple and concrete yes or
no answer, it does not force the participant to take a stand on a particular topic, but allows
them to respond in a degree of agreement; this makes question answering easier on the
respondent. These responses are very easy to code when accumulating data since a single
number represents the participant’s response. Likert surveys are also quick, efficient and
inexpensive methods for data collection. They have high versatility and can be sent out
through mail, over the internet, or given in person. In this study a five point Likert-scale
will be used as indicated below:

 Strongly Disagree
 Disagree
 Neutral
 Agree
 Strongly Agree

3.6 Data Collection Procedure

Survey method will be used for the data collection of this study. A structured
questionnaire will be prepared and distributed to the respondent through personal visit and
electronically. The questionnaire will be filled by the respondents following the instruction
and finally the responses will be collected from the respondents.

3.7 Reliability and Validity

Steps will be taken to make the study reliable so that a valid conclusion could be
generated. A properly structured questionnaire will be developed based on the literature
review to make the research more reliable. Questionnaire will also include cross question
to check the validity of the respondents’ answers. Pre-testing of questionnaire will also be
carried out prior to questionnaire distribution.

39
Pilot testing will be done to check the reliability. The purpose of the pilot test is to refine
the questionnaire so that respondents don’t face any problems answering the question and
to eliminate further problems in recording data. Weakness in design and instrumentation
can be detected through a pilot study and it can provide proxy data for selection of
probability sample (Cooper, 2006). A total of 15 respondents will be chosen for the pilot
test. The questionnaire will be distributed randomly to different demographic respondents
in order to determine the reliability of the instruments that is used to measure the variable
of this study prior performing data collection in order to achieve the objectives.

A new segment on age of child will be included after considering the recommendations
from pilot test. Previously researcher tried to include only children of age group 5 to 13.
Later children up-to 5 years of age was also included for the purpose of study of the
research. Easier vocabularies were also used in the questionnaire as many respondents
found difficulty in understanding various terms in the questionnaire during pilot test.

3.8 Data Analysis Plan and Tools Used

Analysis is important part of the study under which data are presented and analyzed in
useful format. So, after the completion of data collection, all information will be gathered,
edited, coded and recorded in Google docs, SPSS and Microsoft Excel file. Data will be
processed and due considerations will be taken that those data are accurate and consistent
with the intent information obtained.

For the data analysis, various statistical tools will be used to test the hypothesis. The data
will be summed up as per the requirement and the division of the sections of the
questionnaire using the excel sheet. For presentation of data, several graphical tools like
tables, charts, diagrams and graphic will be used. All the data collected will be processed
by using Microsoft Excel and SPSS for obtaining the research result.

The hypothesis testing part will include tables, mean, standard deviation and Person’s
correlation coefficient and the p-values. The p-values will be to find the significance of the
relation and the correlation coefficient will be used to determine the direction of the
relation between dependent and independent variables.

40
For descriptive analysis, cross tabulation, mean analysis and Cronbach alpha test will be
done. In case of inferential analysis: t-test, and ANOVA and regression analysis will be
carried out to draw the inferences from the collected responses. However, the conclusion
and recommendation are totally based upon the findings.

41
 REFERENCES

Ahmed, R. R., Ameen, N., Shaikh, E., & Memon, F. S. (2015). Influence of Children on
Family Purchase Decisions. MBA Thesis.

Ahuja, R., & Stinson, K. (1993). Female-headed single parent families: an exploratory
study of children's influence in family decision-making. Advances Consumer
Research, 20, 469-474.

Ali, A., & Batra, D. (2011). Children influence on parents buying decisions in Delhi
(India). European Journal of Business and Management, 3(11), 19-29.

Assael, H. (n.d.). Consumer behavior-Marketing Action. USA: South West College.

Atkin, C. (1978). Observation of Parent-Child Interaction in Supermarkts Decision-

Making. The Jounal of Marketing, 4(42), 41-45.

B. Guneri, O. Yurt, M.D. Kaplan and M. Delen, 2009. The Influence of Children on
Family Purchasing Decisions in Turkey. Asian Journal of Marketing, 3: 20-32.

