13 - Chapter 5

CHAPTER-V
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
5.1 Introduction
Data analysis is the process by which sense and meaning are made of the data
gathered in the qualitative investigation and by which the new knowledge is applied
to research problems. Pre-designed questionnaires are used to collect the data from
the customers of branded apparel in this study. Through processes of revisiting and
immersion in the data, and through sophisticated methods of structuring, statistical
calculations, or otherwise exploring it, the researcher looked for patterns and insights
relevant to the research objectives and used these to address the investigation. After
the collection of primary data from the respondents who are the customers of branded
apparel, the information was computerized by the SPSS package and processed for
output results through tables and graphs. In this process, the opinions and
responsibility of the customers of branded apparels are tabulated and presented.
Hence, this chapter deals with tables generated from the raw data of visual
merchandising on branded clothing. The analysis and interpretation of the tables are
followed with the discussions
This chapter consists of two sections, where the first section contains
Descriptive statistics. In this section, the distribution of sample respondents by their
gender, age, income level, education, profession, and family size are presented in the
form of tables. Also performed Scale value with mean and standard deviation to
understand the opinions of the branded apparel customers on visual merchandising
elements in making purchase decisions. The second section deals with the hypothesis
testing using the T-test, ANOVA, and chi-square test and Structural equation model
(SEM) used to develop a model with the right mixture of visual merchandising
elements also for hypothesis testing.
80
Section-1:
5.2 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
As mentioned above, Section 1 deals with descriptive statistics of the 500

branded apparel customers who participated in the survey. Descriptive statistics is the
most basic form of statistics and is used to describe the demographic characteristics
of the sample selected for the study
Demography analysis is used to describe the sample in terms of the

demographic characteristics such as gender, age, income, education, occupation,
family size, etc. followed by scale value analysis including mean and standard
deviation calculation. Distribution of sample based on the above mentioned
demographic characteristics is given in the following tables.
5.3 Demographic Profile of the respondents
The demographic profile of the branded apparel customers in retail stores

plays a vital role in purchasing behaviour in connection with visual merchandising
elements. The sale of many products in the market mostly depends on customer
gender, age, income, and occupation, etc. While this study is to know the impact of
visual merchandising on purchase decisions of selected branded apparel stores in
Visakhapatnam city, a sample of 500 branded apparel customers from five selected
branded apparel stores were considered as respondents. Hence, the details of the
demographic profile of these respondents are presented and discussed in the
following.
Gender: Normally, gender is of two types, and these two types have been include
in this study as male and female.
Table 5.1: Gender-wise distribution of the customers in the sample data

S No Gender Frequency Percentage
1 Male 255 51.00
2 Female 245 49.00
Total No of Respondents 500 100.00
Source: Primary Data
81
From the above table 5.1, it is known that from the total respondents of 500
members, males were 255 (51.00%), and females were 245 (49.00%).
Age: The age of the sample customers were found within the range of below 25 to
above 45 years of age. So, accordingly the suitable for measurement, the groups have
been created as below25 years, 25-45 years, and above 45 years.
Table 5.2: Age classification of the respondents
S No Age ( years ) Frequency Percentage

1 Below 25 75 15.0
2 25 - 45 324 64.8
3 Above 45 101 20.2
From the above table 5.2, it is identified that, from the total respondents of
500, below 25 years of age, customers are 75 (15.0%), between 25 to 45 years are 324
(64.80%) and above 45 years was 101 (20.20%). The following figure explains it. It
indicates that the age groups of 25-45 years of customers are more for branded
apparel stores as they are all earning members can afford to spend on branded
clothing.
Education: As per the respondents' responses, the educational qualification has been
categorized as a graduate, postgraduate, professionally qualified, and any other
category.
Table 5.3: Educational Qualifications of the respondents
Educational
S No Frequency Percentage
Qualifications
1 Graduation 179 35.8
2 Post Graduate 134 26.8
Professionally
3 141 28.2
Qualified
4 Others 46 9.2
82
The above table 5.3 explains about the educational qualifications of the
respondents. Out of the total 500 respondents, 179 (35.80%) respondents were
graduates, 134 (26.80%) respondents were postgraduates, and 141 (28.20%)
respondents were occupational qualified and other respondents' are46 (9.20%). It
is clearly stated that most of the branded apparel customers are minimum
graduates, postgraduates, and professionally qualified, very less percentage, I
.e.9.2% customers are uneducated and others.
Annual Income: As per the responses on the annual income of the customers, the
researcher has categorized into three categories as less than Rs.2,00,000,
Rs.2,00,001 --Rs.4,00,000, and above 4,00,000
Table 5.4: Annual income classification of the respondents
S No Annual Income(Rs ) Frequency Percentage

1 Less than 2 Lakhs 129 25.8
2 2 - 4 Lakhs 200 40.0
3 Above 4 Lakhs 171 34.2
From the above table 5.4, it infers that out of 500 respondents, 129 (25.80%)
respondents have an annual income of fewer than two lakhs. 200 (40.0%) respondents
have a yearly salary of two lakhs to 4 lakhs, and 171 (34.20%) respondents have an
annual income of above four lakhs. It is evident that the customers who have more
than two lakhs annual income tend to shop their clothing n branded apparel stores.
Only 25.8% of customers who have less than two lakhs annual income are
occasionally buying from branded apparel stores. The following figure explains it.
Occupation: The Occupation level of respondents has been included for
measurement as public sector employees, private sector employees, self-employed,
and others. So, this group has also been included in this study.
83
Table 5.5: Occupation of the respondents
S No Occupation Frequency Percentage

1 Public Sector 175 35.0
2 Private Sector 82 16.4
3 Self Employed 142 28.4
4 Others 101 20.2
The above table 5.5 explains about the occupation of the respondents. Out of
the total 500 respondents, 175 (35.00%) respondents were public sector employees,
82 (16.40%) respondents were working in the private sector, 142 (28.40%)
respondents were self-employed, and 101 (20.20%) respondents belonged to others. It
infers that the respondents are a mixture of all types of occupations, out of which 35%
belong to public sector units, which is highest, as Visakhapatnam having many public
sector units. Next place will be self-employed with 28.4%
Family size: Family has been divided into three categories like below 3, 3-5
members and above 5 members
Table 5.6: Family members of the respondents
S No Family Members Frequency Percentage

1 Below 3 124 24.8
2 3 - 5 members 250 50.0
3 Above 5 126 25.2
From above table 5.6, it is known that the number of respondents having
family members below 3 was 124 (24.80%), the respondents having family
members of 3 to 5 was 250 (50.00%), and the respondents having five members
was 126 (25.20%). The following figure explains it.
84
5.4 Perceptive analysis of Visual Merchandising
Product display
1. For Calculating the Likert scale, the total value- Scale value is multiplied by
overall frequency (Frequency X Scale value).
2. Maximum Possible score calculation = Highest scale point x No of statements x
Total No of respondents
3. Likert Scale value in percentage is derived by- Frequency X Scale Value / Total
Scale Points X 100.
Table – 5.7: Opinions of branded apparel customers on product

display at retail stores
Strongly Strongly Standard
S. Agree Undecided Disagree
Statement Agree Disagree Total Mean Deviation
No. (F) (F) (F)
(F) (F)
Scale Value (SV) 5 4 3 2 1
When visiting
shops, pay
1 231 221 14 22 12 500 4.27 .899
attention to the
displays.
Frequency x Scale
Value (F X SV)
1155 884 42 44 12 2137-I
You believe that
the displays
2 increase your 226 201 37 26 10 500 4.21 .933
interest in the
products.
Frequency x Scale 2107-
Value (F X SV)
1130 804 111 52 10
II
The size of the
store would
3 influence your 111 168 74 121 26 500 3.43 1.220
preference for
products
Value (F X SV)
555 672 222 242 26
VII
The products
placed like a
4 mess are 26 143 108 216 7 500 3.93 .989
considered as
cheap.
Frequency x
1465-
Scale Value (F X 130 572 324 432 7
IX
SV)
Products in sales
5 should be 87 272 84 52 5 500 3.77 .892
gathered as this
85
can stimulate the
intention to
purchase.
Frequency x
1884-
Scale Value (F X 435 1088 252 104 5
V
SV)
When you are
waiting for
payment, pay
6 attention to 145 257 42 47 9 500 3.96 .955
products that are
nearby.

Value (F X SV)
725 1028 126 94 9
III
Product Display
is a factor that
you consider
7 84 286 25 34 71 500 4.05 .725
when deciding
which stores to
visit.
Frequency x
1778-
Scale Value (F X 420 1144 75 68 71
VI
SV)
I tend to buy
products
8 displayed on or 100 176 2 144 78 500 3.15 1.430
near the payment
desks
Frequency x
1576-
Scale Value (F X 500 704 6 288 78
VIII
SV)
Good Product
display helps me 136 248 33 41 42
9 4.28 .894
make my buying
decisions.
Value (F X SV)
680 992 99 82 42
IV
Total score for
16541
product display
Maximum 5 (Maximum score points) X 500 (number of
22500
Possible Score respondents) X 9 (number of statements)
Percentage of the
The total score for product display/Maximum Possible
score of Product 73.51
Score X 100
Display
86
Opinions of branded apparel customers on product display in the branded
apparel stores are presented in Table–5.7. Data is collected from the respondents on
nine statements, which comprise of the factors of product display on the Likert scale,
and scale value analysis is done for a better understanding of the dimensions and
ranking the statements based on the total scale value.
The data analysed above shows clearly that the mean value of 9 statements 7 is
between 3.5 to 4.5 which shows that most of the respondents agree that the display of
the product is one of the essential visual merchandising items and that they are
attracted by the displays and finally take a favourable purchasing decision. The
product show systemically designed allows customers to shop. The seven statements
have a standard deviation below 1, thereby suggesting that there are no major
variations in the perception of clients except the assertion 'I choose to buy goods at or
near the payment desks' and 'The size of the store can influence your choice of items.'
As per the scale value analysis, the data indicates the influence of the product
display dimension of visual merchandising on the purchase decision. The above data
indicates two aspects that came to the foray when analyzed
1. The initial appearance and display in the store is important

2. Indians are pricing conscious customers
It is clear that Systematic merchandise displays and the products displayed

near the payment desk attracts the attention of the customer and another dimension
which is very prominent in initiating the purchase is the merchandise display on sales
promotion
Though there is a slight indication that that displays near the payment counter
attracts the attention, but in the case of apparel stores, it rarely gets converted into
sales as the respondents stated that they do pay attention to these goods but don‘t tend
to purchase them.
87
Table – 5.8: Opinions of branded apparel customers on Mannequin display
at retail stores

Agree Undecided Disagree
S.No. Statement Agree Disagree Total Mean Deviation
(F) (F) (F)
(F) (F)
Scale Value (SV) 5 4 3 2 1
I get an idea of
what I want to
buy after looking
1 60 231 91 107 11 500 4.20 .879
at the mannequin
displays in the
store
Frequency x
1722-
Scale Value (F X 300 924 273 214 11
III
SV)
When I see
clothes with a
new style or
2 54 251 76 108 11 500 3.96 1.193
design on display,
I tend to buy
them.
Frequency x
1729-
Scale Value (F X 270 1004 228 216 11
II
SV)
When I see
clothes that I like
on the
3 8 257 80 130 25 500 3.95 .904
form/mannequin
in the store, I tend
to buy it.
Frequency x
1593-
Scale Value (F X 40 1028 240 260 7
IV
SV)
I tend to depend
on the store
4 displays when I 61 105 126 201 7 500 3.83 .954
decide to buy
clothes.
Frequency x
1512-
Scale Value (F X 305 420 378 402 7
V
SV)
Mannequin is a
useful means to
communicate
14
about the clothing 228 68 34 22 500
5 8 4.14 .875
than any other
way in the store
88
Frequency x
2026-
Scale Value (F X 1140 592 204 68 22
I
SV)
The total score
for In-store
8582
Form/Mannequin
display
12500
Percentage of the
score of In-store Total score for In-store Form/Mannequin display/
68.6
Form/Mannequin Maximum Possible Score X 100
display
In-store from/mannequin display is one of the essential factors to determine
the visual merchandising of branded apparel stores from the customer point of view,
the opinions of the respondents on the influence of in-store form/mannequin display
to attract branded apparel customers is presented in the Table-5.8. In this context, the
data was collected from the respondents on five statements related to the factors of
mannequin display calculated by Likert scale, and scale value analysis is done for a
better understanding of the influenced dimensions and ranking the statements based
on the total scale value.
The above data clearly shows that out of 5 statements, all of them got the
mean value in between 3.5 to 4.5, which indicates that all the respondents agree that
the mannequins are the crucial means of in-store communication; they also gain
knowledge about the fashion trends through the mannequins. Sometimes they also
rely on mannequins in getting an idea of what is to be purchased. Out of five
statements, four got standard deviation below 1, and this infers that there is no much
deviation in the opinions of the customers on the mannequins displays in branded
apparel stores except the statement 'When I see clothes with a new style or design on
display, I tend to buy them.' This infers that few respondents are differing with the
tendency of purchase based on the displayed item on the mannequins.
As per the scale value analysis, it shows that the influence of mannequin
display in the branded apparel retail store found more prominent in the selection of
clothes in branded apparel stores. The above analysis indicates three dimensions of
in-store form/mannequin display in retail stores that came to the highlight when
analyzed
89
1. Mannequins are the best way to covey the fashion trends to the apparel
customers than any other way in the store
2. When the customer sees clothing featuring anew style or design on display,
he/she tends to buy it.
3. The customer gets an idea of what he/she wants to buy after looking through
mannequin displays.
A coordinated model show at the shop draws buyers and generates interest in
visiting and purchasing branded clothes. The customer's propensity to visit a branded
clothing store when he / she invites his / her model show is increased.
Thus the mannequin display in the store of branded clothing helps the retailer
to attract more and more new customers and to maximize sales. When the customer
sees freshly made clothes on sale, he / she appears to buy it. After looking through
model displays, the customer gets an idea of what he / she wants to buy. Once a
customer see the clothes he / she wants on a poster, he / she appears to buy them.
Table – 5.9: Opinions of branded apparel customers on product shelf position at

retail stores
S.No. Statement Agree Disagree Total Mean deviation
(F) (F) (F)
(F) (F)
Scale Value
5 4 3 2 1
(SV)
I tend to buy
unintended
products while
1 13 81 172 217 17 500 3.93 0.812
I‘m browsing
the aisles of a
store
Frequency x
Scale Value (F 65 324 516 434 17 1356-V
X SV)
I tend to look
at products
2 32 327 77 54 10 500 3.61 0.920
located in eye-
level
Frequency x
Scale Value (F 160 1308 231 108 10 1817-II
X SV)
I tend to stop
and browse
3 products 47 319 36 70 28 500 4.05 .793
displayed on
shelves
90
Frequency x
1787-
Scale Value (F 235 1276 108 140 28
III
X SV)
I tend to buy
products
4 displayed on 91 216 56 102 35 500 3.49 1.058
shelves on
sight
Frequency x
1726-
Scale Value (F 455 864 168 204 35
IV
X SV)
An appropriate
product shelf
position helps
5 84 298 45 55 18 500 3.83 0.894
me to make
better purchase
decisions.
Frequency x
Scale Value (F 420 1192 135 110 18 1875-I
X SV)
The total score
for product 8561
shelf position
12500
Possible Score respondents) X 5(number of statements)
Percentage of
score of a The total score for product shelf
68.4
Product shelf position/Maximum Possible Score X 100
position
The opinions of the respondents on the influence of product shelf position to

