Image, Not Environmentalism: A Qualitative Exploration of Factors Influencing Vehicle Purchasing Decisions

Rebecca J. Hafnera*, Ian Walkerb and Bas Verplankenb

a Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL

b School of Psychology, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY

IN PRESS: Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

* Corresponding author email: rebecca.hafner@wbs.ac.uk

1

Abstract

Previous quantitative research has suggested people take environmental impact into account when choosing cars, and are largely uninfluenced by issues of image. However, neither of these claims appears to reflect current car buying behaviour in the UK. We hypothesized this may be due to the nature of the questions typically used in earlier research, which may have prompted participants to consider environmental issues, and downplay the role of image, more than they would spontaneously. The current research provides a qualitative exploration of factors important to people when deciding which car to buy. Open-ended discussion with recent car-buyers revealed the factors which were most important during the participants’ decision making processes, without prompting participants to agree with ideas raised by the experimenter. These issues were explored in two studies, using a series of focus groups (Study 1), and one-on-one interviews (Study 2). In both studies, the two most central factors were issues of practicality and finance, consistent with previous research. However, unlike in previous research, both studies found image had substantial impact on purchasing decisions. Further, earlier explicit surveys claimed people often considered environmental factors when choosing a vehicle, yet these were hardly mentioned in the current studies. This highlights the importance of using a range of research methods when studying personal travel decisions. Key areas for follow-up research and implications for policy makers aiming to increase uptake sales of low-carbon cars are discussed.

2

Introduction

There has been a dramatic increase in private car ownership in recent years (Clark, 2009). A survey conducted by the Department for Transport (DfT) (2014) shows that in the UK, car ownership increased by 40% between 1994 and 2014. However, this widespread and increasing use of private motor cars causes serious problems for environmental quality, contributing to a number of problems including dependence on fossil fuels (International Energy Agency, 2008); traffic noise (Brink, 2011; Dratva, et al., 2010; European Environment Agency, 2000); collisions (Thornton, Evans, Bunt, Simon, King & Webster: DfT, 2011); and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, which are considered to contribute to global warming and climate change (Intergovernal Panel on Climate Change, 2007). Policy makers have attempted to target this problem in accordance with The European Union’s current strategy to reduce CO2 emissions in cars to 130g CO2/km by 2015, and 95g CO2/km by 2021 (European Commission, 2016); representing reductions of 18% and 40% respectively compared with the 2007 fleet average of 158.7g/km. Key strategies in the strive towards emission targets include initiating widespread reductions in private car use (Steg & Gifford, 2005) and the introduction of new classes of ‘low carbon’ cars, often referred to as Ultra Low Emission Vehicles (ULEVs) (DfT, 2016). Whilst the introduction of UK subsidies have helped to increase uptake of ULEVs, sales of such vehicles still represent a tiny proportion of current UK car sales. Out of 916,000 new vehicles registered in the first quarter of 2016, just 11,750 (1%) were ULEVs (DfT, 2016). More needs to be done to steer car buyers towards these ULEV options, and to do this we need better to understand the decision processes of people buying cars.

A substantial body of research has previously considered this issue (see, for example, Furse, Punj & Stewart, 1984; Flamm, 2009, Lane & Potter, 2007; Choo & Mokhtarian, 2004). In many instances, when people have been asked explicitly, they state that they do have concern for the environment, and take this concern into account when deciding which car to buy. For example, using survey data from 1500 Swiss households, Coad, de Haan, and Woersdorfer (2009) found that the transition to greener vehicles draws on both extrinsic motivation (in terms of financial incentives) and intrinsic motivation (a sense of personal responsibility for environmental issues – see also de Haan, Mueller, & Peters, 2006; Kahn, 2007).

The claim that people take environmental issues into account when deciding which car to buy is also consistent with a national survey of almost 4000 people conducted in 2009-10 for the UK Department for Transport (Thornton et al., 2011), in which participants were asked to endorse the factors most important to them when buying a car or van. The majority of participants agreed that reliability and costs were important (68% and 55% respectively), and 22% said they considered environmental factors. The survey suggested the image portrayed by the vehicle was fairly unimportant to participants, with only 12% agreeing that the image of the brand, and 10% the image of the model, were significant considerations affecting their purchase. Finally, the survey identified habit as another potentially important influence: 38% of participants agreed that they generally buy the same type and/or size of car every time. Brand of car was found to be less important, such that for every person who said they tend to buy the same brand each time there was another who said they tend not to do this. Overall then, extant survey data present a positive picture: when asked, a substantial proportion of people say that environmental consequences will inform their car-buying decisions and relatively few claim to be swayed by the vehicle’s image.

3

However, these stated preferences do not appear to easily translate into action. Whilst there has been some increase in low-carbon vehicle purchasing (from 0.2% of sales in 2014 to 1% in the first quarter of 2016, DfT, 2016); the proportional market share of low-carbon car sales remains relatively limited (DfT 2016; Lane & Potter, 2007; Clark, 2009). Moreover, whilst participants in earlier research such as the DfT survey mostly claimed that they paid little attention to image when choosing a car, this does not sit easily with the healthy market for ‘prestige’ cars, nor the central use of imagery in car marketing (Marketing-Schools, 2015). As such, there appears to be a misalignment between what people state they will take into account during decision making, and the decisions they actually make.

One possible answer might involve the need for decision makers to make trade-offs (see Payne, Bettman & Johnson, 1993), such as pitting personal values or ideals against practical or monetary concerns. People with high levels of environmental concern may state this is an important consideration when faced with a hypothetical choice scenario, yet in reality they may be forced to trade this off to buy a more affordable option. Following a full normative decision process in which all options and attributes are considered is cognitively very demanding. This may thus lead to more heuristic-based choice rules in which only the most important attributes are considered. Sustainability arguments may then drop out of the equation if sustainability is not one of the top priority attributes (Verplanken & Roy, 2015). For instance, Verplanken and Holland (2002) found that in multi-attribute choice tasks sustainable alternatives were only chosen if environmental values were central to an individual’s self-concept and were cognitively activated, which cannot be expected to be a prevalent condition. Another potential explanation of the gap between stated and actual choice processes stems from the fact that people may reveal views they perceive as being more socially desirable in a survey. Specifically, if a person perceives ‘being green’ as a socially acceptable behaviour, they may be more likely to state this is an important concern when directly asked by an experimenter, whilst in reality it may not reflect their genuine values. This suggestion is supported by Griskevicius, Tybur, and Van den Bergh (2010), who found that people were more likely to make pro-environmental choices in social settings than when the same decisions were made in private. Similarly, Donaldson and Grant-Vallone (2002) demonstrated how behavioural research may be subject to biased responses due to a desire to present oneself in a favourable manner (see also Arnold & Feldman, 1981; Arnold, Feldman & Purbhoo, 1985).

Relatedly, because a substantial amount of previous research in this area has been quantitative survey work (e.g., Furse et al., 1984; Clark, 2009; Choo & Mokhtarian, 2004; Coad et al., 2009), the discrepancy between this research and actual low-carbon sales figures may also be attributable to the nature of the survey questions themselves. Specifically, asking participants to rate the importance of a list of pre-selected features may have prompted people to state they consider environmental issues in a way they might not have done spontaneously, calling the validity of this approach into question and raising the possibility that the responses to such survey questions do not accurately reflect real-world decision processes when buying cars.

Given all the above issues, the aim of the current research was to investigate this apparent misalignment between the findings of previous quantitative research, which has placed an emphasis on environmental concern, and actual UK ‘low carbon’ car sales figures. This was done by conducting a series of qualitative focus group sessions (Study 1), and detailed one-

4

on-one interview sessions (Study 2), where recent car buyers were invited to discuss the factors which were most important to them when making their choice. Crucially, participants were not prompted to discuss environmental issues, but rather were free to talk about any aspects of how they chose to buy their car. As such, we aimed to explore whether the same types of responses would spontaneously occur in conversation between group members (Study 1), or between participant and experimenter (Study 2), as were revealed in previous quantitative research, or whether any discrepancies may be found which may provide a perhaps clearer insight into the unprompted motivations and actual behaviour of car buyers of today. We note that although we frame discussion in terms of promoting consideration of ULEV’s we are agnostic about specific technologies, and instead aim to provide unique insight into the precise decision processes involved in this context with a view to promoting uptake of non-specific low-carbon vehicles in the future.

