Fashion Opinion Leadership Amo PDF

INFORMATION TO USERS
The m ost advanced technology has been used to photo

graph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm
master. UMI film s the original text directly from the copy
submitted. Thus, some dissertation copies are in typewriter
face, while others may be from a computer printer.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a
complete manuscript and there are m issing pages, these will
be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyrighted material had to
be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize m aterials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re

produced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper
left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal
sections with small overlaps. Each oversize page is available
as one exposure on a standard 35 mm slide or as a 17" x 23"
black and white photographic print for an additional charge.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been

reproduced xerographically in this copy. 35 mm slides or
6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for
any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for
an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
Accessing the World's Information since 1938
300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
O rd e r N u m b e r 8810S6S
Fashion opinion leadership am ong m ature consumers:

D em ographics, lifestyle and retail patronage behavior
Huddleston, Patricia Therese, Ph.D.

The University of Tennessee, 1987
C o p y r ig h t © 1 9 8 7 b y H u d d le s to n , P a t r ic ia T h e re s e . A l l rig h ts re s e rv e d .
UMI
300 N. Zeeb Rd.
Ann Arbor, MI 48106
PLEASE NOTE:
In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy.
Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark V .
1. Glossy photographs or pages_____
2. Colored illustrations, paper or print_______
3. Photographs with dark background_____
4. Illustrations are poor copy_______
5. Pages with black marks, not original copy
6. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of p ag e_______
7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages_______
8. Print exceeds margin requirements _ _ _ _ _
9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine_______
10. Computer printout pages with indistinct print_______
11. Page(s)___________ lacking when material received, and not available from school or
author.
12. Page(s)___________ seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows.
13. Two pages numbered . Text follows.
14. Curling and wrinkled pages______
15. Dissertation contains pages with print at a slant, filmed as received_________
16. Other______________________________________________________________________
FASHION O P IN IO N LEADERSHIP AMONG MATURE CONSUMERS
DEM O G R A PH IC S, L IF E S TY LE AND R E T A IL
PATRO NAG E BEHAVIO R
A D issertation
Presented for the
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree
T h e U n iv e rs ity of Tennessee, Knoxville
P atricia Th erese Huddleston
December 1987
To th e G raduate Council:
I am subm itting herew ith a d issertation w ritte n by Patricia Therese

Huddleston e n title d "Fashion Opinion Leadership Among M ature
Consumers: Dem ographics, L ife style and Retail Patronage B e h a v io r." I
have examined th e final copy o f this d issertation fo r form and content
and recommend th a t it be accepted in p a rtial fu lfillm e n t o f th e re q u ire
ments for the degree o f Doctor o f Philosophy, w ith a major in Human
Ecology.
o r d . Major Profesor
We have read th is dissertation

and recommend its acceptance:
Accepted fo r the Council:
Vice Provost
and Dean of T h e G rad u ate School
C o p y rig h t © P atricia Therese H uddleston, 1987
All rig h ts reserved
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to th a n k my doctoral committee. D r. Imogene F o rd ,
D r . Jacquelyn DeJonge, D r . M ark Hector and D r . William F3. Locander
for th e ir guidance d u rin g my re se a rch . D r . F o rd , who has served as
my m entor, major professor and frie n d d u rin g my e n tire doctoral
program deserves special thanks fo r the time she devoted to guiding
me th ro u g h the research process.
My frie n d s a t UTK who served as my role models and my sup p o rt
system th ro u g h o u t my program also deserve my th a n k s — C a th y , H o ily,
M addy, M a ry , Nancy and S and y. T h e ir love and sense o f humor gave
me a sense o f balance to my life as a doctoral s tu d e n t.
I w ant to acknowledge the love and s u p p o rt I received from my
frie n d H ild re d . He was always th e re for me d u rin g each step o f the
process, w illing to lis te n , serve as a sounding board or to o ffe r gentle
advice when needed.
My fam ily (A n n , Bob, Jean, Joan, M a ry , T h e re s e , Julie and
A u n t S tan ) also provided me w ith encouragem ent, love and financial
su p p o rt th ro u g h o u t th is process. Special thanks to my mother who
places such a high value on education th a t she helped me fin a n c ia lly ,
a fte r paying fo r the college education o f my 6 sisters and b ro th e r.
I wish to th a n k the D epartm ent o f T e x tile s , M erchandising and
Design fo r its su p p o rt of my research th ro u g h the Ida A . Anders
Fellowships.
I also th a n k 50 Plus magazine fo r p ro vid in g me w ith a mailing list
at no c h arg e . T h e y fu rn is h e d me w ith my sample.
ABSTRACT
The purpose o f this s tu d y was to evaluate fashion opinion leader
ship among consumers o v e r f ift y and to id e n tify the dem ographics, life
style dimensions and re ta il patronage behavior o f th e m ature fashion
opinion leader.
A random sample o f 2,003 consumers, ages 50 and over w ere sent
questionnaires re su ltin g in a 35 p ercent re tu rn ra te (n = 711) usable
fo r analysis.
T w e n ty questions using a fiv e point L ik e rt scale w ere used to
determ ine degree of fashion opinion leadership and re ta il patronage
b e h av io r. Factor analysis using the principal components method of
varim ax rotation was used to analyze the 59 lifestyle items to determ ine
which life sty le variables w ere related to each o th e r. Linear models
w ere used to analyze th e life s ty le v a ria b le s , dem ographic and retail
p atronage behavior c h ara c te ris tic s .
Findings indicated th a t the best pred icto rs of fashion opinion
leadership w ere the life s ty le dimensions o f In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C o n fid e n t,
Recreational S hopper, Fashionably Dressed and Community Involvem ent.
Recreational Shopper appears to be a unique c h a ra c te ris tic of the
m ature fashion opinion lead er. Two demographic c h a ra c te ris tic s , sex
and occupation w ere found to be s ig n ific a n t p red icto rs o f fashion opin
ion leadersh ip. Females w ere found to have s ig n ific a n tly h ig h e r fashion
opinion leadership mean scores than males. Business and communication
related occupations had the highest fashion opinion leadership mean
V
scores. In g e n e ra l, the h ig h e r the occupational s ta tu s , th e h ig h e r the
fashion opinion leadership mean score.
Age was s ig n ific a n t only when divided into p r e - and postretirem en t
age (50-64 and 6 5+ ). P ostretirem ent age was in v e rs e ly related to
fashion opinion lead ersh ip . Positive and s ta tis tic a lly s ig n ific a n t
correlations w ere found between fashion opinion leadership and reported
influence o f younger consumers. None o f the retail patronage behavior
ch aracteristics were useful p red icto rs o f fashion opinion leadersh ip.
These fin d in g s show th a t fashion opinion leaders do e x is t in the
m ature consumer segment and th ey do appear to have ch ara c te ris tic s
th a t businesses can id e n tify and use to ta rg e t products and prom otions.
An u n d e rly in g implication is th a t the over 50 consumer is an a fflu e n t
consumer group th a t should not be ignored in m arketing plans and
promotions.
vi
TA B LE OF C O N TEN TS
C H A PTE R PAGE
I. IN T R O D U C T IO N ............................................................................................ 1
C h a ra cte ris tics o f the M ature C o n s u m e r ........................................ 1

Statem ent o f the P r o b l e m ....................................................................... 5
Purposes o f the S tu d y ............................................................................... 5
Justification ................................................................................................. 6
Conceptual F ra m e w o rk ............................................................................... 7
II. REVIEW OF L I T E R A T U R E ...................................' ................................. 12
Retail Patronage Behavior o f the M ature C o n s u m e r.................... 17

L i f e s t y l e .......................................................................................................... 20
S u m m a r y .......................................................................................................... 23
III. RESEARCH M E T H O D O L O G Y .................................................................. 25
Null Hypotheses ........................................................................................ 25

O perational D e f i n i t i o n s ........................................................................... 26
Research D e s i g n ........................................................................................ 27
Field T e s tin g ............................................................................................. 29
Data C o l l e c t i o n ............................................................................................. 30
Data A nalysis P r o c e d u r e s ....................................................................... 31
IV . P R E SE N TA TIO N AND IN T E R P R E T A T IO N OF RESULTS . . . 35
D escription o f R e s p o n d e n ts .................................................................. 35
Developm ent o f the L ifestyle F a c t o r s ............................................. 41
L ife style F a c t o r s ........................................................................................ 42
Retail Patronage B ehavior I n d i c e s ..................................................... 45
Development o f the Fashion Opinion Leadership Index . . . 45
V. SUM M ARY, C O N C LU S IO N S , IM P L IC A T IO N S AND