attract customers is presented in the Table-5.9. To analyze this data was collected
from the respondents on five statements related to the factors of product shelf position
at retail stores calculated by Likert scale and scale value analysis is done for better
understanding of the influenced dimensions and ranking the statements based on the
total scale value.
The above data clearly shows that out of 5 statements 4 got the mean value in
between 3.5 to 4.5, that indicates that majority of the respondents are agreeing that the
product shelf position is also an essential dimension of visual merchandising as it
makes the customers' shopping easy, eye-level product shelf position always produces
a better result in making the shopping process easy.. The four statements got standard
deviation below 1, this infers that there is no much deviation in the opinions of the
customers about the product shelf position in branded apparel stores.
91
As per the scale value analysis, it is observed that the product shelf position is
also vital in branded apparel stores in the selection and purchase of garments. The
above analysis indicates three dimensions of product shelf position at retail stores that
came to the highlight when analyzed
1. Appropriate product shelf position helps retail consumers in making better

purchase decisions
2. The customer tends to look at products located at eye-level.
3. The customer tends to stop and browse products displayed on shelves.
A systematically designed product shelf position is a positive influencer in a

retail store that creates a desire to purchase selective branded apparel. If the product
shelf position at retail stores liked by the customer, the interest to check the
merchandise would get aroused, so the product shelf position helps the consumers in
making better purchase decisions. The customer tends to look at products located at
eye-level. The customer tends to stop and browse products displayed on shelves.
Table – 5.10: Opinions of branded apparel customers on window

display at retail stores
(F) (F) (F)
(F) (F)
Scale Value
5 4 3 2 1
(SV)
Creative shop
windows
1 243 192 35 22 8 500 3.86 .905
attract you to
a store.
Frequency x
2140-
Scale Value 1215 768 105 44 8
I
(F X SV)
Attention is
always paid to
different
window
2 57 201 36 197 9 500 3.91 .761
displays,
regardless of
what is
displayed
Frequency x
Scale Value 1600-
285 804 108 394 9
(F X SV) IX
92
Frequent
changes to the
window
display have
3 81 245 34 104 36 500 3.40 1.315
arisen interest
for the
products in
that store.
Frequency x
1731-
Scale Value 405 980 102 208 36
VIII
(F X SV)
Frequent
modifications
of the window
display help
4 85 253 23 130 9 500 3.77 .765
you to know
the new
products in
the Store
Frequency x
1775-
Scale Value 425 1012 69 260 9
VI
(F X SV)
If the item
you like
appears in the
5 window, your 106 279 49 56 10 500 3.99 .817
desire to buy
it will be
stimulated.
Frequency x
1915-
Scale Value 530 1116 147 112 10
III
(F X SV)
I tend to
choose which
store to buy
depends on
6 69 240 84 82 25 500 3.63 .916
the eye-
catching
window
display
Frequency x
1746-
Scale Value 345 960 252 164 25
VII
(F X SV)
I feel
compelled to
enter the store
7 when I see an 152 188 8 119 33 500 3.17 1.221
exciting
window
display.
93
Frequency x
1807-
Scale Value 760 752 24 238 33
V
(F X SV)
I tend to enter
a store when I
8 am attracted 104 262 4 97 33 500 3.84 .739
by a creative
window.
Frequency x
1807-
Scale Value 520 1048 12 194 33
V
(F X SV)
Window
displays
always
9 increase your 128 309 30 28 5 500 4.16 .841
interest in the
products
shown.
Frequency x
2027-
Scale Value 640 1236 90 56 5
II
(F X SV)
Window
Display
attracts me to
a product or
item that I had
10 82 299 29 63 27 500 4.33 .929
not
considered
buying before
entering a
store.
Frequency x
1846-
Scale Value 410 1196 87 126 27
IV
(F X SV)
Total score
for window 18394
display
Maximum
5 (Maximum score points) X 500 (number of
Possible 25000
respondents) X 10 (number of statements)
Score
Percentage of
the score of The total score for window display/Maximum
73.6
Window Possible Score X 100
display
The opinions of the respondents on the influence of the window display in

attracting customers is presented in Table–5.10. Data is collected from the
respondents on ten statements, which are related to the factors of window display
94
computed on the Likert scale, and scale value analysis is done for a better
understanding of the influenced dimensions and ranking the statements based on the
total scale value.
The above data clearly shows that out of 10 statements, 8 got the mean value
in between 3.5 to 4.5, which indicates that the majority of the respondents agree that
the window display is one of the essential elements in a branded retail store. Creative
window displays play an important role in attracting customers. Most of the time, the
customers' desire towards the product will be influenced by the attractive window
display. Out of ten statements, eight got standard deviation below 1, and thus infer
that there is no much deviation in the opinions of the customers about the window
display in branded apparel stores except the frequent changes in window displays
arousing interest .role of a window display in compelling customers to enter into the
store
As per the scale value analysis, the above table indicates two dimensions of
window display that came to the highlight when analyzed
1. The customers are attracted to the branded apparel stores by the window display.
2. Window displays increase the interest of the customers towards those product
items being displayed and influenced to buy.
An attractive window display increases the volume of sales by attracting the

customer to the store and creating a strong desire to buy the product. When the item
the Customer likes is shown on the window, the incentive to buy it is enhanced if the
absorption of window displays contents will increase the interest of the Consumer in
the shop. The tendency to enter the store is increased if an attractive window display
attracts him / her. The frequent change in the window display thus helps the retailer to
bring the new product to the shop. The customer therefore tends to choose the store to
be chosen according to the window display.
95
Table – 5.11: Opinions of branded apparel customers on Interior
color at retail stores

(F) (F) (F)
(F) (F)
Scale
5 4 3 2 1
Value (SV)
The colors
of the store
can switch
1 your 66 203 116 55 60 500 2.73 1.064
purchase
behavior
and mood
Frequency
x Scale 1660-
330 812 348 110 60
Value (F X VII
SV)
The colors
that are
used in the
store entice
2 125 268 28 70 9 500 4.09 .896
to a
favorable
purchase
decision
Frequency
x Scale 1930-
625 1072 84 140 9
Value (F X III
SV)
The color
tone of a
fashion
product
3 may 80 334 57 21 8 500 4.09 .997
influence
your
preference
for it.
Frequency
x Scale
400 1336 171 42 8 1957-II
Value (F X
SV)
Some
bright
4 colors in 139 172 15 146 28 500 4.10 .834
the store
such as red
96
and orange
tend to
stand out
and draw
your
attention
Frequency
x Scale
695 688 45 292 28 1748-V
Value (F X
SV)
The
colorful
assortment
of fast
fashion
5 182 181 53 7 77 500 3.40 1.028
products
could
awaken
your
conscience.
Frequency
x Scale 1884-
910 724 159 14 77
Value (F X IV
SV)
The color
of the
background
in product
displays
6 90 372 3 15 20 500 3.92 0.816
can have a
powerful
effect on
your
shopping
Frequency
x Scale
450 1488 9 30 20 1997-I
Value (F X
SV)
Interior
color can
create a
positive
7 87 193 131 39 50 500
mood to 3.84 .868
buy
garments in
the store
Frequency
x Scale 1728-
435 772 393 78 50
Value (F X VI
SV)
97
The total
score for
12904
the color of
the display
Maximum
Possible 17500
Score
Percentage
of the score The total score for the color of display/Maximum
73.7
of Color of Possible Score X 100
display
The Table-5.11 presents the opinions of the branded apparel customers on the
influence of interior colors on the purchase decision. Data was collected from the
respondents on seven statements, which are related to the factors of color calculated
on Likert scale, and scale value analysis is done for better analyzing of the influenced
dimensions and ranking the statements based on the total scale value of each factor
represent color at branded apparel stores.
The above data clearly shows that out of 7 statements, 5 got the mean value in
between 3.5 to 4.5, which indicates that the majority of the respondents are agreeing
that the Interior color also helps the retailer in provoking the customer for their
purchase decision. The colors that are used in the store entice to a favorable purchase
decision. The background colors for product displays are essential in visual
merchandising. Out of seven statements, five got standard deviation below 1, this
infers that there is no much deviation in the opinions of the customers about interior
color and its influence except the attitudes towards the colorful assortment of fast
fashion products could awaken customer conscience and the role of interior colors in
switching the mood for definite purchase.
As per the result obtained from the scale value analysis. The above table infers
two dimensions of color that came to the highlight when analyzed:
1. The color of the background in product displays can have a powerful effect on
your shopping
2. The color tone of a fashion product may influence your preference for it.
An appropriate interior color attracts the customer of branded apparel into the
store and creates interest in the products. The colors of the store can switch the
98
customer's mood into a positive attitude. The tendency to purchase a branded apparel
gets stimulated when he/she attracted by its tone of color of a fashion product. The
color of the background in product displays can have a powerful effect on customer
shopping also ensures a delightful shopping experience.
Table – 5.12: Opinions of branded apparel customers on lighting at retail stores

Strongly Strongly Mean Standard
S.No. Statement Agree Disagree Total deviation
(F) (F) (F)
(F) (F)
Scale Value
5 4 3 2 1
(SV)
Always pay
attention to
1 things covered 72 289 28 103 8 500 3.67 .892
by intense
lighting.
Frequency x
1814-
Scale Value (F 360 1156 84 206 8
IV
X SV)
The use of
lights of
different
brightness to
2 decorate the 82 165 23 218 12 500 3.88 .739
shop would
stimulate the
preference for
products.
Frequency x
1587-
Scale Value (F 410 660 69 436 12
VI
X SV)
The use of
lights of
different
brightness to
decorate the
3 126 180 26 122 46 500 3.88 .907
shop would
increase the
possibility of
making
purchases.
Frequency x
Scale Value (F 630 720 78 244 46 1718-V
X SV)
Your interest in
a product may
4 170 284 11 26 9 500 3.81 .937
increase if you
can see it.
99
Frequency x
Scale Value (F 850 1136 33 52 9 2080-II
X SV)
You would like
to buy the
product only if
5 262 191 7 29 11 500 3.53 .852
you have
already checked
it.
Frequency x
Scale Value (F 1310 764 21 58 11 2164-I
X SV)
The mood
generated by
the use of
6 dimmed lights 45 61 144 213 37 500 3.27 1.142
increases your
interest in
purchases
Frequency x
1364-
Scale Value (F 225 244 432 426 37
VII
X SV)
Proper Lighting
helps me
compare the 122 278 21 39 40 500
7 3.77 .922
merchandise I
am considering
buying
Frequency x
1903-
Scale Value (F 610 1112 63 78 40
III
X SV)
The total score
for lighting at 12630
the store
17500
Percentage of
the score of The total score for lighting at store/Maximum
72.1
Lighting at the Possible Score X 100
store
The opinions of customers on the influence of the lighting in taking purchase
decision is presented in the Table-5.12. Data was collected from the respondents on
seven statements which are related to the factors of lighting at retail stores calculated
on Likert scale and scale value analysis is done for better analyzing of the influenced
dimensions and ranking the statements based on the total scale value of each factor
represent lighting at branded apparel retail stores.
100
The above results show clearly that from 7 statements 6 the average value is
between 3.5 and 4.5, indicating that the majority of respondents believe that the
lighting has a significant impact on the consumer purchasing decision in branded
clothing retail stores. The use of different shine lights to decorate a shop would
encourage a preference for products; if the customer can see them clearly under
proper lighting, the customer interest in a product may increase. The consumer still
focuses on the items under bright light. Of the seven claims, six have below 1 a
standard deviation, and this means this there is no substantial deviation in customers'
views about the lighting in the retail store, except for the mood produced by the use of
dimmed lights.
According to the results obtained from the analysis of the scale value, the
lighting is influenced by two dimensions:
1. Customers only want to buy branded clothing when they have checked it
clearly when they visit the shop and
2. The interest of the customer in a product may be increased if the product

can be clearly seen with sufficient lighting in the store.
Proper lighting attracts the customers of branded apparel into the store. If
product displayed under attractive light, the desire of buying it will be raised,
therefore, the retailer must use required lighting combinations are thoroughly utilized
in the store to improve the store ambiance, they must also focus all the merchandise in
the selling area
The purchase tendency of the customer in branded apparel increased when

he/she attracted by a fashionable product with bright lighting; the same will be
considered for the purchase. Therefore, assortments of fast fashion products with
decent light in the retail stores could raise the interest in it. So appropriate lighting
will influence the purchase decision.
101
Table – 5.13: Opinions of branded apparel customers on the signage
of display at retail stores
S.No Statement Agree Disagree Total Mean deviation
(F) (F) (F)
(F) (F)
Scale Value
5 4 3 2 1
(SV)
Signage
increases
your
1 awareness/k 175 237 54 26 8 500 4.33 .718
nowledge of
the products
presented.
Frequency
x Scale 2045-
875 948 162 52 8
Value (F X III
SV)
Signage in
the form of
labels gives
2 you more 178 257 26 11 28 500 3.97 .843
information
about the
product.
Frequency
x Scale 2046-
890 1028 78 22 28
Value (F X II
SV)
The more
information
you have
about a
3 307 74 10 81 28 500 3.86 .896
product, the
more likely
you will
buy it.
Frequency
x Scale
1535 296 30 162 28 2051-I
Value (F X
SV)
The backlit
signs are
usually
more
4 20 290 110 28 52 500 3.74 .844
prominent
in attracting
customers.
102
Frequency
x Scale 1698-
100 1160 330 56 52
Value (F X VIII
SV)
Always pay
5 attention to 77 197 28 175 23 500 3.60 .866
the signs.
Frequency
x Scale
385 788 84 350 23 1630-X
Value (F X
SV)
If I see an
exciting
promotional
offer
(reduced
6 price, sales 84 318 34 61 3 500 3.50 .932
promotion,
etc.) on
shop signs,
I tend to
buy.
Frequency
x Scale
420 1272 102 122 3 1919-V
Value (F X
SV)
Sales
/clearance
sales signs
7 encourage 44 160 143 144 9 500 3.56 .777
me to look
through
clothes
Frequency
x Scale 1586-
220 640 429 288 9
Value (F X XI
SV)
When I see
a particular
promotional
8 sign, I will 80 301 102 11 6 500 3.60 .815
look at
those
clothes
103
Frequency
x Scale 1938-
400 1204 306 22 6
Value (F X IV
SV)
You are
more likely
to make an
unintended
9 purchase if 95 102 163 130 10 500 3.52 .892
the clothing
is in
promotional
sales
Frequency
x Scale 1642-
475 408 489 260 10
Value (F X IX
SV)
I tend to
buy
garments on
special
offers
10 communicat 130 227 74 54 15 500 3.49 1.139
ed by
advertising
/promotiona
l signs in
the store.
Frequency
x Scale 1903-
650 908 222 108 15
Value (F X VI
SV)
Appropriate
Signage
provides me
with
information
that I
11 124 167 147 49 13 500 3.41 1.018
believe is
useful in
making
daily
purchasing
decisions.
104
Frequency
x Scale 1840-
620 668 441 98 13
Value (F X VII
SV)
The total
score for
20298
signage of
display
Maximum
Possible 27500
Score
Percentage
of the score The total score for signage of display/Maximum
73.8
of Signage Possible Score X 100
of display
Table-5.13 Analyses the opinions of the respondents on the influence of

