International Journal of Basic and Applied Science, Vol 01, No. 04, April 2013, pp.

791-799 Aloma and Lawan 792 Insan Akademika Publications Demographic variables reveal ongoing trends, such as shift in age, gender and

income distribution that signal business opportunities. The demographic factors have a huge impact on the assessment of different features which are generally associated with clothes. Consumers belonging to a higher social class would prefer a certain type of clothe which they would feel would cater their needs. Similarly buying behavior would also be depending on the age group. The features younger consumers would look for in clothes may not be the same with older consumers. Marketers have found age, for instance, to be a particular useful demographic variable for distinguishing market segments, largely because products needs and interests often vary with consumers age. Many marketers have today curved themselves a niche in the market place by concentrating on some specific groups base on demographic variables. Marital status has traditionally been the focus of most marketing. For many products and services, household continues to be the relevant consuming unit, marketers are interested in the number of and kinds of household that own and/or buy certain products, more so, marketers have discovered the benefits of targeting specific marital status groupings. Other demographic variables include income, education and occupation. Although income has long been an important demographic variable for distinguishing markets, a major problem with targeting market on the basis of income alone is that its simply indicates the ability (or inability) to pay for a product. It is against this background that this study examined the combined effects of demographic variables on consumer buying behavior of clothes 2 Research Methodology The area of study is Borno State. The State was created in 1976 out of the defunct North-Eastern State of Nigeria. It is the largest in the Federation in terms of land mass, covering a total of 69,436 Sqkm (BOSEEDS, 2005). Borno state lies between latitudes 100N and 130N and longitudes 11.40E and 14.40E. The state shares international borders with Cameroun to the East, Niger to the North, and Republic of Chad to the North-East. The state is a multi-ethnic one with about thirty different languages. This study utilized both primary and secondary sources of data. Structured questionnaire was employed to elicit responses on consumer demographic data influencing clothes buying behavior. The population for the study comprised inhabitants of three local government areas, one from each of the three senatorial districts of Borno state, selected using purposive sampling technique. The population was subdivided into different age groups (strata) from which a total sample of 192 respondents were drawn at random. The data obtained were subjected to descriptive statistics and chi square using Stata version 8 analytical package and presented in tabular form according to the five stages of buying decision The first stage in consumer buying decision process is the need recognition, situation where the consumer felt a difference between his/her actual state and the desired state. Table 1 shows the distribution of respondents according to their age, gender, marital status, occupation, education and income and their separate influences on clothes need recognition. These was measured on five variables-clothes security, belonginess or social needs, ostentations, and basic wardrobe requirement Aloma and Lawan International Journal of Basic and Applied Science, Vol 01, No. 04, April 2013, pp. 791-799 www.insikapub.com 793 Table 1. Distribution of respondents based on clothes need recognition
Variables Security Belonginess Ostentations Basic need Total Chi-square (2) Age: <25 5(2.9) 1(.6) 3(1.7) 7(4.0) 16(9.2) 26-35 30(17.2) 7(4.0) 11(6.3) 24(13.8) 72(41.4) 36-45 24(13.8) 5(2.9) 13(7.5) 18(10.3) 60(34.5) 46 or older 7(4.0) 3(1.7) 5(1.7) 11(6.3) 26(14.9) Total 66(37.9) 16(9.2) 32(18.4) 60(34.5) 174(100) 3.7 (p<0.9292) Gender Female 26(14.) 4(2.3) 12(6.9) 17(9.8) 59(33.9) Male 40(22.9) 12(6.9) 20(11.5) 43(24.8) 115(66) Total 66(37.5) 16(6.9) 32(18.4) 60(34.5) 174(100) 2.47 (p<0.4809) Marital status: Widow 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 3(1.7) 2(1.1) 5(2.9) Divorced 3(1.7) 0(0.0) 1(.6) 1(5.7) 5(2.9) Single 17(9.8) 5(2.9) 5(2.9) 22(12.6) 49(28) Married 46(26.4) 11(6.3) 23(13.2) 35(20.1) 115(33) Total 66(37.9) 16(9.2) 32(18.4) 60(34.5) 174(100) 12.89 (P<0.1675) Occupation: Farmer 18(10.3) 4(2.3) 10(5.7) 14(8.0) 46(26.4) Student 11(6.3) 6(3.4) 16(9.2) 9(5.2) 32(18.4) Politician 1(.6) 4(2.3) 0(0.0) 3(1.7) 8(4.6) Retiree 5(2.9) 1(5.7) 1(.6) 5(2.9) 12(6.9) Businessmen 9(5.2) 0(0.0) 4(2.3) 7(4.0) 20(11.6)