In addition, as well as contrasting the findings of these two studies with previous quantitative research, we also aimed to compare the two studies with each other, in order to build a fuller understanding of the validity and effectiveness of different methodological approaches in furthering understanding of the same underlying construct of decision making processes involved in vehicle choice. Specifically, we hoped to determine whether the same pattern of results would be found in group settings versus one-on-one discussions. We predicted that, if social pressure to be seen as ‘thinking green’ might lead to biased results in quantitative self-report style surveys, then this same pattern of thinking may also lead to some discrepancies between our focus group and interview sessions: as one-on-one sessions may provide even greater freedom from pressures of social desirability. Following this reasoning we predicted even greater deviation from the quantitative survey findings in Study 2.

There is, of course, a long and substantial literature on how people reach decisions. This ranges from models of instantaneous decisions in pressing circumstances, such as the recognition-primed decision model (Klein, 1998) to more long-term and deliberative models of rule-based reasoning (Nisbett, Krantz, Jepson, & Kunda, 1983; Kruglanski, Friedland, & Farkash, 1984) and economic models of utility maximization (Savage, 1954; von Neumann & Morgenstern, 1944). A key difference between accounts of decision-making is the extent to which the process is seen as conscious and deliberate or unconscious and automatic. One useful approach for understanding this discrepancy stems from dual process theory, widely popularized by Daniel Kahneman (2003; 2011; see also Evans, 2003; 2008; Stanovich & West, 2000; Ferreira, Garcia-Marques, Sherman & Sherman, 2006). This provides a distinction between two cognitive systems, an intuitive and automatic “System 1,” and a deliberative and controlled “System 2.” System 1 processing enables tasks to be completed effortlessly – like driving a car for an experienced driver, whilst System 2 is the seat of effortful and deliberative mental activity, which consciously compares costs and benefits, short versus long term consequences, and likely versus unlikely outcomes. Using System 2 requires greater effort and draws on limited cognitive resources. When decisions are complex, when there is limited time to make them, or attentional resources are deployed elsewhere, people might defer to intuitive, as opposed to deliberative thinking.

It is clear that car buying will be a very occasional behaviour for most people and so might, initially, appear to be the kind of decision that would be explained through rational and deliberate reasoning based models. However, research into dual-process theory has found that decision making under uncertainty reflects both types of processing strategy; with each

5

making independent contributions (e.g. Ferreira et al., 2006). As such, we had reason to believe that decisions would not be best explained with a purely rational choice framework, but rather that both processing strategies may be influential. There are a few reasons for this. First, heuristics are a common theme in many decision-making models (see, Kahneman, Slovic & Tversky, 1982) and, even though car buying decisions are rare, we had no strong basis to rule out the idea that heuristics might still be used to narrow down the choice set given the large number of car models available to a buyer.

In addition, research has provided evidence habit and past experiences are also highly influential in car purchasing decisions (e.g. Thornton et al., 2011). According to Bargh and Barndollar (1996), habit is an “automated strategy for dealing with the environment to affect a desired goal” (p. 461), reflecting how the behaviour, which initially starts as a deliberate goal-directed process, over time becomes frozen into set behavioural patterns (see also, Dahlstrand & Biel, 1997; Verplanken & Wood, 2006; Verplanken, Walker, Davis & Jurasek, 2008; Walker, Thomas & Verplanken, 2015; Wood & Rünger, 2016). Aarts, Verplanken and Van Knippenberg (1997) previously established that habit played an important role in establishing travel mode behaviours (see also, Verplanken et al., 2008; Chen & Chao, 2008; Friedrichsmeier, Matthies & Klöckner, 2013). As such, we hoped to contribute to this literature by looking for instances whereby participants referred to elements of previous experience impacting on current decision making processes, or described elements of automaticity in their decision-making processes.

Study One

Method

Participants

11 Bath residents (6 men and 5 women, mean age 39.5 years, with a range of 20 to 64 years), who had either recently bought a car, or who were currently in the process of buying one, were recruited to take part in the focus group sessions. Participants were found through leaflets distributed around the main car dealerships in the Bath area; a press release placed in local newspaper, The Bath Chronicle; and an advert placed on the University of Bath’s internal notice-board. Participants were each paid £10 in return for 60 – 90 minutes participation in the discussion groups, and were also entered into a prize draw.

For reference, Bath is a city in the South West of England with an estimated population of 176,000, representing 0.31% of England and Wales (according to the Bath and North East Somerset Census, 2011). According to the 2011 Census, the number of cars and vans owned by residents has increased by 6,958 since 2001 to 92,628; this means that there are now 125 cars and vans per 100 households. This is substantially greater than the figure of 116 cars and vans per 100 households for England overall.

Procedure

Participants were invited to attend one of three focus group sessions. The first consisted of four people who had bought cars within the last six months, the second contained two people who were currently in the process of buying a car, and the final group contained five people

6

who had all bought cars within the last two months. Mini-focus groups such as these are increasing in popularity due to the increased comfort for participants over larger groups (see Litosseliti, 2003). We note that the current studies do not attempt to address alternate social pressures according to variations in group size, but rather to address the differences between any group vs. individual setting with traditional survey methodologies. Yet addressing differences according to specific variations in group size could be an interesting avenue for future research to explore.

The main aim of the focus groups was to encourage participants to reflect upon, and discuss, all the factors that were important to them during their decision-making process. We aimed to keep the focus groups relatively unconstrained and free, so participants had ample opportunity to express their views, unaffected by the facilitator, who attempted to offer no views throughout. Seven questions were prepared to start, and, if necessary, advance the focus groups’ discussions, providing the following (flexible) protocol:

1. Introduction, scope of the project2. Opening up general, unstructured discussion of important factors:

“What were you thinking about when you chose it?”3. Encouraging a more detailed narrative response:

“How did you come to your decision? Can you talk me through the process?”4. Role as decision maker:

“Were you the sole decision maker? Or did other people have an influence?”5. Assessing implicit motivations and norms:

“What do you imagine your friends / family will think when they see you in the car?”6. Assessing role of previous experiences:

“To what extent was your decision influenced by cars you may have bought in the past?”

7. Reflection upon qualities of the ideal car“In an ideal world, what would you have gone for?”

Thematic Analysis

The focus group transcripts were studies using a thematic analysis, which is a method for identifying, analysing and reporting patterns (i.e., themes) within data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). More in-depth procedures such as Grounded Theory or Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis were considered unnecessary in this study as we were mostly interested in the explicit ideas and motivations covered in participants’ discussions and how these relate to statements from earlier quantitative research, rather than seeking to discover unspoken or hidden ideas or discourses.

In accordance with the procedures suggested by Braun and Clarke (2006; see also Sparkes & Smith, 2013), the discussion group transcripts were read several times to ensure thorough comprehension. Patterns within the data were then coded and extracts from the original data were assembled into non-overlapping themes and subthemes, which were then compared to the original transcripts and further developed.

In addition, we also aimed to incorporate an element of quantitative analysis into our procedures. After the main thematic analysis was complete, we went back through the data

7

and coded each response into an identified theme and sub-theme. This approach complements the approach used in most previous qualitative work, and we felt it was a useful addition to such approaches as it enables the reader to see the spread of response types, and the prevalence and relevance of each theme, in accordance with how frequently cited each was within conversation. It also allowed us, in Study 2, to provide a novel graphical display showing the order in which the topics arose in interviews and the amount each topic was discussed, providing further insight into the decision processes involved.

Results

Initial thematic analysis identified seven core themes. These are provided in Table 1 below, with corresponding sub-themes for each.

Table 1. Study 1 themes and sub-themes

THEME Practicality FinanceTrusted

Information Sources

Previous Experience

Image Colour Environment

SUBTHEMES

Individual/ family needs

Initial outlay Establishing history

Negative experiences

guiding choice

Car to reflect self-image and

identity

Colour as a

guiding factor

Environmental considerations

SafetyReliability Cost of

insurance/ taxSeeking

experience of friends/ family

Positive experiences

guiding choice

Comfort Fuel efficiency Other external info sources

Requirements for hobbies

Maintenance costs

Gadgets and gizmos

Depreciation

Following initial thematic analyses, each comment generated was then coded into one of seven identified themes by two coders in order to generate an overview of the frequency of response type. High levels of agreement were observed between the two judges: Kappa = .83, p<.001, establishing excellent inter-rater reliability. The results are displayed in Figure 1 below.