signage to attract their customers.
In this connection, the data was collected from the respondents on 11

statements, which are related to the factors of signage display computed on the Likert
scale, and scale value analysis is done for a better understanding of the influenced
dimensions and ranking the statements based on the total scale value.
The above data clearly shows that out of 11 statements, 9 got the mean value
in between 3.5 to 4.5, which indicates that the majority of the respondents are
agreeing that the Signage is an essential element of visual merchandising that
influence the purchase decision. Signage increases customer awareness of the
products presented, the more information that the customer gets through signage, the more
they likely buy, Purchase tendency will be increased once the customers see different
promotional signage, because of appropriate signage customers may get influenced for
unintended purchases sometimes. Out of eleven statements, two got standard deviation
below 1, for other 2 two statements 'I tend to buy garments on special offers
communicated by advertising /promotional signs in the store.‘ and ‗Appropriate Signage
provides me with information that I believe is useful in making daily purchasing decisions‘
have got the standard deviation is more than 1, that means the opinions of the
customers have deviated on those statements.
105
As per the result obtained from the scale value analysis, there are three
dimensions of signage that came to the highlight when analyzed
1. The more information the customers have got about a product, the more likely
they will buy it.
2. Signage in the form of tags offers the customers more information about the
product.
3. Signage increases your awareness of the products presented in apparel retailing.
The branded apparel retail shop provides customers with details on the
merchandise, promotional deals, new launches, discounted products, different product
locations and so forth. Whenever the customer sees a specific promotional sign on the
branded clothing store, he / she will see this clothing. If it sees an enticing
promotional deal, such as discounted prices, exclusive promotions, etc., on in-store
signs, it appears to purchase the product from special deals displayed through in-store
promotional and advertisement signage.
The regular adjustment of the show allows the retailer to remind the retailer of the
new arrivals. Signage allows the consumer to quickly locate their needed clothing
without much searching.
Table – 5.14: Opinions of branded apparel customers on Store -

the layout of retail stores

(F) (F) (F)
(F) (F)
Scale
Value 5 4 3 2 1
(SV)
I tend to
buy
unintended
products
1 while 64 157 73 151 55 500 3.20 1.154
trying to
find a
specific
product
106
Frequency
x Scale 1524-
320 628 219 302 55
Value (F IV
X SV)
I like
shopping if
I find the
desired
products
2 21 244 26 110 99 500 4.13 .886
quickly
and
without
much
search.
Frequency
x Scale 1478-
105 976 78 220 99
Value (F VI
X SV)
When I go
to a store, I
tend to
walk
3 directly to 241 183 23 25 28 500 3.89 .799
the
products I
intend to
buy
Frequency
x Scale
1205 732 69 50 28 2084-I
Value (F
X SV)
When I
enter a
shop, I
4 tend to go 79 207 44 162 8 500 3.87 .792
to the new
arrivals
section.
Frequency
x Scale
395 828 132 324 8 1687-II
Value (F
X SV)
When I
enter a
store, I
tend to
5 17 223 74 178 8 500 3.50 .974
follow the
store's
design
while I
107
browse the
store.
Frequency
x Scale 1563-
85 892 222 356 8
Value (F III
X SV)
Store
layout
influences
6 my long- 58 143 91 167 41 500 3.67 .945
term
purchasing
decisions
Frequency
x Scale
290 572 273 334 41 1510-V
Value (F
X SV)
The total
score for
9846
the layout
of the store
Maximum
Possible 15000
Score
Percentage
of the
The total score for the layout of store/Maximum
score of 65.6
Possible Score X 100
Layout of
store
The opinions of the customers on the influence of store layout in making a

purchase decision in branded apparel stores are presented in the Table-5.14. In this
context, the data was collected from the respondents on six statements related to the
factors of retail store layout calculated by Likert scale, and scale value analysis is
done for a better understanding of the influenced dimensions and ranking the
statements of retail store layout based on the total scale value.
Out of 6 statements five have a mean value between 3.5 and 4.5, which
indicates that most respondents believe that the shop layout is one of the key elements
of visual merchandising that affect the decision and purchase in branded clothing
stores. The customer selects his / her intended item easily without much search or
waiting for a sales agent. Comfortable storage layout makes customers loyal to the
store and creates an emotional connection between retailers and consumers. Out of
108
six, I prefer to buy unintended goods when attempting to find a specific commodity, I
have a standard deviation greater than 1. This shows that customers differ on the
layout of the role shop on unintentional shopping.
According to the scale value analysis, three dimensions of the store-the shop
layout, which is illustrated when evaluated
1. Once consumers join a store, they appear to go straight to the items they want to
purchase.
2. When customers enter a shop, they tend to go straight to the newcomers section.
3. When customers enter a store, they tend to follow the layout of the store while
navigating the store.
A systematically designed store layout plan will make the customer do

shopping with more ease and confidence; they can pick their required garments on
their own instead of waiting for the sales representatives in the store. This will further
save the customer's time.
So the suitable store layout of the retail store helps the retailers to attract new
potential customers in the store and increase the footfalls. So designing an appropriate
store layout is very crucial in the overall success of the branded apparel retail store.
109
Table 5.15 Opinions of branded apparel customers on purchase
decision at retail stores
S. No. Visual merchandising elements Total score Percentage of score
1 Signage 20298 73.8 – I
2 Interior color 12904 73.7-II
3 Window display 18394 73.6 – III
4 Product display 16541 73.5 – IV
5 Lighting effects 12630 72.1 – V
6 Mannequins 8582 68.6 – VI
7 Product –shelf position 8561 68.4 – VII
8 Store -Layout 9846 65.6 –VIII
The Table-5.15 represents the overall opinions of branded apparel customers

on visual merchandising elements at the retail store. It is found that out of the total 8
items of visual merchandising, Store signage place in the first position with 73.8
percent score followed by interior color with the score 73.7 percent, window display
with 73.6 percent, product display 73.5 percent, lighting effects with 72.1 percent,
mannequins with 68.6 percent, product shelf position 68.4 percent and store layout
65.6 percent.
Hence, the analysis reveals that signage, window display, interior color,
product display, and lighting influences the customer's purchase decision greatly, as
they got more than seventy percent score. The next priority is given to mannequins,
product –shelf position with above sixty percent weightage, and Store- layout holds
the last place.
110
Section 2
5.5 Hypothesis testing using T-Test &ANOVA
To examine whether there is a significant difference between and among the

different customer groups ( categorized based on gender, age, education, income
level, occupation, and family size) on their perceptions on Visual merchandising
elements like Store displays(Product display, Mannequin display, Product shelf-
position,)Window display, store atmospherics (interior color, lighting) Signage and
Store –layout. T-test was performed to determine the significant difference in the
customers' perceptions of visual merchandising elements based on gender, and
ANOVA was used for the rest of the demographic factors.
Table 5.16: The perceptions of the branded apparel consumers on different

visual merchandising dimensions according to their Gender using T-test
Std. Std. t- P-
Dimension Gender N Mean
Dev. Err. value value
Male 255 4.38 0.75 0.03
Product Display 0.849 0.000
Female 245 4.96 0.84 0.04
Male 255 3.95 0.68 0.03
Store Displays Mannequins 0.789 0.000
Female 245 4.12 0.71 0.02
Product Shelf Male 255 3.72 0.82 0.03
1.012 0.000
Position Female 245 4.12 0.67 0.05
Male 255 31.26 4.36 0.28
Window Display 0.862 0.450
Female 245 32.68 4.11 0.38
Male 255 4.68 0.83 0.07
Lighting 0.489 0.000
Female 245 4.28 0.64 0.08
Store Male 255 3.95 0.73 0.06
Atmospherics Interior Color Female 245 3.97 0.81 0.10 0.956 0.000
Female 245 4.23 0.85 0.06
Male 255 29.87 3.12 0.16
Signage 0.745 0.000
Female 245 28.69 3.24 0.32
Male 255 24.62 4.12 0.34

Store Layout 0.486 0.512
Female 245 27.36 4.09 0.26
Significant @ 5% level.
111
Null Hypothesis: H0A1: There is no significant difference between gender concerning
perceptions of Visual merchandising elements, i.e., Store displays, (product display,
mannequin, product shelf position) Window display, Store atmospherics (interior
color, lighting), Signage, store layout.-Rejected
The above table 5.16 presents the perceptions of the respondents based on
their gender towards different visual merchandising elements like Store displays(
Product display, Mannequin display, Product shelf- position,) Window display, store
atmospherics (interior Color, lighting) Signage and Store –layout. The consumer
awareness of product display between males and females shows that the average
perceived score of female (4.96) found higher than male (4.38), and the standard
deviations are 0.84 and 0.75, respectively. With this difference in mean score
distribution, the tested T-value 0.849is indicates a significant difference between the
opinions of male and female customers because the P-value is 0.000which is less than
0.05. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. That indicates that female customers are
more attracted to product displays than male consumers.
The branded apparel consumer‘s perception of mannequin display between

males and females shows that the average perceived score of female (4.12) found
higher than male (3.95), and the standard deviations are 0.71 and 0.68 respectively.
With this difference in mean score distribution, the tested T-value 0.789is indicates a
significant difference between the opinions of male and female customers because the
P-value is 0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. That
indicates that female customers are more observing the mannequin displays in the
apparel stores; they are following fashion trends by mannequins than male customers.
The consumer perception of product shelf-position in branded apparel stores

between males and females shows that the average perceived score of female (4.12)
found higher than male (3.72), and the standard deviations are 0.67 and 0.82
respectively. With this difference in mean score distribution, the tested T-value 1.012
is indicated a significant difference between the opinions of male and female
customers because the P-value is 0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence, the null
hypothesis is rejected. That indicates that female customers felt more comfortable
with product shelf position especially eye-level shelf position.
112
The consumer attitude on a window display of branded apparel stores
between males and females shows that the average perceived score of female (32.68)
found higher than male (31.26), and the standard deviations are 4.11 and 4.36
respectively. With this difference of mean score distribution, the tested T-value
0.862is indicates no significant difference between the opinions of male and female
customers on the window display element because the P-value is 0.450which is higher
than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is accepted. The Shopper opinion on the
lighting display of branded apparel stores between males and females shows that the
average perceived score of male (4.68) found higher than female (4.28), and the
standard deviations are 0.83 and 0.64, respectively. With this difference of mean score
distribution, the tested T-value 0.489 is indicated a significant difference between the
opinions of male and female customers on lighting because the P-value is 0.000which
is less than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is rejected. This indicates that male
customers are paying more attention to the products under intense lighting. They are
more stimulated towards product purchase if the store is decorated with the
illumination of different brightness than the female customers. When it comes to the
perceptions on the interior color in branded apparel stores between males and females
shows that the average perceived score of female (3.97) found higher than male
(3.95), and the standard deviations are 0.81 and 0.73 respectively. With this difference
of mean score distribution, the tested T-value 0.956 is indicated a significant
difference between the opinions of male and female customers on interior color
because the P-value is 0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is
rejected. This infers that female customers are more attracted to store interior color
than male customers.
The customer observation on the signage of branded apparel stores between

males and females shows that the average perceived score of male (29.87) found
higher than female (28.69), and the standard deviations are 3.12 and 3.24 respectively.
With this difference of mean score distribution, the tested T-value 0.745indicates
significant difference between the opinions of male and female customers on signage
element because the P-value is 0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence, the Null
hypothesis is rejected. This infers that male customers are focusing more on store
signage before their purchase decision than female customers.
Also noticed that consumer perception on store layout between males and
females shows that the average perceived score of females (27.36) found higher than
113
males (24.62), and the standard deviations are 4.09 and 4.12 respectively. With this
difference of mean score distribution, the tested T-value 0.486is indicates no
significant difference between the opinions of male and female customers on Store -
layout element because the P-value is 0.512which is higher than 0.05. Hence, the Null
hypothesis is accepted .From the above table analysis and discussion, it is clear that
there is a significant difference between the perceptions of male and female
consumers of branded apparels on visual merchandising elements, where male are
more positive on the lighting of the store and female are more positive towards
window display, interior color, and store layout dimensions.

visual merchandising dimensions according to their Age
Std. Std. F- P-
Dimension Age N Mean
Below 25 yrs. 75 9.24 1.21 0.02
Product
25 to 45 yrs. 324 8.29 1.29 0.08 0.84 0.000
Display
45yrs and above 101 10.24 1.48 0.09
Below 25 yrs. 75 9.26 1.98 0.08
Store
Mannequins 25 to 45 yrs. 324 8.39 1.82 0.06 0.94 0.000
Displays
45yrs and above 101 7.85 1.67 0.08
Below 25 yrs. 75 8.26 2.1 0.06
Product Shelf
25 to 45 yrs. 324 8.38 1.23 0.08 0.62 0.000
Position
45yrs and above 101 10.96 0.98 0.09
Below 25 yrs. 75 30.25 4.11 0.21
Window Display 25 to 45 yrs. 324 29.86 4.21 0.2 0.869 0.865
45yrs and above 101 29.84 4.32 0.31
Below 25 yrs. 75 9.27 1.21 0.08
Lighting 25 to 45 yrs. 324 10.35 1.24 0.09 0.67 0.000
45yrs and above 101 9.12 1.64 0.11
Store Below 25 yrs. 75 8.68 0.91 0.09
Atmospherics 25 to 45 yrs. 324 9.23 1.31 0.07
Interior Color 45yrs and above 101 9.89 1.21 0.12 0.51 0.000
25 to 45 yrs. 324 8.34 0.98 0.07
45yrs and above 101 9.76 1.06 0.12
Below 25 yrs. 75 31.02 3.41 0.18
Signage 25 to 45 yrs. 324 30.08 3.89 0.17 0.875 0.579
45yrs and above 101 31.12 3.87 0.27
Below 25 yrs. 75 30.18 4.18 0.28
Store Layout 25 to 45 yrs. 324 30.89 4.29 0.29 1.089 0.249
45yrs and above 101 29.26 4.08 0.23
114
Null Hypothesis: H0A2: There is no significant difference among age concerning
perceptions of Visual merchandising element, i.e., Store displays, (product display,
color, lighting), Signage, store layout- Rejected.
their age towards different visual merchandising elements like Store displays( Product
display, Mannequin display, Product shelf- position,) Window display, store
atmospherics (interior color, lighting,) Signage and Store –layout.
In this table, the average perceived scores of different age group branded
apparel consumers on product display at stores indicate that the maximum average
rating obtained for 45 years and above age group (10.24), below 25 years (9.24)
followed by 25-45 years (8.29). And the standard deviations are 1.48, 1.21and 1.29
respectively, with this difference of mean score distribution the tested F-value is 0.84
found a significant difference between the opinions of the respondents with different
age groups because the P-value is 0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence, the Null
hypothesis is rejected. This infers that there is a significant difference between
different age group consumers' perception of the product display element in branded
apparel stores.
The average perceived score of different age group consumers of branded