Civil Servant 20(11.5) 4(2.3) 11(6.3) 21(12.1) 56(32.2) Total 66(37.9) 16(9.2) 32(18.4) 60(34.5) 174(100) *28.74 (P<0.0174) Education:NonFormal 4(2.3) 2(1.1) 1(.6) 9(5.2) 16(9.2) Primary 2(1.1) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 2(1.1) Secondary 9(5.2) 0(0.0) 6(3.4) 7(4.0) 22(12.6) Diploma/NCE 33(19.0) 6(3.4) 18(10.3) 28(16.1) 85(48.9) Degree 13(7.5) 8(4.6) 5(2.9) 13(7.5) 39(22.4) Post Degree 5(2.9) 0(0.0) 2(1.1) 3(1.7) 10(5.7) Total 66(37.9) 16(9.2) 32(18.4) 60(34.5) 174(100) 19.27(P<0.2018) Income < 150000 24(13.8) 5(2.9) 2(1.1) 20(11.5) 51(29.3) 150-350000 28(16.1) 8(4.6) 4(2.3) 25(14.4) 65(37.4) 350-500000 8(4.6) 2(1.1) 10(5.7) 8(4.6) 28(16.1) 500000 > 6(3.4) 1(0.57) 16(9.2) 7(4.0) 30(17.2) Total 66(37.9) 16(9.2) 32(18.4) 60(34.5) 174(100) *44.30 (P<0.0000) Field survey, 2012 *Figures in parentheses represent percentage scores