8

Practicality; 28.67%

Financial Con-siderations;

20.74%Trusted Infor-

mation Sources; 14.72%

Previous Expe-rience, 14.72%

Image; 12.04%

Colour; 8.36% Environment, 0.67%

Figure 1. Pie chart showing the frequency of different types of response generated across the three focus groups (collapsed).

As Figure 1 shows, six themes accounted for the vast majority of statements in the dataset (297 out of 299, or 99.33%). These were: Practicality, Financial Considerations, Trusted Information Sources, Previous Experiences, Image and Colour. We now provide an overview of each of these six key themes in turn, in order of their prevalence within the conversations.

Theme 1: Practicality

The most frequently cited category of response within this theme was ‘individual / family needs and requirements’.Individual / family needs and requirements

This sub-theme largely centred upon discussion of how participants took great care to ensure any chosen car would meet a specific list of personal and practical requirements. For example:

Group 2 (M, Age: 20): “I’m looking for possibly two-seat, petrol car, I prefer petrol as takes you longer to get up to speed using diesel”

Group 3 (M, Age: 64): “We wanted something small, it had to have 4 or 5 doors because of carrying elderly passengers and granddaughter, and air conditioning, they were 2 ‘musts’”

Group 3 (F, Age: 41): “It’s a small car which is great because it’s just me on my own....so I just needed something small and easy to park”

Such practical considerations were very similar across groups, and appeared to provide a starting point in the decision-making process for most participants, wherein a list of personal practical requirements, such as, number of doors, space inside the car, air conditioning, or ISOFIX points, needed to be achieved before an option could be added to a mental short-list of potential options.

Theme 2: Financial Considerations

Initial Outlay

The second most frequently cited category of response concerned financial considerations, and within this category the most prominent sub-theme involved initial outlay costs; involving discussion of how initial outlay and purchase price played a key role during the decision making process. For example:

Group 1 (M, Age: 23): “Err first thing I thought about was probably (...) budget and type of car (.)”

Group 2 (F, Age: 24): “I haven’t yet made a- a decision as to which type of car but probably something that would be (..) in the economic (.) boundaries of a normal

9

student (.) so nothing very very special just something that would be useful (.) so I’m looking at err (.) utility basically and I think I will start my search for a particular model based on that (.) thought”

Consistent with previous quantitative survey work (e.g., Thornton et al., 2011), financial considerations appeared to be highly influential during decision making, often establishing the boundaries of the choice set itself, in terms of which options the individual could realistically consider from the vast array of new and used cars available for sale at any one time once initial practical considerations were met. Indeed this appears to relate directly to the concept of ‘initial consideration sets’ outlined in marketing science (Eliaz & Spiegler, 2010); referring to a simplification process used in complex decision circumstances, that establishes a ‘relevant’ choice set based upon (deliberate as well as automatic) screening criteria.

Theme 3: Trusted Information Sources

The next most frequently cited category of response concerned trusted information sources, whereby most participants described going through a period during which they gathered information from trusted sources before making their choice. These information sources were divided into three sub-themes: 1. Establishing history; 2. Seeking information from trusted friends and family; and 3. Trusted external sources of information. Of these, the most frequently cited sub-theme was establishing history, which played an important role during decision making for the majority of participants.

Establishing History

Participants were found to frequently mention establishing the history of the vehicle, or acquiring some knowledge about the previous owners, as a highly influential determinant of choice outcome. For example:

Group 1 (M, Age: 23): “The chap who owned it before owns a garage (..) and (..) looked after it it was his sort of (..) it was his sort of project for driving at the weekends I think”

Group 3 (M, Age: 64): “You know one recommendation is (...) a National Trust1 sticker in the car (.) you know it’s (..) says a lot about the owners [laughter] (..)”

Theme 4: Previous Experiences

Previous experiences were also found to be influential during car purchasing decisions. Responses in this category were found to fit into one of two sub-categories, which involved either 1. Negative previous experience influencing choice; or 2. Positive previous experience influencing choice.

Negative previous experience influencing choice

1 The National Trust is a charity that preserves historic buildings and land. In popular imagination its members are disproportionately older, retired people.

10

Group 1 (M, Age: 44): “So yeah I mean I was influenced by German engineered car definitely because (..) you know I’m (..) my experience of cars is they are built to a much higher standard than (…) sorry (..) I have had a Citroen (..) and the quality is significantly better”

Group 3 (M, Age: 64): “Our old car was too big too clumsy too awkward no good for (.) like supermarket car parks it was really difficult you had to go to (.) the farthest corner you know to (.) because (.) you could [laughter] (.) get in and get out again you know so (..) umm (.) so we wanted something small”

Group 3 (M, Age: 63): “The car that I just sold (.) errm (.) is err (.) was a chocolate teapot I think is the best description really (.) it was a Porsche Boxster (.) errm (.) I had to be shoe-horned in and out of it (.) ‘cause as you can see I’m quite [laughter] a big chap (..) I know it sounds really (..) such (..) you know (.) small things but you know (.) I found it (.) incredibly difficult getting in and out of the car in the garage I mean it was (.) on the floor (..) and I had about that much space to get in you know (..) [laughter] I lost my temper about it in the end really you know I what the hell am I doing with this car?”

Theme 5: Image

Car to reflect self-image and identity

Image was found to be the fifth most-frequently cited consideration. People often described how image led them to consider certain cars and avoid others, due to a desire to project the right image and social status. This was found to be a common theme which occurred frequently across all three groups. For example:

Group 3 (F, Age: 56): “I think I’d read somewhere that the average age of a Jazz owner was 64 (..) and I decided I couldn’t be associated with what I consider to be an old person’s car”

Group 3 (F, Age: 41): “I think my friends and family will think it’s a cute car (..) right up my street”

Group 2 (F, Age: 24): “There is a point when there is a breakthrough after the (.) functionality of (.) errm (..) the car (.) when you start associating the image of the car to yourself and it becomes a part of your image as well”

Theme 6: Colour

On numerous occasions, participants were found to discuss how the colour of the car was important to them during decision making. The two most frequently cited sub-themes in this category concerned colour for personal preference, and colour for practical reasons. For example:

Group 3 (M, Age: 64): “Colour was important (..) I wouldn’t buy a purple car (.) or yellow one or a brown one or probably not a green one”

11

Group 3 (F, Age: 56): “Colour as well you know (.) I didn’t fancy white (..) and so I considered some other colours but I decided that red was the one that was going to look best even if it was a bit on the grubby side”

Some participants were only found to mention colour when discussing their ideal or ‘dream’ car. For example:

Group 1 (M, Age: 44): “Having never bought a new car (.) I would but one which I could choose the colour (..) you know how it is with second hand cars you just hate the colour that it is (..) it would be red (..) yeah I’ve had one red car before (.) and it would probably be (..) a Volkswagen (.) or an Audi (..) not the cheaper stable-mates of Skoda”

Group 2 (F, Age: 24): “I would probably go for black as well, because I find it very elegant, and I usually like elegant stuff, so it would match my lifestyle. However that would only be for my idealistic car, for a very functional one I wouldn’t really mind the colour”

Therefore it appeared that colour may be viewed as something of a luxury in vehicle purchasing decisions. Whilst those with a more flexible budget may be able to afford to incorporate consideration of colour into their decision-making process, others typically went with whatever option they could find that satisfied their practical and financial requirements. However, the fact that colour was often spontaneously discussed as an ideal or ‘dream’ characteristic suggests it nevertheless remained a prominent part of the thought processes of the majority of participants, even if this was typically outweighed by other criteria. A practical implication of this apparently suppressed desire for choosing colour might be that providing cheap colour (and other personalization) options to purchasers of new cars could be an influential tool to steer them away from one car and towards another.

Discussion

A key aim of this study was to explore the apparent misalignment between the findings of previous quantitative research (e.g., Coad et al., 2009; de Haan et al., 2006; Kahn, 2007; Thornton et al., 2011), and actual UK low-carbon sales figures (Clark, 2009). Analysis revealed that more than three-quarters of the statements made by people discussing their car-buying decisions fell into just 6 categories: Practical Issues, Financial Considerations, Trusted Information Sources, Previous Experiences, Image, and Colour. Generally, these findings were found to be largely in line with earlier quantitative research. Specifically, the suggestion that practical issues were of primary importance, followed by financial considerations, is consistent with the DfT survey (Thornton et al., 2011). However, in contrast, the DfT survey did not find image to be an important consideration: very few respondents in that study agreed that image was important. We suggest that people tend not to agree that image is important when asked directly – perhaps because to do so would appear vain. An earlier study by our research group explicitly quantified this idea that, when asked directly, people will not endorse image or status as motives for car use: Thomas and Walker (2011) found that just 0.3% of car users in a large workplace survey agreed that issues of prestige were amongst their motives for driving. But whether or not people respond defensively to implications of vanity, the key lesson from the current study is that the role of image might be more subtle than is sometimes assumed. Whilst important to people, it may typically be

12

traded off in place of practical and financial considerations (Payne et al., 1993; Mas-Colell, Whinston & Green, 1995). This might explain previous studies concluding that image is not important at all.