apparel stores on mannequin display indicates that the highest average score counted
by below 25 years (9.26) followed by 25-45 years (8.39) and the least average score
calculated by above 45 years age group (7.85). And the standard deviations are 1.98,
1.82and 1.67 respectively, with this difference of mean score distribution the tested F-
value is (0.94) is found a significant difference among the opinions of the respondents
with different age groups because the P-value is 0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence,
the Null hypothesis is rejected. This infers that there is a significant difference
between the perceptions of different age group consumers on mannequin display and
its influence on purchase decisions. Below 25 years age group customers are more
admired on various mannequin displays, they follow the fashion trends which are on
the mannequins, 25- 45 years age group customers are giving slight attention to
mannequins, supported by 45 years and above age group.
115
Regarding product shelf-position, the average perceived score of different age
group consumers of branded apparel stores indicates that the maximum average score
obtained by 45 years and above (10.96) followed by 25-45 years (8.38) and below 25
years age group (8.26). And the standard deviations are 0.98, 1.23and 2.1
respectively, with this difference of mean score distribution of the tested F-value 0.62
is found significant difference among the opinions of the respondents with different
age groups because the P-value is 0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence, the Null
hypothesis is rejected. This infers that there is a significant difference between
different age group consumer's perceptions of product shelf-position, as 45 years and
above age group customers find it more accessible with the appropriate eye- level
product shelf position than other age groups.
When it comes to the window display, the average perceived scores show
highest by below 25 years (30.25) followed by 25-45 years (29.86) and the least
average score counted by above 45 years age group (29.84). And the standard
deviations are 4.11, 4.21and 4.32, respectively. With this difference of mean score
distribution of the tested F-value, 0.869 indicates that there is no significant difference
between the opinions of different age group customers because the P-value is
0.865which is higher than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is accepted. This infers
that there is no significant difference between different age group consumers'
perceptions of a window display element of visual merchandising.
Regarding lighting, at branded apparel stores the average perceived score of

different age group consumers indicates that the highest average score viewed by 25-
45 years age group (10.35), followed by below 25 years (9.27) and the least average
score counted by above 45 years age group (9.12). And the standard deviations are
1.21, 1.24and 1.64 respectively, with this difference of mean score distribution of the
tested F-value 0.67 is found a significant difference among the opinions of the
respondents with different age groups because the P-value is 0.000which is less than
0.05. Hence, reject the Null hypothesis.
It infers that there is a significant difference between different age group

consumer's perceptions of the lighting element; this indicates that appropriate lighting
has a more positive influence on the age groups 25-45 years customers. Followed by
below 25 years and above 45 years age groups.
116
The average perceived scores of different age group consumers of branded
apparel on interior color dimensions indicate the highest average score counted by the
above 45 years age group (9.89). Followed by 25-45 years (9.23) and least average
score calculated by below 25 years (8.68). And the standard deviations are 1.21,
1.31and 0.91 respectively, with this difference of mean score distribution of the tested
F-value 0.51 is found significant because the P-value is 0.000which is less than 0.05.
Hence, the Null hypothesis is rejected. It infers that there is a considerable difference
between different age group consumer's perceptions of the interior color element. The
above 45 years age group is more influential than the other two groups.
The average perceived scores obtained for different age group consumers of
branded apparel stores on Signage. It indicates that the maximum average score
incurred by above 45 years (31.12) followed below 25 years age group (31.02). And
least score obtained for the group 25-45 years (30.08) And the standard deviations are
3.87, 3.41and 3.89 respectively, with this difference of mean score distribution of the,
tested F-value 0.875 is indicates that there is no significant difference between the
opinions of different age group customers about the store signage in branded apparel
stores because the P-value is 0.579which is higher than 0.05. Hence, the Null
hypothesis is accepted.
Regarding the store layout at branded apparel stores, the average perceived
score of different age group consumers indicates that the highest average score
counted by 25-45 years (30.89) followed by below 25 years (30.18) and the least
average score calculated by above 45 years age group (29.26). And the standard
deviations are 4.29, 4.18and 4.08 respectively, with this difference of mean score
distribution of the tested F-value 1.089 indicates that there is no significant difference
between the opinions of different age group customers about the store layout in
branded apparel stores because the P-value is 0.249which is higher than 0.05. Hence,
the Null hypothesis is accepted.
According to the above table analysis and discussion, it shows that there is a
significant difference among the different age groups of branded apparel consumers
on product display, mannequins, product shelf position, interior color, and lighting.
But when it comes to the window display, signage, and store layout, there is no
significant difference found in the perceptions of the customers.
117
visual merchandising dimensions according to their Education level
Educational Std. Std. f- P-
Dimension N Mean
Qualifications Dev. Err. value value
Graduation 179 8.46 1.74 0.08
Post Graduate 134 9.26 1.84 0.09
Product
Professionally 1.020 0.000
Display 141 0.84 0.07
Qualified 10.86
Others 46 7.28 1.84 0.09
Graduation 179 7.34 1.25 0.06
Post Graduate 134 8.37 1.85 0.08
Store
Mannequins Professionally 0.980 0.000
Displays 141 0.85 0.09
l Qualified 10.74
Others 46 7.31 1.13 0.08
Graduation 179 8.32 1.87 0.08
Post Graduate 134 7.68 1.91 0.07
Product Shelf
Professionally 0.640 0.000
Position 141 10.84 0.61 0.08
Qualified
Others 46 7.11 1.41 0.08
Graduation 179 30.25 3.15 0.24
Post Graduate 134 31.02 3.28 0.24
Window Display Professionally 0.853 0.783
141 30.12 3.96 0.27
Qualified
Others 46 30.25 3.58 0.31
Graduation 179 9.54 1.54 0.1
Post Graduate 134 10.21 1.11 0.09
Lighting Professionally 0.840 0.000
141 10.11 0.85 0.08
Qualified
Store Others 46 7.84 0.91 0.09
Atmospherics Graduation 179 10.28 1.64 0.07
Post Graduate 134 8.37 0.95 0.1
Interior Color Professionally 0.960 0.000
141 10.87 0.64 0.09
Qualified
Others 46 8.24 1.24 0.07
Graduation 179 29.84 3.89 0.19
Post Graduate 134 29.82 3.67 0.18
Signage Professionally 0.658 0.568
141 27.59 3.59 0.21
Qualified
Others 46 28.65 3.58 0.27
Graduation 179 28.36 4.11 0.21
Post Graduate 134 29.35 4.25 0.23
Store Layout Professionally 1.089 0.002
141 27.69 4.26 0.24
Qualified
Others 46 28.36 4.18 0.26
118
Null Hypothesis: H0A3: There is no significant difference among education
concerning perceptions of Visual merchandising elements, i.e., Store displays,
(product display, mannequin, product shelf position) Window display, Store
atmospherics (interior color, lighting), Signage, store layout -Rejected.
their education level towards different visual merchandising elements like Store
displays( Product display, Mannequin display, Product shelf- position,) Window
display, store atmospherics (interior Color, lighting) Signage and Store –layout.
In this table the average perceived scores of different education level group
consumers of branded apparel stores on Product display are obtained as graduates
(8.46) postgraduates (9.26), professionally qualified (10.86), and others(7.28) And
the standard deviations are 1.74, 1.84,0.84 and 1.84respectively, out of all
professionally qualified respondents scored highest and others stands least, With this
difference of mean score distribution, the tested F-value 0.120 is found significant
rejected. This infers that there is a considerable difference between different education
group consumer's perceptions based on product display elements. It is noticed that the
professionally qualified customers are observing the product displays thoroughly to
gain as much knowledge as possible as other educational groups.
Regarding the average perceived scores of different education level group

consumers of branded apparel stores on mannequin display are obtained as graduates
(7.34) postgraduates (8.37), professionally qualified (10.74) and others (7.31) and the
standard deviations are 1.25, 1.85, 0.85 and 1.13respectively, out of all professionally
qualified respondents scored highest and others scored least. With this difference in
mean score distribution, the tested F-value 0.980 is found significant because the P-
value is 0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is rejected. This
infers that there is a considerable difference between different education group
consumer's perceptions based on a mannequin display element. It is noticed that the
professionally qualified customers are following the fashion trend on a mannequin
and tries to follow the trend than other different educational groups.
When it comes to the average perceived scores of different education level

group consumers of branded apparel stores on product –shelf position, the obtained
119
scores for graduates (8.32) postgraduates (7.68), professionally qualified (10.84) and
others(7.11)And the standard deviations are 1.87,1.91,0.61 and 1.41 respectively, out
of all professionally qualified respondents scored maximum and other scored
minimum, With this difference of mean score distribution the tested F-value 0.640 is
found significant because the P-value is 0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence, the Null
hypothesis is rejected. This infers that there is a considerable difference between
different education group consumer's perceptions based on product shelf position. It is
noticed that the customers who are professionally qualified enjoying shopping when
the garments that they intend to buy found with ease as they displayed at eye- level,
and they can easily access the item without difficulty than the rest of the groups.

consumers of branded apparel stores on window display are obtained as graduates
(30.25) postgraduates (31.02), professionally qualified (30.12), and others(30.25)And
the standard deviations are 3.15,3.28,3.96and 3.58respectively, out of all postgraduate
respondents scored highest and professionally trained grabbed least score, With this
difference of mean score distribution the tested F-value 0.856 it indicates that there is
no significant difference between the opinions of different educational group
customers about the window display in branded apparel stores because the P-value is
0.783which is more significant than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is accepted.

group consumers of branded apparel stores on lighting element, the obtained scores
for graduates (9.54) postgraduates (10.21), professionally qualified (10.11) and
of all postgraduate respondents scored maximum and others secured minimum score,
With this difference of mean score distribution, the tested F-value 0.840 is found
significant because the P-value is 0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence, the Null
hypothesis is rejected. This infers that there is a considerable difference between
different education group consumer's perceptions based on the lighting of the store. It
indicates that the customers who are postgraduates are more particular about the
lighting arrangements in the store; they tend to buy more if the items are properly
visible under bright lighting than the rest of the educational groups.
120
consumers of branded apparel stores on interior color are obtained as graduates
(10.28) postgraduates (8.37), professionally qualified (10.87) and others(8.24)And
the standard deviations are1.64,0.95,0.64and1.241.13respectively, out of all
professionally qualified respondents scored highest and others scored least, With this
difference of mean score distribution the tested F-value 0.960 is found significant
rejected. This infers that there is a considerable difference between different education
group consumer's perceptions regarding store interior color. It is noticed that the
professionally qualified customers are more attracted to the interior color than the
other educational groups.

consumers of branded apparel stores on Signage are obtained as graduates (29.84)
postgraduates (29.82), professionally qualified (27.59) and others(28.65)And the
standard deviations are 3.89,3.67,3.59and 3.58 respectively, out of all graduate
respondents scored highest and professionally qualified respondents scored least.
With this difference of mean score distribution, the tested F-value 0.658 indicates that
there is no significant difference between the opinions of different educational group
customers about the signage in branded apparel stores because the P-value is
0.568which is higher than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is accepted.

group consumers of branded apparel stores on Store layout, the obtained scores for
graduates (28.36) postgraduates (29.35), professionally qualified (27.69) and
of all postgraduates respondents scored maximum and professionally qualified
respondents scored minimum, With this difference of mean score distribution, the
tested F-value 1.089 is found significant because the P-value is 0.002, which is less
than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is rejected. This infers that there is a
considerable difference between different education group consumer's perceptions
based on the Store layout of the store. It indicates that the customers who are
postgraduates are more influential by the store layout when they make purchase
decisions than the other educational group customers.
121
According to the above table indicate the analysis and discussion, it shows that
there is a significant difference among the perceptions of different education level
group branded apparel consumers on visual merchandising attributes like product
display, mannequin display, product shelf position, interior color, lighting, and store
layout, whereas it is found that there is no significant difference among the
perceptions of different educational group customers on window display and signage.

visual merchandising dimensions according to their income levels
Std. Std. F- P-
Dimension Annual Income N Mean
Less than 2Lakhs 129 6.24 1.26 0.08
Product
2 Lakhs to 4 Lakhs 200 8.67 1.85 0.09 0.840 0.000
Display
4 Lakhs and above 171 10.14 1.34 0.07
Less than 2Lakhs 129 10.24 1.08 0.09
Store
Mannequins 2 Lakhs to 4 Lakhs 200 9.89 1.65 0.07 0.720 0.000
Displays
4 Lakhs and above 171 9.82 0.98 0.09
Less than 2Lakhs 129 9.84 1.62 0.1
Product Shelf
2 Lakhs to 4 Lakhs 200 10.12 1.98 0.09 0.680 0.000
Position
4 Lakhs and above 171 9.27 0.99 0.08
Less than 2Lakhs 129 30.25 4.29 0.22
Window Display 2 Lakhs to 4 Lakhs 200 30.27 4.2 0.14 0.895 0.856
4 Lakhs and above 171 31.25 4.11 0.31
Less than 2Lakhs 129 10.24 1.21 0.09
Lighting 2 Lakhs to 4 Lakhs 200 8.56 0.99 0.08 0.810 0.000
Store 4 Lakhs and above 171 9.56 1.63 0.1
Atmospherics Less than 2Lakhs 129 9.85 1.28 0.09
Interior Color 2 Lakhs to 4 Lakhs 200 9.34 1.18 0.07 0.670 0.000
4 Lakhs and above 171 10.12 1.39 0.09
Less than 2Lakhs 129 30.28 3.25 0.14
Signage 2 Lakhs to 4 Lakhs 200 29.39 3.27 0.18 0.859 0.586
4 Lakhs and above 171 29.87 3.58 0.28
Less than 2Lakhs 129 24.69 4.18 0.29
Store Layout 2 Lakhs to 4 Lakhs 200 25.68 4.12 0.27 1.089 0.000
4 Lakhs and above 171 28.65 4.11 0.21
Null Hypothesis: H0A4: There is no significant difference among income level

atmospherics (interior color, lighting), Signage, store layout.-Rejected
122
The above table 5.19 presents the perceptions of the respondents towards
different visual merchandising elements like Store displays( Product display,
Mannequin display, Product shelf- position,)Window display, store atmospherics
(interior Color, lighting) Signage and Store –layout based on their Annual income
level.
In this table, the average perceived scores of different income level group
consumers of branded apparel stores on Product display are obtained as <2 Lakhs
(6.24) 2 lakhs- 4 lakhs (8.67) and > 4 lakhs (10.14) And the standard deviations are
1.26, 1.85, and 1.34respectively, out of all respondents whose annual income is above
4 lakhs scored highest and below 2 lakhs scored least, With this difference of mean
score distribution the tested F-value 0.840 is found significant because the P-value is
0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is rejected. This infers that
there is a significant difference among the perceptions of product display elements
based on their income levels. It is noticed that the customers whose annual income is
more than four lakhs are more particular about the product displays and thoroughly
observing what it is being displayed. Those respondents' yearly income is below two
lakhs and is not as good as others on checking displays.
Regarding the average perceived scores of different income level group

consumers of branded apparel stores on mannequin display are obtained as <2 Lakhs
(10.24), 2lakhs- 4lakhs (9.89) and > 4lakhs (9.82) And the standard deviations are
1.08, 1.65, and 0.98respectively, out of all respondents whose annual income is below
2lakhs scored highest and above 4lakhs scored least, With this difference of mean
there is a considerable difference among the perceptions of mannequin display
elements based on their income levels. It is noticed that the customers whose annual
income is less than 2lakhs they are mostly youth, they are the best followers of the
mannequins, they help the young shoppers to know the fashion trends whereas the
respondents' whose annual income is more than 4lakhs are mostly elders they may not
that observe the mannequins as others check.
When it comes to the average perceived scores of different income level group
consumers of branded apparel stores on Product shelf position are obtained as <
123
2Lakhs (9.84), 2lakhs- 4lakhs (10.12) and > 4lakhs (9.27) And the standard
deviations are 1.62, 1.98, and 0.99 respectively, out of all respondents whose annual
income is in between 2- 4lakhs scored maximum and above 4lakhs scored minimum,
With this difference of mean score distribution the tested F-value 0.680 is found
hypothesis is rejected. This infers that there is a substantial difference among the
perceptions on product shelf position based on their income levels. It is noticed that
the customers whose annual income is between 2 - 4lakhs tend to attract more to the
eye-level shelf position to check the displayed garments with ease. Those respondents'
yearly income is above four lakhs and is not so concerned about the product shelf
position during their purchases.