Chi-square association test shows that income [44.30(P<0.0000)] followed by occupation [28.74(P<0.0174)] have significant influence on clothes need recognition age (34.5%) rated high as determinant of the need to buy clothes, as opposed to the low emphasis accorded belonginess (18.4%) and ostentations (9.2%). In contrast, the specific results showed that basic need count more with 24.8% than cloth security (22.9) among male buyers. Similarly, basic need was also favoured (12.6%) against clothes security (9.8%) among singles, while among widows under marital status, ostentations topped their consideration for factors determining need for clothes. In a related case, belonginess topped the determining factor for Politicians (2.3%), deduced under occupation, and among degree holders (4.6%) under education classification. Also consumers whose income p.a. exceeds N350, 000 favored ostentations as a determining factor for the need to buy clothes as against basic need. The second stage in consumer decision making process is to search for information or alternatives available to fill the identified need. The responses of consumers in respect of sources of this information or how they become aware of the kinds of clothes and knowledge thereof is shown in table 2 International Journal of Basic and Applied Science, Vol 01, No. 04, April 2013, pp. 791-799 Aloma and Lawan 794 Insan Akademika Publications Table 2 Distribution of respondents based on clothes information search Variables Mental archive Media Sales people
Society Total Chi-square (2) Age: < 25 5(2.9) 1(5.7) 2(1.1) 8(4.6) 16(9.22) 26-35 33(19.0) 2(1.1) 7(4.0) 30(17.2) 72(41.4) 36-45 24(13.8) 2(1.1) 7(4.0) 27(15.5) 60(34.5) 46 > 10(5.7) 1(5.7) 2(1.1) 13(7.5) 27(15.5) Total 72(41.4) 6(3.4) 18(10.3) 78(44.8) 174(100) 2.08 (P<0.9901) Gender: Female 26(14.9) 1(5.7) 6(3.4) 26(14.4) 59(33.9) Male 46(26.4) 5(2.9) 18(10.3) 52(29.9) 15(66.1) Total 72(41.4) 6(3.4) 18(10.3) 78(44.8) 174(100) 1.74 (P<0.628) Marital Status: Widow 2(1.1) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 3(1.7) 5(2.9) Divorced 3(1.7) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 2(1.1) 5(2.9) Single 17(9.8) 3(1.7) 6(3.4) 23(13.2) 49(28.2) Married 50(28.7) 3(1.7) 12(6.9) 50(28.7) 115(66.1) Total 72(41.4) 6(3.4) 18(10.3) 78(44.8) 174(100) 4.25 (P<0.894) Occupation: Farmer 13(7.5) 3(1.7) 5(2.9) 25(14.4) 46(26.4) Student 17(9.8) 1(5.7) 3(1.7) 11(6.3) 32(18.9) Retiree 6(3.4) 0(0.0) 1(5.7) 5(2.9) 12(6.9) Politician 6(3.4) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 2(1.1) 8(4.6) Businessmen 5(2.9) 0(0.0) 2(1.1) 13(7.5) 20(11.5) Civil Servant 25(14.4) 2(1.1) 7(4.0) 22(12.6) 56(32.2) Total 72(41.4) 6(3.4) 18(10.3) 78(44.8) 174(100) 15.28 (P<0.431) Education: Non-Formal 3(1.7) 1(.6) 1(.6) 11(6.3) 16(9.2) Primary 2(1.1) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 2(1.1) Secondary 5(2.9) 0(0.0) 1(.6) 15(8.6) 22(12.6) Diploma/NCE 35(20.1) 1(.6) 11(6.3) 38(21.8) 85(48.9) Degree 21(12.1) 4(2.3) 2(1.1) 12(6.9) 39(22.4) Post Degree 7(4.0) 0(0.0) 1(.6) 2(1.1) 10(5.7) Total 72(41.4) 6(3.4) 18(10.3) 78(44.8) 174(100) *28.49 (P<0.019) Income < 150000 29(16.7) 3(1.7) 9(5.2) 36(20.7) 77(44.3) 150-350000 24(13.8) 0(0.0) 5(2.9) 24(13.8) 53(30.1) 350-500000 10(5.7) 2(1.1) 2(1.1) 7(4.0) 21(12.1) 500000 > 9(5.2) 1(5.7) 2(1.1) 11(6.3) 23(13.2) Total 72(41.4) 6(3.4) 18(10.3) 78(44.8) 174(100) 5.83 (P<0.756) Field survey, 2012 *Figures in parentheses represent percentage scores Chi-

square association test shows that education (2 = 28.49, p<0.0187) significantly influenced consumers sources of information about clothes. Results revealed that society (44.8%), followed by mental archive (41.4%) were the main sources of information about the clothes consumers buy. On the other hand consumers were also rarely exposed to dresses of their choice through sales people (10.3%) and media (3.4%). Conversely though, result based on age revealed that consumers aged 26 and 35 years (19.0%), as well as students (9.8%), politicians (9.8%), retirees (6.3%) and civil servant (5.2%) and elites (degree and higher degree holders) mostly got information about clothes through their psychological fields rather than the society. Primary school leavers, however, exclusively became aware and got information about clothes through sales people only. The leading role of the society as a source through which consumers got exposed to clothes may not be unconnected with the fact that marketing activities such