R E C O M M E N D A T IO N S ............................................................................... 71
S u m m a r y .......................................................................................................... 71
C o n c lu s io n s ............................................. ........................................................ 77
L im it a t i o n s ..................................................................................................... 80
Im p lic a tio n s ..................................................................................................... 81
R e c o m m e n d a tio n s ........................................................................................ 83
L IS T OF R E F E R E N C E S ............................................................................................. 85
A P P E N D IX ....................................................................................................................... 91
V I T A ................................... 109
vii
L IS T OF TABLES
T A B LE PACE
1. 50 Plus S u b s crib e r Profile ....................................................................... 28
2. Demographic C h a racteristics o f R e s p o n d e n ts .................................... 37
3. L ife style Factors E xtracted from L ife style I t e m s ............................ 43
4. A nalysis o f V ariance o f Demographics and

Fashion Opinion L e a d e r s h ip ....................................................................... 48
5. Analysis o f V ariance o f Selected Demographics and

Fashion Opinion L e a d e r s h ip ....................................................................... 48
6. Least Squares Means fo r Sex and Fashion Opinion

L e a d e r s h i p .......................................................................................................... 49
7. Least Squares Means for Occupation and Fashion

Opinion L e a d e r s h ip ........................................................................................ 50
8. Analysis o f V ariance o f S ex, L ife style Factors

and Fashion Opinion L e a d e rs h ip .............................................................. 52
9. Analysis o f V ariance of S ex, Selected L ife style

Factors and Fashion Opinion L e a d e r s h ip ............................................ 52
10. Analysis o f V arian ce o f A g e, Selected L ife style

Factors and Fashion Opinion L e a d e r s h ip ............................................ 53
11. Analysis o f V ariance o f Retail Patronage B ehavior

and Fashion Opinion L e a d e r s h ip .............................................................. 56
12. Analysis o f V arian ce o f Fashion Opinion Leadership

and In -S to re C o n v e n ie n c e ........................................................................... 59
13. A nalysis o f V ariance o f Fashion Opinion Leadership

and P r ic e /Q u a lit y ............................................................................................ 59
14. Analysis o f V arian ce o f Fashion Opinion Leadership

and Special Needs ........................................................................................ 60
15. Analysis o f V ariance o f Fashion Opinion Leadership

and Store Location and M o b i l i t y .............................................................. 60
16. Analysis o f V arian ce o f Demographics by Sex

and Fashion Opinion L e a d e r s h ip .............................................................. 62
viii
TABLE PACE
17. Analysis o f V ariance of L ifestyle by Sex

and Fashion Opinion L e a d e r s h ip ............................................................ 64
18. Analysis o f V ariance o f Demographics by Age

and Fashion Opinion L e a d e r s h ip ............................................................ 66
19. A nalysis o f V ariance o f L ife style by Age and

Fashion Opinion L e a d e r s h ip ...................................................................... 68
20. C orrelation Coefficients fo r Fashion Opinion

