Understanding the Consumer MMP-5-UTC
- Subject Code :
MMP-5-UTC
- Country :
United Kingdom
Asignment Brief
Module Title: |
Understanding the Consumer |
Module Code: |
MMP-5-UTC |
Assignment No/Title: |
Individual Report |
Assessment Weighting: |
100% |
Submission Date: |
Week 11 Monday 16th December 2024 16.00 |
Feedback Target Date: |
15 Working Days |
Module Leader |
Dr David Capper |
Word count |
4,000 words |
1. This assignment must be submitted electronically by 4.00 pm on the submission date. 2. To submit electronically you must upload your work to the e-submission area within the respective module on Moodle. 3. Multiple drafts can be submitted up to the submission date. 4. Please remember you must leave at least 24 hours between submissions if you make changes to your work. Each submission will overwrite the previous one until the due date and time has passed. 5. You are reminded of the Universitys regulations on cheating and plagiarism. In submitting your assignment, you are acknowledging that you have read and understood these regulations. 6. You are reminded that it is your responsibility to keep an electronic copy of your assignment for future reference. 7. Your citation needs to follow the Harvard style referencing. |
|||
This Assignment was developed to assess the following Learning Outcomes: 1. Detail the main theories and models underpinning consumer behaviour. 2. Critically explain the core psychological and external variables that influence the decision- making process of consumers. 3. Apply appropriate consumer behaviour theory to solve problems arising within on-line and off- line platforms. 4. Analyse the wider social issues of consumer and behaviour and be able to debate issues in relation to more general ethical & cultural perspectives. |
Individual Report (100%)
The Individual Report is designed to provide students with the opportunity to demonstrate their understanding of consumer behaviour theories and the application of these theories to a range of examples. Using a selection of low involvement and high involvement products/ services students are required to critically analyse communications from a range of sources and apply a range of consumer behaviour theoretical concepts to a selection of the topics below. At least one of your chosen topics should consider ethical considerations.
Task 1: Consumer Decision Making
- Critically evaluate the significance of Consumer Decision Making models as frameworks for marketers to understand and influence consumer choices.
Task 2: Psychological Core Variables
Choose two of the following topics to demonstrate an understanding of how these variables affect the individual decision-making process:
- Perceptual Theory: Critically discuss how the perceptual processincluding perceptual exposure, perceptual attention, and perceptual interpretation shapes consumer decision making and how marketers utilize these insights to craft effective messaging. Provide a variety of relevant examples.
- Learning Theory: Explore (1) stimulus-response models such as classical conditioning and instrumental conditioning, and (2) cognitive learning theory to analyse how these learning theories inform consumer decision making and underpin communication and branding strategies. Include a range of appropriate examples.
- Attitude Theory: Utilize attitude theory and models such as the ABC Model, Functions of Attitude Model and Elaboration Likelihood Model to examine how marketers leverage these theories in constructing messages that influence consumer attitudes and decision making. Present various relevant examples.
- Self/Personality/Lifestyle Theory: Discuss how theories and models such as The Self, Ideal Self, Congruence, ID, Ego, Superego, and VALS are employed by marketers to shape messaging strategies that resonate with consumers and impact their decision-making processes. Provide a range of
Task 3: External Variables
Select one of the following topics to illustrate how the variable influences individual decision making:
- Social Class: Critically analyse Social Class Stratification theory and models to assess whether social class continues to be an effective method for segmenting markets and influencing consumer decision making. Support your discussion with a variety of examples.
- The Family: Examine Family theory and models such as the Family Life Cycle and Family Decision-Making Model to explore how marketers use these theories and models to understand family dynamics in consumer decision making and segmentation. Evaluate the ongoing effectiveness of these models for market segmentation and provide a range of relevant examples.
Submission Instructions
- This assignment must be submitted electronically by 00 pm on the submission date.
- To submit electronically you must upload your work to the e-submission area within the respective module on Moodle.
- Multiple drafts can be submitted up to the submission
- Please remember you must leave at least 24 hours between submissions if you make changes to your work. Each submission will overwrite the previous one until the due date and time has passed.
- You are reminded of the Universitys regulations on cheating and plagiarism. In submitting your assignment, you are acknowledging that you have read and understood these regulations.
- You are reminded that it is your responsibility to keep an electronic copy of your assignment for future reference.
Presentation Instructions
- 3,500 - 4,000 words
- Words should be distributed equally between the 4
- The front page, contents page and bibliography will not count towards the word total. All other elements, the introduction, main body, conclusion and in-text referencing count towards the overall total. If the total word limit is below or above the stated amount, marks will be deducted. Any work over 4,000 words will not be marked. Work must be referenced (using LSBU Harvard style) and a bibliography provided
- Course work must be submitted using font size 11 or 12, with a minimum of 5 line spacing
- Your student number must appear at the front of the coursework, along with the date, seminar tutor and title of work.
- Include a contents
- Include an introduction and
- Examples of pictorial adverts should be scanned into the body of the work or appendices.