In contrast to previous research, less than 1% of all comments in the focus groups related to environmental issues. This stands in striking contrast to the DfT finding that 22% of respondents claimed they considered environmental issues when choosing a car. This appears to provide support for our earlier suggestion that the nature of the survey questions may have prompted people to say they considered environmental issues, whereas in reality they did not; highlighting the importance of using a variety of approaches in studies such as this in order to access implicit motivations.

Study 2

Study 2 was a direct extension of Study 1. We hoped to explore whether moving from a group setting to individual interviews would give participants greater freedom to discuss perhaps less socially desirable motivations, and to determine the impact of this for those looking to promote consideration of environmental issues during vehicle-purchasing decisions.

Method

Participants

25 participants (12 men and 13 women, mean age = 43.5 years), who had all bought a car within the past month, were invited to take part in a series of one-on-one interview sessions (mean interview length: 43 minutes 32 seconds). These sessions were designed to explore the findings of our previous focus groups in greater detail. Participants were recruited through a partner organization who maintained a database of car purchasers.

Procedure

As in Study 1, the main aim of the interview sessions was to encourage participants to reflect upon, and discuss, all the factors which were important to them during their recent decision making process. Once again, we aimed to keep the focus groups relatively unconstrained and free, so participants had ample opportunity to express their views, unaffected by the facilitator (who attempted to offer no views throughout). Based upon the questions used in the focus groups, eight questions were prepared to start, and, if necessary, advance the discussions, providing the following (flexible) protocol:

1. Introduction, scope of the project2. Opening up general, unstructured, narrative discussion of important factors:

“Can you tell me the story of your decision process, starting with what made you decide to get a new car?”

3. Continuation of discussion of factors:“How did you go about choosing the car? What criteria did you look for?”“How did you weigh all of these things up? Was one more important to you than the others?”

4. Assessing the role of previous experience

13

“Was your decision influenced by any cars you may have bought in the past?”5. Further exploration of influential factors

“Did you rule out any types of cars?”6. Focus on choice outcome

“Can you tell me about the car you bought?”“To what extent did you get what you were looking for? / To what extent is it different?”

7. Assessing the effects on the individuals’ life“How does having this car affect: Your working life / Your life outside work / Your relationships with others / The way others see you?”

8. Reflection upon social perception“What does this car say about you? / What will other people think when they see you in this car?”

Thematic Analysis

Following the procedure used in Study 1, the interview transcripts were studied using a thematic analysis. The method was the same as in Study 1. A novel addition was that we recorded the exact time at which each theme or subtheme first appeared during each interview. This information provided insight into which issues participants felt comfortable discussing right away, versus those which required greater time investment.

Results

The thematic analysis identified nine themes in the interviews. As per Study 1, each of the nine themes and sub-themes are presented for reference in Table 2 below.

Table 2. Study 2 themes and sub-themes

THEME Practicality Finance ImageTrusted

Information Sources

Previous Experience

Sales Experience Colour Emotion Environment

SUBTHEMES

Individual/ family needs

Initial outlay Aesthetics Establishing history

Positive experiences

guiding choice

Valued customer

Colour for personal

preference

Emotional object /

gut reactions

Justifying non consideration

e.g. non practicality

Mechanically sound

Fuel efficiency

Car to reflect self-image and identity

Seeking experience of friends/

family

Negative experiences

guiding choice

Post-sales service

Colour to suit car

“Feel good factor”

Emissions

Gadgets and

gizmos

Maintenance costs

Car to attract

attention

Other external info

sources

Desire to try something different

Dealer / seller

convenience

Colour for practical reasons

“Peace of mind

factor”Requirements for hobbies

Cost of insurance/

tax

Car to fit in with

neighbourhood

Dealer reputation

Feelings of

masculinity / feminity

Performance

Depreciation Car to be inconspicuous/ blend in

Getting a good deal

Features Value for money

Sense of prestige

Loyalty scheme

Safety Security of buying from shop type

environmentReliability Sales tacticsComfort Test drive

14

Each response was coded then into one of these themes. In order to establish inter-rater reliability, the first 25% of responses (599 statements) were double coded by two judges, and high levels of agreement were observed: Kappa = .88, p<.001. As such all 100% of responses as coded by the first judge were then used for further analysis. The frequencies with which the themes emerged are displayed in Figure 2.

Figure 2. The frequency of different types of response generated across the interview sessions.

As Figure 2 shows, eight major themes were identified from the dataset in Study 2. These were: Practicality, Financial Considerations, Image, Trusted Information Sources, Previous Experience, Sales Experience, Colour and Emotional Considerations. Almost all responses – 2347 out of 2394 statements generated (or 98.04%) – fit into one of these eight categories.

We now provide an overview of the results in each of these eight categories. Some categories are directly akin to the results attained in Study 1, both in content and in relative positioning in importance within the decision making process (e.g., practicality, financial considerations, previous experience and trusted information sources). Accordingly, we provide only brief commentary on these results, to allow greater focus on areas where the results of Study 2 differed from Study 1, and from previous quantitative research. This may be either in terms of content or in terms of relative positioning in importance within the decision making process, which we hope will ultimately allow us to attain greater insight into the validity and effectiveness of contrasting research methodologies within this domain.

Theme 1: Practical Considerations

Individual / family needs and requirements

15

Practicality; 33.38%

Financial Consider-ations; 17.75%Image; 16.12%

Trusted Information Sources; 7.23%

Previous Experience; 7.23%

Sales Experience; 7.18%

Colour; 4.89%

Emotional Considerations; 4.26% Environmental; 1.96%

Replicating Study 1, by a substantial margin the most frequently cited category of response was practical considerations, with a particular focus upon choosing a car which would meet the family or individuals’ personal needs and requirements.

For example: Participant 5 (Gender: F, Age: 48): “Basically, we need an estate car. We have a dog, we have a child, and I have a husband in a wheelchair, so we need a large car”

Again, this sub-theme encompassed issues of safety, reliability and comfort, as well as more personal practical requirements such as specific features, gadgets and gizmos. Other key sub-themes in this category were found to include: requirements for pursuing hobbies; and performance.

Theme 2: Financial Considerations

Initial Outlay

Replicating Study 1, the most prominent sub-theme in this category was found to be initial outlay. For example:

Participant 9 (Gender: M, Age: 37): “Ok, well that’s the budget, I know roughly what I want, let’s see what I can get for that”

Additional sub-themes in this category were again found to include fuel economy and maintenance costs (see Table 2).

Theme 3: Image

Aesthetics

Image was found to be the third most frequently referenced category of response, and within this group two prominent sub-themes were identified. These were aesthetics and car as a vessel for projecting a desired self-identity. For example:

Participant 1 (Gender: F, Age: 26): “I like cars and I like them to look good (..) to look nice (.) errm but that is purely aesthetic it didn’t (.) the S-line spec’s nothing to do with engine or anything it was just a little bit more (.) premium I guess”

Participant 11 (Gender: M, Age: 62): “It’s important that a Jaguar looks like a Jaguar (..)a big car with a long bonnet, wide at the back, really low, sleek, smooth, looks the business”

Participant 20 (Gender: F, Age: 41): “Do you know I wouldn’t buy a car that was a horrible design (.) I’m very much influenced by the (.) it’s always a nice shape and things with VW’s and stuff”

Car to reflect self-image and identity

16

The second sub-theme in this category concerned the use of image as a means of reflecting self-identity, or personal beliefs and values. For example:

Participant 10 (Gender: M, Age: 29):“Actually it’s quite nice – it shows all the hard work I’ve done has paid off and so from that instance it’s quite nice to show it off sometimes”

Participant 11(Gender: M, Age: 62): “I guess something about having a Jaguar has become part of who I am I suppose”Participant 16 (Gender: F, Age: 41): “I think there’s a certain type of person that goes around driving in a big, white, flash-looking car, and that’s not me”

Image was discussed more often, and in a greater level of detail, in these interviews than in Study 1. The finding that image was the third most frequently cited category of response in these in-depth interviews is also in contrast with previous quantitative survey work, e.g. Thornton et al., (2011), who found that only 12% of participants said the image of the brand, and 10% image of model, were important considerations when deciding which car to buy. In our interviews, not only was image the third most frequently cited factor when deciding which car to buy, but 100% of participants mentioned some aspect of image as having a guiding influence on their choice. Once again this suggests that people may downplay these motivations in self-report quantitative surveys, perhaps to present themselves in a more favourable light (Arnold & Feldman, 1981; Arnold et al., 1985; Donaldson & Grant-Vallone, 2002). This again reinforces the need to use a variety of methodologies to gain insight into implicit motivations.

