2018
DOI: 10.1177/1470785317751997
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Patterns of fruit and vegetable buying behaviour in the United States and India

Abstract: This paper describes the patterns discovered in fruit and vegetable buying behaviour in the United States and India. Using claimed buying data obtained from online questionnaires, it compares the patterns against those found extensively in consumer goods categories across the world. This study analyses consumer loyalty with Double Jeopardy, consumer sharing with Duplication of Purchase and brand user profiles with Mean Absolute Deviations. The results show the buying behaviour patterns of Double Jeopardy, Dupl… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
16
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
(36 reference statements)
3
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These participants might still consume broccoli but less than once a week. This share is close to the broccoli purchasing behavior suggested by Anesbury et al (2018), which shows that 49% of U.S. consumers buy broccoli at least once in 2 weeks. We include broccoli nonbuyers because they might be the potential buyers of local NYS-grown broccoli even if they are consuming broccoli less than once a week.…”
supporting
confidence: 86%
“…These participants might still consume broccoli but less than once a week. This share is close to the broccoli purchasing behavior suggested by Anesbury et al (2018), which shows that 49% of U.S. consumers buy broccoli at least once in 2 weeks. We include broccoli nonbuyers because they might be the potential buyers of local NYS-grown broccoli even if they are consuming broccoli less than once a week.…”
supporting
confidence: 86%
“…The pattern occurs in FMCGs including instant coffee (Greenacre et al, 2015), toothpaste, carbonated soft drinks, yogurt, instant noodle, soy sauce (Uncles & Kwok, 2009), and many other categories such as washing detergent (Scriven et al, 2017). Earlier research analyzing fresh category loyalty was not at a brand level, and the behavioral data were not observational (i.e., claimed) (Anesbury, Greenacre, et al, 2018).…”
Section: Dj-a Behavioral Loyalty Patternmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, consumers purchase more than one brand within a category (Banelis et al, 2013). Therefore, the DoP method and its application (Anesbury, Greenacre, et al, 2018) examine multi-brand loyalty.…”
Section: Dj-a Behavioral Loyalty Patternmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…D is then used to calculate theoretical (expected) values – D multiplied by individual penetration values. The expected values are then compared to the observed values (average duplication figures) to determine the fit of the Duplication of Behaviour Law numerically [34].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Duplication of Purchase Law [31] is an empirical description of how brands share customers, that is, how they compete for customers. The Law has been extensively tested across a range of purchasing contexts (consumer packaged goods [32, 33], fruit and vegetables [34] and sports brands [35]), and non-purchase-related choice behaviours (TV viewing behaviour [36], listening to the radio [37], cultural event attendance [38], gaming [39], gambling [40], leisure time activities [41], sport attendance and team preferences [42], and physical activity [43]). The application of the Law across such a wide variety of conditions demonstrates its robustness, and superior ability to explain and predict competition for different types of consumer behaviours.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%