Beatty, Sharon, E., & Talpade, S. (1994). Adolescent Influence in Family Decision-
Making: A Replication with Extension”. journal of Consumer Reserach, 21, 332-341.

Beneke, J., Silverstone, G., Woods, A., & Schneider, G. (2011). The influence of the
youth on their parents’ purchasing decisions of high-technology products.
African Journal of Business Management, 5(10), 3807-3712.

Blackwell, R., Miniard, P., & Engel, J. (2006). Consumer Behavior (10 th rework and
revised edition ed.). Canada: Thomson South-Western Publisher.

Carlson, L., & Grossbart, S. (1988). Parental Style and Consumer Socialization of
Children. Jounal of consumer Research, 15(1), 77-94.

Cartwright, D. (1959). Studies in social power. Research center for group dynamics:
University of Michigan.

42
Chankon, K., Hanjoon, L., & Marc, A. T. (2009). Adolescents perceptions of family
communication patterns and some aspects of thier consumer socialization.
Psychology and Marketing, 26(10), 888-907.

Chaudhary, M. (2013). Role of Children in the family buying process. Thesis, Noida.

Commuri, S., & Gentry, J. (2000). Opportunities for Family Research in Marketing.
Academy of Marketing Science Review, 1-34.

Cowan, G., & Avants, S. (1988). Children's Influence Strategies: Sturcture, Sex
Diffrences, and Bilateral Mother-Child influence. Child Deveplopment, 5(59),
1303-1313.

Dr.oec.troph. (2011). Children‟s Influence on the Family Decision-Making Process in

Food Buying and Consumption:An Empirical Study of Children‟s Influence. Phd
thesis, 1-238.

Eirini, F. (1999). An integrated model of consumer materialism: Can economic

socialization and maternal values predict materailistics attitudes in adolescents?
Journal of Socio-Economics, 28, 707-724.

Filiatrault, Pierre, & Ritchie, J. (1980). Joint Purchaisng Decisions: A comparison of

Influence structure in Family and Couple Decision-making Units. Journal of
Consumer Research, 7, 131-140.

Flurry, L., & Burns, A. (2005). Children's Infulence in Puchase Decisions. A social Power
Theory Approach. Journal of Business Research, 58, 593-601.

Foxall, G. R. (1977). Consumer Behavior: a practical guide. R.P.A. Books.

Foxman, E. R., Tansuhaj, P., & Ekstrom, K. (1989a). Family members perceptions of
adolescents influence in famliy decision making. journal of consumer Research,
15, 482-491.

Ganjinia, H., Gilaninia, S., & Maleknejad, E. (2013). Children's Influence in Family
Purchasing Decision. Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and
Management Review, 2(7), 76-80.

43
George, P. M., & Moore, R. L. (1979). Decision- Making Among the Young: A
socialzation perspective. Journal of consumer Research, 16, 101-111.

Geuens, Maggie, Mast, Gitte, & De Pelsmacker, P. (2002). Children's Influence on Family
Purchase Behaviour: The Role of family Structure. Asia Pacific Advances in
Consumer Resarch, 23, 81-82.

Hamilton, K., & Catterall, M. (2006). consuming love in poor families children’s
Influence on consumption decisions. Journal of Marketing Management, 22, 1031-1052.

Hansen, F., & Halling, J. (2002). Born og ungesforbrug. In F. M. Hansen, & L. G. Halling
J, Borns opvaekst somforbrugere (pp. 27-64). Copenhagen Denmark:
Samfundslitteratur (in Danish).

Haynes, J. L., Diane C Burts, D. A., & Rinn, C. (1993). Consumer Socialization of
Preschoolers and Kindersgartners as related to clothing consumption. Psychology
and Marketing, 10(2), 151-166.

Hundal, B. (2001). Consumer Behaviour in Rural Market: A study of Durables.

Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar.

Ishaque, A., & Tufail, M. (2014). Influence of Children on Family Purchase

Decision:Empirical Evidence from Pakistan. International Review of Management
and Business Research, 3(1), 162-173.

Isin, & Alkaibay. (2011). Influence of children on purchasing decisions of well to do

families,. Young cosumers: Insight and Ideas for Resposible Marketers, 12(1), 39-52.

