Learn in your language
Skip to content
A Level · Cambridge (CIE) · 9990

Apply the PAD model to scent and crowding in retail environments

Explain pleasure, arousal and dominance, then evaluate evidence on mall scent and perceived crowding without overstating what self-report studies establish.

Section OPTION-CO-2.1.3 · 2.1.3 Retail atmospherics

Cambridge International AS & A Level Psychology 9990 · Consumer Psychology · 2028–2030 · Version 1 · OPTION-CO-2.1.3

Original StudyForA teaching for the Cambridge 2028–2030 syllabus. This is not Cambridge material or an official mark scheme. Research findings are summarised for learning and should not be treated as universal consumer rules.

Before you begin

  • This lesson covers Cambridge Psychology 9990 Consumer Psychology section 2.1.3 in the 2028–2030 Version 1 syllabus. The cited shopper studies measured pleasure and arousal but did not directly measure dominance.

Work on paper. Try each question before revealing help, and explain why your method works.

Quick readiness check

In the PAD model, what does dominance describe?

What you will learn

  • Explain pleasure, arousal and dominance in Mehrabian and Russell's PAD model
  • Describe approach and avoidance responses to environmental cues
  • Evaluate Chebat and Michon (2003) on mall scent, shopper perceptions and spending
  • Evaluate Machleit et al. (2000), Study 1, on human and spatial crowding, emotions and satisfaction

PAD describes three distinct emotional dimensions

Mehrabian and Russell described environmental responses using pleasure, arousal and dominance. Pleasure ranges from unpleasant to pleasant; arousal from low stimulation to high activation; dominance from feeling constrained to feeling in control. A person can be highly aroused but pleased or displeased, so arousal alone is not a positive response.

The model proposes that environmental cues can relate to these internal states, which can in turn relate to approach or avoidance: for example, staying, exploring or affiliating versus leaving or avoiding. These are explanatory links to test, not a guarantee that a particular smell, sound or crowd will produce the same action for every shopper.

A study can measure a dimension with self-report scales, but the scale must fit the claim. Do not say evidence measured all three PAD dimensions if the researchers measured only pleasure and arousal.

Chebat and Michon (2003) compared ambient scent in a real mall

The researchers conducted a two-wave mall-intercept field experiment in one community mall near Montreal. The control wave had no added scent; during the next wave, diffusers released a light citrus scent in a main corridor. The study reports 447 control questionnaires and 145 questionnaires from shoppers exposed to the scent. Participants rated the mall environment and product quality, reported pleasure and arousal, and stated how much they had spent during the trip.

The authors compared an emotion-first model with a cognition-first model using structural equation modelling. The cognition-first model fit better: scent was linked to more favourable perceptions of the mall and product quality, while spending was explained more by perceived product quality than by mood. The result challenges a simple claim that scent increases spending by making shoppers feel pleased.

This field setting includes real shoppers and a natural mall environment, but conditions were collected in different weeks rather than randomly assigning each individual shopper. It is one mall in one Canadian context, and spending was reported by shoppers. The study measured pleasure and arousal, not dominance; it therefore does not directly test all three PAD dimensions.

Machleit et al. (2000), Study 1 separated two kinds of crowding

Study 1 was a field survey of 722 marketing students from three US universities. Participants recalled a recent shopping trip and completed a questionnaire about human crowding (the number or busyness of other shoppers) and spatial crowding (feeling cramped or confined), alongside emotions and shopping satisfaction. The emotional measures included Mehrabian and Russell's pleasure and arousal scales, not dominance.

Higher perceived human and spatial crowding were associated with lower shopping satisfaction. Emotional responses partly mediated those relationships; expectations of crowding and personal tolerance also mattered. This suggests that the meaning of a crowd depends on the shopper and the store context, rather than density alone.

Because the study relied on retrospective questionnaires rather than manipulating crowding, it supports associations, not a simple causal claim. Student respondents and recalled trips may not represent all shoppers, and the study did not measure dominance. Its useful distinction between people-density and space-density should be preserved when applying the findings.

Use the model to frame a careful application

For a scent or crowding scenario, first identify the environmental cue; then predict a possible effect on pleasure, arousal or dominance; finally explain a possible approach or avoidance response. Support each link with evidence and state where the study leaves a link unmeasured.