consumers of branded apparel stores on window display are obtained as<2lakhs
4.29, 4.2, and 4.11 respectively, out of all respondents whose annual income is above
4lakhs scored highest and below 4lakhs scored least, With this difference of mean
score distribution the tested F-value 0.895. It indicates that there is no significant
difference among the opinions of different income level consumers on window
displays in branded apparel stores because the P-value is 0.856which is greater than
0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is accepted.
consumers of branded apparel stores on lighting element are obtained as < 2Lakhs
1.21, 0.99, and 1.63 respectively, out of all respondents whose annual income is
below 2lakhs scored maximum and between 2- 4lakhs scored minimum, With this
difference of mean score distribution the tested F-value 0.810 is found significant
rejected. This infers that there is a significant difference among the perceptions of
lighting in the retail store based on their income levels. It is noticed that the customers
whose annual income is below 2lakhs they are more influenced by the store lighting.
Those respondents' annual income is between 2- 4 lakhs are not very particular about
the store lighting during shopping.
124
consumers of branded apparel stores on interior color are obtained as <2 Lakhs (9.85),
2lakhs- 4lakhs (9.34) and > 4lakhs (10.12) And the standard deviations are 1.28,
1.18, and 1.39respectively, out of all respondents whose annual income is above
4lakhs scored highest and between 2-4lakhs scored least, with this difference of mean
there is a significant difference among the perceptions on the interior color element
based on their income levels. It is noticed that the customers whose annual income is
above 4lakhs they are more attracted by the interior color, but whereas the
respondents' whose annual income is in between 2- 4lakhs are given lease importance
to the interior color when it comes to purchasing decision

consumers of branded apparel stores on signage are obtained as<2lakhs (30.28),
2lakhs- 4lakhs (29.39) and > 4lakhs (29.87) And the standard deviations are 3.25,
3.27, and 3.58 respectively, out of all respondents whose annual income is below
2lakhs scored highest and between 2-4lakhs scored least, With this difference of mean
difference among the opinions of different income level consumers on signage in
branded apparel stores because the P-value is 0.586, which is higher than 0.05. Hence,
consumers of branded apparel stores on store layout element are obtained as < 2Lakhs
4.18, 4.12, and 4.11 respectively, out of all respondents whose annual income is
above 4lakhs scored high and less than 2lakhs scored low, With this difference of
mean score distribution the tested F-value 1.089 is found significant because the P-
value is 0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is rejected. This
infers that there is a significant difference among the perceptions on store layout in
the retail store based on their income levels. It is noticed that the customers whose
annual income is above 4lakhs are more influential by the right store layout. Those
respondents' annual income is less than 2- lakhs are not considering the store layout at
their store visit.
125
According to the above table analysis and discussion, it shows that there is a
significant difference among the perceptions of different income level consumers on
product display, mannequin, product shelf position, interior color, lighting, and store
layout elements, Whereas it is found that there is no significant difference in their
perceptions on window display and signage based on their income level.

visual merchandising dimensions according to their Occupation
Std. Std. F- P-
Dimension Occupation N Mean
Public 175 10.62 0.98 0.09
Private
Sector 82 10.86 1.94 0.08
Product Display 1.020 0.985
Self
Sector 142 10.37 1.94 0.09
Others
Employed 101 10.12 1.96 0.06
Public 175 10.21 1.15 0.06
Store Private
Sector 82 10.24 1.38 0.07
Mannequins 1.890 0.842
Displays Self
Sector 142 10.69 1.92 0.08
Others
Employed 101 10.09 1.27 0.1
Public 175 10.87 1.96 0.08
Private
Sector 82 10.98 1.27 0.09
Product Shelf Position 0.850 0.624
Self
Sector 142 10.41 1.93 0.1
Others
Employed 101 10.27 1.39 0.07
Public 175 31.26 4.16 0.2
Private
Sector 82 30.25 4.29 0.19
Window Display 0.846 0.000
Self
Sector 142 30.89 3.89 0.18
Others
Employed 101 31.24 3.86 0.25
Public 175 9.98 1.94 0.1
Private
Sector 82 10.14 1.11 0.08
Lighting 0.040 0.001
Self
Sector 142 10.98 1.68 0.07
Store Others
Employed 101 9.98 1.98 0.09
Public 175 10.87 0.97 0.08
Atmospherics
Private
Sector 82 10.62 1.23 0.07
Interior Color Self
Sector 142 10.51 1.95 0.09 0.014 0.000
Others
Employed 101 9.92 1.29 0.08
Others 101 10.98 1.01 0.09
Public 175 30.29 4.01 0.19
Private
Sector 82 31.08 4.23 0.21
Signage 0.849 0.562
Self
Sector 142 29.58 4.28 0.2
Others
Employed 101 29.34 3.29 0.21
Public 175 25.36 4.12 0.19
Private
Sector 82 28.36 4.13 0.21
Self
Sector 142 29.34 3.08 0.18
Others
Employed 101 26.35 3.56 0.21
Significant @ 5% level
126
Null Hypothesis: H0A5: There is no significant difference among occupations
atmospherics (interior color, lighting), Signage, store layout - Rejected.
(interior Color, lighting) Signage and Store –layout based on their occupation
In this table the average perceived scores of different customers based on their
occupation on product display in branded apparel stores are public sector (10.62),
private sector (10.86), self –employed (10.37) and others (10.12)And the standard
deviations are 0.98,1.94,1.94 and 1.96respectively, out of all respondents who are
working in private sector scored highest and others scored least, With this difference
of mean score distribution, the tested F-value 1.020 It indicates that there is no
significant difference among the opinions of consumers with different occupations on
product display in branded apparel stores because the P-value is 0.985.which is higher
than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is accepted
Regarding the average perceived scores of different customers based on their

occupation on mannequin display in branded apparel stores are public sector (10.21),
private sector (10.24), self –employed (10.69) and others (10.09) And the standard
deviations are 1.15, 1.38, 1.92 and 1.27respectively, out of all respondents who are
self-employed scored highest and others scored least, With this difference of mean
difference among the opinions of consumers with different occupations on mannequin
display in branded apparel stores because the P-value is 0.842which is higher than
0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is accepted.
When it comes the average perceived scores of different customers based on

their occupation on product shelf position in branded apparel stores are public sector
(10.87), private sector (10.98), self –employed (10.41) and others (10.27) And the
standard deviations are 1.96, 1.27, 1.93 and 1.39 respectively, out of all respondents
who are working in private sector scored maximum and others scored least, With this
difference of mean score distribution the tested F-value 0.850. It indicates that there is
127
no significant difference among the opinions of consumers with different occupations
on the product shelf position in branded apparel stores because the P-value is
0.624which is greater than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is accepted.

occupation on window display in branded apparel stores are public sector (31.26),
deviations are 4.16, 4.29, 3.89 and 3.86 respectively, out of all respondents who are
working in public sector scored maximum and private sector customers scored least,
With this difference of mean score distribution the tested F-value 0.846, and is found
hypothesis is rejected. It infers that there is a substantial difference among the
perceptions on a window display in the retail store based on their occupation. It is
noticed that the customers who are working in public sectors are more attracted by
window displays than the respondents of other professions.
When it comes the average perceived scores of different customers based on

their occupation on lighting element in branded apparel stores are public sector (9.98),
deviations are 1.94, 1.11, 1.68 and 1.98 respectively, out of all respondents who are
self-employed scored maximum and others scored lowest, With this difference of
mean score distribution the tested F-value 0.040, and is found significant because the
P-value is 0.001which is less than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is rejected. It
infers that there is a considerable difference among the perceptions of lighting in the
retail store based on their occupation. It is noticed that the customers who are doing
business on their own and other self-employed are more concerned about the lighting
while picking their preferred apparel, whereas customers who are working in public
sectors and others have not given much priority to lighting elements.

occupation on interior color element in branded apparel stores are public sector
(10.87), private sector (10.62), self –employed (10.51) and others (9.92) And the
standard deviations are 0.97, 1.23, 1.95 and 1.29 respectively, out of all respondents
who are working in public sector scored maximum and others scored lowest, With
this difference of mean score distribution the tested F-value 0.014, and is found
128
hypothesis is rejected. This infers that there is a significant difference among the
perceptions of interior color in the retail store based on their occupation. It is noticed
that the customers who are employed in the public sector are more influential by the
store interior color, and others stand in the last position in giving priority to the
interior color.

occupation on signage in branded apparel stores are public sector (30.29), private
sector (31.08), self –employed (29.58) and others (29.34) And the standard deviations
are 4.01, 4.23, 4.28 and 3.29 respectively, out of all respondents who are working in
private sector scored highest and self-employed scored least, With this difference of
mean score distribution the tested F-value 0.849. It indicates that there is no
significant difference among the opinions of consumers with different occupations on
signage in branded apparel stores because the P-value is 0.562. It is which is greater
than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is accepted. When it comes the average
perceived scores of different customers based on their occupation on store layout
dimension in branded apparel stores are public sector (25.36), private sector (28.36),
self–employed (29.34) and others (26.35) And the standard deviations are 4.12, 4.13,
3.08 and 3.56 respectively, out of all respondents whom self-employed scored
maximum and public sector scored lowest, With this difference of mean score
distribution the tested F-value 1.249, and is found significant because the P-value is
0.000which is less than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is rejected.
This infers that there is a considerable difference among the perceptions of

store dimensions in the retail store based on their occupation. It is noticed that the
self-employed customers are more concerned with the store layout. Those who belong
to the public sector are giving the least priority when compared with other customer
groups.
According to the above table analysis and discussion, it is clear that there is a
significant difference among the perceptions of customers with a different occupation
on the window display, lighting, interior color, and store layout. When it comes to
visual merchandising elements like product display, mannequins, product shelf
position, and signage, no significant difference found the customers' perceptions.
129
visual Merchandising dimensions according to their Family Size
Family Std. Std. F- P-

Dimension N Mean
Size Dev. Err. value value
Below 3 124 10.11 1.19 0.09

3-5
Product Display 250 10.24 1.21 0.08 0.480 0.000
members
Above 5 126 9.87 1.34 0.1
Below 3 124 10.84 1.15 0.08
3-5
Mannequins 250 9.86 1.14 0.09 0.670 0.000
members
Store Displays
Above 5 126 10.84 1.29 0.07
Below 3 124 10.96 1.12 0.09
3-5
250 10.12 1.41 0.08
Product Shelf members
0.940 0.000
Position
Above 5 126 10.92 1.38 0.09
Below 3 124 31.2 3.59 0.24

3-5
250 30.28 3.25 0.23
Window Display members 0.859 0.785
Above 5 126 31.24 3.59 0.21
Below 3 124 10.98 1.14 0.08
3-5
Lighting 250 10.11 1.86 0.07 0.312 0.423
members
Store Above 5 126 9.97 1.21 0.1
Atmospherics Below 3 124 10.86 1.12 0.09
3-5
Interior Color 250 10.78 1.32 0.08 0.432 0.158
members
Above 5 126 10.84 1.24 0.09
Below 3 124 30.28 3.68 0.27
3-5
250 31.27 3.57 0.31
Signage members 0.625 0.000
Above 5 126 29.24 3.68 0.14
Below 3 124 28.34 3.68 0.26

3-5
250 29.18 3.89 0.18
members
Above 5 126 28.34 4.12 0.19
Significant @ 5% level
130
Null Hypothesis: H0A6: There is no significant difference among family size
atmospherics (interior color, lighting), Signage, store layout.-Rejected
(interior Color, lighting,) Signage and Store –layout based on their family size
In this table, the average perceived scores of different customers based on

their occupation on product display in branded apparel stores are below 3 family
members (10.11),3-5 family members (10.24) above 5 members(9.87) And the
standard deviations are 1.19, 1.21and 1.34respectively, out of all respondents those
who have family size between 3-5memebrs are scored high, and family size of above
5 members scored least, With this difference of mean score distribution, the tested F-
value 0.480, and is found significant because the P-value is 0.000which is less than
0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is rejected.
This infers that there is a significant difference among the perceptions on

product display in the retail store based on their family size. It is noticed that the
customers who have a family size of 3- 5 members are more focusing on product
displays, and customers of above five members' family size are giving the least
priority to product display.

occupation on mannequins in branded apparel stores are below 3 family members
(10.84),3-5 family members (9.86) above 5 members(10.84) And the standard
deviations are 1.15, 1.14and 1.29 respectively, out of all respondents those who have
family size below 3memebrs and above 5 members are scored high, and family size
between 3-5 members scored least, With this difference of mean score distribution the
tested F-value 0.670, and is found significant because the P-value is 0.000which is
less than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is rejected.
131
This infers that there is a significant difference among the perceptions on
mannequins dimension in the retail store based on their family size. It is noticed that
the customers who have both the family sizes of below 3members and above five
members are more influential by mannequins, and the customers who have the family
size of 3-5 members don't have much focus on it.
When it comes to the average perceived scores of different customers based on

their occupation on product shelf position in branded apparel stores are below 3
family members (10.96),3-5 family members (10.12) above 5 members(10.92) And
the standard deviations are 1.12,1.41and 1.38respectively, out of all respondents those
who have family size of below 3memebrs are scored high, and family size between 3-
5 members scored least, With this difference of mean score distribution the tested F-
This infers that there is a significant difference among the perceptions of the
customers on the product shelf position in the retail store based on their family size. It
is noticed that the customers who have the family size below three members are more
interested if the product shelf position is at eye- level and customers of below three
members' family size are not much concerned about it.