Jain, K., & Sharma, K. (2002). Relevance of Personal Factors as Antecedents of Consumer
Involvement: An Exploration. Vission, 13-24.

Jain, N., & Dave, A. (2015). Influence of Children on Family Buying Decisions:
Moderating role of Demographic Factors. ELK Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing
and Retail Management, 6(3), 43-58.

Kaur, P., & Singh, R. (2006). Children in Family Purchase Decsion Making in India and
the West: A Review. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 1(8), 1-31.

44
Kiriinya, S. N. (2014). Determinants of Children's Influence on Family Purchase
Decisions in Kenya. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and
Social Sciences, 4(7), 325-339.

Kumar, S. (2013). Influence of Children in The Process of Family Purchase Decision for
High,Low and Child centric products. IRC's International Journal of
Multidisciplinary Research in Social & Management Sciences, 1(2), 5-16.

Lackman, C., & Lanasa, J. M. (1993). Family decision making theory: An overview and
assesment. Psychology & Marketing, 2, 81-93.

Laczniak, Russell, N., & Kay, P. (2004). Under the Infulence: Targeted Advertisng
Pinpoints How kids Sway Parents' Buying Decisions. Marketing Research, 16(1), 34-39.

Lee, C. K.-C., & Collines, B. A. (2000). Family decision making and coalition patterns.
European Jounal of Marketing, 34(9/10), 1181-1198.

Lee, K., & Beatty, S. (2002). Family Structure and Infulence in Family Decison making.
Journal Of consumer Marketing, 19.

Mangleburg, T., Grewal, D., & Bristol, T. (1999). Family Type, Family Authority
Relations and Adolescents' Purchase Influence. Advances in Consumer Research, 26,
379-188.

Mangleburg 1990; Lee 1994), Influence of children in family purchase decisions: the
Degree of Doctor of philosophy in Marketing

Martensen, A., & Grønholdt, L. (2008). Children’s influence on family decision making.
Innovative Marketing, 4(4), 14-22.

Mary, D., & Madeleine, L. (2002). Against All Odds: Family Life on a Low Income in
Ireland. Dublin: Combat Poverty Agency.

McNeal, J. (1992). Kids as customers. New York: Lexington Books.

McNeal, J. (1992b). Children as market of influencers,Kids as customers. A handbook of

Marketing to children, 63-87.

45
Mikkelsen, M., & Norgaard, M. (2006). Children's Influence on Family Decision-Making
in Food Buying and Consumption. Denmark: The National Institute of Public Health
Denmark and MAPP-Center for Research on Customer Relations in the Food sector.

Moschis, G. P., & Chruchill, G. A. (1978). Consumer Socialisation: A Theoretical and

Empirical Analysis. Journal of Marketing Resarch, 15, 599-609.

Moschis, G., & Mitchell, L. (1986). Televison Advertising and Interpersonal Infulences on
Teenagers' participation in family consumption Decisions. Advances in Consumer
Research, 13, 181-186.

Neelay, S., & Coffey, T. (2007). Understanding the "Four-Eyed,Four-Legged" Consumer:

A segmentation Analysis of U.S. Moms. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice,
26(10), 251-261.

Ogden, D. T., Ogden, J. R., & Ramzy, O. (n.d.). Perceptions of Children’s Influence on
Purchase Decisions A Comparison between the U.S. and Egypt. NA.

Palan, Kay, M., & Wilkes, R. (1997). Adolescent-Parent Interaction in Family Decision-
Making. Jorunal of consumer Resarch, 159-169.

Philomena, O. U. (2015). Determinants of Children’s Role in Family Buying Decision-

Making: The Case of South-South, Nigeria. Internat ional Journal of Management
Science and, 1(7), 30-38.

Polya, E. (2012). Purchase Decision Making Process and Roles Within the Family. Theses
of PhD Dissertation, Szent István University Gödöllő.

Prahalad, C., & Liberthal, K. (2003). “The End of Corporate Imperialism”. Harvard
Business Review, 81(8), 109-17.

Prakash, M., & Yadav, H. (2012). Influence of Children on Family Purchasing Decision.
International Research Journal of Management Science & Technology, 5(1), 399-440.

