Self‐reporting vs. observation: some cautionary examples from parent/child food shopping behaviour

Most studies on decision‐making in relation to consumption are based on self‐reported behaviour. This approach assumes that consumers can account for their decision‐making processes. However, several studies show that consumers are not always aware of what happens when they purchase goods because of the role of habit and routines, or a lack of willingness to account accurately for their purchases. A clear example of this is family decision‐making about food shopping. It is well documented that parents know that their children influence what they buy in supermarkets but it is also found that parents and children do not agree on just how much influence children have. Thus, a gap exists in the knowledge about what is actually happening in this grey zone of grocery shopping which seemingly cannot be solved through retrospective data collection. Family shopping is neither a completely rational nor conscious process, which makes the use of self‐reported behaviour problematic. This study discusses the limits of survey and interview approaches to parents' and children's shopping decisions in comparison with observations. An observational study of parent/child supermarket shopping in Denmark is used to exemplify the strengths of observation. Findings show that both parents and children are juggling a number of roles and apply a range of negotiation strategies which can explain why it is hard to account for who decided what afterwards. The article concludes that mapping certain types of consumer actions calls for other methods than self‐reported behaviour.