Authors : Md. Rafiqul Islam; Dr. Md. Nuruzzaman

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 4 - April

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/mryexuw7

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/y58m5vdc

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26apr436

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : The FMCG sector in Bangladesh involves frequent buying and strong competition. Both the financial and social factors also influence the consumers. This study examines how brand familiarity, price sensitivity, and peer influence affect consumers’ brand choice in this sector. A quantitative and explanatory research design was used. A survey was conducted on 397 FMCG consumers to get the data. The descriptive statistics, the reliability analysis, the exploratory factor analysis, the Pearson correlation and the multiple regression were used to analyze the data. The findings indicate that peer influence is the strongest positive factor affecting brand choice (β = .426, p < .001). Brand familiarity is the second strongest positive factor (β = .406, p < .001). In contrast, price sensitivity has a significant negative effect on brand choice (β = −.280, p < .001). The regression model is statistically significant. It explains 34.3% of the variation in brand choice (R² = .343, Adjusted R² = .338; F(3, 393) = 68.356, p < .001). This research contributes to the body of knowledge on consumer behavior as it provides a joint account of brand selection in the FMCG market of a developing economy. The findings indicate that managers ought to develop a better brand familiarity, value-based pricing and apply peer-based communication strategies to enhance brand preference and customer retention.

Keywords : FMCG, Brand Familiarity, Price Sensitivity, Peer Influence, Brand Choice.

References :

1. Paasovaara, R., Luomala, H. T., Pohjanheimo, T., & Sandell, M. (2012). Understanding consumers' brand‐induced food taste perception: A comparison of ‘brand familiarity’–and ‘consumer value–brand symbolism (in) congruity’–accounts. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 11(1), 11-20.
2. Aaker, D. A. (1991). Managing brand equity: Capitalizing on the value of a brand name. Free Press.
3. Abdullah-Al-Mamun, M. K. R., & Robel, S. D. (2014). A critical review of consumers’ sensitivity to price: Managerial and theoretical issues. Journal of International Business and Economics, 2(2), 1-9.
4. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
5. Shah, N., & Khan, A. (2024). Price Sensitivity and Its Impact on Brand Switching Behavior. Journal of Strategic Business Research, 2(2), 35-49.
6. Prinstein, M. J., & Giletta, M. (2021). Five priorities for future research on child and adolescent peer influence. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 67(4).
7. Ebrahim, R. S., Ghoneim, A., Irani, Z., & Fan, Y. (2016). A brand preference and repurchase intention model: The role of consumer experience. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(13–14), 1230–1259.
8. Nepomuceno, M. V., Laroche, M., & Richard, M.-O. (2014). How to reduce perceived risk when buying online: The interactions between intangibility, product knowledge, brand familiarity, privacy and security concerns. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(4), 619–629.
9. Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591-621.
10. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE.
11. Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (5th ed.). SAGE.
12. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage.
13. Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1-22.