as point of purchase display, print and broadcast media advertisement are seldom available to most of the target audience of this study, as such they heavily rely on gate keepers and opinion leaders in the society Aloma and Lawan International Journal of Basic and Applied Science, Vol 01, No. 04, April 2013, pp. 791-799 www.insikapub.com 795 The third stage in the decision process is to evaluate the alternatives available. Table 3 shows distribution of respondents according to their age, gender, marital status, occupation, education and income and certain criteria used in evaluating clothes before purchase. Table 3. Distribution of respondents based on clothes evaluation Criteria Variables Price Brand Style Quality Total
Chi-square (2) Age: <25 1(5.7) 0(0.0) 3(1.7) 12(6.9) 16(9.2) 26-35 21(12.1) 2(1.1) 8(4.6) 42(24.1) 73(42.0) 36-45 11(6.3) 0 (0.0) 8(4.6) 40(23.0) 59(28.7) 46 > 8(4.6) 2(1.1) 4(2.3) 12(6.9) 26(14.9) Total 41(23.6) 4(2.3) 23(13.2) 105(60.3) 174(100) 11.93 (P<0.2175) Gender: Female 17(9.8) 3(1.7) 5(2.9) 35(20.1) 60(34.5) Male 24(13.8) 1(5.7) 18(10.3) 71(40.8) 114(65.5) Total 41(23.6) 4(2.3) 23(13.2) 105(60.3) 174(100) 5.54 (P<0.1360) Marital Status: Widow 0(0.0) 0(0.0) 1(5.7) 4(2.3) 5(2.9) Divorced 3(1.7) 1(.6) 1(.6) 0(0.0) 5(2.9) Single 10(5.7) 1(.6) 8(4.6) 31(17.8) 50(28.7) Married 28(16.1) 2(1.1) 13(7.5) 71(40.8) 114(65.5) Total 41(23.6) 4(2.3) 23(13.2) 105(60.3) 174(100) 15.72 (P<0.0729) Occupation: Farmer 12(6.9) 2(1.1) 6(3.4) 26(14.9) 46(26.4) Student 9(5.2) 0(0.0) 5(2.9) 18(10.3) 32(18.4) Retiree 2(1.1) 0(0.0) 1(5.7) 9(5.2) 12(6.9) Politician 2(1.1) 0(0.0) 1(5.7) 5(2.9) 8(4.6) Businessmen 4(2.3) 0(0.0) 3(1.7) 13(7.5) 20(11.5) Civil Servant 12(6.9) 2(1.1) 7(4.0) 35(20.1) 56(32.2) Total 41(23.6) 4(2.3) 23(13.2) 105(60) 174(100) 4.92 (P<0.9927) Education: Non-Formal 2(1.1) 0(0.0) 1(0.57) 13(7.5) 16(9.2) Primary 1(0.57) 0(0.0) 1(0.57) 0(0.0) 2(1.1) Secondary 1(0.57) 1(0.57) 5(2.9) 15(8.6) 22(12.6) Diploma/NCE 29(16.7) 2(1.1) 9(5.2) 46(26.4) 86(49.4) Degree 6(1.1) 0(0.0) 7(4.0) 25(14.4) 38(21.8) Post Degree 2(1.1) 1(0.57) 0(0.0) 7(4.0) 10(5.7) Total 41(23.6) 4(2.3) 23(13.2) 105(60.3) 174(100) 24.24 (P<0.0612) Income<150000 14(8.0) 2(1.1) 8(4.6) 53(30.5) 77(44.3) 150-350000 18(10.3) 0(0.0) 9(5.2) 26(14.9) 53(30.5) 350-500000 6(3.4) 1(5.7) 3(1.7) 11(6.3) 21(12.1) 500000 > 3(1.7) 1(5.7) 3(11.7) 16(9.2) 71(40.8) Total 41(23.6) 4(2.3) 23(13.2) 105(60.3) 174(100) 10.51 (P<0.3111) Field survey, 2012 *Figures in parentheses represent percentage scores Results in general shows that quality