Leadership and Reported Influence o f Y ounger
C o n s u m e r s ......................................................................................................... 69
CH A PTE R I
IN T R O D U C T IO N
C h a racteristics o f the M ature Consumer
T h e size o f the population o f o ld er people in the U nited States has
been increasing in both numbers and in percentage of th e total
population since the tu rn of th e c e n tu ry (T im s , 1984). In the
lite ra tu r e , a number of terms are used to re fe r to consumers over 50.
For purposes of this research the term used will be the m ature
consum er. C u r r e n tly , those over 50 number 82.1 million people, or one
of e v e ry 4 Americans (L in d e n , 1986). By the year 2000, projected
g ro w th in this age g roup is expected to be 23 p ercen t compared to
11 p e rce n t fo r the rest of th e population (G ilm an, 1986). T h is will
b rin g th e total population of the m ature consumer to approxim ately
100 million by the y ear 2000, making more than 28 p ercent of the total
U .S . population over 50.
Once th o u g h t to be a g roup c h aracterized by p o v e rty , the actual
p o v e rty ra te for the over 50 consumer is only 12.4 p ercen t (B e rg e r ,
1 985). A verage household income fo r this group is $23,255 w hile fo r
the population as a whole it is $25,211. When taking into consideration
the fact th a t this age g roup is ty p ic a lly fre e from mortgage o bligatio ns,
the p urchasing power o f this g roup's income increases. F ifty p ercent
of homeowners 50-64 have paid o ff th e ir mortgages w ith th a t number
increasing to 80 p ercent in those 65 and o ld e r. Per capita income fo r
2
the o v er 50 population is $10,549 compared to $9,338 fo r th e total U .S .
population (L in d e n , 1986).
T h is segment of the population g roup controls 50 percen t o f all
d is c re tio n a ry personal household income, totallin g $130 billion and
accounts fo r 40 percent o f total consumer demand (L in d e n , 1986). The
d is c re tio n a ry income for households 50 plus is 20 p e rc e n t h ig h e r than
needed to maintain a com fortable stan d ard o f liv in g . F u r th e r , based on
census d a ta , per capita e xp e n d itu re s o f the over 50 y e a r old household
make it the most im portant consumer m arket in th e U .S . to d a y .
E arning and income power are both at a peak and a re spent on new
clo thes, tr a v e l, the th e a te r and din in g out (A lla n , 1 98 1 ). In a d d itio n ,
th is segment o f the population, focusing on s e lf-fu lfillm e n t, will spend
money on fitn e s s , health and new technology designed to make life
easier and more pleasant (S k e lly . 1986).
With such trem endous purchasing power it is not s u rp ris in g th a t
th is g ro u p has been ta rg e te d by a num ber o f in d u stries such as health
c a re , reai estate and insurance companies (P e tre , 1 986). The recent
Senior World's Fair in 1985 held in A tla n tic C ity p rovided 100 major
corporations the o p p o rtu n ity to fe a tu re th e ir products and services to
the o v er 50 consumer (T r a c y , 1 98 5 ). H ow ever, in g e n e ra l, in d u stries
have been slow to ta rg e t th is g ro u p in m arketing e ffo rts of consumer
p ro d u c ts . T h is is ironic because S kelly (1986) suggests th a t the 50
plus consumer may re p re s e n t the segment to ta rg e t as a defense
s tra te g y for branded goods. O lder consumers have been ch aracterized
as "s tra te g ic shoppers" (S k e lly , 1 98 6 ), meaning th a t th e y have
3
experim ented and have selected the brands th e y like and remain loyal to
them . T h u s , for consumer products companies those o v e r 50 represent
a large untapped m arket segment (B iv in s , 1 984). R etailers can be
included among the businesses th a t have la rg e ly ignored this g ro u p .
With only a handful o f excep tio n s, such as Sears Roebuck w ith th e ir
M ature Outlook Club and May D epartm ent S to re s , ob servers indicate
th a t most re ta ile rs re fu s e to acknowledge or ta r g e t th is grow ing
consumer group (B iv in s , 1 98 4 ). A recent s tu d y (C elanese, 1987) found
th a t 60 p ercen t o f ail stores su rveyed had not developed any specific
m arketing or m erchandising program s for consumers o v e r 50. It has
been noted th a t people do not stop w earing clothes d u rin g middle or old
a g e, how ever in glancing th ro u g h c u rre n t fashion magazines it is
d iffic u lt to fin d models w ith whom the m ature consumer could id e n tify
(A lla n , 1981).
While re ta ile rs have la rg e ly ignored this segment o f the population,
fashion opinion leaders a re a segment th a t has received a g re a t deal of
a tte n tio n from them . Opinion leadership is the deg ree to which an
in d ivid u a l is able to influence inform aiiy o th e r in d ivid u a ls a ttitu d e s or
o v e rt behavior in a desired way w ith re la tiv e fre q u e n c y (R o g ers , 1983,
p. 2 7 ). A fashion leader is a person who serves as a source of fashion
inform ation and advice fo r oth er people (S h r a n k , 1 97 3 ). Many attem pts
have been made to id e n tify and p ro file fashion opinion leaders because
th ey re p re s e n t an extrem ely im portant m arket segm ent. Fashion leaders
act as change agents in the d iffu s io n process o f pro d u ct acceptance
(Sum m ers, 1970). Acceptance o f products by fashion leaders increases
4
the likelihood of th e ir acceptance by the general population, which
tran slates into volume sales fo r the re ta ile r. it has been suggested
th a t the 50 plus niche contains many potential opinion leaders, who
serve as an inform ation resource for y o unger consumers. T h e ir
recommendations may prove to be a pow erful influence on the decision
making o f others (S k e lly , 1986, p . 1 7 ).
Allan (1981 , p. 32) has observed " little is known about how life
style p a tte rn s , psychological and a ttitu d in a l sets and environm ental and
physical considerations a ffe c t purchasing decisions of the 55 plus
p o p u latio n ." One problem w ith id e n tify in g c h ara c te ris tic s of the over
50 consumer is th a t it is a heterogeneous g ro u p . Researchers have
divided it into the yo u n g -o ld (5 0 -6 4 ) and the old-old (o v e r 8 5 ), and
active w o rkers v ers u s re tiree s (T r a c y , 1 985). Once th o u g h t to be a
group rid d e n w ith d isabilities and illness, the fact is th a t only a small
number are physically disabled and only 5 p ercent o f those over 55 are
in nursing homes ( M a rketin g New s, Nov. 1985). P etre suggests th a t
mass m arketers who do not get acquainted now w ith the mature
consumer will r e g re t it. By the tu rn of the c e n tu ry today's free
spending "y o u n g -o ld " will be the re tiree s and the 50-65 crow d,
including the oldest baby boomers will be a b ig g e r p a rt of the
population than e v e r before (P e tre , 1986, p. 7 8 ). In o rd e r to b e tte r
serve this population businesses need to understand these
c h a ra c te ris tic s . I f a p ro file of fashion opinion leaders over 50 were
available to re ta ile rs and other consumer p roduct companies, relevan t
ch aracteristics and needs of this group could be iden tified and
5
a p p ro p ria te m arketing stra teg ie s planned and implemented. To date no
em pirical studies have focused on id e n tify in g fashion opinion leaders
among those over 50.
Statem ent o f the Problem
To assist businesses in ta rg e tin g th e ir m arketing e ffo rts to
consumers over 50, the fashion opinion leadership in this age g roup will
be e valu ated . Retail patronage behavior and life sty le c h aracteristics o f
the m ature fashion opinion leader will be id e n tifie d . From these
fin d in g s , a dem ographic and life s ty le p ro file of the m ature fashion
opinion leader will be developed.
Purposes o f the S tu d y
1. To q u a n tify the existence o f opinion leadership in the m ature
consumer segment.
2. To develop a dem ographic and life sty le p ro file of opinion
leaders in this segm ent, id e n tify in g differen ces between male
and female opinion leaders and diffe re n ce s between two age
groups 50-64 and 65-80.
3. To id e n tify retail patronage behavior of m ature opinion
leaders.
4. To determ ine the e x te n t to which m ature opinion leaders re p o rt
influencing younger consumers in th e ir purchasing processes.
6
Justification
A unique o p p o rtu n ity exists fo r an in te rd is c ip lin a ry research
project u tilizin g the disciplines of human ecology, m arketing and
consumer b eh avio r. To m a rk e te rs , those over 50 are a forg o tten
g e n era tio n . While the young are d ilig e n tly p u rs u e d , the no longer
young are larg e ly ignored (L in d e n , 1986). It is amazing th a t a group
this pow erful in both numbers (25 p ercen t o f the population) and in
spending power ($130 billion in d is c re tio n a ry income) has been so
overlooked by businesses.
Research has also ignored this age g ro u p . Studies th a t do focus
on the older consumer usually include only those over 65, ignoring
those 50-64— the most a fflu e n t and active of the m ature consumer
segm ent. The assumptions have been th a t this is a poor, handicapped
or otherw ise im paired g ro u p . S kelly (1985) suggests th a t consumers
o ver 50 conjure up visions of health care products and financial
services.
The m ature consumer has not been ta rg e te d as the sample in
studies on opinion lead ersh ip , most stu d ie s, conducted in the e arly
1970s focused on convenience samples of college students in the 18-22
year old age g ro u p . No studies to date on opinion leadership have
attem pted to p ro file both male and female opinion leaders. All oth er
studies have used single sex samples.
Human ecology w ith its focus on the interaction between humans
and th e ir environm ents can c o n trib u te its unique p e rsp ective in
analyzing the m ature opinion leader's c h ara c te ris tic s and id e n tify in g
7
th e ir needs. T h e re su lts can then be communicated to the businesses
th a t serve them.
Conceptual Framework
D iffusion is the process by which an innovation is communicated
th ro u g h c e rta in channels o v er time among the members of a social
system (R o g e rs , 1983, p . 5 ) . An innovation can be a p ro d u c t, an idea
or a process. It is th ro u g h the diffusion process th a t new ideas,
products and processes are adopted by the members o f a social system .
D iffusion th e o ry focuses on in terpersonal communication w ith in a social
system and how this communication affects the ra te at which innovations
are adopted (C atignon and Robertson, 1985). T h ro u g h interpersonal
communication, v a ry in g levels of personal influence among the members
o f the social system em erge. D iffusion theorists postulate th a t personal
influence is a key fa c to r accounting fo r the shape and speed o f the
d iffu sio n process (G atignon and R obertson, 1985).
The conceptual model used in this research is E. M. Rogers
d iffusion of innovations (see Fig u re 1 ). A model is a symbolic
re p resen tatio n o f the various aspects o f a complex situation and th e ir
in te rrela tio n s h ip s ( L ip p itt , 1973, p. 2 ) . A visual model c la rifie s the
n a tu re of the relationships among situational components.
Rogers (1983) id e n tifies four elements in th e diffu sio n process:
the innovation, communication channels, time and the social system . An
innovation is an idea, object or practice th a t an in d ivid u a l perceives as
being new. Five c h a ra c te ris tic s of innovation have been id e n tifie d :
SOCIAL SYSTEM
Innovation Coiwunication CoHHunication

Channel Channel
relative
advantage Acceptance
Adoption or
sonpatibility mass Hedia Hass ledia Rejection
;?iL Innovation
sonplexity knowledge
of innovation
trialahility hflnterpersonal hInnovation
jftservability Innovators
Opinion leaders
11in;
FIGURE 1
D IF F U S IO N OF IN N O V A TIO N S
Source: Rogers: Diffusion o f Innovations, 1983