occupation on window displays in branded apparel stores are below 3 family members
deviations are 3.59, 3.25 and 3.59 respectively, out of all respondents those who have
family size of both below 3memebrs and above 5 members are scored high and family
size between 3-5 members scored least, With this difference of mean score
distribution the tested F-value 0.859, It indicates that there is no significant difference
among the opinions of consumers with different family sizes on window displays in
branded apparel stores because the P-value is 0.785which is greater than 0.05. Hence,

their occupation on lighting element in branded apparel stores are below 3 family
132
standard deviations are 1.14, 1.86 and 1.21 respectively, out of all respondents those
who have family size of below 3memebrs are scored high, and family size above 5
members scored least, With this difference of mean score distribution the tested F-
value 0.312, It indicates that there is no significant difference among the opinions of
consumers with different family sizes on lighting element in branded apparel stores
because the P-value is 0.423which is greater than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is
accepted.

occupation on interior color in branded apparel stores are below 3 family members
(10.86), 3-5 family members (10.78) above 5 members (10.84) And the standard
deviations are 1.12, 1.32 and 1.24 respectively, out of all respondents those who have
family size of below 3memebrs are scored high, and family size between 3-5
members scored least, With this difference of mean score distribution the tested F-
value 0.432,
This indicates that there is no significant difference among the opinions of

consumers with different family sizes on interior color of the store in branded apparel
stores because the P-value is 0.158which is greater than 0.05. Hence, the Null
hypothesis is accepted.

occupation on signage in branded apparel stores are below 3 family members
deviations are 3.68,3.57and 3.68 respectively, out of all respondents those who have
family size is in between 3-5 members are scored high and family size above 5
members scored least, With this difference of mean score distribution, the tested F-
It infers that there is a considerable difference among the perceptions of the customers
on signage in the retail store based on their family size. It is noticed that the customers
who have the family size between 3-5 members are more focused on different
Signage within the store, and customers of the above five members' family size are
not much-concerned store signage.
133
their occupation on Store layout in branded apparel stores are below 3 family
standard deviations are 3.68, 3.89and 4.12 respectively, out of all respondents those
who have family size in between 3-5 members are scored high and family sizes of
below 3 members as well as above 5 members are scored least, With this difference of
mean score distribution the tested F-value 1.689,
It indicates that there is no significant difference among the opinions of

consumers with different family sizes on store layout in branded apparel stores
because the P-value is 0.658 which is higher than 0.05. Hence, the Null hypothesis is
accepted.
According to the above table analysis and discussion, it is clear that there is a
significant difference among the perceptions of customers with a different occupation
on product display, mannequin display, product shelf position, and signage. But when
studied other visual merchandising elements like a window display, lighting, and store
layout, it is found that there is no significant difference in customer's perceptions.
5.6 Hypothesis testing using Chi-square Test and Result:
This section deals with the testing of hypotheses with statistical instruments. It
is a statistical test used to determine if there is adequate proof in a sample of data that
the whole population is affected by a specific condition. In this study, the statistical
hypothesis is an assumption about the perceptions of retail branded apparel customers
on visual merchandising dimensions. This assumption may or may not be true. Hence,
hypothesis testing refers to the formal procedures used by statisticians to accept or
reject statistical hypotheses.
In this regard, the researcher used the chi-square test on the distribution of
various demographic respondents on their visual merchandising opinions. The
following tables show the results of the hypothesis tests and then analyze the findings
below each row.
134
5.7 Gender and Visual merchandising elements
Performed Chi-Square test with Gender and Visual Merchandising elements;

i.e. Store displays, (product display, mannequin, product shelf position) Window
display, Store atmospherics (interior color, lighting), Signage, store layout. The
results are shown below. The Chi-Square test was performed at 5% Level of
Significance.
Table 5.22: Gender with Visual Merchandising Elements

Test
Degrees of
Elements Statistic Sig. Value Result
Freedom
Value
Store Displays (Product Alternative

Display, Mannequins, 18 76.26 0.00 Hypothesis
product shelf position) Accepted.
Alternative
Window Display 9 84.25 0.00 Hypothesis
Accepted.
Store Alternative
Atmospherics(Lighting, 16 68.64 0.00 Hypothesis
interior color) Accepted.
Alternative
Signage 10 76.48 0.00 Hypothesis
Accepted.
Alternative
Store layout 5 52.46 0.00 Hypothesis
Accepted.
Source: Primary Data and calculated from SPPS V24.

The cross tab calculations were performed by considering the weighted
average scores of each element.
Null Hypothesis: H0B1: There is no momentous association between gender and

visual merchandising elements like Store displays, (product display, mannequin,
product shelf position) Window display, Store atmospherics (interior Color, lighting),
signage, store layout in making a purchase decision. .-Rejected
Table 5.22 represents the distribution of male and female respondents in their
opinions on the store display elements. It is found that the opinions of male and
female respondents indicate significance because the chi-square value 76.26 and p-
135
value 0.00 is less than 0.05. It shows the Association of gender with the attractive
Product display in making my buying decisions, the tendency of buying garments
with the inspiration of mannequins, and the appropriate shelf position in making
better purchase decisions. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an
association between gender and store displays
According to the opinions of male and female respondents, it is found the

Association of gender with the tendency of entering into the store by a creative
window display that further leads to a favorable purchase decision. Here the chi-
square value 84.25 is indicated significance because the p-value 0.00 is less than 0.05.
Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association between gender and
window display.
The store regarding atmospherics elements, the male and female respondent's
opinions show differences where the chi-square value 68.64 is found significant
because the p-value 0.00 is less than 0.05.
Therefore, this infers that the Association of gender with the interior Color of
the store that entices a favorable buying decision, usage of different lightings in
enhancing the possibility of purchase intension. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected.
There is an association between gender and store atmospherics elements.
The opinions of the male and female respondents about signage, it is found
that the opinions of the respondents show significant. In this distribution, the chi-
square value 76.48 is found significant because the p-value 0.00 is less than 0.05. It
infers that Association of gender with the appropriate Promotional/sales signage that
positively evokes purchase intention. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is
an association between gender and Signage elements.
According to the opinions of the male and female respondents, it is found that
the Association of gender with the influence of good store layout in inducing repeated
purchase behavior. In this context, the calculated chi-square value of 52.46 is
significant because p-value 0.00 is less than 0.05. Hence, the null hypothesis is
rejected. There is an association between gender and Store layout. It can be inferred
that gender determining the Visual merchandising elements at branded apparel and
influenced the purchasing behavior of the consumers.
136
5.8 Age and visual merchandising elements
Chi-Square test is performed with Age and Visual Merchandising

elements. i.e, .store displays, (product display, mannequin, product shelf position)
Window display, Store atmospherics (interior Color, lighting), signage, store layout.
The results are shown in below table 5.23. The Chi-Square test was performed at 5%
Level of Significance.
Table 5.23: Age with Visual Merchandising elements
Test
Degrees of
Elements Statistic Sig.Value Result
Freedom
Value

Display, Mannequins, 36 87.65 0.00 Hypothesis
product shelf position) Accepted.
Alternative
Accepted.
Store Alternative
Atmospherics(Lighting, 32 49.58 0.00 Hypothesis
interior color) Accepted.
Alternative
Accepted.
Alternative
Accepted.
The crosstab calculations were performed by considering the weighted

Null Hypothesis: H0B2: There is no momentous association between age of the

customer and visual merchandising elements like Store displays, (product display,
137
Color, lighting), Signage, store layout in making purchase decision-Rejected
The distribution of different age group respondents' opinions on store product

display finds momentous because the calculated chi-square value is 87.65, and the p-
value is 0.00, which is less than 0.05. It shows the Association of age with the
attractive Product display in making my buying decisions, the tendency of buying
garments with the inspiration of mannequins, and the appropriate shelf position in
making better purchase decisions. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an
association between age and store displays
The calculated chi-square value (79.58) of the age-wise distribution in their

opinion on the tendency of entering into a store by a creative window display that
further leads to a positive purchase decision shows significant because the p-value is
0.00 which is less than 0.05. It infers that there is an association of age with the
window display elements. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected.
The difference in the opinions of different age groups respondents on the store
atmospherics elements shows significant because the tested chi-square value is 49.58,
and the p-value is 0.00, which is less than 0.05. Therefore, this infers that the
Association of age with the interior Color of the store that entices a favorable buying
decision, usage of different lightings provokes purchase intension. Hence, the null
hypothesis is rejected. There is an association between age and store atmospherics
elements.
Regarding the signage elements with the opinions between different age
groups, customers found a significant difference because the calculated chi-square
value is 75.62, and the p-value is 0.00. It is less than 0.05. It infers that Association of
age with the appropriate Promotional/sales signage that positively evokes purchase
intention. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association between age
and Signage elements.
It is found that the Association of age on the influence of good store layout in
inducing repeated purchase behavior is significant because of the calculated chi-
square value 68.34 and the p-value 0.00, which is less than 0.05. Therefore, the
analysis indicates that there is an association of age with the respondents and store
138
layout elements. Hence the null hypothesis is accepted. There is an association
between age and Store layout elements.
It can be inferred that age determining the Visual merchandising elements at

branded apparel stores and influenced the purchase decision of the shoppers.
5.9 Income and Visual merchandising elements
Chi-Square test is performed with Income and Visual Merchandising

elements. i.e. Store displays, (product display, mannequin, product shelf position)
Window display, Store atmospherics (interior Color, lighting), Signage, store layout.
Table 5.24: Income Levels with Visual merchandising elements
Test
Degrees of
Elements Statistic Sig. Value Result
Freedom
Value
Store Displays
Alternative
(Product Display,
36 89.56 0.00 Hypothesis
Mannequins, product
Accepted.
shelf position)
Alternative
Accepted.
Store Alternative
Atmospherics(Lightin 32 78.89 0.00 Hypothesis
g, interior color) Accepted.
Alternative
Accepted.
Alternative
Accepted.

Null Hypothesis: H0B3: There is no momentous association between the

Income level of the customer and visual merchandising elements like Store displays,
139
atmospherics (interior Color, lighting), Signage, store layout in making a purchase
decision –Rejected
The above table represents the annual income-wise distribution of respondents'

opinions on store display elements. It shows the Association of Incomer with the
attractive Product display in making my buying decisions, the tendency of buying
garments with the inspiration of mannequins, and the appropriate shelf position in
making better purchase decisions. It shows significant because the tested chi-square
value is 89.56, and the p-value is 0.00 less than 0.05. Hence the null hypothesis is
rejected. There is an association between the income level of the respondent and Store
Display elements.
The distribution of different income group respondents' opinions on the

window display elements finds significant because the calculated chi-square value is
75.28, and the p-value is 0.00, which is less than 0.05. It infers that the Association of
an annual income of the respondents with the tendency of entering into the store by a
creative window display that further leads to a positive purchase decision. Hence, the
null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association between the income level of the
respondent and Window Display elements.
The calculated chi-square value (78.89) of various income group respondents

distribution in their opinion on the store atmospherics would affect their preference
towards the products is shows significant because the p-value is 0.00.which is less
than 0.05. Therefore, this infers that the Association of income level with the interior
Color of the store that entices a favorable buying decision, usage of different lightings
positively influence purchase behavior. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There
is an association between income level and store atmospherics elements.
The opinions of the various income group respondents on the signage

elements show significant because the tested chi-square value is 69.32, and the p-
value is 0.00, which is less than 0.05. It shows that the Association of income with the
appropriate Promotional/sales signage that positively evokes purchase intention.
Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association between annual income
and Signage elements.
140
It is found that the difference in the opinions of different income level
customers with store layout elements shows significant because of the calculated chi-
square value 72.63 and the p-value 0.00, which is less than 0.05.
Therefore, the analysis indicates that there is an association of annual income

with the influence of good store layout in inducing repeated purchase behavior. Hence
the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association between the income level of the
respondent and Store layout elements. This can be inferred that the income of the
consumer determining the Visual merchandising elements at branded apparel stores
and influenced the purchase intention of the customers.
5.10 Education and Visual merchandising elements
Chi-Square test is performed with the Education qualification of the

respondent and Visual Merchandising elements; i.e. Store displays, (product display,
Color, lighting), Signage, store layout. The results are shown in below table 5.25. The
Chi-Square test was performed at 5% Level of Significance.
Table 5.25: Education Qualification with Visual merchandising elements

Test
Degrees of Sig.
Elements Statistic Result
Freedom Value
Value
Display, Mannequins, product 54 97.86 0.00 Hypothesis
shelf position) Accepted.
Alternative
Accepted.
Alternative
Store Atmospherics(Lighting,
interior color)
Accepted.
Alternative
Accepted.
Alternative
Accepted.
141
Null Hypothesis: H0B4: There is no momentous association between Education

qualification of the customer and visual merchandising elements like Store displays,
atmospherics (interior Color, lighting), Signage, store layout in making purchase
decision.-rejected
According to the opinions of different educational qualification respondents, it

shows the Association of education with the attractive product display in making my
buying decisions, the tendency of buying garments with the inspiration of
mannequins, and appropriate shelf position in making better purchase decisions.
There the chi-square value 97.86 is found significance because the p-value is 0.00,
which is less than 0.05. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association
between the education qualification of the respondent and the Store Display.
Regarding window display elements, it shows a difference in the opinions of

different educational qualification respondents. While the chi-square value 86.69
indicates significance because the p-value 0.00 is less than the table value. It infers
that the Association of educational qualification respondents with the tendency of
entering into the store by a creative window display that further leads to a positive
purchase decision. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association
between the education qualification of the respondent and Window Display.
According to the opinions of the respondents (based on their education level)

towards the store, atmospherics elements are as follows. The Association between
education and the interior Color of the store entices a favorable buying decision. And
also the usage of different lightings in enhancing the possibility of purchase intension.
Here the chi-square value 87.65 indicates significance because the p-value 0.00 is less
than 0.05. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association between the
education qualification of the respondent and the Store Atmospherics elements.
The Association of education of respondents with signage elements shows a

significant difference. The chi-square value 89.63 is obtained, which indicates
substantial because the p-value 0.00 is less than 0.05. It infers that Association of
education with the appropriate promotional/sales signage that positively evokes
purchase intention. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association
between education and Signage elements.
142
It shows that there is a momentous difference among different educational
qualification respondents on store display elements. In this distribution of a sample, it
is found that the calculated chi-square value 94.85 is significant because the p-value
0.00 is less than 0.05. It infers that the Association of education with the influence of
good store layout in inducing repeated purchase behaviour. Hence, the null hypothesis
is rejected. There is an association between the education qualification of the
respondent and Store layout elements.
It can reveal that education of the consumer determining the Visual

merchandising elements at branded apparel stores and influencing the buying
behaviour of the shoppers.
5.11 Occupation and Visual merchandising elements
Chi-Square test is performed with occupation and Visual Merchandising

elements. i.e., Store displays, (product display, mannequin, product shelf position)
Window display, Store atmospherics (interior Color, lighting), Signage, store layout.
Table 5.26: Occupation with Visual merchandising elements