dominated (60%) the clothes selection criteria across age, gender, marital status, occupation and educational level; as against the weak emphasis accorded price (23%), style (13.2%) and then brand (2.3%). However, among divorcees, price (1.7%) was the most important clothes evaluation criteria; as brand (0.6%) was to the elites (higher degree holders) than style (0%). Quality dominated the criteria for evaluating clothes for purchase, this could be because most of the respondents for this study are low income earners who would want to maximize value for their money and ensure maximum satisfaction, the high influence of brand among post degree holders could largely be due to the exposure they have had while in the universities and prestige or equity associated with brands. International Journal of Basic and Applied Science, Vol 01, No. 04, April 2013, pp. 791-799 Aloma and Lawan 796 Insan Akademika Publications After evaluation, the consumer settles on an option and eventually pays for it as the most preferred. Table 4 shows which consumers age, gender, marital status, occupation, level of education, and income influences their clothes (type) buying decision. Table 4. Distribution of respondents based on demographics and their effects on type of clothes Variables Native Western Total Chi-square (2) Age: < 25
11(6.3) 5(2.9) 16(9.2) 26 35 47(65) 25(14.4) 72(41.4) 36 45 39(22.4) 2(12.1) 60(34.5) 46 or older 18(10.3) 8(4.6) 26(14.9) Total 115(66.1) 59(33.9) 174(100) *12.95 (P<0.0047) Gender: Female 36(20.7) 23(13.2) 59(33.9) Male 79(45.4) 36(20.7) 115(66.1) Total 115(66.1) 59(33.9) 174(100) 1.03 (P<0.3111) Occupation: Farmer 33(19.0) 13(7.5) 46(26.5) Student 14(8.0) 18(10.3) 32(18.4) Retiree 8(4.6) 0(0.0) 8(4.6) Politician 7(4.0) 5(2.9) 13(6.9) Businessmen 13(7.5) 7(4.0) 20(11.5) Civil Servant 40(23.0) 16(9.2) 56(32.2) Total 115(66.1) 59(33.9) 174(100) *12.93 (P<0.0240) Education: Non-Formal 11(6.3) 15(8.6) 46(26.4) Primary 1(0.6) 1(0.6) 2(1.1) Secondary 10(5.7) 12(6.9) 22(12.6) Diploma/NCE 58(33.3) 27(15.5) 85(48.9) Degree 27(15.5) 12(6.9) 39(22.4) Post Degree 8(4.6) 2(1.1) 10(5.7) Total 115(66.1) 59(33.9) 174(100) 10.64 (P<0.0591) Marital Status: Widow 3(1.7) 2(1.1) 5(2.9)

Divorced 3(1.7) 2(1.1) 5(2.9) Single 33(19.0) 16(9.2) 49(28.2) Married 76(43.7) 39(22.4) 115(66.1) Total 115(66.1) 59(33.9) 174(100) 0.20 (P<0.9776) Income <150000 48(27.6) 18(10.3) 66(37.9) 150-350000 30(17.2) 20(11.5) 50(28.7) 350-500000 18(10.3) 9(5.2) 27(15.5) 500000 > 19(10.9) 12(6.9) 31(17.8) Total 115(66.1) 59(33.9) 174(100) *12.45 (P<0.4848) Field survey, 2012 *Figures in parentheses represent percentage scores Chi-square

association test indicated significant influence of age (2 = 12.95, p<0.0047) and income (2 = 12.93, p<0.4848) on consumer buying behaviour with respect to the kind of clothes they buy. Results, in general, show that native clothes are mostly patronized (66.1%) than western clothes (33.9%). Irrespective of the age, gender, occupation, educational level, marital status and income level categories, consumers prefer native to western clothes, except secondary respondents which showed preference for western clothes (6.9%) than native (5.7%). This can be explained by the fact that the target audiences of this study are largely collectivist in nature and are bound to show similar behaviour including dressing for fear of being labeled as deviant by other members of the larger society. Aloma and
Lawan International Journal of Basic and Applied Science, Vol 01, No. 04, April 2013, pp. 791-799 www.insikapub.com 797

