Study on Social Behaviour of Human and Various Factors Affecting It

Social behaviour defined as “individuals or groups, acquiring, using and disposing of products, services, ideas or experiences” (Arnould, Price & Zinkha, 2004). There are numbers of different theories explaining Social behaviour (Statt, 1997; Blackwell, Minrard, and Engel, 2006; Chaudhuri, 2006) and a huge amount of literature currently exists (Grunert 2002; Botonaki, Ploymeros, Tsakorodou, & Mattas, 2006; Friese, Wanke, and Plessner, 2006). There are different number of characteristics, which can impact on Social behaviour (Figure 1), which includes from demographic variables to purchase and consumption behaviours.

Social attitude can be described as “an evaluation of a concept or object, such as a brand that expresses a degree of favour or disfavour” (Arnould et al., 2004). Social attitude can be divided into three sections – affect, behaviour and cognition. Affect is an instrument, which makes the Social, feels about a product, and behaviour is Social intention to experiment with the product and cognition is the belief the Social has exhibit in a product (Solomon, 2004). Human’ mood can strongly influence their doing behaviour. Blackwell et al. (2006) found that a positive mood resulted in Human reducing the length and complexity of the decision making process. Human’ emotions also play a significant role in doing process. Emotions in relation to Social behaviour defined as mental processes that result in body and additional mental processes (Arnould et al., 2004).

Experiences are the core of Social behaviour. The Oxford English Dictionary defines as experience as “the events that have taken place within the knowledge of an individual”. To each experience, Human bring a level of effort and skill (Barnett and Breakwell, 2001). Social previous experiences play a crucial role in his future doing behaviour processes.

Social decision-making is often complicated and may involve a number of constructs. Several perspectives on Social decision-making have been considered in the literature. Some researchers have suggested that Human are ‘value driven’ (Zeithmal, 1988; Levy, 1999). A Social’s perceived value may be seen as an expression of ‘an overall assessment of the utility of a product or service based on perceptions of what is received and what is given’ (Zeithmal,1988). On the other hand, some researchers (Celsi and Olson, 1988; Petty, Cacioppo, & Schumann, 1983; Petty and Cacioppo, 1986; Blackwell et al., 2001) have emphasized the role of involvement in explaining how likely Human are to process, e.g. cognitive information (Swinyard, 1993) and to engage in extensive evaluations of attributes and products. Low-involved Human may use simple decision rules in arriving at attitudinal judgments. According to ‘cue utilization theory’ (Steenkamp, 1989; Richardson, Dick, & Jain., 1994) Human simply may use one or more indicators (eg. Price) of the quality or the overall performance of a product. Beside, the behaviour of high-involved Human may be analyzed and described based on the information processing perspective.

AgeGenderIncome EducationOccupationFamily sizeNationalityMarital statusReligionEthnicityUp-bringing

Demographic

Shopping locationBrand loyaltyFrequency of purchase

Purchase and Consumption Behaviour

CharacteristicsOf ConsumerBehaviourCulture Values Experience Personality

Figure 1: Characteristics of Social behaviour

INFLUENCES

Numerous factors can influence Human’ doing behaviour. Demographic variables that refer to selected population characteristics include gender, age, education, income, occupation and living arrangements, all of which create an impact upon an individual doing behaviour. Factors such as the type of food, where the food has been purchased and the level of trust a Social feels towards a particular product are also influential.

GENDER

It has been argued that gender has an impact on food choice and doing behaviour decisions. The majority of females are responsible for the weekly food shop hence this should influence their interaction decision, especially when the female is interaction on behalf of the family unit (Humphery, 1998). Women are reported to have higher intakes of fruits and vegetables, higher in takes of dietary fibre and lower intakes of fat than males (Westenhoefer, 2005). Wardle, Haase, Steptoe, Nillapun, Jonwutiwes, and Bellisle have supported this research, (2004) stated that women were more likely to avoid high fat foods. More likely to be dieting and placed a greater importance on healthy food.

AGE

Age has an influence on doing behaviour in the shape that different age groups have different needs. In comparison to younger people, the elderly Human eat lesser and make different food choices (Holbrook, 1996). A series of focus groups accomplished by chambers, Lobb, Butler, and Traill (2008) has shown differences with food choices decisions between age groups. They further stated that 60 plus age group to be more likely to make food choices based on health consideratios, on the other hand, those 18-30 are more likely to base their decisions on their knowledge of the food, how it is prepared as well as how much it costs and the time constraints associated with it.

It can be a matter of debate that both family and household influences affect Social doing behaviour. Families include of individuals related by blood, marriage, adoption and emotional commitment (Arnould et al., 2004). However a household is different to a family, in that it can be defined as a person or group of co-habiting persons who jointly manage time and money budgets ( Antonides and Van Raaij, 1998). A spending priorities can get affected by a family structure in the sense that a mother will be influenced to some extent by what her husband and children like to eat, and may do things for them she would not consume for herself (Statt, 1997).

Generally, it has been accepted that income is a vital factor influencing food choices and the subsequent doing behaviour of Human. As describe by Roux et al. (2000) that reduction in income may negative impact on an individual’s ability to eat a healthy diet. Further some European studies also suggested that the Human who are socio-economically better off have the ability to consume more fruit and vegetables (Dibsdall, Labert, Bobbin, & Frewer, 2003; Prattala, Groth, Oltersdorf, Ross, Sekula, & Tuomainen, 2003). Education factor can affect Social doing behaviour. Roux, Le Couedic, Durand, & Luquet (2000) described that cooking expertise, food ethics and the motivation for eating, influence food choices, particularly those with lower incomes. It is suggested that education levels are key factor when Social do a food product.