Test
Degrees of Sig.
Freedom Value
Value
Alternative
Accepted.
Alternative
interior color)
Accepted.
Alternative
Accepted.
Alternative
Store layout 15 85.35 0 Hypothesis
Accepted.
143
The cross tab calculations were performed by considering the weighted
Null Hypothesis: H0B5: There is no momentous association between Occupation of

the customer and visual merchandising elements like Store displays, (product display,
Color, lighting), Signage, store layout in making purchase decision.-Rejected
The above table represents the occupation-wise distribution of opinions on

statements of product display dimension. According to the distribution of data on the
opinions of different occupation group customers towards pay attention to the display,
it is found the association of occupation with the attractive product display in making
my buying decisions, the tendency of buying garments with the inspiration of
mannequins. And appropriate shelf position in making better purchase decisions are
indicated significant because the tested chi-square value is 87.65. The p-value is 0.00
less than 0.05. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association between
the Occupation of the respondent and Store Display elements.
The distribution of different occupation levels of customers' opinions on the

window finds significant because the calculated chi-square value is 78.96, and the p-
value is 0.00, which is less than 0.05. It infers that the association of Occupation with
the tendency of entering into the store by a creative window display that further leads
to a positive purchase decision. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an
association between the Occupation of the respondent and Window display
The calculated chi-square value (68.34) of occupation-wise distribution, in

their opinion on the Store Atmospherics elements, would affect their preference
towards the products' is shows significant because the p-value is 0.00, which is less
than 0.05. Therefore, this infers that association of Occupation with the interior Color
of the store that entices a favorable buying decision, usage of different lightings
influences customer purchase decision. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is
an association between occupation and store atmospherics elements.
The difference in the opinions of different occupation level of customers on

the Signage elements shows significant because the tested chi-square value is 76.42,
and the p-value is 0.00, which is higher than 0.05. It shows the association of
Occupation with the appropriate Promotional/sales signage that positively evokes
144
purchase intension. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association
between occupation and Signage elements.
Regarding the store layout elements, the opinions among different occupations
of customers found a significant difference because the calculated chi-square value is
85.35, and the p-value is 0.00. Hence, it is inferred that the Association of Occupation
with the influence of good store layout in inducing repeated purchase behavior. The
null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association between the Occupation of the
respondent and Store layout elements.
This can be inferred that occupation is determining the visual merchandising

elements at branded apparel stores and affecting the purchase decision of the shoppers
positively.
5.12 Family Size and Visual merchandising elements
Chi-Square test is performed with the Family Size of the respondent and
Visual Merchandising elements. i.e., Store displays, (product display, mannequin,
product shelf position) Window display, Store atmospherics (interior Color, lighting),
Signage, store layout. The results are shown in below table 5.27. The Chi-Square test
was performed at 5% Level of Significance.
Table 5.27: Family Size with Visual merchandising elements

Test
Degrees of Sig.
Freedom Value
Value
Alternative
Accepted.
Alternative
interior color)
Accepted.
Alternative
Accepted.
Alternative
Accepted.
145
Null Hypothesis: H0B6: There is no momentous association between Family size of

the customer and visual merchandising elements like Store displays, (product display,
Color, lighting), signage, store layout in making purchase decision.-Rejected
According to the opinions of different respondents based on their family size

with the attractive product display in making my buying decisions, the tendency of
buying garments with the inspiration of mannequins, and appropriate shelf position in
making better purchase decisions. The obtained chi-square value 79.36 is indicated
significance because the p-value 0.00 is less than 0.05. Hence, the null hypothesis is
rejected. There is an association between the family size of the respondent and Store
Display elements.
Regarding the opinions of the respondents with different family size with
window display shows a difference with chi-square value 86.35, it is found significant
because the p-value 0.00 is less than 0.05. Therefore, this infers that the Association
of family size with the tendency of entering into the store by a creative window
display that further leads to a positive purchase decision. Hence, the null hypothesis is
rejected. There is an association between the family size of the respondent and
Window Display elements.
The opinions of the respondents on the store atmospherics based on their

family size. In this distribution, the chi-square value 76.38 is found significant
because the p-value 0.00 is less than 0.05. Therefore, this infers that Association of a
family with the interior Color of the store that entices a favorable buying decision,
usage of different lightings in enhancing the possibility of buying intension. Hence,
the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association between family and store
atmospherics elements.
According to the opinions of the respondents with signage, it is found that the
Association of occupation with the appropriate Promotional/sales signage that
positively evokes purchase intention. In this context, the calculated chi-square value
of 67.69 is significant because p-value 0.00 is less than 0.05. Hence, the null
146
hypothesis is rejected. There is an association between the family size of the
respondent and Signage elements.
The opinions of the different family size respondents indicate that the
Association of family size with the store layout. Here the chi-square value is 71.35,
and the p-value is 0.00, which is less than 0.05. It is found that the Association of the
family with the influence of good store layout in inducing repeated purchase behavior.
Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. There is an association between the family size
of the respondent and Store layout elements.
It can be inferred that the family size of the respondents determining the
Visual merchandising elements at branded apparel stores and affecting the buying
decision of the shoppers.
5.13 Structural Equation Model
Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) is a multivariate technique that

estimates a series of interrelated dependency relationships simultaneously. The term
Structural Equation Modelling expresses that the causal processes in the study
represented by a set of structural equations (i.e., regression) and that these can be
modelled graphically to allow a more precise conceptualization of the study. The
hypothetical model can be statistically tested in simultaneous analysis of the whole
system of variables to determine how much it is consistent with the data. If the
goodness-of-fit is adequate, the model supports the plausibility of the postulated
relations between the variables.
5.14 Structural Equation Model for Visual Merchandising Elements
In the present study, the relationship of different visual merchandising

elements like store displays (product display, mannequin display, product shelf
position), window display, Store Atmospherics (interior color, lighting), Signage, and
Store Layout elements on customer purchase decision was explored. This element
constitutes visual merchandising elements. The model of visual merchandising
elements causal relationships were developed through SEM with AMOS.
147
Table 5.28: Observed Endogenous Variables
Variable Name Definition

Pro_1 Pay attention to the displays when visiting shops.
Pro_2 You think displays increase your product interest.
Pro_3 The size of the store will influence your product choice.
Pro_4 Products placed like a mess are considered as cheep
Products on sale should be collected as this can spur the intention to
Pro_5
buy.
Pro_6 Pay attention to nearby items when you are waiting for payment.
Product Display is a factor you consider when deciding which shops
Pro_7
you are visiting.
Pro_8 I tend to purchase products on or near the payment desk
Pro_9 Product displays helps me to make my purchasing decisions
I get an idea of what to buy after looking at the mannequins in the
Man_10
shop
Man_11 I tend to buy the clothes with a new style or design on display.
When I see clothes that I like on mannequins, I tend to purchase
Man_12
them.
When I choose to buy clothes, I tend to depend on the mannequins
Man_13
displays.
Mannequin is a useful way of communicating in the shop about the
Man_14
clothing.
When I walk through the corridors of a store, I tend to buy products
Pshelf_15
unintentionally.
Pshelf_16 I tend to browse products displayed at eye level.
Pshelf_17 I prefer to stop and search the items shown in the shelves.
Pshelf_18 I tend to buy products on sight on shelves.
Right product shelf position assists me in making better purchasing
Pshelf_19
decisions.
win_20 You're attracted by creative store windows into a store.
No matter what it is displayed, attention will still be paid to different
win_21
window displays
Frequent changes to the window display are arousing interest for the
win_22
products in that store.
148
Regular window display modifications help you know about new
win_23
items in the Store
If the item you want appears in the window, it will stimulate your
win_24
desire to buy it.
I tend to choose which shop to purchase depends on the window
win_25
display.
When I see an interesting window display, I feel compelled to enter
win_26
the shop.
win_27 If a creative window attracts me, I tend to enter a store.
win_28 Displays always increase your interest in the displayed products.
Window Display attracts me to a product or item I didn't intend to
win_29
purchase before entering a store.
int_30 The store colors can change your buying behavior and mood
int_31 The colors used in the shop leads to a positive decision.
int_32 The fashion product's color tone may influence your preference.
Some bright colors like red and orange in the store tend to stand out
int_33
and draw your attention
Your conscience could awaken by the colorful fast fashion
int_34
assortments.
The background color of product displays can have a powerful
int_35
effect on your shopping
In-store colors can create a positive mood for the shop to buy
int_36
clothes
light_37 Always pay attention to garments covered under strong lighting..
The use of different lights to decorate the shop would stimulate the
light_38
product preference.
The use of lights of different brightness to decorate the shop would
light_39
increase the possibility of purchases.
If you can see the product clearly it, your interest in a product may
light_40
increase
light_41 You only want to buy the product if you've checked it already.
Your buying interest increases the mood generated by dimmed
light_42
lights.
light_43 Proper lighting helps me to compare the products I want to purchase
Signage improves your product awareness.
sign_44
149
Signage in the form of labels provides you with more product
sign_45
information.
The more information you have on a product, the more likely you
sign_46
are to purchase it.
In comparison with other lights, backlit signs are normally more
sign_47
prominent.
sign_48 Always pay attention to the signs.
I prefer to buy if I see an interesting promotional deal on shop signs
sign_49
(lower prices, promotion, etc.)
sign_50 Sales / Clearance signs encourage me to check clothing
I'm going to look at the clothes when I see a special promotional

sign_51
sign.
If apparel is in promotional/discount sales, you are more likely to
sign_52
make an impulse purchase
I tend to buy garments on special offers communicated by
sign_53
advertising /promotional signs in the store.
Appropriate Signage gives me information which I think is useful
sign_54
when making everyday purchase decisions.
I tend to buy unintentional items while trying to find a certain
store_55
garment
I like shopping if it is simple and easy without much search to find

store_56
the right items.
I prefer to go straight to the items I want to purchase when I enter

store_57
into an apparel store
store_58 I prefer to go to the new arrivals section when I enter a store.
store_59 I tend to follow the design of a store when I enter a store.
The store layout influences my purchasing decisions over the long

store_60 term (More likely, because of the good store layout, you buy a
certain brand or product several times)
150
Table 5.29: Unobserved Exogenous Variables
Store Displays (SD) e13 e30 e47
Window Display (WD) e14 e31 e48
Store Atmospherics (SA) e15 e32 e49
Signage (S) e16 e33 e50
Store Layout (SL) e17 e34 e51
e1 e18 e35 e52
e2 e19 e36 e53
e3 e20 e37 e54
e4 e21 e38 e55
e5 e22 e39 e56
e6 e23 e40 e57
e7 e24 e41 e58
e8 e25 e42 e59
e9 e26 e43 e60
e10 e27 e44
e11 e28 e45
e12 e29 e46
151
Fig5.1: Structural Equation Model for Visual Merchandising Elements (Store
Displays, Window Display, Store Atmospherics, Signage, and Store Layout)
152
Fig 5.2: STANDARDIZED ESTIMATES: Structural Equation Model of Visual
Merchandising Elements
Fig 5.2: Standardized Estimates: Structural Equation Model for Visual Merchandising
Elements (Store Displays, Window Display, Store Atmospherics, Signage, and Store
Layout)
153
5.15. Structural Equation Modeling: Evaluating Model Fit
The development of the model is the beginning of the SEM, but it needs to be
tested statistically. Most statistical methods only require one statistical test to
determine the significance of analyses. The following measures are the indicators for
a good model fit. Confirmatory Factor Analysis was employed to identify the
excellent model for SEM.
Table 5.30: SEM: Model Standard Values
Name of Category Name of Index Level of acceptance

Chi-Square P-Value > 0.05
Absolute Fit RMSEA RMSEA < 0.08
GFI GFI > 0.90
AGFI AGFI > 0.90
CFI CFI > 0.90
Incremental Fit
TLI TLI > 0.90
NFI NFI > 0.90
Parsimonious Fit Chisq/df < 5.0
Table 5.31: The literature support for the respective fitness index
Name of Name of
Full name of Index Literature
Category Index
Wheaton et al.
Chi-Square Discrepancy Chi-Square
(1977)
Root Mean Square Error of Browne and
Absolute Fit RMSEA
Approximation Cudeck (1993)
Joreskog and
GFI The goodness of Fit Index
Sorbom (1984)
Tanaka and Huba
AGFI Adjusted Goodness of Fit
(1985)
CFI Comparative Fit Indices Bentler (1990)
Incremental Fit
Bentler and Bonett
TLI Tucker-Lewis Index
(1980)
NFI Normed Fit Index Bollen (1989)
Parsimonious Chi-Square/Degrees of Marsh and Hocevar
Chisq/df
Fit Freedom (1985)
154
5.16 Calculated values of Visual Merchandising Elements of SEM
This is the model that comes from the theoretical model of the confirmatory
factor analysis. Fitness Index Goodness, Modified Fitness Index, Root Mean Square
Error Approximation Comparative fit index, GFI, AGFI, RMSEA, CFI are not
recommended to the degree set by Joreskog and Sorban (1993), nor is data suggesting
the model of fit. The description of the fit indices can be found in table 5.32 below
Table 5.32: Fit Indices for Structural Equation Model
Indices Name Indices Values Standard Values
Chi-Square 25604.935 ----------------
Probability Level 0.000 ≥ 0.05
Chi-Square / df 13.620 < 5 Preferable
RMSEA 0.159 < 0.05

> 0.9 – good and
NNFI or TLI 0.081
> 0.8 – permissible
GFI 0.116 >0.9 – good
IFI 0.118 >0.9 – good