Consumers tendency to continue or discontinue buying and/or using a particular kind of clothe largely depends on whether or not he/she is satisfied with it. Table 5 shows distribution of respondents according to age, gender, marital status, occupation, level of education, and income and the extent to which they influence satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the type clothe purchased Table 5. Distribution of respondents based demographics and effects on post purchase behavior Variables Satisfaction
Dissatisfaction Total Chi-square (2) Age: <25 15(8.6) 1(.6) 16(9.2) 26-35 62(42.2) 10(5.7) 72(414) 36-45 49(28.2) 11(6.3) 60(34.5) 46> 21(12.1) 5(2.9) 26(14.4) Total 147(84.5) 27(15.5) 174(100) 1.83 (P<0.6084) Gender: Female 49(28.2) 10(5.7) 59(33.9) Male 98(56.3) 17(9.7) 115(66.1) Total 147(845) 27(15.5) 174(100) 0.14 (P<7087) Marital Status: Widow 5(2.9) 0(0.0) 5(2.9) Divorced 4(2.3) 1(.6) 5(2.9) Single 41(23.4) 8(4.6) 49(28.2) Married 97(55.7) 18(10.3) 115(66.1) Total 147(84.5) 27(15.5) 174(100) 1.02 (P<0.0729) Occupation: Farmer 39(22.4) 7(4.0) 46(26.4) Student 27(15.5) 5(2.9) 32(18.4) Retiree 10(5.7) 2(1.1) 12(6.9) Politician 6(3.4) 2(1.1) 8(4.6) Businessmen 17(9.8) 8(4.6) 20(11.5) Civil Servant 48(27.6) 8(4.6) 56(32.2) Total 147(84.5) 27(15.5) 174(100) 4.51 (P<0.4787) Education: Non-Formal 15(8.6) 1(0.57) 16(9.2) Primary 1(0.57) 1(0.57) 2(81.1) Secondary 17(9.2) 5(2.9) 22(12.6) Diploma/NCE 71(40.1) 14(8.0) 85(48.9) Degree 34(19.5) 5(2.9) 39(22.4) Post Degree 9(5.2) 1(0.57) 10(5.7) Total 147(84.5) 27(15.5) 174(100) *87.87 (0.0000) Field survey, 2012 *Figures in parentheses represent percentage scores Results

indicate that 84.5% of respondents do reinforce their purchase as against 15.5% who expressed dissatisfaction or regret after purchase. The responses across age, gender, marital status, occupation and educational qualification categories, suggests that consumers demographic variables do influence significantly the level to which they are satisfied dissatisfied with a purchase of particular type of clothes. However, Chi-square association test indicated that education (2 = 87.87, p<0.0000) had overbearing influence on consumer clothes post purchase behavior. 3 Discussion of Findings The present study investigated consumer demographic variables influencing clothes buying behaviour. Findings revealed that basic need requirement mainly determines consumers need to buy clothes,
International Journal of Basic and Applied Science, Vol 01, No. 04, April 2013, pp. 791-799 Aloma and Lawan 798 Insan Akademika Publications which may probably be due to the fact that consumers studied are low income

earners who may prioritize their spending to satisfy basic needs. This concurs with a study conducted by Myers, Stanton, and Haug (1971) who found income to be a major factor determining consumers propensity to spend and the lower it is the higher the need to carefully share it among basic needs. It was found out that society (opinion leaders, gate keepers, friends, family,) served as the main awareness window through which information and knowledge about clothes are obtained. This may be