Rindfleisch, Aric, & Burroughs, J. E. (1996). The changing American

Family:Causes,Consequences and Considerations for Consumer Resarch. Advances
in Consumer Research, 23, 81-82.

46
Roberts, M., Wortzel, L., & Berkeley, R. (2001). Mothers Attitiudes and perceptions of
Children's Influence and Their Effect on Family Consumption. Advances in Consumer
Research, 8, 730-735.

Roedder, J. D. (1999). Consumer Socialisation of children: A retrospective look at twenty-

five years of research. Journal of consumer resarch, 26(3), 183-213.

Sanik, M., & Mauldin, T. (1986). Single Versus Two Parent Families.A Comparison of
Mother's Tme. The Single Parent Family (January) , 35, 53-56.

Schiffman, L., & Kaunak, L. (2007). Consumer Behavior. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Shahrokh, Z. D., & Khosravi, M. E. (2014). Children’s Influence in Family Consumption

Decisions:An Integrative Approach. International Review of Management and
Business Research, 3(2), 1275-1287.

Sharma, A., & Sonwaney, V. (2013). Theoretical modeling of infulence of children on

family purchase decision making. Procedia-Social and Behavoral Sciences, 133, 38-
46.

Sharma, A., & Sonwaney, V. (2014). Theoretical modeling of influence of children on

family purchase decision making. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 38-46.

Shoham, Aviv, Rose, M, G., & Aysen, B. (2004). ), “The Effect of Family communication
Patterns on Mothers’ and Fathers’ Perceived Influence in Family Decisions.
Advancces in Consumer Research, 31, 692-693.

Slama, E., & Taschian, A. (1985). Selected Socioeconomic and Demographic

Characteristics Associated with Purchasing Involvement. Journal of Marketing, 49,
72-82.

Solomon, 2011; Lee & Beatty, 2002; Assael, 1998, Determinants of Children’s Role in
Family Buying DecisionMaking: The Case of South-South, Nigeria

Soni, S., & Upadhyaya, M. (2007). Pester Power Effect of Advertising . Intenational
Marketing Confrence on Marketing & society, 8-10.

47
Sundberg, N., Sharma, V., Wodtli, & Rohlia, P. (1969). Famuly Cohesinvenss and
Autonomy in India and United States. Journal of Marriage and Family, 31(2), 403.

Suwardinata, H. (2011). Chidren's infulence on the Family Decision making Process in

Food Buying and Consumption . An Inaugural- Dissertation for the award of
Doctorate degree.

Szybillo, G., & Sosanie, A. (1977). Family decision making: Husband, wife and children.
(W. Perreault, Ed.) Advances in consumer Research, pp. 46-49.

Tomar, R. S. (2015). Kids Visit to shopping malls and their influence on parent’s purchase
decisions: A demographic study with reference to India. ELK Asia Pacific Journal of
Marketing and Retail Management, 12-26.

Trudy, M., & Kourilsky, M. (1999). The Uss of Economic Reasoning to Increase
Satisfaction with Family Decision-Making. Journal of Consumer Research, 183-188.

Velso, A.R, Hilderbrand, D. F., P, R. D., & Campormar, M. (2008). Children in the low
income retail market. RAEelectonica, 7(2).

Verma, D., & Kapoor, S. (2003). Dimensions of buying roles in family decision making.
Managment Review, 7-14.

Wang, X. (n.d.). Children’s Influence in Family Decision Making. BACHELOR THESIS,

Xiaolin Wang.

Ward, S., & Daniel, W. (1972). Children's Puchase Influence Attempts and Parental
Yielding. Journal of Marketing Research, 9, 316-319.

Williams, L. A., & Burns, A. (2000). Exploring The Dimensionality of Children’s Direct
Influence. Advances in Consumer Research, 27, 64-71.

48
 QUESTIONNAIRE

Dear Respondent,

I am an MBA Evening student at Ace International College, Pokhara University. As a part

of completion of my MBA degree, I am conducting research on “Children’s influence on
family buying decisions”. I would be most grateful if you could complete the enclosed
questionnaire based on your genuine feelings. Your results will remain confidential, and
you will be anonymous upon the completion of this survey.