CFI 0.186 >0.9 – good
Table 5.33: Internal Consistency analysis of critical factors
Factors Original No Original No of items Final no of Final

of items Alpha deleted Items Alpha
Store Display 19 0.637 14 5 0.667

Window 10 0.705 6 4 0.780
Display
Store 17 0.688 14 3 0.692
Atmospherics
Signage 11 0.604 7 4 0.758
Store Layout 6 0.646 0 6 0.646
The above table 5.33 shows the internal consistency analysis of critical
factors, which includes the original number of items (63) from various visual
merchandising elements, out of which 22 questions were sustained.
155
5.17 DEVELOPMENT OF VISUAL MERCHANDISING FACTORS USING
STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELLING: FINAL MODEL FIT
The modeling of structural equation allows the relative strength of

relationships between variables to be examined. We first conduct a confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA) in this research to ensure that all indicator variables that are
used to measure the building are reliable and valid. Second, we postulate and check
the important factors between each structure and each variable indicator. Following
the confirmatory factor analysis, the following figure shows an overview of the SEM
results. The model was constructed with the other factors and latent variables.
Fig 5.3: STANDARDISED ESTIMATES: Modified Structural Equation Model

of Visual Merchandising Elements
Fig 5.3: Standardized Estimates: Modified Structural Equation Model for Visual
Merchandising Elements (Store Displays, Window Display, Store Atmospherics,
Signage, and Store Layout)
156
The fitness test for SEM is used to check whether the specified variable is
appropriate for the model. This calls for the acceptance of H0, which means that the
complete hypothesized model suits well (H0). In this regard, we are looking for a
probability result higher than 0.05.The result from SEM shows the · 2 value of 694.8,
a p-value of 0.324 with 180 degrees of freedom. This outcome supports the H0 that
the SEM fits well. The p-value is considerably high (P-value 0.05), which means that
the overall model with the data is well supported. In addition, other statistical
structural indices such as the fit index (GFI 0.927), Bentler comparative fit scale (CFI
0.097), and Root Means approximation of square error (RMSEA 0.024) indicate the
fit of the model. It shows that our probability value (0.324 to0.05) and structural
modeling indices are far higher than the recommended level so that the model is seen
as well representing the data (Hair et al. 1995).
Table 5.34 Measurement result of SEM (Goodness-of-fit statistic values)
Indices Name Indices Values Standard Values
Chi-Square 694.8 ----------------
Probability Level 0.324 ≥ 0.05
Chi-Square / df 3.48 < 5 Preferable
RMSEA 0.024 < 0.05
> 0.9 – good and

NNFI or TLI 0.957
> 0.8 – permissible
GFI 0.927 >0.9 – good
IFI 0.913 >0.9 – good
CFI 0.919 >0.9 – good
The SEM may also calculate the size and contribution of each variable to the
respective structure. All these indicators have a significant probability value (critical
ratio ≥ 2) and therefore provide statistical proof of their significant contribution to the
analysis of statistical data.
157
Table No 5.35 SEM Model Results
Construct Indicator Standard Loading(β) S.E. C.R.(t) Probability
Pro_4 0.461 0.05 70.094 Significant

Man_11 0.305 0.04 78.883 Significant
Store Displays Man_12 0.254 0.04 79.941 Significant
Pshelf_15 0.546 0.04 113.13 Significant
Pshelf_19 0.678 0.05 72.662 Significant
win_22 0.895 0.05 70.597 Significant
win_27 0.848 0.05 81.267 Significant
Window Display
win_28 0.494 0.04 87.424 Significant
win_29 0.584 0.04 89.538 Significant
light_37 0.225 0.05 77.739 Significant
Store Atmospherics light_42 0.255 0.04 97.813 Significant
light_43 0.307 0.05 85.054 Significant
sign_50 0.777 0.05 75.775 Significant
Signage
store_55 0.002 0.05 65.366 Significant
Store Layout
Table 5.35 shows that other indicating variables have a positive significance
on each construct. These indicators extracted from the Confirmatory Factor Analysis
for the construction of the SEM model. These extracted factors have a significant
impact on visual merchandising than the remaining variable
After taking into consideration of the results, the model can be depicted as
shown in the below figure 5.4.
158
Fig 5.4: Result of Path analysis
From the above figure, it can be observed that convenience with a beta value
of 0.895 has the maximum influence on customer purchase decision .i.e. Window
display. This result highlights the importance of Window display. It is the effective
way through which the retailer can communicate the central theme of the store, also
inform the customer about the type of merchandise that the retailer sells in the store
and attracts the customer into the store. The next element with a beta score of 0.777 is
Signage, which is the second-highest influencer on the customer's purchase decision
in branded apparel stores. Signage includes all promotional signs, clearance/discount
sales signs, and directional signboards, which will inform and direct the customers
within the store. Coming to the third most influencer on customer's purchase decision
159
is Store–layout with a beta score of 0.712, It is evident that appropriate store-layout
makes the shopping more convenient and easy. The fourth highest influencer on
customer's purchase decision is Product –shelf position with a beta score of 0.678, this
infers that, if the merchandise display is at eye- level and easily accessible to the
customer, He/she will touch and feel the fabric that enhances the tendency of buying.
Product displays stand at fifth position with a beta score 0.461; It is an indication that
attractive merchandise display on the floor provokes positive shopping behavior. It is
followed by lighting with a beta score of 0.307, and mannequin with a beta score of
0.305 comes as the lowest influencer compared to the rest. Because as many branded
apparel stores provide appropriate lighting and mannequins are the primary display
mechanism in apparel stores. It is not surprising. However, if we compare the
influence of visual merchandising on purchase decisions in a different retail format
store, the result could be different.
5.18 SEM Model Discussion
As per the result obtained from the above table No: SEM model, It can be
observed that the standard β coefficients for store display elements of product display,
mannequin display, product –shelf position are 0.461, 0.305, 0.254,0.546 and 0.678
respectively, window display has the standard β coefficient values 0.895, 0.848,
0.494, 0.584. When it comes to Store atmospherics, the significant element is lighting
and has the standard β coefficient values of 0.225, 0.255, and 0.307. The other
important component is Signage and has the standard β coefficient values 0.777,
0.758, 0.531, and 0.539. The last component that has taken for the study is Store –
layout; the corresponding standard β coefficient values are 0.002, 0.093, 0.005, 0.712,
0.628, and 0.458. So from the obtained standard β coefficients for all the dimensions
of Visual merchandising, it is evident that all of them are significantly influencing the
customer's purchase decision in branded apparel stores.
5.18.1Store Displays and Customer’s purchase decision:
Null Hypothesis H0.C1: There is no influence of Store displays on Customer‘s

purchase decision
The construct Store displays have been defined by the variables product
display, mannequin display, and product shelf position; they further comprises of
160
significant factors, i.e. (Pro_4) the products placed like a mess are considered as
cheap, with the standard β coefficient (0.461 ). It infers that the retailer/visual
merchandiser must take utmost care to display the merchandise in the neat and tidy
way; they must be displayed by using appropriate display tools, like hangers,
gondolas, and glass units, etc. premium cloths cannot be sold once if they placed like
a mess.
When it comes to Mannequin display, there are two significant factors, i.e.
(Man_11) when I see clothes with a new style or design on display; I tend to buy
them, with the standard β coefficient (0.305).
This clearly states that the dresses on the mannequins must be changed frequently so
that the customers will get some idea about the new arrivals in the store. This will
reduce the monotony of the store to improve its novelty. The second factor is
(Man_12) when I see clothes that I like on the form/mannequin in the store; I tend to
buy them, with the standard β coefficient (0.254). This reveals that the neatly dressed
mannequin helps the shopper to visualize how a particular pair appears, if it is
attractive, the customer may be influenced to purchase it.
There is one more important indicator, i.e., product shelf position; it includes
two significant factors, i.e. (Pshelf_15) I tend to buy unintended products while I am
walking in the corridors of a store, with the standard β coefficient (0.546). It discloses
that the right shelf position enhances the visibility of the merchandise that furthers
provokes customers‘ impulse purchase behavior and tempts to by unintended
merchandise as well. And (Pshelf_19) Appropriate product shelf position helps me to
make better purchase decisions, with the standard β coefficient (0.678).
It suggests that the product shelf position must be at the customer's eye level and
easily accessible to the shopper so that he/she can touch and feel the fabric and can
judge the quality of the garment that leads to a better buying decision.
As per the structural equation model tested, the construct store displays having
a positive influence on customer purchase decisions.
161
5.18.2 Window Displays and Customer's purchase decision:
Null Hypothesis, H0.C2: There is no influence of window display on customer's

purchase decision.
The construct Window display consists of four significant factors that

influence customer's purchase intension in the branded apparel stores. i.e. (win_22)
frequent changes to the window display are arousing interest for the products in that
store, with the standard β coefficient (0.895). These evidences that Window displays
must be timely changed and must arrange with the new arrivals, which arouse interest
in the customers, (win_27) I tend to enter a store when I am attracted by a creative
window, with the standard β coefficient (0.848). A creative window display will
attract the customer into the store, and it is the essential means through which the
customer will get the basic idea of the store. And the type of merchandise that the
retailer sells, (win_28) Window displays always increase your interest in the products
shown, with the standard β coefficient (0.494). It clarifies that window displays are
the crucial tools to create interest in the products that are being displayed in the
branded apparel stores. And (win_29) Window Display attracts me to a product or
item that I had not considered buying before entering a store, with the standard β
coefficient (0.584). It emphasizes that even though the customer doesn't have the idea
to buy a particular garment because of the window display, he/she gets attracted to it,
and there is a possibility of picking it.
Therefore window display is proved as one of the essential factors of Visual

merchandising, leading to shopper's purchase decisions.
5.18.3 Store atmospherics and customer's purchase decision:
Null Hypothesis, H0.C3: There is no influence of Store atmospherics on customer's

purchase decision.
The construct Store atmospherics consists of three significant factors that

impact customer buying intention. i.e., (light_37) always pays attention to things
covered by intense lighting, with the standard β coefficient (0.225). It infers that good
lighting always makes the customer attentive in the store as the products can be seen
clearly. The second factor is (light_42). The mood generated by the use of dimmed
lights increases your interest in purchases, with the standard β coefficient (0.255). It
162
reveals that positive shopping mood will be generated with the appropriate
illumination in the apparel store that may further help in making a purchase decision.
The third significant factor is (light_43). Proper lighting helps me compare the
merchandise I am considering buying, with the standard β coefficient (0.307). It tells
that suitable lighting provides an opportunity for the customer to compare the
displayed merchandise in terms of garment quality, style, shade, and texture with
another to make a better purchase decision.
Therefore, in-store atmospherics, lighting plays a vital role in generating a

positive mood, better product comparison leading to consumer's purchase decisions.
5.18.4 Signage and Customer's purchase decision:
Null Hypothesis, H0.C4: There is no influence of Signage on Customer's purchase

decision
Signage as a construct has been explained by the four major significant factors
that motivate customer purchase intention, i.e., the first one is (sign_53)Sales
/clearance sales signs encourage me to look through clothes, with the standard β
coefficient (0.777). Secondly, (sign_54) when I see a particular promotional sign, I
will look at those clothes, with the standard β coefficient (0.758). Third is (sign_56) I
tend to buy garments on special offers communicated by advertising /promotional
signs in the store, with the standard β coefficient (0.531). From these three factors,
this is imperative that different Clearance sale / promotional Signage inflate store
sales by making the shopper have a thorough check of displayed apparel. And
(sign_57) Appropriate Signage provides me with information that I believe is useful
in making daily purchasing decisions, with the standard β coefficient (0.539).
It summarizes that appropriate signboards and other Signage will inform the
customers about different offers and promotions within the store so that the shopper
can make profitable purchase decisions.
Hence Signage provides more convenience to shoppers by giving necessary

information about the offers and promotions within the store for better and financially
viable purchase decisions as proved in the structural model.
163
5.18.5 Store –Layout and Customer's purchase decision:
Null Hypothesis, H0.C5: There is no influence on store layout on customer's

purchase decision
Store - Layout is another vital construct consists of six significant factors that
have a considerable effect on the purchase decision of branded apparel customers. i.e.,
(store_58), I tend to buy unintended products while trying to find a specific product,
with the standard β coefficient (0.002). (store_59)I like shopping, if I find the desired
products easily and without much search, with the standard β coefficient (0.093).
(store_60)When I go to a store, I tend to walk directly to the products I intend to buy,
with the standard β coefficient (0.005), (store_61) when I enter a shop; I tend to go to
the new arrivals section, with the standard β coefficient (0.712). (store_62)When I
enter a store, I tend to follow the store's design while I browse the store, with the
standard β coefficient (0.628). (store_63)Store layout influences my long-term
purchasing decisions (it is more likely that you purchase a particular brand or Product
several times due to good store layout), with the standard β coefficient (0.458)
It infers that the Store –Layout is also as important as the other visual
merchandising elements in influencing customer's purchase decisions. Customers will
always get delighted with easy accessibility of the required merchandise, find it easy
to pick his/her favorite clothes, systematically designed store –layout prompts the
customer to walk directly to go to the required section within the store. Furthermore
creates a long-lasting impression in the minds of the customers to stick to a particular
store or brand, which leads to store loyalty. It shows a strong linkage established
between Store –layout and shoppers' buying choice.
It is very clear that the elements of Visual merchandising, i.e., Store displays,
window display, store atmospherics, Signage, store –layout, are positively influencing
the purchase decisions of branded apparel customers in this research study.
164

13 - Chapter 5

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

13 - Chapter 5

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

13 - Chapter 5

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHAPTER-V

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

5.2 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

As mentioned above, Section 1 deals with descriptive statistics of the 500

Demography analysis is used to describe the sample in terms of the

5.3 Demographic Profile of the respondents

The demographic profile of the branded apparel customers in retail stores

Table 5.1: Gender-wise distribution of the customers in the sample data

Source: Primary Data

Table 5.2: Age classification of the respondents

S No Age ( years ) Frequency Percentage

Table 5.4: Annual income classification of the respondents

S No Annual Income(Rs ) Frequency Percentage

Source: Primary Data

S No Occupation Frequency Percentage

Source: Primary Data

Table 5.6: Family members of the respondents

S No Family Members Frequency Percentage

2 3 - 5 members 250 50.0

3 Above 5 126 25.2

Total No of Respondents 500 100.00

Source: Primary Data

Table – 5.7: Opinions of branded apparel customers on product

Frequency x Scale 1982-

1. The initial appearance and display in the store is important

It is clear that Systematic merchandise displays and the products displayed

Strongly Strongly Standard

Table – 5.9: Opinions of branded apparel customers on product shelf position at

The opinions of the respondents on the influence of product shelf position to

1. Appropriate product shelf position helps retail consumers in making better

A systematically designed product shelf position is a positive influencer in a

Table – 5.10: Opinions of branded apparel customers on window

The opinions of the respondents on the influence of the window display in

An attractive window display increases the volume of sales by attracting the

Strongly Strongly Standard

Table – 5.12: Opinions of branded apparel customers on lighting at retail stores

2. The interest of the customer in a product may be increased if the product

The purchase tendency of the customer in branded apparel increased when

Table-5.13 Analyses the opinions of the respondents on the influence of

In this connection, the data was collected from the respondents on 11

Table – 5.14: Opinions of branded apparel customers on Store -

Strongly Strongly Standard

The opinions of the customers on the influence of store layout in making a

A systematically designed store layout plan will make the customer do

S. No. Visual merchandising elements Total score Percentage of score

1 Signage 20298 73.8 – I

2 Interior color 12904 73.7-II

3 Window display 18394 73.6 – III

4 Product display 16541 73.5 – IV

5 Lighting effects 12630 72.1 – V

6 Mannequins 8582 68.6 – VI

7 Product –shelf position 8561 68.4 – VII

8 Store -Layout 9846 65.6 –VIII

The Table-5.15 represents the overall opinions of branded apparel customers

To examine whether there is a significant difference between and among the

Table 5.16: The perceptions of the branded apparel consumers on different

Male 255 24.62 4.12 0.34

The branded apparel consumer‘s perception of mannequin display between

The consumer perception of product shelf-position in branded apparel stores