Theme 4: Trusted Information Sources

Trusted External Sources of Information

As per Study 1, participants were found to frequently cite an aspect of information seeking as forming an important stage in their decision making process. The first sub-theme within this category concerned gathering information from trusted external sources including websites, magazines, and reading reviews. For example:

Participant 19 (Gender: M, Age: 33): “Research on-line (..) suppose looking at various like parkers.co.uk (.) looking what’s around and what’s well rated (.) and then looking around at dealerships and seeing what they had on the forecourt really”

Secondary sub-themes were found to include: establishing history; and seeking information from trusted family and friends. The vast majority (92%) of participants were found to refer to some aspect of information seeking, confirming our earlier focus group findings, and further demonstrating that, on the whole, people are unwilling to make a choice without seeking out information from trusted resources at one stage or another.

Theme 5: Previous Experience

The next theme to emerge was previous experience – which also emerged in Study 1:

17

Participant 19 (Gender: M, Age: 33): “We wanted better ground clearance as well (.) that was another thing that was annoying about the Toyota (.) just because every time it went over a speed bump the bottom of it hit the speed bump (.) and that was irritating”

As per Study 1, previous experience was discussed with approximately equal frequency to Trusted Information Sources, suggesting that both form important aspects of an information seeking stage in decision making. Both themes were spontaneously raised by 92% of participants, and no-one made their choice without considering one or other of these factors.

Theme 6: Sales Experience

The next theme to emerge concerned the influence of the sales experience. Within this category the most prominent sub-theme was the importance of feeling valued as a customer. For example:

Valued customer

Participant 5 (Gender: F, Age: 48): “If you are sitting there, if they think you have been sitting there too long, anybody will come up and say what is the status of your car, do you need me to check anything for you? It is actually really nice. I know to a lot of people that wouldn’t really be important but to us, it is”

Participant 7 (Gender: F, Age: 27): “I think the whole buying experience I think is really important to have good staff in the showroom as well. And offer people cups of tea! [laughs] That sold it for me!”

Participant 14 (Gender: M, Age: 55): “I like Peugeot (.) I like the garage that I deal with (.) there (.) I cannot stand (.) barrow-boy salesman (.) and I’ve had other cars in the past (.) and I’ve dealt with a lot of different sales people (.) and I’ve always been very unimpressed by the (.) excuse the phrase bull (.) that some of them come out with (.) there (...) but I’ve always found (.) errm Wokingham Motors to tell the truth you know what I mean they’re very matter-of-fact there they’re very willing to help et cetera you know like you couldn’t ask for a better sales person (..) which is something that means a lot to me”

Participant 18 (Gender: F, Age: 56): “And in the end it came down to the salesman, you know, whether you like them or not, whether you like the dealership or whatever, that’s kind of how it ends up”

In many cases participants discussed how this had a significant impact on their choice outcome, in terms of swaying their final choice to go for or against a particular option, or brand of car. Notably, this theme did not emerge in Study 1’s focus groups – again highlighting how a more in-depth discussion can reveal more about the factors influential in decision making. Specifically, it may be that some factors are less salient than others, yet when given time and freedom to discuss the topic in detail, participants discussed sales experience, and emotional considerations (below) as having a greater impact on their choice

18

than has been revealed in previous quantitative surveys (e.g. Thornton et al., 2011), or indeed, in Study 1.

Theme 7: Colour

Colour was the seventh most frequently cited theme to emerge from the interview sessions, and within this theme three key sub-themes were identified. These were as follows: Colour for personal preference; Colour to suit type of car; and Colour for practical reasons.

Colour for personal preference

Participant 8 (Gender: F, Age: 49): “How very sad, but I always wanted a red car! So I decided that I'd have a red car. So that limited my choice even more”

Participant 11 (Gender: M, Age: 62):“I mean wouldn’t it be awful to buy a car that you think you are going to have for eight to ten years, have it for a week and then think, I really don’t like that colour. That would be just dreadful. So there might have been a bit of safety through experience, we’d had a blue one, we loved it and they do blue, so let’s have a look at that then”

Participant 23 (Gender: M, Age: 57):“Colour is important, for instance while I was initially thinking about cars I drove a Volkswagen Polo that was a really bright errm, almost magenta colour I suppose a purple-y magenta colour, and I just really didn’t like the colour I must admit although the car was okay, the colour sort of put me off a bit yeah”

In all, colour was found to be highly influential factor in decision making for the majority of participants: 96% of participants discussed colour as having an influence on their choice at some point during their interview. Approximately 5% of all comments were found to relate to the influence of colour on choice outcome, providing useful verification and replication of our findings from Study 1. However, in these interview sessions the influence of colour was found to be more in-depth, with the emergence of additional sub-themes

Theme 8: Emotional Considerations

Emotional Object / Gut Reactions

The final key theme to emerge was emotional considerations, and the most frequently cited sub-theme within this referred to cars as emotional objects, and the importance of emotional gut reactions. For example:

Participant 7 (Gender: F, Age: 27):“We went over to the dealership and they didn’t have the one we were looking at but they had this other one and straight away it was like “Oh, I love it” ”

Participant 11 (Gender: M, Age: 62):“I wasn’t really looking for an average perfectly good car I was looking for something that felt a bit special (.) felt like we were treating ourselves a bit” …

19

… “It’s silly really because a car should be what you get in to from A to B and you ought to be able to do it in the most economical and cheapest and least environmentally damaging way possible (.) but it’s not about that [laughs] (.) it’s about emotions”

Participant 23 (Gender: M, Age: 57):“Really it’s gunna be just something that I drive (.) so yeah I guess you know it’s (.) it was more just to please and indulge myself than any other overriding criteria I suppose”

Three other key sub-themes were identified. These concerned feeling happy and relaxed, here termed the “feel good factor”, and feeling safe/secure, here termed the “peace of mind factor”, and discussion of feelings of masculinity or femininity playing a role in choice. These themes have not previously been identified or explored in the academic literature on vehicle purchasing decisions.

Feeling Happy/ Relaxed “Feel Good Factor”

Participant 11 (Gender: M, Age: 62):“It looks like a nice car and that makes us feel good I think (.) it makes me feel good [laughs]”

Participant 14 (Gender: M, Age: 55):“The more I saw about it the more I thought (.) you know this is nice this looks good (.) I’d be happy being sat in this”

Participant 15 (Gender: F, Age: 57):“It makes you feel a bit kind of more good about yourself driving a nice car”

Participant 18 (Gender: F, Age: 56): “Really it depends on just how you feel on the day really (…) and when I test-drove the Toyota I just felt happier than the Jazz”

Feeling Safe/ Secure “Peace of Mind Factor”

Participant 3 (Gender: F, Age: 34):“I quite like the idea that people can see me coming as well (…) you feel a bit safer”

Participant 5 (Gender: F, Age: 48):“The new car has got run flat tyres (.) so therefore with my husband with his disability as well (..) he can get home safely (.) being in a wheelchair (.) you know (.) he can’t easily get out on the side of a motorway (.) he can’t change a tyre himself (.) he is vulnerable (..) That was the other reason”

Participant 10 (Gender: M, Age: 29):“The new car is less of a target for my wife as well because I always felt a bit worried if she was getting into a car park late and getting into that car (.) whereas this car it’s an older car so (…)”

Participant 17 (Gender: M, Age: 32):“Because there’s more space it does feel a little bit safer because stuff doesn’t have to be piled up so high in the boot”

Feelings of Masculinity / Femininity

20

Participant 1 (Gender: F, Age: 26):“It looks more aggressive, a bit more angular, so that’s why I liked it”

Participant 13 (Gender: M, Age: 68):“I didn’t really want anything too small though (.) I don’t know why (.) maybe it’s a male ego thing (.) I don’t know [laughs]”Participant 22 (Gender: M, Age: 64):“Oh I wouldn’t have bought a ‘hairdressers car’ [laughter] (.) no no way (..) well I wouldn’t want people to think that I was soft (.) effeminate or whatever”

As the quotes above demonstrate, a substantial part of this influence involved initial gut reactions to the car, or viewing the car as an emotional object. This theme was not found to emerge in our earlier focus groups, and is not widely considered as having an important influence on decision making in previous quantitative surveys (e.g. DfT survey: Thornton et al., 2011). Yet, as these results demonstrate, emotional issues were found to have a substantial impact on participants’ choices, with 100% of participants spontaneously raising some aspect of emotional considerations at some point during their interview. It appears that the pre-set questions used in most quantitative surveys may limit responses in this manner, leaving certain factors undisclosed.

