Catalog vs Non-catalog Shoppers of Apparel: Perceived Risks, Shopping Orientations, Demographics, and Motivations

Abstract

The major objective of the study was to investigate how catalog and non-catalog shoppers perceived the risks involved in purchasing apparel from catalogs. The study also investigated catalog and non-catalog shoppers' shopping orientations and their demographic characteristics. The principal components analysis of the data collected from 131 female subjects revealed four types of perceived risks-financial risk, social risk, functional risk, and time risk—plus a Shopping Orientation factor. The results of multivariate and univariate analyses of variance indicated that non-catalog shoppers showed higher levels of risk perceptions of financial, social, functional, and time risks than did the catalog shoppers. However, there was no group difference on shopping orientation. Demographic variables also resulted in no group differences except in marital status. Sixty percent of the catalog shoppers were married, while only 47% of the non-catalog shoppers were married The authors recommend strategies, based on the results of the study, to catalog retailers of apparel.

Consumer attitudes and intentions toward personalization of fair trade apparel

“…In previous research, apparel products were associated with greater risk, due to constant changes in fashion trends, higher social visibility, and inappropriate selection of clothing that may influence a negative self-image (Kwon, Paek, & Arzeni, 1991;Laurent & Kapferer, 1985;Prasad, 1975;Winakor, Canton, & Wolins, 1980). Although this may be true for many customers, the results of this study showed that fair trade customers did not associate perceived social and financial risk with their attitudes toward personalization.…”

“…Most fashion products are perceived to be socially and financially risky (Kwon et al, 1991;Prasad, 1975). Constant changes in fashion trends and higher prices of fashionable garments can increase social and financial risks (Kwon et al, 1991;Laurent & Kapferer, 1985;Prasad, 1975). For example, according to Winakor and Lubner-Rupert (1983), a basic shirt waist style dress was perceived to be less financially risky as compared to a fitted dress style that was more fashionable at the time of the research.…”

“…According to Jacoby and Kaplan (1972), apparel products are perceived to be risky as compared to other products. Due to changes in fashion trends, inappropriate selection of clothing that influences a negative self-image is associated with a high level of perceived social risk (Kwon, Paek, & Arzeni, 1991;Laurent & Kapferer, 1985;Winakor, Canton, & Wolins, 1980). A high level of social visibility of apparel products increases the perceived social value and in turn, the perceived risk associated with purchasing apparel (Prasad, 1975).…”

“…Most fashion products are perceived to be socially and financially risky (Kwon et al, 1991;Prasad, 1975). Constant changes in fashion trends and higher prices of fashionable garments can increase social and financial risks (Kwon et al, 1991;Laurent & Kapferer, 1985;Prasad, 1975).…”

The Influence of Perceived Risk of Up-cycling Fashion Product on Trust, Purchase Intention and Recommendation Intention

“…(Choi, 2003;Kim & Hwang, 2011;Nam & Lee, 2009). 또한, 지 각된 위험은 패션제품 종류와 쇼핑맥락에 따라 다양한 위험지 각 차원들이 관찰되었다 Kwon et al, 1991 (Hair et al, 1998), 개념신뢰도(construt realiability)값 또한 모두 0.7 이상으 85.193) .912…”