I request you to please provide the following information.

Section 1: Respondents Profile

1. Gender i) Male [ ] ii) Female [ ]

2. Age i) 20 - 29 [ ] ii) 30-35 [ ]

iii)36-40 [ ] iv) Above 40 [ ]

3. Education Level i) Upto SLC [ ] ii) + 2 [ ]

iii) Bachelors [ ] iv) Masters & Above [ ]

4. Occupation i) Employee [ ] ii) Business [ ]

iii) Professional [ ] iv) Unemployed [ ]

Section 2: Socio-Demographic Status

1. Family structure i) Single-parent [ ] ii) Double-parent [ ]

2. Type of Family i) Joint Family [ ] ii) Nuclear Family [ ]

49
 3. Household income i) Below 25,000 [ ] ii) 25,000-50,000 [ ]
(Monthly) iii)50,000-100,000 [ ] iv)100,000 & above[ ]

4. Spouse employment status: i) Working [ ] ii) Non-working [ ]

Section 3: Child Demographics

1. Gender (Youngest child): i) Male [ ] ii) Female [ ]

2. Age (Youngest child): i) Upto 5 Yrs [ ] ii) 5-7 Yrs [ ]

iii) 8-10Yrs [ ] iv) 11-13 Yrs [ ]

Please indicate the level of agreement with the following statements. ** (Consider your
youngest child only)

Key 1= Strongly Disagree, 2= Disagree, 3= Neutral, 4= Agree, 5= Strongly Agree

Particulars Perceptions

Parental Style

1. I mostly force my child to do things that I want. 1 2 3 4 5

2. I shout at my child when he/she misbehaves. 1 2 3 4 5

3. I scold my child when my child’s behavior doesn’t meet my expectations. 1 2 3 4 5

4. I punish my child to make my child improve. 1 2 3 4 5

5. I never allow my child to interrupt others. 1 2 3 4 5

Type of Product

1. My child’s opinion is only limited to products of direct use to him/her. 1 2 3 4 5

2. I always agree to the choice of my child, while buying their clothes and 1 2 3 4 5

50
 stationery.
3. When I buy family related products, my child shows more interest. 1 2 3 4 5

4. My child provides opinion about family leisure time activities such as 1 2 3 4 5

vacations, movies, eating out.
5. When I buy expensive and durable products, my child shows more 1 2 3 4 5
interest.

Socialization
1. Sometimes I prefer opinion from my children as they tend to have 1 2 3 4 5
more knowledge of the products.
2. My child discusses the information about products they have heard 1 2 3 4 5
from their friends.
3. My child tends to follow their peer group while choosing products. 1 2 3 4 5
4. My child discusses the information about products they have viewed 1 2 3 4 5
on internet.
5. My child forces me to buy products their friends possess. 1 2 3 4 5

Advertisement
1. My child often recommends products seen on TV advertisement. 1 2 3 4 5

2. My child often insists to buy a product seen on advertisement. 1 2 3 4 5

3. My child comes to know about products from TV ads which are of 1 2 3 4 5

family use.
4. My child insists me to co-view some commercials when we are about 1 2 3 4 5
to purchase the product.
5. Advertisements have comparatively more impact on the minds of my 1 2 3 4 5
child.
6. Advertisement increases recall rate of my child. 1 2 3 4 5

51
52
Family Purchase Decision

1. I agree to the choice of my child while buying a household product. 1 2 3 4 5

2. In my family most of routine decisions are initiated by children. 1 2 3 4 5

3. The children are early adopters and make a hurry to take decisions. 1 2 3 4 5

4. Children play the role of mediator in any type of conflict in the decisions of 1 2 3 4 5
family.
5. My child can easily influence purchase decision of my family. 1 2 3 4 5

6. I allow my child to buy daily need products of his/her choice. 1 2 3 4 5

7. I appreciate the things purchased by my child. 1 2 3 4 5

8. Most of the time child is the initiator/problem recognizer and hence the first 1 2 3 4 5
person to demand for the product.

Thank you for precious time and participation.

53