Microsoft Word 2007 ichrie conference Proceedings Final-Final 06-06-07. doc

RESULTS 
Each dependent measure was submitted to an ANOVA using the type of the scenario as a between-subjects 
factor. The ANOVA results were not significant. Therefore, the data derived from the two scenario conditions were 
pooled in the subsequent data analyses.
Hedonic value of impulse buying 
To test the hedonic value hypothesis that predicts greater buying impulsiveness is associated with greater 
pleasure experienced, hierarchical multiple regression analyses were performed. Pleasure rating was regressed on 
impulse buying tendency and buying impulsiveness measure in a hierarchical fashion. At Step 1, the control 
variable impulse buying tendency was entered. At Step 2, buying impulsiveness measure was added to the model.
A significant increment in 
R
2
 
would indicate that the reported buying impulsiveness in the particular 
purchase situation contributed to the felt pleasure after the trait-based variation was accounted for. This was exactly 
the pattern emerged from the regression analysis. A significant increment in 
R
2
(
∆
 R
2
=
 
0.10
, F 
(2, 275) = 33.11, 
p<
0.01) was observed in the results. Regression analyses revealed that higher level of buying impulsiveness was 
significantly related to higher level of felt pleasure. As predicted, the direction of the association was positive and 
the magnitude of the association between the reported buying impulsiveness and felt pleasure was moderately strong 
(
)
01
.
0
,
90
.
5
)
275
,
1
(
,
54
.
0
<
=
=
p
t
β
. Taken together, Hypothesis 1 was supported.
Affective ambivalence 
To test the hypothesis that cognitive ambivalence experienced by an impulse buyer is positively related to 
the felt affective ambivalence, hierarchical multiple regression analyses were performed. At Step 1, the control 
variable impulse buying tendency was entered. At Step 2, cognitive ambivalence measure was added to the model. 
A significant increment in 
R
2
 
would indicate that cognitive ambivalence contributed to the felt affective 
ambivalence after the trait-based variation was accounted for. This was exactly the pattern emerged from the 
regression analysis. A significant increment in 
R
2
(
∆
 R
2
=
 
0.16
, F
(2, 265) = 26.36, 
p<
0.01) was observed in the 
results. Regression analyses revealed that higher level of affective ambivalence was significantly related to higher 
level of cognitive ambivalence. As predicted, the direction of the association was positive and the magnitude of the 
association between cognitive ambivalence and affective ambivalence was moderately strong 
(
)
01
.
0
,
20
.
7
)
265
,
1
(
,
41
.
0
<
=
=
p
t
β
. Therefore, Hypothesis 2 was supported.
Dominant reactions 
It was hypothesized that the outcome of cognitive evaluation would determine the dominant reactions of 
the affective ambivalence experienced by the impulse buyer such that a favorable outcome of cognitive evaluation is 
likely to induce a dominant reaction of pleasure while an unfavorable outcome is likely to induce a dominant 
reaction of guilt.
Median split was applied on respondents’ cognitive evaluations of the impulse purchase to divide the 
sample into favorable (
n 
= 130) and unfavorable (
n 
= 139) subgroups. Such a split was based on theoretical 

---