Visual model and adaptations by P. Huddleston
9
re la tiv e a d va n ta g e , co m p atib ility , com plexity, tr ia la b ility , and
o b s e rv a b ility . The degree to which an innovation possesses each o f
these c h ara c te ris tic s determ ines how q u ic k ly an innovation will spread
th ro u g h o u t a social system . Communication channels re fe r to the ways
in which messages are sent from a source to a re c e iv e r. These
channels can be d ivid ed into two d iffe re n t typ es: mass media and
in terpersonal communications. Tim e also affects the diffusion process
and re fe rs to the in te rv a l re q u ire d fo r an innovation to spread th ro u g h
a social system . A social system is defined by Rogers (1983, p. 24) as
a set of in te rre la te d un its th a t are engaged in jo in t problem solving to
achieve a common goal. T h e social s tru c tu re , communication s tru c tu re
and norms of the social system have the potential to facilitate or
o b s tru c t the diffu sio n o f innovations w ithin a p a rtic u la r social system.
Mass media is the communication channel g e n era lly used by
companies to introduce and promote new products or ideas to persuade
consumers to make th e in itial purchases. H ow ever, mass media alone is
not responsible for the spread o f an innovation thro u g h o u t an e n tire
social system . In te rp ers o n a l communication is believed to be v ita l to
the success or fa ilu re o f an innovation to spread th ro u g h o u t a social
system . Once the mass media has been used to introduce the
in n o vatio n , Rogers (1983) has observed th a t w ithin any social system
th e re are in d ivid u a ls who will adopt innovations more ra p id ly than
o th e rs . T h e re are also in d ivid u als who influence the decisions o f other
members of the social system as to w hether or not to adopt or re je c t an
in no vation. T h e fir s t ty p e o f individual is defined as an innovator or
10
the fir s t 2 .5 p ercent of a population to adopt an innovation (R o g ers ,
1 983). T h e second ty p e o f in d iv id u a l, an opinion lea d e r, is defined as
someone who is able to influence oth er in d ivid u a l's a ttitu d e s or o v e rt
behavior inform ally in a desired way w ith re la tiv e fre q u e n cy (R o g e rs ,
1983, p . 2 7 ). A p rim ary d iffe re n c e between opinion leaders and
innovators is th a t opinion leaders tend to conform to societal norm s, are
p erceived to be knowledgeable about the innovation and are easy to
communicate w ith . Innovators tend to be less conforming and less
communicative than opinion leaders. It is the degree and q u a lity of
communication between opinion leaders and followers th a t e ith e r
facilitates or halts the diffu sio n o f innovations. When opinion leaders
do not adopt an innovation, th e likelihood o f its success is minimal. If
opinion leaders do e x e rt disp ro p o rtio n ate influence on other in d ivid u a ls,
then id e n tify in g them and persuading them to adopt a new p roduct
becomes im portant to the o rig in ato rs o f the innovation. As Zaltman and
S tiff (1973, p . 427) suggest: the opinion leadership concept is an
appealing one fo r those managing the diffu sio n of innovations. If
opinion leaders e xis t and can be id e n tifie d , th ey re p re s e n t a point of
communication leverage or m ultiplication in promoting the innovation.
F u r th e r , Rogers (1983) postulates th a t new ideas will d iffu s e most
fre q u e n tly between individuals who are alik e (hom ophilous). H ow ever,
o th er research (G ra n o v e tte r, 1973) indicates th a t homophily may act as
a b a r rie r to diffusion and suggests th a t in some instances, new ideas
will e n te r a social system th ro u g h individuals o f h ig h e r social status
(h e te ro p h ilo u s ). It thus becomes im portant to determ ine w hether
11
opinion leaders tend to influence people who are sim ilar or d iffe r e n t
from them in areas such as social class, occupational status and
life s ty le .
One o f fo u r methods can be used to id e n tify opinion leaders. The
sociometric method asks members of a social system to id e n tify the
person th e y would be most lik e ly to seek inform ation from about a
p a rtic u la r topic. Opinion leaders a re the people chosen most fre q u e n tly
by the others in the social system . T h is method is applicable only
when all the members o f th e social system can be in te rv ie w e d .
Key inform ant method is somewhat sim ilar to th e sociometric
m ethod. Opinion leaders are id e n tifie d by people who a re v e ry
know ledgeable about the communication flow in a p a rtic u la r social
system . A g a in , the key inform ant method is applicable only when the
social system is small enough fo r the key inform ants to know e ve ry o n e.
The s e lf-d e s ig n a tin g -s e lf-re p o rt method asks th e respondents to
indicate how much influence th e y th in k th e y have on others' decisions
about a p a rtic u la r topic. T h is method is used w ith la rg e , random
samples o f a population.
O bservation is the fo u rth method o f id e n tify in g opinion leaders.
An in v es tig a to r id en tifies and records the communication behavior in a
social system (R o g e rs , 1983, p . 2 8 0 ). T h is method w orks only in a
v e ry small social system.
12
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LIT E R A T U R E
A review of lite ra tu re will be presented fo r th e follow ing:
(1 ) opinion lea d e rs h ip , (2 ) re ta il patronage b eh avio r of th e m ature
consumer and (3 ) life s ty le .
Those over 50 have seldom been included as p a rt o f th e sample in
research dealing w ith fashion opinion lea d e rsh ip . Most studies
conducted in the e a rly 1970s focused on convenience samples of college
stud ents in the 18-22 y e a r old age g ro u p . An overview o f existing
dem ographic and life s ty le profiles of fashion leaders will now be
p resen ted .
In th e ir investigation o f characteristics o f fashion innovativeness
and fashion leadership of female college s tu d e n ts , S chrank and Gilmore
(1973) found fashion leaders to have a positive a ttitu d e tow ard
conform ity in dress and to have a high in te re s t in c lo th in g .
Innovativeness and fashion leadership were s ig n ific a n tly re la te d . In
th is s tu d y , fashion leaders w ere found to e x is t across socioeconomic
g ro u p s , but fashion leadership was not s ig n ific a n tly related to
socioeconomic level.
Summers (1970) found th a t fashion leaders w ere concentrated in
segments th a t had h ig h e r income and occupational s ta tu s . O rg an iza
tional and social a c tiv itie s w ere found to be strong determ inants of
fashion lead ersh ip . Fashion involvem ent was found to be one o f the
s tro ngest v a ria b le s e ts , w ith opinion leaders concentrated among those
13
who enjoyed testin g and experim enting w ith new clothing fashions.
O th e r demographic ch ara c te ris tic s found to be re ie v a n t to fashion
leadership include ag e, m arital s ta tu s , education, and area of
residence. Summers found th a t 38 percen t of fashion leaders were
u n d er 29, 31 p ercen t w ere 3 0 -3 9 , 26 p ercen t w ere 4 0 -5 0 , while only
21 percent w ere over 50. T h ir ty -s ix p ercen t o f the fashion leaders had
one or more years o f college (Sum m ers, 1970). Fashion leaders were
more like ly to live in urban areas and w ere more like ly to be single.
Polegato and Wall (1980) found m arital status and fashion
leadership to be s ig n ific a n tly re la te d , w ith almost all o f the m arried
respondents being fashion lead ers, a fin d in g th a t conflicts w ith
Summers (1 9 7 0 ). T h e m ajority of fashion leaders lived in urban areas.
No relationship between fashion leadership and socioeconomic status was
found (Polegato and Wall, 1980).
In a s tu d y of u n iv e rs ity women, M yers (1971) found th a t a h ig h ly
sig n ific a n t and positive relationship existed among fashion adoption,
fashion opinion leadership and favorableness tow ard new s tyles. For
opinion lead ers, emulation and d iffe re n tia tio n o ccurred w ithin ra th e r
than between socioeconomic ievels. M arital s ta tu s , year in u n iv e rs ity
and socioeconomic status w ere not pred icto rs of fashion leadership.
Reynolds and D arden (1972) found in te re s t, media exposure and
gregariousness to c o rrela te s ig n ific a n tly w ith opinion leadership of
suburban housewives from A tla n ta , G eorgia. G eneralized s elf
confidence, inform ation seeking and magazine re ad e rs h ip were the best
pred icto rs of opinion leadership for this sample.
14
In th e ir study of male fashion leaders (D a rd e n and Reynolds,
1 9 7 2 ), found fashion in te re s t and fashion venturesom eness to be good
p red icto rs of fashion leadersh ip. While generalized self confidence,