due to the reason that the audiences targeted for this study were mostly resident in villages and hardly have access to such other sources like the media (prints and broadcast), bill boards and other outdoor media. This is in line with Kotler, (2000), that people rely heavily on opinion leaders and gate keepers in the society for information on new product innovation even after exposure to advertisement. The study further revealed that quality was the main clothes evaluation (choice) criteria and most consumers patronized native clothes. This may also be due to need to drive the maximum value for their limited resources, which is also in line with theoretical economics as reported by Schiffman and Kanuk (1997) that consumers, especially low income earners are always economical in their purchase decision and always consider functional (quality) aspect of a product in order to make a purchase that is not just satisfactory but a perfect one (maximum value for money). The influence of gender and marital status was invariably not significant on consumer buying process. Gender insignificantly influences cloth buying behaviour. This may be due to the fact that buyers of cloth pass through the same process of buying decision making irrespective of gender. This agrees with Goldsmith (2002) who found consistency for both men and women while examining personal characteristics of frequent clothing buyers. Occupation had bi-variate significant influence on clothes need recognition process and patronage as well. Age, especially period the between 25years 36years was found to have overpowering influence as revealed by consistent high percentage influences equivalence across the buying decision stages. This may probably be due to our tendencies to learn and adapt to ways of the society as we pass through our lifecycle stages, and particularly because of physical development, which affect the kind clothes we buy. This agrees with Rocha et al (2005) and Dilworth-Anderson and Boswell, (2007) who all experienced different requirements for clothing and fashion products based upon age or stages in the lifecycle and sizes. Education had overbearing influence on consumer post purchase behaviour as well as information search. This may be attributed to the fact that highly educated people are generally seen as problem solvers and are likely to seek for information. This corroborate with series of empirical studies which revealed that persons with high education have greater contact with mass media (Katz, Lazarsfeld 1955) and that these persons read more advertisements than others. The influence of income was also significant on need recognition and patronage. 4 Conclusion Demographic factors made up of age, gender, marital status, occupation, education and income are key factors affecting consumer buying behaviour, it is therefore, concluded that these factors, either acting independently or in conjunction with each other have significant degree of influences at each stage (need recognition, information search, evaluation, patronage, and post purchase behaviour) of the consumer clothes buying decision making process. Aloma and Lawan International Journal of Basic and Applied Science, Vol 01, No. 04, April 2013, pp. 791799 www.insikapub.com 799 5 Recommendations Based on findings of the study the following recommendations are made: a. As part of their efforts to convince customers to purchase the kinds of clothes they sell, marketing managers are recommended to adopt market segmentation strategy and segment their clothes markets on the bases of demographic variables such as age, income, and gender since they were all found to have great degree of influences on clothes buying decisions; b. It also recommended for marketing managers to stimulate opinion leadership in some key members of the society by encouraging favourable word-of-mouth about their products since clothes consumers are found to heavily rely on them for information; c. It is also recommended for marketers to ensure that their products are adequately labeled with important features and attributes to satisfy the educated ones who are found to be problem solvers and would deliberately seek for information in that direction;

d. Finally, it is recommended for marketers of clothes to emphasize demographic representation in the market segment they are serving or intend to serve in order to give their customers a sense of belonging and comfort with their chosen clothes References Boseeds. (2005). Historical background of Borno State, Borno State Government Dilworth-Anderson, P. A. & Boswell, G. H. (2007). Cultural diversity and aging: Ethnicity, minorities and subcultures. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Goldsmith, M. ( 2002). The Many Facets of Leadership, Vicere Financial Times NY. Prentice Hall Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communication. NY: Free Press. Kotler, P. (2000). Marketing Management, India, Prentice-Hall Myers, J. H., Stanton, R. R., & Haug, A. F. (1971). Correlates of Buying Behavior: Social Class vs. Income, Journal of Marketing, 35(4), pp. 816. Rocha, M.A.V., Hammond, L. & Hawkins D. (2005). Age, gender and national factors in fashion consumption. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 9 (4), pp. 380-390. Schiffman, L. G., & Kanuk L. L., (1997). Consumer Behaviour. NJ. Upper Saddle River, Prentice- Hall, Inc.