Ordering of topics within interviews

When the interview data were organized to show the length of time spent on each theme and also the average point at which each theme first appeared (Figure 3), it is striking how Image – the third-most discussed topic – was typically one of the last subjects to arise, whilst issues such as Practicality, Financial Considerations and Previous Experience were typically raised very early on during discussions. Similarly, Emotional considerations were typically the last issue to be raised by participants, appearing on average 35.31% of the way into the interview sessions. Figure 3 therefore suggests that people are typically willing to discuss instrumental motivations at first, and will only open up about additional motivations such as Image and Emotion when some degree of trust is established between conversation members (see also, Musselwhite & Haddad, 2010), and crucially, when in the absence of social pressures. This all further highlights the importance of using a variety of different methodologies in studies such as these to assess decision makers’ implicit motivations.

21

Practi

cality

Financ

ial C

onsid

erati

ons

Previo

us E

xper

ience

Enviro

nmen

tal

Sales E

xper

ience

Truste

d Info

rmati

on S

ourc

esIm

age

Colour

Emotion

al Con

sider

ation

s

0100200300400500600700800900

Tot

al N

o. o

f Sta

tem

ents

Figure 3. Number of statements made about each theme across the interviews. The themes are ordered on the x axis according to the modal average order in which they arose across participants.

Discussion

Two studies provided an in-depth exploration of the factors influencing decision-making processes in vehicle choice. We hoped that by combining the results of qualitative focus group sessions (Study 1), and one-on-one interviews (Study 2), we would begin to build a comprehensive picture of the factors which play an important role in determining choice within this domain, providing important complementary information to traditional survey-based methods.

Overall, these studies suggested that the top two most important factors when deciding which car to buy consistently involved practical and financial considerations. This is entirely in line with previous research into car purchasing decisions (e.g. Thornton et al., 2011), and suggests these two criteria are used as a means of establishing an ‘initial consideration set’ (Eliaz & Spiegler, 2010) of feasible options which are then subject to detailed consideration. However, below these top two reasons, our work suggested substantially different patterns than this earlier quantitative work.

A key difference from previous work concerned the role of Image and Emotion, both of which were found to have a substantially greater influence on decision making than in earlier surveys. This appears to be in line with dual process theories of judgement under uncertainty (Kahneman; 2003; 2011; Evans, 2003; 2008; Stanovich & West, 2000; Ferreira et al., 2006); demonstrating the simultaneous contribution of automatic and non-conscious processing strategies within this decision context. Our finding that Image and Emotion play a crucial role during decision making is in line with a substantial body of previous empirical research. For example, Heffner, Kurani & Turrentine (2007) found that a key factor driving decisions to purchase hybrid electric vehicles is a desire to communicate information about one’s social identity – for example to be seen as an “intelligent moral person who cares about others” (pp. 412). Whilst, Noppers, Keizer, Bolderdijk and Steg (2014), explored the significance of instrumental (functional), environmental and symbolic (self-identity and social status) attributes for the adoption of two sustainable innovations: electric vehicles and local renewable energy systems, and found that evaluation of the symbolic and environmental attributes of these innovations are the greatest predictors of intention to adopt. In addition, Sheller (2004) discusses the importance of affective dimensions within car cultures, which she argues are not simply about rational economic choices, but rather are the product of aesthetic and emotional responses to driving, as well as projecting social practices of ‘caring’ through car use. As such, our findings appear to be highly consistent with previous empirical work in this area. Our studies also highlight the importance of using a variety of methodological approaches in order to assess implicit motivations, which do not appear to be accurately represented via quantitative surveys that require and prompt people to choose from a list of pre-determined motives (see, Arnold & Feldman, 1981; Arnold et al., 1985; Donaldson & Grant-Vallone, 2002.

In Study 2 we find that the third most frequently cited topic of image is also one of the last to arise. This appears to fit with suggestions that such issues may be typically downplayed, at

22

least at the outset, due to self-presentational factors. Indeed supporting this, Musselwhite and Haddad conducted a qualitative exploration of older drivers in the UK. Similar to the present study, their participants focused almost exclusively on practical and instrumental factors when explaining their travel choices during initial group discussions. It was only later, during one-on-one telephone interviews, that their participants also began to describe affective reasons for travel (independence, control) and aesthetic needs (opportunities to interact with nature). Musselwhite and Haddad describe how participants felt the need to downplay these motivations during initial group discussions, and were only able to open up about these issues when removed from the group setting. This is further supported by Griskevicius et al.’s (2010) research into the effects of social scrutiny in decision making, which compared likelihood of selecting ‘green’ products when decisions were made in public versus private. Participants were found to be more likely to select ‘green’ products when choosing in public versus private, which the authors attribute to the effects of social scrutiny in choice, and a desire to maintain projection of a positive, socially conscious, self-image.

A topic of particular interest here was the extent to which decision makers were taking environmental issues into account when deciding which car to buy. Previous quantitative survey work has suggested that a substantial proportion of people consider environmental issues when choosing a car (Coad et al., 2009; de Haan et al., 2006; Kahn, 2007; Thornton et al., 2011). But, as noted earlier, this does not appear to be reflected in the sales figures of low-carbon vehicles in the current UK market. We aimed to explore this apparent discrepancy between previous research and actual behaviour by providing an open-ended and un-prompted exploration of the factors involved in vehicle choice. In particular, we hoped a reduction of prompting effects (both studies) and social pressures (particularly Study 2), could lead to a less inhibited discussion of less socially desirable motivations and influences. Our finding that just 1% of comments related to this topic across both our studies, suggests that environmental factors might be far less important than previous work has suggested. We cannot definitively say that methods which prompt participants to agree with motives are inferior to methods which allow participants spontaneously to raise their motives, but we do note that the amount of discussion received by environmental issues in the present study is far more in line with low-carbon vehicle sales than earlier survey work. That said, it remains possible that this disparity is the result of there being fewer low-carbon choices than conventional choices in the motor vehicle market. Clearly this is an area that could usefully receive additional research.

We were also interested in exploring the role of previous experience in vehicle choice. Both studies in this paper found this was a highly important consideration during decision making. Indeed, in Study 2, the majority (92%) of participants were found spontaneously to discuss either previous experience, information gathering from external sources, or (in many cases) both, at some point during their interview session. This suggests that these may form two components of an information-seeking stage, which appears to be essential in most people’s decision-making process. It may be that seeking information in this manner (either from oneself or from external sources) forms a kind of heuristic strategy to simplify what would otherwise be a vastly complex choice set. In other words, people find out “what’s good”, either by reflecting upon personal previous experiences, or by asking other people, and then use this information to narrow down their search to a more manageable number of options.

23

Accordingly, previous research outside the field of car buying has shown that using simplifying heuristics is a relatively common response to the problem of information overload (Payne et al., 1993). Although not a ‘rational’ response to decision making; in the sense that a perfectly rational decision-maker would make decisions based upon the assigned expected utilities of all possible outcomes (Mas-Colell et al., 1995; von Neumann & Morgenstern, 1944); research has shown that creating a more manageable number of options (perhaps by quickly narrowing down the field with heuristic strategies) can in fact increase satisfaction with the chosen product (e.g. Chernev, 2003; Iyengar & Lepper, 2000; Iyengar, Wells & Schwartz, 2006; Shar & Wolford, 2007). As such it may be that relying on previous experience and information gathered from others in this manner is in a sense a rational response to an otherwise potentially overwhelming choice environment.

