More than half of buyers purchasing homes in the Bay State during the first quarter used a real estate agent to represent them exclusively, rather than working with a seller’s agent, according to a recent survey of homebuyers and sellers.

The survey, conducted for the Massachusetts Association of Realtors, showed that 53 percent of homebuyers had buyer representation, a trend that has been more prevalent in other parts of the country but has only gradually entered the Massachusetts marketplace. However, the number of Bay State buyers choosing to have representation during the home-buying process still lags behind what’s happening across the country. Nationally, 63 percent of homebuyers reported that they had buyer representation in a survey conducted by the National Association of Realtors.

“I do think it [buyer representation] has finally come to Massachusetts, and it’s taken a long time,” said Shari Marquis, an owner of Marquis GMAC Real Estate, which has offices in Brighton, Duxbury, Plymouth and Wareham. “Buyers [today] are more knowledgeable and they want someone to represent their interests.”

Buyer representation is just one of the homebuyer patterns included in the NAR 2003 Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers released last month. NAR conducts a national survey every other year that highlights information on home-buying and selling trends. This is the first year that MAR requested an oversampling of Massachusetts homebuyer and seller populations to get a grasp on state trends. The NAR survey included 159 respondents from Massachusetts.

The survey found that:

Buyer representation has made a more gradual entrance into the Bay State. According to industry leaders, because there are no specific or comprehensive laws about agency in Massachusetts, it’s been challenging to get agents to understand and embrace buyer agency. Many agents who help buyers with their home search in this state are actually working as subagents of the home seller’s agent or serving as dual agents, which must be disclosed to the consumer.

“In Massachusetts, it isn’t as easy to practice buyer agency as it is in other states,” explained Marquis.

In recent years, however, more agents have started offering buyer representation in addition to helping sellers, or have started focusing exclusively on serving buyers. MAR President Peter P. Casey said 2,000 of the association’s members have received training and have earned some type of buyer representative designation.

“We’ve got plenty of members who are actively willing to do buyer agency,” said Casey, president of Prudential Wilmot Whitney Real Estate in Weston. But Casey agreed with Marquis’ assessment that the laws have been a challenge in Massachusetts. “The law is perhaps a little more complex in Massachusetts,” said Casey, noting that the association has been working to rectify that.

A MAR task force has been working on a proposal that seeks to clarify agency law for more than a year. “The association is doing everything we can to create an environment where consumers have choices – more and better choices and choices that are easier to understand,” said Casey.

Still, there are real estate firms that refuse to offer buyer representation.

“We still don’t do buyer agency and we haven’t lost a buyer because of that,” said Ralph Miller, broker-owner of Hughes & Hughes Real Estate in Natick and a member of The Realty Guild. At companies that don’t offer buyer representation, the buyer and agent relationship – and ultimately the real estate transaction itself – is likely to go smoothly “if you explain agency to them [buyers] correctly at the first meeting,” said Miller.

According to the survey, first-time buyers in Massachusetts were more likely than repeat buyers to select an agent who represented their interests, whereas nationally, an equal number of first-time and repeat buyers chose buyer representation.

Marquis said one reason that not as many repeat buyers would choose a buyer representative could be because they’ve gone through the homebuying process before and are more experienced. In addition, many of them may have previously purchased at a time when buyer representation wasn’t practiced heavily and so they’re not as aware of the practice.

The majority of homebuyers and sellers, however, chose to work with a real estate agent, even as the Internet has made it easier for consumers to search for and sell property on their own. Eighty-six percent of home sellers in Massachusetts used a real estate agent to sell their house, and 82 percent of homebuyers actually bought their home through an agent.

Accurate pricing and a faster home sale were noted as the two top reasons that sellers used a real estate agent, said Casey, quoting the NAR survey. Casey pointed out that sellers who reported using a real estate agent sold their homes faster and at a higher price.

“The use of a Realtor generates a 21 percent – on average – higher selling price than folks who don’t use a Realtor,” said Casey.

‘Extra Equity’

Casey said the statistics show that a high percentage of sellers realize the “value of using an agent” who can maximize the marketing and exposure of a for-sale house and who can price it accurately so it can sell faster.

Still, 8 percent of Bay State home sellers reported selling their home on their own and 3 percent tried to sell it themselves and ended up using an agent.

Some homeowners may be enticed by advertisers who promote for-sale-by-owner Web sites that they can sell their home on their own and save on the real estate commission they would have to pay an agent, said Casey. But what home sellers who forgo using an agent may not realize, he said, is that they’ll be limiting the property’s marketing exposure and won’t be getting the higher prices that they won’t be getting the highest price for their property.

Miller said using a real estate agent is the best option. “You wouldn’t practice law if you didn’t have a law degree or you don’t try to self-medicate yourself if you have a medial problem,” he said. “If you have a real estate problem you go to a real estate professional. Selling a piece of property for the average person is cumbersome and tedious.”

Meanwhile, even though today’s homebuyers have access to home listings via the Internet and don’t have to rely as heavily on real estate agents for information, they still turn to the real estate agents. Nearly 90 percent of Internet searchers also used an agent, according to NAR, compared to 79 percent of non-Internet users.

NAR reports that the proportion of buyers who found their home on the Internet has doubled every two years from 1995 to 2001. Eight year ago, less than 1 percent of all homebuyers first found the home they purchased online. In 2003, more than half of all homebuyers used the Internet to search for homes.

Whether they were using the Internet in their home search or not, Bay State homebuyers were spending much more on housing. The median price of a home purchased by a first-time buyer during the first quarter this year was $216,000 and $295,000 for repeat buyers, much more than the national median for all buyers of $164,500.

The typical house in the Bay State cost buyers $147 per square foot, whereas nationally, the typical home cost $89 per square foot.

Higher home prices might be an impediment, but the state’s homebuyers were still able to make bigger down payments for their homes, compared to other U.S. buyers.

Marquis said the rapid price appreciation benefits repeat buyers who were able to build up equity and use the big profits from their previous home to make a big down payment on a new home.

“That extra equity is getting averaged in,” she said.

Citing U.S. Census figures, Casey said that Massachusetts households also have a higher median income – $43,000 compared to $37,000 nationally – and there are slightly more two-income households in this state, factors that would help consumers borrow less money when they’re buying property.

Still, both Marquis and Miller said they still see many first-time buyers purchasing with low down payments.