co g n itive s ty le , re la tiv e p o p u la rity and color consciousness w ere not
p red icto rs of fashion leadersh ip. In another s tu d y o f male fashion
lead ers, Baum garten (1 9 7 5 ), found them to have many sim ilarities to
th e ir female c o u n te rp a rts . T h ey also tended to be more socially a c tiv e ,
more appearance conscious, had high fashion involvem ent, and spent
more money on clothing than nonleaders.
S elf m onitoring, the degree to which in d ivid u als monitor the way in
which th ey p resen t themselves in social s itu atio n s, was found to
influence the degree of fashion opinion leadership in a study o f 50
female college students (D avis and Lennon, 1985). This relationship
can perhaps be explained by the fa c t th a t people who are high in s elf
m onitoring behavior are more sensitive to situational cues. T h e re fo re ,
th e y tend to be more aware o f th e ir own clothing in relation to others'
clothing in social situations and are also more aware o f the e x te n t to
which th ey influence others' clothing b eh avio r.
F u rth e r analysis o f this sample revealed th a t cognitive com plexity
and fashion opinion leadership w ere also re la te d . Lennon and Davis
(1987) investig ated cognitive com plexity in relation to fashion opinion
leadership and fashion innovativeness. C onsistent w ith the findings o f
o th e r studies (S c h ra n k and Gilm ore, 1 97 3 ), fashion opinion leadership
and fashion innovativeness were positively c o rre la te d . Fashion opinion
leadership and cognitive com plexity w ere in v ers ely related indicating
15
th a t fashion opinion lead ers, being lower in c o g n itive com plexity, were
concerned w ith conform ing to g ro u p norms.
Fashion opinion leadership has been examined in two cross c u ltu ra l
s e ttin g s . Chow dhary (1934) found female fashion opinion leaders in
India to have g re a te r media e x p o s u re , h ig h e r social p a rticip a tio n and a
more positive a ttitu d e tow ard change than nonleaders. Education and
income w ere not s ig n ific a n t p re d icto rs of opinion lead ersh ip . A c tiv itie s
and ideas which w ere more in d iv id u a lis tic , such as a tten d in g parties
and s erv in g on committees, w ere engaged in more often by opinion
leaders than nonleaders.
An investigation o f the c h ara c te ris tic s of Korean fashion opinion
leaders indicated th a t fashion opinion leadership and a ttitu d e s tow ard
change were s ig n ific a n tly c o rre la te d , w ith opinion leaders expressing a
p ositive a ttitu d e tow ard change (Kim and S c h ra n k , 1982). Comparing
American and Korean fashion leaders produced a sim ilar relationship
between fashion opinion leadersh ip and a ttitu d e tow ard change. Both
the American and Korean samples e xh ib ite d more positive a ttitu d e s
tow ard change than nonleaders. S ig n ific a n t d iffe re n ce s w ere also found
fo r socioeconomic scale and opinion leadership fo r both the American
and Korean samples (S c h ra n k , Sugawara and Kim, 1982).
In his stu d y o f black female opinion lea d e rs, Tat (1984) found
fashion leaders to be s ig n ific a n tly d iffe r e n t than nonleaders on fashion
in te re s t and media exp o s u re , w ith both social and personal sources of
inform ation being w idely used by th e opinion leaders. Opinion leaders
and nonleaders did not d iffe r s ig n ific a n tly on dem ographics.
16
Opinion leadership appears to be a two way process w ith opinion
leaders being influenced by others (M yers and R obertson, 1972).
H ow ever, in this s tu d y , opinion leadership and social a c tiv ity w ere not
found to be re la te d . Social leadership and opinion leadership also had
v e ry low c o rrela tio n s . Moderate correlations of opinion leadership w ith
discussion, know ledge, and in te re s t factors in topic areas o f opinion
leadership w ere found.
T h e relationship between opinion seekers and opinion leaders was
examined in a telephone s u rv e y o f male and female heads o f households
in Pennsylvania and the su rro u n d in g states (F e ic k , Price and H ig ie,
1 98 6 ). Opinion seekers use knowledgeable individuals to fin d out about
or evaluate p ro d u c ts . F o rty -s ix p e rce n t o f the sample w ere found to
be opinion lea d e rs, 42 p ercent opinion seekers. Opinion seekers were
more like ly to seek out and d iffu s e m arketplace inform ation than other
respond ents. A pproxim ately tw o -th ird s o f the opinion seekers w ere also
opinion leaders in a p ro d u c t c a te g o ry . T h is fin d in g provides support
for the concept o f the opinion leader as an inform ation e x c h a n g e r.
An unresolved issue re g a rd in g opinion leadership appears to be
th a t of g e n e ra liza b ility across p ro d u c t g roups. Rogers and Cartano
(1962) postulate th a t th e re is little overlap among the d iffe r e n t types of
opinion leaders. H ow ever, King and Summers (1970) found opinion
leadership to overlap across p ro d u c t categories, w ith hig h est overlap
o c cu rrin g between pro d u ct categories which involve sim ilar in te re s ts .
M yers and Robertson (1969, 1972) found some overlap w ith sim ilar
17
in te res ts but no system atic relationship o f opinion leadership across
p ro d u ct categories.
Retail Patronage Behavior of the M ature Consumer
T h e m ajority o f studies o f re ta il patronage behavior of the m ature
consumer have focused on the e ld e rly consum er, defined as a consumer
over 65 years o f age. No studies th a t focused on the re ta il patronage
b ehavior of consumers between 50-64 were found.
A stu d y of 403 re tire d consumers revealed th a t older buyers
seemed to welcome special tre a tm en t from re ta ile rs , such as re ta ile rs
who made a special e ffo rt to ta rg e t re tirem en t age people. H ow ever,
the respondents in this stu d y did not re p o rt behavior th a t suggested a
need fo r special tre a tm e n t. Changes of re tirem en t age w ere not
responsible fo r the b u y in g behavior o f this sample. Based on the
fin d in g s , feeling valued as a re tirem e n t age shopper was im portant to
the 65 plus consumer (G e lb , 1978).
Mason and Bearden (1978) conducted a series of personal
in terview s w ith e ld e rly (65+) consumers to investigate th e ir shopping
behavior and th e ir food purchasing p a tte rn s . They found th a t the
e ld e rly often use shopping as a form of recreation or as an o p p o rtu n ity
to socialize or e xe rc is e . While mass media was used as an inform ation
source for shopping, personal exp e rien ce , or the advice of frie n d s or
relatives more often w ere used as a guide to purchasing decisions.
Almost all o f th is sample comparison shopped and w ere loyal to story."
18
th a t o ffere d senior c itizen discounts. O ver 80 p e rce n t of the sample
fe lt th a t m erchants w ere honest and tru s tw o rth y in dealing w ith them.
N in ety p e rc e n t of the 354 older consumers in a sample of
Washington D .C . residents were found to have purchased at least one
item of clothing in the past year (T o n g re n , 1 98 1 ). F u r th e r , in
exam ining w h eth er the 65+ consumer was able to fu lfill th e ir desire for
new c lo th in g , over half o f the sample reported being able to purchase
the clothing they w an ted . By c o n tra s t, only 6 p e rce n t o f the sample
had purchased major appliances in the past y e a r. While the m ajority o f
the respondents indicated th a t th ey wished to replace an appliance,
o n e -th ird expressed a reluctance to do so because the old one still
w orked.
Lam bert's (1979) investigation of older consumers' unmet needs at
the re ta il level indicated th a t the 55 plus consumer wanted senior
citizen discounts to apply to a w ider v a rie ty o f p ro d u c ts . T h e y desired
more courteous treatm en t and more assistance in locating products from
sales personnel. Stores need to provide more complete and readable
directories', price tags and labels. Increased tra n s p o rta tio n services to
and from the store w ith more convenient p a rk in g and entrances
provided for those who do d riv e w ere other needs expressed by the 55+
consumer.
In a stu d y o f over 3,000 e ld e rly consumers, Lum pkin et a l. (1985)
found th a t the fiv e most d eterm inant a ttrib u te s e ld e rly shoppers used
when shopping fo r w earing apparel were: (1 ) a b ility to re tu rn
u n s atisfa c to ry p ro d u c ts , (2 ) pro d u ct q u a lity , (3 ) a ttra c tiv e p rices.
19
(9 ) styles and sizes suited to ag e, and (5 ) store re p u ta tio n . A b ility to
re tu rn u n s atisfa c to ry products and styles and sizes suited to age w ere
d eterm inant fo r all age groups (u n d e r 59, 6 0 -6 4 , 65-74 and 7 5 + ). In
g e n e ra l, the yo u n g -o ld placed a g re a te r determ inance on p ric e s , sales,