Cultural meaning, scent sensitivity, crowding tolerance, expectations, purpose and perceived control can change the response. An accessible, calm environment may help some shoppers, while others may seek lively stimulation. Ethical retail design should not assume that inducing arousal or reducing a shopper's control is always beneficial.

Sources for this lesson

Pause and explain

Which result is supported by Machleit et al. (2000), Study 1?

Put the idea to work

Worked example

A manager says, ‘Chebat and Michon proved that citrus scent makes every shopper happy and spend more because of PAD.’ Correct the statement using their method and findings.

Show the worked solution
  1. Name the design and the measures, including the PAD dimensions that were measured.
  2. State which causal ordering fit better and what predicted spending in that model.
  3. Give a reason the conclusion cannot be universalised.

Answer Chebat and Michon compared an unscented control week with a citrus-scented week in one Montreal-area mall and analysed shopper questionnaires and reported spending. Their cognition-first model fit better: scent was associated with mall and product-quality perceptions, and perceived product quality related more strongly to spending than mood. They measured pleasure and arousal, not dominance, and did not show that citrus makes every shopper happy or causes higher spending in every mall.

Try a topic test

Choose Easy, Normal or Difficult. Save your answers and open worked review after finishing.

Test this topic →

From guided practice to a new situation

Write your answer and reasoning first. Use a hint only if you are stuck. The model solution is for self-checking; your written work is not automatically marked.

1 · Guided

A shopper says that a busy market feels exciting but also hard to navigate. Use the PAD model to explain why ‘busy’ does not have one fixed emotional effect.

Give me a hint

Separate activation from pleasantness and perceived control.

Compare my reasoning
  1. The busy setting may increase arousal, but that does not determine whether the shopper feels pleasure or displeasure.
  2. Difficulty navigating may reduce the shopper's sense of dominance or control, even if the activity is stimulating.
  3. The response can depend on the shopper's purpose, crowding tolerance, expectations, culture and whether they choose to stay or leave.

A busy market may increase arousal while producing different levels of pleasure and perceived control. A shopper who enjoys lively browsing may approach, while someone who feels constrained or displeased may avoid it; the cue does not determine one response for everyone.

Look for these in your work

  • Three dimensions distinguished
  • Approach and avoidance linked cautiously
  • Individual and situational factors considered
2 · Independent

Evaluate the claim: ‘Chebat and Michon proved that scent increases sales because it improves shoppers’ mood.’

Give me a hint

Compare the models and identify one design feature that limits causal certainty.

Compare my reasoning
  1. The field study compared a control wave and a citrus-scent wave in one Montreal-area mall, using questionnaires and reported spending.
  2. The cognition-first model fit better; mall and product-quality perceptions were linked to scent, and product-quality perception related more strongly to spending than mood.
  3. The study used different waves rather than individual random assignment, took place in one mall and measured pleasure and arousal but not dominance; it therefore does not establish a universal sales effect caused by mood.

The claim misstates the result. Chebat and Michon's cognition-first model fit better than the emotion-first model: scent related to perceptions of the mall and product quality, while product-quality perception was more closely linked to spending than mood. Because the conditions occurred in different weeks in one mall and shoppers reported spending, the study does not prove a universal causal sales effect through mood.

Look for these in your work

  • Model comparison accurate
  • Spending pathway interpreted
  • Causal and generalisation limits stated
3 · Transfer

Design a study testing whether crowding affects shoppers' experience in two differently arranged stores. Measure human and spatial crowding separately, include the PAD dimensions, and protect participants' privacy.

Give me a hint

Define how each crowding dimension and each PAD state will be measured, and decide whether the design can support causation.

Compare my reasoning
  1. Recruit consenting adult shoppers at both stores and use the same brief survey after a visit; ask separate items about number of shoppers and feeling cramped or confined.
  2. Measure pleasure, arousal and perceived control with distinct, clearly worded scales, and record relevant context such as store type, visit purpose and expected crowding. If comparing naturally occurring visits, describe the design as correlational.
  3. Do not record identifiable movement or payment data without a justified consent process; make participation voluntary, store responses securely and explain that results may vary by store, culture and individual tolerance.

A privacy-conscious field survey could measure human crowding, spatial crowding and all three PAD dimensions separately at both stores, while recording visit purpose and expectations. If density is not experimentally assigned, the study can identify associations but should not claim that crowding caused a particular emotional response.