Given this argument, it would be interesting for future research to continue to explore this link between complex choice environments and the impact of information gathering upon outcome satisfaction2. For instance, one could aim to compare the decision strategies and satisfaction levels of car buyers in a hypothetical scenario in which they are asked to choose a car from a selection in which half the participants are able to gather information from the internet or other external sources, and half are not. By comparing the experiences of previous car buyers, and those who have never bought or owned a car before, one could explore the impact of information-gathering upon strategies and outcome satisfaction. For instance, one might predict that those who have bought a car before, and are allowed to search for information, may form a reduced choice set from which they may be better able to pick an option which satisfies their needs, potentially leading to the highest levels of outcome satisfaction. Conversely, one might predict those participants who have never owned or bought a car before, and who were not allowed to search for information, may be the least satisfied – potentially as a result of being less able to narrow down their selection of options from the outset. By providing measures of outcome satisfaction, and asking participants to describe their decision process at each key stage in this manner, one could determine the impact of information seeking on how people structure their decision making processes, and whether this has any subsequent impact on satisfaction with choice. This remains an interesting avenue for future research to explore.

Finally, an additional factor that emerged unexpectedly in this project was the apparent role of colour as a highly influential determinant of vehicle choice. In both Study 1 and Study 2, an approximately equal proportion of comments were found to relate to this topic. Colour was discussed in an even greater level of detail in Study 2, with the emergence of several sub-themes that were not apparent in the focus group sessions. This all raises the question of whether colour could be used to guide decision-making toward more environmentally sound options. For instance, if two options are evenly matched on price, yet one has lower emissions than the other, can the addition of more colour options be used to steer decision-making towards the more environmentally sound option? This remains an interesting avenue for future research to explore.

A Proposed Model

2 Satisfaction with the chosen vehicle was not within the remit of this current study, as participants were either in the process of choosing a vehicle or had only just bought it, and so would not have had time to form an informed opinion.

24

Drawing together the insights that have emerged here, in Figure 4 we present a hypothetical flow chart of the most common sequence of considerations faced by decision makers within this domain. This deliberation process is proposed based upon time data and theme frequency analysis and is intended to represent an average decision chain, acknowledging that certain people might follow a slightly different sequence. We recognise that at this stage this model is purely speculative, but we present it as a summary of our insights from conducting this study in the hope it forms an interesting point of consideration for future research in this domain.

Figure 4. Flow chart of hypothesised sequence of variables influencing car purchasing decisions.

As Figure 4 suggests, people appear to go through a similar sequence of steps when deciding which car to buy. The first of these relates to reducing the size of the choice set available based upon practical and financial needs, reflecting a process of establishing a feasible ‘initial consideration set’ (Eliaz & Spiegler, 2010). The second stage in the decision making process then typically involves some aspects of information seeking: so with practical and financial needs in mind, people then consider either their own personal previous experience, or gather information from other trusted sources, in order to create a short-list of options which should satisfy these criteria. Once people have made a short-list, most attempt to view as many potential options as possible: leading them to the next stage in the decision making process – emotional considerations: ‘Does the car feel right?’, ‘Do I like it and will I be happy in it?’ This is then followed by concerns about image, so whether or not the car fits with the image the person is trying to portray, and whether they like the appearance of the vehicle, which is typically followed by consideration of colour. The final stage of the decision making process was found to concern the influence of the sales experience: where the approach of the sales person or sales environment could be enough to sway the participant either for or against choosing that particular option. Although subject to individual variation, we believe this is a fairly typical sequence of the variables considered by most car buyers.

This model bears similarity to the traditional funnel metaphor used in marketing, in which consumers start with a number of potential options and then methodically reduce that number based on relevant criterion in order to make a choice (Lewis, 1908). Building on this, the ‘consumer decision journey’ (Court, Elzinga, Mulder & Vetvik, 2009) asserts that such decisions essentially constitute a circular journey containing four stages: 1. Establishment of an initial choice set, 2. Active evaluation, in which consumers add or subtract options as they evaluate requirements, 3. Moment of purchase, and 4. Post-purchase experience, in which

25

ColourInfluence of

Sales Experience

Gathering information from trusted

sources

Previous Experience

Emotional Considerations

Influence of Image

Reduce choice set based on practical and

financial needs

Awareness of large

number of possible choices

consumers build expectations based on experience to inform the next decision journey. We propose that our elaborated model provides in-depth theoretical insight as to the precise processes and factors involved at both stages 1 and 2, in the context of vehicle purchasing. By relying solely on issues that were spontaneously raised by participants across two studies we provide reliable insight into all possible influences within the choice process that ultimately affect that crucial ‘moment of choice’ decision.

Conclusions

The two studies presented in this paper were designed to provide an in-depth exploration of factors influencing vehicle-purchase decisions. We were specifically interested in exploring the role that environmental concern plays within vehicle choice, with a view to gaining insight into the apparent discrepancy between previous quantitative survey work which suggested environmental concerns were important and actual sales figures of low carbon vehicles in the UK. In general, our findings agree with previous quantitative work that money and practical considerations are the most important factors for people buying vehicles. However, we then found issues of image and identity to be far more important in this qualitative study than in previous quantitative research. Conversely, issues of environmentalism – which were frequently endorsed in earlier surveys – were hardly mentioned here as being important when choosing a vehicle. We suggest quantitative work in this area might have problems with socially desirable responding and prompting effects, and so should be complemented by qualitative work if we are truly to understand vehicle purchasing decisions.

An interesting avenue for future research to explore involves using this information in an effort to steer people towards more environmentally sound options. For instance this might be achieved by a) offering the chance to personalise certain features, in order to make the car more in-line with the image the chooser wants to present, b) emphasising emotional connotations associated with environmentally options over other options, or c) manipulating the number of alternative colours available. In each case it would then be possible to assess whether these driving forces of emotion, aesthetics, and identity management have any potential for influencing subsequent choice behaviour in more environmentally sound directions.

26

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by a grant from Shell UK to the University of Bath and Cardiff Univer-sity. The authors thank Steve Skippon for all his help with the project.

27

References

Aarts, H., Verplanken, B., & Van Knippenberg, A. (1997). Habit and Information Use in Travel Mode Choices. Acta Psychologica, 96, 1 – 14.

Arnold, H. J., & Feldman, D. C. (1981). Social Desirability Response Bias in Self-Report Choice Situations. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 377 – 385.

Arnold, H. J., Feldman, D. C., & Purbhoo, M. (1985). The Role of Social Desirability Response Bias in Turnover Research. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 955 – 966.

Bargh, J. A., & Barndollar, K. (1996). Automaticity in Action: The Unconscious as Repository of Chronic Goals and Motives. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The Psychology of Action: Linking Cognition and Motivation to Behaviour (pp. 457 – 481). New York: The Guilford Press.

Bath and North East Somerset Council. (2011). Census 2011 – Our Local Population Explained. Retrieved May 15, 2013, from: http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/services/your-council-and-democracy/local-research-and-statistics/census-and-population

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. QualitativeResearch in Psychology, 3, 77 – 101.

Brink, M. (2011). Parameters of Well-Being and Subjective Health and their Relationship with Residential Traffic Noise Exposure: A Representative Evaluation in Switzerland. Environment International, 37, 723 – 733.

Chen, C. F., & Chao, W. H. (2011). Habitual or Reasoned? Using the Theory of Planned Behaviour, Technology Acceptance Model, and Habit to Examine Switching Intentions toward Public Transit. Transportation Research F, 14, 128 – 137.

Chernev, A. (2003). When More is Less and Less is More: The Role of Ideal Point Availability and Assortment in Consumer Choice. The Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 170 – 183.

Choo, S., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2004). What Type of Vehicle do People Drive? The Role of Attitude and Lifestyle in Influencing Vehicle Type Choice. Transportation Research Part A, 38, 201 – 222.

Clark, S. D. (2009). The Determinants of Car Ownership in England and Wales from Anonymous 2001 Census Data. Transportation Research Part C, 17, 526 – 540.

Coad, A., de Haan, P., Woersdorfer, J.S. (2009). Consumer Support for Environment Policies: An Application to Purchases of Green Cars. Ecological Economics, 68, 2078 – 2086.