and v a rie ty in the s to re s , while older consumers wanted knowledgeable
salespeople. T h is sample rated th e physical aspects o f a retail store
(i.e ., wide aisles, re s t area in sto re) low re la tiv e to the oth er store
a ttr ib u te s . While m eaningful d iffe re n ce s among store a ttrib u te s were
found to e x is t, in g e n e ra l, the e ld e rly do not re q u ire or want store
a ttrib u te s th a t are d iffe re n t from the re s t o f the population.
Situational c o n te xt ( g if t shopping vs. personal shopping, time
p ressu re v s. no time p re s s u re ) was found to influence store choice and
store a ttrib u te saliences in a stu d y of 120 a d u lt women (M attson , 1 982).
For g ift shoppers, salesperson a tte n tio n , re tu rn policies and p restige
brands are the most salient store a ttrib u te s . When shopping fo r
them selves, female consumers consider price and sizes c a rrie d by the
store to be more salient a ttrib u te s . The results indicated th a t
situational con text should be taken into consideration in models o f store
choice.
A stu d y o f the relationship between store image c h ara c te ris tic s and
actual p roduct store choice examined the im portance o f 5 store image
c h ara c te ris tic s (c o n v en ie n c e/s to re location, p ric e , w a rra n ty policies,
salesperson e xp e rtis e and v a rie ty of m erchandise) to departm ent and
specialty store custom ers (S ch iffm an , Dash and D illo n , 1977).
D epartm ent store customers placed more significance on location and
20
g u a ran tee policies, while specialty store custom ers emphasized
salesperson e x p e rtis e and v a rie ty of m erchandise. Price was on!'/ of
lim ited value in discrim inating between these types o f custom ers.
L ifestyle
L ife style can be defined as a way of livin g shaped by personal
values and experien ces. L ife style c h ara c te ris tic s enable m arketers to
b e tte r d is tin g u ish between d iffe re n t groups w ithin a society by
p ro v id in g a p ro file of th e ir p a tte rn s of liv in g — w ork h a b its , d aily
a c tiv itie s , in terests and s e lf-p e rc e p tio n s . These c h ara c te ris tic s are
said to "add flesh to the bones of dem ographic consumer profiles"
(Douglas and U rb a n , 1977), p ro v id in g a more complete u n d e rstan d in g of
the consum er. The elements of a consumer's life s ty le are believed to
influence p references which in tu rn guide goal form ation and decision
making (S c h u tz , Baird and H aw kes, 1 97 9 ). If m a rketers b e tte r
u n d e rstan d w hat m otivates consumer p re fe re n c e s , then products and
promotions can be ta rg e te d more e ffe c tiv e ly .
L ife style can be measured in several w ays. A c tiv itie s , in te res ts
and opinions (A id s ) can be evaluated as a reflection o f a consumer's
life s ty le . A backw ard p ro file can be done by a n alyzin g a consumer's
purchases and then in fe rrin g a life s ty le from these purchases.
Sometimes perso n ality tra its will be used to measure life s ty le , although
g e n e ra lly research of th is n a tu re is re fe rre d to as psychographic
research (W ells, 1974). By fa r the most common approach is th e A IO
in v e n to ry .
21
M arketing researchers have adopted life sty le research d u rin g the
last two decades because it perm its the use o f la rg e , random samples
ra th e r than reliance on smaller focus group d ata. This increases the
g e n e ra liza b ility o f the fin d in g s to a population la rg e r than the sample.
Because responses to life s ty le items are expressed on a num eric scale
( L i k e r t ) , the results o f this ty p e o f research produces q u a n tita tiv e data
th a t can be analyzed by more sophisticated statistical methods such as
factor analysis, regression and analysis of v arian ce.
Besides its advantages as a research tool, life sty le c h aracteristics
are useful to m arketers in a number o f w ays. Most fre q u e n tly , they
are used for segmentation purposes— e ith e r to describe existing
segments in terms o f brand p re fe ren c e or how consumers choosing one
b rand d iffe r from consumers choosing a n o th er. T h e y can be used to
create new m arket segments by id e n tify in g how c u r re n t life sty le
p a tte rn s are not being served by p roduct o ffe rin g s (id e n tify in g
m arketing o p p o rtu n itie s ) (W ells, 1 974). For exam ple, Cosmas (1974)
found th a t a relationship exists between a consumer's life sty le and
overall pro d u ct assortm ent decisions. L ifestyle c lu sterin g of the sample
of 1 ,797 consumers produced 7 d is tin c t g ro u p s , each w ith unique
p ro du ct assortm ent emphases. To illu s tra te . T ra d itio n a lis ts (life s ty le
g ro u p ) placed a high w eig h t on cooking, baking and s h e lf stocking
p ro du ct assortm ent c lu s te rs . Because the T ra d itio n a lis t group placed
an emphasis on women as homemakers, th e ir life sty le is reflected in
th e ir consumption.
22
Media decisions and a d v e rtis in g campaigns are often based, in
p a r t, on the life s ty le characteristics of the ta r g e t segm ent. Using the
p ro file o f the ta rg e t m a rk e t, the media m ix, message, language, s ty le ,
settings and casts are chosen to reach the intended audience.
O th e r uses o f the results of life s ty le research include product
positioning and repositioning in the m a rk e t, emphasizing selected
p ro d u ct featu res w hile dow nplaying o th e rs . D ifferences in retail
patronage behavior can also be id en tified by life s ty le ch ara c te ris tic s.
Reynolds and D arden (1974) used life s ty le c h ara c te ris tic s as a means of
id e n tify in g store loyal custom ers. Results of the s tu d y of 1 ,099 female
homemakers revealed th a t store loyal customers tended not to be opinion
leaders, w ere not venturesom e, urban orien ted or c re d it users. They
w ere time conscious and entertain m en t media u s ers . These findings
sup p o rt using life s ty le ch ara c te ris tic s in id e n tify in g differences in retail
patronage b e h av io r.
Wells (1974) suggests th a t life s ty le dimensions can be used to
u n derstand innovativeness and opinion lead ersh ip . H ow ever, only one
stud y could be found th a t investigated this relationship specifically. In
th e ir comparison o f Am erican and Canadian female consumers, T ig e rt
and A rnold (1971) found th a t the s e lf-d es ig n a te d opinion leader
depended on an in terp erso n al netw ork of communication for inform ation
and was an inform ation exc h a n g e r. Opinion leaders w ere also dynam ic,
having above average levels of s elf-confidence and independence.
O th er life s ty le d e scrip to rs included: p rice consciousness.
23
in no vativeness, in te re s t in the a r ts , fashio n, cooking and tra v e l.
Opinion leaders w ere found to be sociable and active in the community.
While perso n ality ch ara c te ris tic s were g e n era lly not good p redicto rs
o f opinion lea d e rsh ip , two studies examined psychographic (p e rs o n a lity )
c h ara c te ris tic s and opinion leadersh ip. In a s tu d y o f 389 male u n d e r
g ra d u a te s , King and Sproles (1973) found th a t psychological variables
w ere not as good p red icto rs of opinion leadership as w ere sociological
and fashion involvem ent v a ria b le s . H ow ever, several psychological
c h a ra c te ris tic s — narcissism , greg ario u sn ess, s tu d e n t activism and
nonindividualism w ere found to overlap in p re d ic tin g opinion leadership
and innovativeness.
In th e ir exam ination o f Canadian female college s tu d e n ts , B re tt and
Kernaleguen (1975) found th a t opinion leadership was not related to
field dependence (re lia n c e on the environm ental fie ld ). Opinion leaders
rep o rted a s ig n ific a n tly lower level of fa c ilita tin g a n x ie ty , suggesting
th a t opinion leaders m ight try to influence others to bolster
s elf-co n c e p t.
Summary
Fashion opinion lead ersh ip , a concept postulating th a t some
consumers e x e rt a disproportionate influence over the behavior of
o th e rs , has been w idely s tu d ie d , using college students or the
25-44 y e a r old consumer as the sample. With the m ature consumer
becoming a more im portant dem ographic segment from an economic
24
s ta n d p o in t, it becomes necessary to examine th e e x te n t to which fashion
opinion leadership exists in this g ro u p .
Studies of re ta il patronage behavior of the e ld e rly consumer
revealed th a t older consumers have d is tin c t and id e n tifiab le shopping
p a tte rn s . H ow ever, the need for special tre a tm e n t due solely to age
was not in d ica te d .
L ife s ty le has been used successfully to p ro file consum ers, develop