Look for these in your work

  • Two crowding dimensions measured separately
  • All PAD dimensions operationalised
  • Consent and causal limits addressed

Common mistakes

  • Treating high arousal as automatically pleasant
  • Claiming that the Chebat and Michon study measured dominance
  • Concluding from a better-fitting model that the proposed causal order is definitively proven
  • Treating Machleit et al.'s retrospective correlations as an experimental causal result
  • Combining human density and spatial crowding into one measure
Recall without your notes

What can you explain now?

What is one important limitation when using these two studies as evidence for all three PAD dimensions?

Compare with the explanation

Both studies measured pleasure and arousal but did not directly measure dominance.

Their findings can inform discussion of the model, but they do not directly test the full three-dimension PAD profile.

After trying it yourself, choose your next review. This is your self-assessment.

Your review choice appears on Today. Sign in to sync it across devices.

Back to Today

Make it stick

Define pleasure, arousal and dominance; then give one supported result and one limitation from each retail-atmospherics study.

If you needed the solution, close it and solve the problem again from a blank page. A correct answer is stronger when you can explain the reason for each step.

Keep learning Psychology

Check the official syllabus 2028–2030
Course scope and assessment

Seven original lessons map all 15 AS research-method and methodological-concept sections to explained Guided, Independent and Transfer practice. All 12 compulsory AS core studies have original study-specific teaching and staged practice; five additional A Level methodology lessons cover research design and validity. All 15 Clinical, all 15 Consumer (2.1.1–2.5.3) and all 15 Health (3.1.1–3.5.3) Psychology sections link to original teaching and staged practice. All 15 Organisational Psychology sections 4.1–4.5 now have original teaching and explained staged practice; the six new 4.4–4.5 lessons bring the planning map to 92 of 92 indexed sections. Consumer lessons cover physical and psychological environments; decision models, heuristics and mistakes; packaging, selling and buying; advertising, self-monitoring, product placement, brand recognition and slogans. Evaluation boundaries are explicit: studies use particular products, samples, tasks and settings; gaze, recall, self-report, EEG indices, ratings, choices and purchases are different outcomes. Health evidence is bounded: Laba et al. measured hypothetical preferences; Riekert and Drotar raise a non-response concern; Chung and Naya's cap tracked openings, not swallowing; Chaney et al. was a short caregiver-reported pilot; Yokley and Glenwick examined immunisation attendance in one public-health setting. MacLachlan et al. report one patient, not a controlled treatment effect; Brudvik et al. compared separate child, parent and physician ratings in one emergency department. Chandola et al. found a cohort association; Wang et al. measured responses during a monitored arithmetic task; Evans and Wener observed commuters; Bridge et al. found mixed self-rated outcomes in radiotherapy. Janis and Feshbach measured short-term self-reports in one school; Lewin et al. tested a rehabilitation package, not information alone. Tapper et al. and Fox et al. studied bounded school and worksite programmes; incentive effects do not establish transfer or rule out reporting effects. Weinstein measured comparative expectations, while Seligman’s framework is conceptual and Shoshani and Steinmetz used a school-level comparison. These findings do not establish universal health effects or diagnose individuals. Need-theory examples use a child measurement study, not a workplace test; SMART is a practical checklist, not a motivational theory. Landry et al. compared reward framing with student volunteers in a lab; this does not establish universal effects in workplaces. Cuadrado et al. (2008) measured undergraduate evaluations of presented leaders, not workplace performance or hiring; this does not establish a universal gender effect. The historical 1995 Munchausen criteria are not a current diagnostic checklist. Cambridge’s 2028–2030 Reference List treats Oruč et al. (1997) as an example of genetic explanation although its participants had bipolar I; gambling disorder is listed in Cambridge’s Clinical topic but classified under addictive behaviours in ICD-11. Candidates choose two options, but all four remain listed so schools can select a route. The 92-section count is a planning index, not a Cambridge score. Remaining work is deeper coverage review, separate-year syllabus reconciliation, timed-paper practice and human subject-expert review. The separate 2027 and 2024–2026 syllabuses are not reconciled into this route. Practice is not official grading, a timed-paper simulation or human subject-expert review.

StudyForA · Learn with understanding

Original teaching content and links to official sources. Check your exam year and qualification before using a resource.