Court, D., Elzinga, D., Mulder, S., & Vetvik, O. J. (2009). The Consumer Decision Journey. McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved June 14, 2016, from: http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/the-consumer-decision-journey

Dahlstrand, U., & Biel, A. (1997). Pro-Environmental Habits: Propensity Levels in Behavioural Change. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27(7), 588 – 601.

de Haan, P., Mueller, M. G., Peters, A. (2006). Does the Hybrid Toyota Prius lead to Rebound Effects? Analysis of Size and Number of Cars Previously Owned by Swiss Prius Buyers. Ecological Economics, 58, 592 – 605.

Department for Transport. (2002). Powering Future Vehicles: The Government Strategy. Department for Transport, London.

Department for Transport. (2006). Transport Statistics Great Britain (2006). The Stationary Office.

28

Department for Transport. (2016). Vehicle Licensing Statistics: Quarter 1 (Jan – Mar) 2016. Retrieved June 12, 2016, from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/528143/vehicle-licensing-january-to-march-2016.pdf

Donaldson, S. I., & Grant-Vallone, E. J. (2002). Understanding Self-Report Bias in Organizational Behaviour Research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 17, 245 – 260.

Dratva, J., Zemp, E., Felber Dietrich, D., Bridevaux, P.-O., Rochat, T., Schindler, C., Gerbase, M.W. (2010). Impact of Road Traffic Noise Annoyance on Health-Related Quality of Life: Results from a Population-Based Study. Quality of Life Research, 19, 37 – 46.

Eliaz, K., & Spiegler, R. (2010). Consideration Sets and Competitive Marketing. The Review of Economic Studies. 78(1), 235 – 262.

Epstude, K., & Roese, N. J. (2008). The Functional Theory of Counterfactual Thinking. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(2), 168 – 192.

European Union. (2014). Regulation (EU) No 333/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 Amending Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 to Define the Modalities for Reaching the 2020 Target to Reduce CO2 Emissions from New Passenger Cars. Official Journal of the European Union, L 103/15. Retrieved June 12, 2016, from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2014.103.01.0015.01.ENG

European Environment Agency. (2000). Are We Moving in the Right Direction? Indicators on Transport and Environmental Integration in the EU: TERM2000.Environmental Issue Report No. 12. Indicator 4: Traffic Noise: Exposure and Annoyance. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.

Evans J. S. B. T. (2003). In Two Minds: Dual Process Accounts of Reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 454 – 459.

Evans J. S. B. T. (2008). Dual-processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255 – 278.

Ferreira, M. B., Garcia-Marques, L., Sherman, S. J., & Sherman, J. W. (2006). Automatic and Controlled Components of Judgment and Decision Making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(5), 797 – 813.

Flamm, B. (2009). The Impacts of Environmental Knowledge and Attitudes on Vehicle Ownership and Use. Transportation Research Part D, 14, 272 – 279.

Friedrichsmeier, A., Matthies, E., & Klöckner, C. A. (2013). Explaining Stability in Travel Mode Choice: An Empirical Comparison of Two Concepts of Habit. Transportation Research Part F, 16, 1 – 13.

Furse, D. H., Punj, G. N., & Stewart, D. W. (1984). A Typology of Individual Search Strategies Among Purchasers of New Automobiles. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 417 – 431.

Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going Green to be Seen: Status, Reputation, and Conspicuous Conservation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(3), 392 – 404.

Hafner, R. J., White, M. P., & Handley, S. J. (2012). Spoilt for Choice: The Role of Counterfactual Thinking in the Excess Choice and Reversibility Paradoxes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 28 – 36.

Heffner, R. R., Kurani, K. S., & Turrentine, T. S. (2007). Symbolism in California’s Early

29

Market for Hybrid Electric Vehicles. Journal of Transportation Research Part D, 12, 396 – 413.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2007). Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, Summary for Policy Makers. Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change, New York.

International Energy Agency. (2008). Energy Balance of the OECD and Non-OECD Countries. International Energy Agency, Paris.

Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When Choice Is De-motivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 995 – 1006.

Iyengar, S. S., Wells, R. E., & Schwartz, B. (2006). Doing Better but Feeling Worse: Looking For The ‘Best’ Job Undermines Satisfaction. Psychological Science, 17(2), 143 – 150.

Kahn, M. E. (2007). Do Greens Drive Hummers or Hybrids? Environmental Ideology as a Determinant of Consumer Choice. Journal of Environmental Economicsand Management, 54, 129 – 145.

Kahneman, D. (2003). A Psychological Perspective on Economics. The American Economic Review, 93(2), 162 – 168.

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment under Uncertainty:

Heuristics and Biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.Klein, G. A. (1998). Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. MIT Press:

Cambridge, Massachusetts. Kruglanski, A. W., Friedland, N., & Farkash, E. (1984). Lay Persons’

Sensitivity to Statistical Information: The Case of High Perceived Applicability.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 503 – 518.

Lane, B., Potter, S. (2007). The Adoption of Cleaner Vehicles in the UK: Exploring the Consumer Attitude–Action Gap. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15, 1085 – 1092.

Lewis, E. E. (1908). Financial Advertising (The History of Advertising). Taylor & Francis: United States.

Litosseliti, L. (2003). Using Focus Groups in Research. London: Continuum.Marketing-Schools. (2015). Marketing Cars: How Successful Car Manufacturers

Market their Vehicles to you. Retrieved April 27, 2015, from: http://www.marketing-schools.org/consumer-psychology/marketing-cars.html#link3

Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M., & Green, J. (1995). Microeconomic Theory. Oxford University Press.

Musselwhite, C. & Haddad, H. (2010). Exploring Older Drivers’ Perceptions of Driving. European Journal of Ageing, 7, 181 – 188.

Nisbett, R. E., Krantz, D. H., Jepson, C., & Kunda, Z. (1983). The Use ofStatistical Heuristics in Everyday Inductive Reasoning. Psychological Review,90, 339 – 363.

Noppers, E., Keizer, K., Bolderdijk, J., & Steg, L. (2014). The Adoption of Sustainable Innovations: Driven by Symbolic and Environmental Motives. Global Environmental Change, 25, 52 – 62.

Payne, J. J., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993).The Adaptive Decision Maker. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Roese, N. J. (1997). Counterfactual Thinking. Psychological Bulletin, 121(1), 133 – 148.

30

Savage, L. J. (1954). The Foundations of Statistics. New York: Wiley.Shar, A. M., & Wolford, G. (2007). Buying Behaviour as a Function of Parametric

Variation of Number of Choices. Psychological Science, 18(5), 369 – 370.Sheller, M. (2004). Automotive Emotions: Feeling the Car. Theory Culture & Society,

21(4 – 5), 221 – 242.Sparkes, A., & Smith, B. (2013). Qualitative Research Methods in Sport, Exercise

and Health: from Process to Product. London: Routledge Press.Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual Differences in Reasoning:

Implications for the Rationality Debate. Behavioural and Brain Sciences,23, 645 – 665.

Steg, L., & Gifford, R. (2005). Sustainable Transportation and Quality of Life. Journal of Transport Geography, 13, 59 – 69.

Thomas, G.O. & Walker, I. (2011). University of Bath Travel Survey 2010/11. Bath, UK: University of Bath.

Thornton, A., Evans, L., Bunt, K., Simon, A., King, S., & Webster, T. (2011). Climate Change and Transport Choices Segmentation Model: A Framework for Reducing CO2 Emissions from Personal Travel. Retrieved May 8, 2013, from:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/climate-change-and-transport-choices-segmentation-study-final-report

Verplanken, B., & Holland, R. (2002). Motivated Decision-Making: Effects of Activation and Self-Centrality of Values on Choices and Behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 434 – 447.

Verplanken, B., & Roy, D. (2015). Consumer Habits and Sustainable Consumption. In L. Reisch & J. Thøgersen (Eds.), Handbook of Sustainable Consumption. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar (pp. 243 – 253).

Verplanken, B., Walker, I., Davis, A., & Jurasek, M. (2008). Context Change and Travel Mode Choice: Combining the Habit Discontinuity and Self-Activation Hypotheses. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28, 121 – 127.

Verplanken, B., & Wood, W. (2006). Interventions to Break and Create Consumer Habits. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 25, 90 – 103.

von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Walker, I., Thomas, G.O., Verplanken, B. (2015). Old Habits Die Hard: Travel Habit Formation and Decay During an Office Relocation. Environment & Behaviour, 47(10), 1089 – 1106.

Wood, W., & Rünger, D. (2016). Psychology of Habit. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 11.1-11.26.

31