b e n e fit segm ents, ta rg e t promotions and develop new p ro d u c ts .
Exam ining the retail patronage behavior and life s ty le c h ara c te ris tic s o f
m ature opinion leaders should pro vid e v alu a b le insights into th e needs
o f th is im portant dem ographic g ro u p .
25
CHA PTER Hi
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Presented in this ch ap ter are (1 ) hypotheses, (2 ) operational
d e fin itio n s , (3 ) research design including the selection and developm ent
o f m easures, sample selection and sample size, (4 ) collection o f data and
(5 ) data analysis procedu res.
Null Hypotheses
Based on the preceding review of lite ra tu r e , the following
hypotheses have been form ulated:
1. No s ig n ific a n t relationship exists between fashion opinion
leadership o f m ature consumers and:
a. demographics
b. life sty le
c. re ta il patronage behavior
2. Retail patronage behavior o f m ature consumers is not a p re
d ic to r o f fashion opinion leadersh ip.
3. G ender o f m ature fashion opinion leaders is not related to:
a. demographics
b. life sty le
4. M ature fashion opinion leaders 50-64 do not d iffe r from m ature
fashion opinion leaders 65-80 on:
a. demographics
26
b. life sty le
5. No co rrelation exists between fashion opinion leadership and
reported influence o f y o u n g e r consumers.
O perational D efinitions
Fashion opinion leadersh ip: The degree to which respondents
re p o rt th a t th ey influence o th e rs ' a ttitu d e s or behavior tow ard fashions
or new products (Section 1 , items 1 -2 0 ). Measured by summing items
1-20 Section 4. H ighest possible score is 100, lowest possible score is
20.
Demographics: M arital s ta tu s , ag e, g e n d e r, income, sources of
income, educational le v e l, geographic regio n, occupation (Section 5,
items 1 -1 1 ).
Lifestyle: Respondents' p ro file o f a c tiv itie s , interests and opinions
based on th e ir responses to items 1-59 in Section 2.
Retail patronage b e h av io r— The store c h aracteristics id en tified as
im portant by the respondents (Section 1, items 1 -2 0 ). These 20 items
are assigned equal lin ear w eights and added to a rriv e at the following
indices: In -S to re Convenience and Physical Environm ent— Items 6 , 7, 9
and 15; Store Location and M o b ility — Items 10, 11, 12, 14 and 19;
P ric e /Q u a lity R elationship— Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 16, 17, 18 and 20;
Special Needs— Items 8 and 13.
27
Research Design
T h e s u rv e y research method was used to pro vid e both a d e sc rip
tion and analysis o f m ature fashion opinion leaders.
Sample Selection
A mailing list of 2003 was random ly selected from the 446,000
su bscribers to 50 Plus magazine to be used in th e s tu d y . 50 Plus is a
news and service magazine fo r and about a c tiv e , a fflu e n t older men and
women. It ta rg e ts the population o f in te re s t— consumers over 50 years
of age and focuses on enjoying the "m ature years" and planning fo r an
a ctive retirem en t ( 50 F-ius M a rk et Research, 1986). T a b le 1 presents a
p ro file of the 50 Plus s u b s c rib e r.
In stru m en t
The self adm inistered 15 page questionnaire was d ivid ed into fiv e
sections (see a p p e n d ix ). T h e design o f the questionnaire was based on
the Total Design Method described by Dillman (1 9 7 8 ). Section 1
focused on the store services or ch ara c te ris tic s deemed im portant by
the respondent and th e degree to which the store th e y most fre q u e n tly
shop is th o u g h t to possess these c h a ra c te ris tic s . D egree o f importance
was represented by a 5 point L ik e rt Scale. Degree to which the store
is th oug ht to possess these ch ara c te ris tic s is rep resented by a 3 point
L ik e rt Scale. T h is section is an adaptation of Lum pkin, C re en b u rg and
C old stu cker's (1985) measure of retail patronage behavior of the
e ld e rly .
28
T a b le 1 . 50 Plus S u b s crib e r P rofile
C h a ra c te ris tic P ercent
Sex
Female 63%
Male 37%
Age
u n d er 50 2.3%
50-54 9.8%
55-64 46.3%
65 and o v er 41 .6%
M arital S tatus
M arried 66.2%
Single 5.2%
Widowed 19.3%
D iv o rce d /S ep a ra te d 9.3%
Income
less than $10,000 10.6%
10,0 0 0 -1 4 ,9 9 9 9.8%
1 5 ,0 00 -1 9 ,99 9 9.4%
2 0 ,0 0 0 -2 4 ,9 9 9 11.5%
2 5,0 0 0 -4 9 ,9 9 9 41.0%
5 0 ,0 0 0 -7 4 ,9 9 9 12.0%
7 5,0 0 0 -9 9 ,9 9 9 2.9%
100,000 or more 2.8%
Homeownership
Homeowners 84.3%
Renters 12.6%
Unknown 3.7%
Education
A tten d ed College 45.0%
College G raduate 25.0%
A verage Household Size 2.1 adults
29
Section 2 had 59 statements re g a rd in g the respondent's a c tiv itie s ,
in te res ts and opinions and asked fo r degree o f agreem ent or disagree
ment w ith each statem ent based on a 6 point L ik e rt scale. This section
was a m odification o f R eynolds, C ra sk and Wells (1977) and Lum pkin,
G reenberg and G oldstucker's (1985) life s ty le measures. Lumpkin et al.
(1985) designed th e ir life s ty le measure specifically fo r the 65 plus
consum er.
Section 3 measured th e fre q u e n cy which the respondent p a rtic i
pated in a v a rie ty o f a c tiv itie s . T h is was taken from Reynolds e t ai.
(1977) and Cassill (1 9 8 6 ).
Section 4 consisted of a 20 item opinion leadership scale, a
m odification o f S chrank and Gilmore's (1973) opinion leadersh ip scale.
Respondents w ere esked to indicste th e ir d ecree of ec]reement or
disagreem ent w ith each statem ent based on a 5 point L ik e rt Scale.
Section 5 consisted o f 11 dem ographic questions concerning age,
income, occupational s ta tu s , education, geographic region and number
in household. It also contained a statem ent requesting the respondents
to g ive th e name and address o f the person th e y most often seek advice
from before purchasing a new p ro d u c t.
Field T e stin g
The q uestionnaire was field tested w ith 73 female and 27 male
consumers over the age of 50. None w ere members o f the final sample.
Four groups w ere used: (1 ) T h e K noxville Home Economists in
Homemaking, K n o x v ilie , Tennessee, (2 ) T h e Cedar B lu ff C h a p te r o f the
American Association o f R e tire d Persons, K n o x v ille , Tennessee, (3 ) The
30
U n iv e rs ity of Tennessee Retirees Association, The U n iv e rs ity of
T ennessee, K n o xville, Ten nessee, and the (4 ) Women's L ite ra tu re
C ro u p . Field testing was u n d e rta ke n to insure th a t the instru m en t was
readable and th a t the in stru ctio n s w ere c le a r. In a d d itio n , it was
necessary to id e n tify if any form at modifications were needed and to
determ ine the time needed to complete the q u e stio n n aire . The final
q uestionnaire was revised based on the recommendations from th e field
te s t and the results o f a facto r analysis o f the 101 life sty le items. The
facto r analysis was completed as an item reduction tool, reducing the
101 o riginal items to 59.
Data Collection
The data were collected via a mail questionnaire. The
s e lf-a d m in is te re d , precoded qu estio n n aire was sent to 2003 consumers
via f ir s t class mail. P rinted in booklet form (8 1/2 " x 11") on b u ff
20 lb paper w ith black in k , each questionnaire had the U n iv e rs ity of
Tennessee seal and the title o f the stu d y p rin te d on the fro n t page.
T h e y w ere stamped w ith an in d ivid u a l iden tificatio n number (1 -2 ,0 0 3 ) on
the up p er rig h t hand corner so th a t the re tu rn e d questionnaire could
be checked o ff the mailing lis t. Enclosed w ith the questionnaire was a
cover le tte r , p rin te d on departm ental s ta tio n e ry , explainin g the purpose
of the s tu d y . Also enclosed in this packet was a business re p ly
envelope fo r the respondents to re tu rn the in s tru m en t. A two week
response deadline was re q u e s te d , w ith a follow -up postcard sent to
nonrespondents two weeks a fte r the initial m ailing.
31
The purpose o f th e iden tificatio n number was explained in the
co ver le tte r. Dillman (1978) recommends placing the ID num ber in a
c o rn e r o f the title page in case the respondent decides to c u t o ff the
n um ber. T h is insures th a t data w on't be lost. As an incentive to
complete the q u e stio n n aire , a summary o f the results was o ffere d to the
resp ond ents, if th e y requested it . T h is research was exem pt from
review by the Committee on Research Participation which approves
projects involving human subjects (A p p e n d ix ).
Data A nalysis Procedures
The responses of the subjects w ere tra n s fe rre d to data disks
which w ere read into the com puter fo r analysis. S tatistical analyses
used w ere fre q u e n cy d is trib u tio n s , principal components facto r analysis
w ith varim ax ro ta tio n , and regression analysis.
1. Percentages and fre q u e n cy d is trib u tio n s of th e demographic
v aria b les were used to determ ine the characteristics o f th e sample.