Assessment Criteria: |
|||||||||
Your work is being marked according to the following rubric: |
|||||||||
80-100% |
70-79% |
60-69% |
50-59% |
40-49% |
30-39% |
0-29% |
|||
Structure & |
Outstanding |
Excellent |
Very good structure |
Structure and |
Weak structure |
Poor structure & |
Very poor |
||
presentation |
structure & |
structure & |
& presentation of |
presentation are |
& presentation |
presentation of |
structure & |
||
presentation of |
presentation of |
work. All areas of |
of an average to |
of work. |
work. Structure |
presentation of |
|||
10% |
work. All areas |
work. All areas |
structure and |
quite good |
Structure and |
and |
work. |
||
of structure and |
of structure |
presentation are of |
quality with |
presentation |
presentation are |
Structure and |
|||
presentation are |
and |
a good- very good |
some |
are of a limited |
of a poor quality |
presentation |
|||
of exceptional |
presentation |
quality with some |
improvements |
quality with |
with substantial |
are of a very |
|||
quality with no |
are of excellent |
minor |
identified. |
numerous |
improvements |
poor quality |
|||
improvements |
quality with |
improvements |
improvements |
identified. |
with most/all of |
||||
identified. |
no/little |
identified. |
identified. |
the work |
|||||
improvements |
needing |
||||||||
identified. |
improvement. |
||||||||
Outstanding |
Excellent |
Very good |
Average |
Weak |
Poor application |
Very poor |
|||
Referencing |
referencing of |
referencing of |
referencing of |
application of |
application of |
of relevant |
application of |
||
work. |
work. |
work. |
relevant |
relevant |
referencing |
relevant |
|||
10% |
Consistent, error |
Consistent, |
Consistent |
referencing |
referencing |
conventions, |
referencing |
||
free application |
error free |
application of |
conventions, |
conventions, |
with errors and / |
conventions, |
|||
of relevant |
application of |
relevant referencing |
with some |
with errors and |
or |
with work not |
|||
referencing |
relevant |
conventions with |
errors and / or |
/ or |
inconsistencies. |
referenced |
|||
conventions with |
referencing |
few errors. |
inconsistencies. |
inconsistencies. |
Most areas not |
accordingly. |
|||
great attention to |
conventions |
Many areas not |
referenced |
||||||
detail. No |
with great |
referenced |
accordingly. |
||||||
improvements |
attention to |
accordingly. |
|||||||
identified. |
detail. No/ Little |
||||||||
improvements |
|||||||||
identified. |
|||||||||
Research |
Outstanding |
Excellent |
Very good |
A range of |
Limited |
Some evidence |
Little or no |
||
independent |
independent |
independent |
sources used, |
research |
of research but |
research |
|||
10% |
relevant |
relevant |
relevant research |
although the |
identified and |
insufficient |
presented. |
||
research |
research |
evidenced by |
quality or |
used with |
quality or |
Needs |
|||
evidenced by |
evidenced by |
quality and quantity |
quantity could |
numerous |
quantity. Needs |
significant |
|||
quality and |
quality and |
of sources used. |
be improved. |
improvements |
support to |
support to |
|||
quantity of |
quantity of |
Some small areas |
identified. |
develop |
develop |
||||
sources used |
sources used |
of improvement |
research skills. |
research |
|||||
with no |
with no /little |
identified. |
skills. |
||||||
improvements |
improvement |
||||||||
identified |
identified. |
||||||||
Outstanding |
Excellent |
Very good |
Some accurate |
Weak |
Poor |
Very poor |
|||
Theory |
theoretical |
theoretical |
theoretical content |
understanding |
understanding |
understanding |
understanding |
||
content |
content |
underpinning work. |
of key aspects |
of key aspects |
of key aspects |
of key aspects |
|||
40% |
underpinning |
underpinning |
Accurate critical |
of subject. |
of subject. |
of subject. Very |
of subject. |
||
work. Shows |
work. Shows |
understanding of |
Evidence of |
Limited |
limited evidence |
Little/ no |
|||
sustained critical |
critical breadth, |
key aspects of |
critical coherent |
evidence of |
of coherent |
evidence of |
|||
breadth, |
accuracy, and |
subject. Evidence |
knowledge with |
coherent critical |
critical |
coherent |
|||
accuracy, and |
detail in |
of coherent |
some |
knowledge with |
knowledge with |
critical |
|||
detail in |
understanding |
knowledge with |
improvements |
numerous |
substantial |
knowledge |
|||
understanding |
key aspects of |
some minor |
required. |
improvements |
improvements |
with most of |
|||
key aspects of subject. No |
subject. No/Little |
improvements identified. |
required. |
required. |
the work requiring |
||||
improvements required. |
improvement required. |
improvement. |
|||||||
Application |
Outstanding |
Excellent levels |
Very good levels of |
Evidence of |
Weak of |
Poor application |
Very poor |
||
levels of |
of application. |
application. |
coherent |
application of |
of theory. Very |
application of |
|||
30% |
application. |
Consistently |
Consistently |
application skills |
theory. Limited |
limited evidence |
theory. Little/ |
||
Consistently |
applies |
applies application |
with some |
evidence of |
of coherent |
no evidence of |
|||
applies |
application of |
of theory to context |
improvements |
coherent |
application skills |
coherent |
|||
application of |
theory to |
with some minor |
required. |
application |
with substantial |
application |
|||
theory to |
context. |
improvements |
skills with |
improvements |
skills with most |
||||
context. No |
No/little |
identified. |
numerous |
required. |
of the work |
||||
improvements |
improvements |
improvements |
requiring |
||||||
required. |
required. |
required. |
improvement. |