2. A SAS com puter program for principal components method o f
facto r analysis w ith varim ax rotation (S ta tis tica l A nalysis Systems
M anual, 1985) was perform ed on the 59 life s ty le items (Section 2,
items 1-59) to determ ine which variables were related to each o th e r.
Factor analysis is a method fo r determ ining the number and n a tu re of
u n d e rly in g variables among large numbers o f measures (K e r lin g e r, 1964,
p . 6 5 0 ). It was used as a data reduction technique fo r the life sty le
items. The fir s t step in facto r analysis is to g en erate a correlation
m atrix and then facto r analysis was computed to c lu s te r v ariab les th a t
32
c o rre la te w ith each o th e r. T h e objective o f p rin cip al components factor
analysis is to tra n s fo rm a set o f in te rre la te d v ariab les into a set of
u n re late d or u n c o rrela te d combinations o f these v a ria b le s . Factors are
selected so th a t each item or component it contains accounts fo r a
decreasing p roportion o f the v aria n ce in the o rig in al v ariab les (i.e .,
the fir s t p rin cip al component rep resen ts the larg e s t amount o f variance
in th e d a ta , the second rep resen ts the second larg e s t and so o n ). The
results of p rin cip al component analysis include all the eigenvalues fo r
all the variables and a p a tte rn m atrix fo r eigenvalues g re a te r than one.
O nly factors w ith eigenvalues g re a te r than one w ere retained fo r
fu r th e r analysis.
V arim ax rotation is a method o f orthogonal rotation which simplifies
th e facto r s tru c tu re by maximizing the v arian ce o f a column o f the
p a tte rn m atrix (Kim and M u e ller, 1978, p . 7 9 ). O rthagonal rotations
m aintain the independence o f fa c to rs . Both p rin c ip a l components and
varim ax rotation produce a m atrix of fa c to r loadings, which range from
- 1 .0 to + 1 .0 , and express the degree o f c o rrelatio n between an item and
the factor (K e rlin g e r , 1 96 4 ). Factors w ith eigenvalues g re a te r than one
w ere retained fo r fu r th e r analysis. Factor scores w ere then generated
by a SAS score program using the raw data and combining it w ith the
facto r loadings to compute w eights for each item in the fa c to r, while
m aintaining the same c o rrelatio n between the items as the factor
loadings. T h e fa c to r scores w ere used in fu r th e r analyses ra th e r than
the raw d ata.
33
3. To determ ine i f relationships existed between fashion opinion
leadership and dem ographics, life s ty le and re ta il patronage b e h av io r,
m ultiple regression was used. Regression analysis is used to determ ine
if lin ear relationships e x is t between two v a ria b le s . Regression will
p ro vide estimates o f values of the dependent v a ria b le from values o f the
independent v a ria b le . The SAS General Linear Model (G LM ) was the
procedu re used fo r this s tu d y . It uses th e method o f least squares
means to f it general lin ear models. GLM handles classification variables
which have d is cre te lev e ls, such as g e n d e r, as well as continuous
variab les which measure q u a n titie s , such as fashion opinion leadership.
T y p e I and T y p e II I Sums of Squares and R -s q u a re value were noted.
Type III SS is th e Sum o f Squares calculated by adding a v aria b le last
in the model. It does not take into account o th e r variables or the
o rd e r in which th ey are en tered into th e model. Type III Sum of
Squares w ere used to determ ine sig n ifican ce. R -s q u a re measures the
amount o f v a ria tio n in the dependent v a ria b le which was accounted fo r
by the regression model and was used to determ ine how useful the
p re d ic to r v aria b les w ere at accounting fo r th e v a r ia b ility in fashion
opinion lead ersh ip . Least square means w ere used to id e n tify
sig n ific a n t relationships between fashion opinion leadership and
dem ographics. S tatistical significance was determ ined at the .05 level
of p ro b a b ility . C o rrelatio n was used to determ ine if m ature opinion
leaders re p o rt influencing younger consumers in th e ir purchasing
processes•
34
T h e dependent v a ria b le , fashion opinion lea d e rsh ip , was a rriv e d at
by adding the scores o f items 1-20 in Section 4 o f the q uestionnaire.
Demographics in v estig ated were m arital s ta tu s , occupation, age,
u rb a n iza tio n , re tirem en t s ta tu s , education, income and sex.
Retail patronage behavior was measured by items 1-20 in Section 1
and w ere d iv id e d into four summation v ariab les sim ilar to Lum pkin,
G reenberg and G oldstucker (1 9 8 5 ). These v ariab les w ere: In Store
Convenience (sum o f items 6, 7 , 9 , 1 5 ), C onvenience-S tore Location and
M obility (sum o f items 10, 11, 12, 14, 1 9 ), P ric e /Q u a lity Relationships
(sum o f items 1 , 2, 3, 4 , 5, 16, 17, 18, 20) and Special Needs (sum o f
items 8 , 1 3 ).
T h e re w ere 8- life s ty le dimensions th a t w ere d e riv e d from the factor
a n aly s is , seven o f which w ere used fo r analysis. These dimensions
included: In d e p e n d e n c e /S e lf C onfidence, S im plicity P rone/C h ange
A v e rs e , Recreational S hopper, P hysically F it, Fashionable C lo th in g ,
Community In vo lvem en t, and Education.
35
CHA PTER IV
P R ESEN TA TIO N AND IN T E R P R E T A T IO N OF RESULTS
T he data were obtained from 711 respondents c o nstituting
35 p e rce n t o f the sample o f 2003 consumers 50 years o f age and o ld e r.
F o rty -fo u r p ercen t o f the respondents requested a summary o f the
results which was offered as an incentive fo r completing and re tu rn in g
th e q u estio n n aire.
Analyses of data a re presented under the following headings:
(1 ) D escription of Respondents, (2 ) Development o f life s ty le fa c to rs ,
re ta il patronage behavior indices, and fashion opinion leadership in d e x ,
(3 ) Influence of dem ographics, life sty le and retail patronage behavior
on fashion opinion lea d e rsh ip , (4 ) Influence of fashion opinion
leadership on retail patronage b e h a v io r, (5 ) Influence o f gender on
demographics and life s ty le dimensions of fashion opinion leaders,
(6 ) Influence o f age on demographics and life s ty le o f fashion opinion
lead ers, (7 ) C orrelation between fashion opinion leadership and reported
influence on Y ounger Consumers.
D escription of Respondents
Respondents, ages 5 0 -8 4 , represented 49 o f the 50 states of the
U nited States— Alaska was th e only state not represented in this
sample. While all six geographic regions w ere re p re s e n te d , the m ajority
o f the respondents lived in one of th re e areas— M idw est, N ortheast or
South (2 9 .4 p e rc e n t, 2 3 .9 p ercen t and 21.7 p e rc e n t, re s p e c tiv e ly ).
36
T h is geographic d is trib u tio n is sim ilar to the U .S . population except fo r
the S outhern and Mountain regio ns. Specific comparisons fo r the
g eographic regions include: N o rth ea s t, 23.9 p ercent compared to
2 0.9 p ercen t (S ta tis tica l A b s tra c t, 1987); S outh, 21.7 p ercen t compared
to 3 4.3 percen t (S ta tis tica l A b s tra c t, 1987); M idw est, 2 9 .4 p ercent
compared to 2 4.8 p ercen t (S ta tis tic a l A b s tra c t, 1987); Southw est and
Rocky M ountain, 12.1 p ercen t compared to 5 .4 p ercent (S ta tis tic a l
A b s tra c t, 1987); and P acific, 12.5 p ercen t compared to 14.7 p e rce n t
(S ta tis tica l A b s tra c t, 1987). Almost h a lf of the respondents
(4 5 .6 p e rce n t) lived in the s u b u rb s , followed by urban dw ellers
(3 0 .8 p e rc e n t) and those living in ru ra l areas (2 1 .9 p e rc e n t).
Frequencies and percentages of the respondents are given in
T ab le 2 and are summarized below. All n's do not total to 711 in each
analysis because some respondents chose to delete c ertain items.
P rim arily a female sample (72 p e rc e n t), the m ajority o f th e subjects
w ere between 50 and 70 years o f age. T w e n ty -s ix percent w ere 5 0 -5 9 ,
39.7 p ercent w ere between 6 0 -6 9 , 15.6 p ercen t w ere between 70 and 79
and 2 .4 p ercen t w ere 80 or o ld e r. T h e age breakdow n of th e sample is
q u ite sim ilar to the s u b sc rib e r p ro file provided by 50 Plus m agazine.
S ix ty -o n e p e rce n t of the sample ranged in age from 5 0 -6 4 , while
56.1 p ercent of the 50 Plus subscribers fall into th a t age b ra c k e t.
T h ir ty -e ig h t p ercen t o f the sample was 65 or older versus 4 1.6 percen t
of 50 Plus s u b sc rib e rs.
The overwhelm ing m ajority of respondents (8 1 .7 p e rce n t) owned
th e ir own home, w ith over h a lf (5 5 .5 p e rce n t) being a two person
37
Table 2. Demographic characterisics o f respondents.
C h a ra c te ris tic Frequency Percent
G eographic Region
N orth east 170 23.9
South 154 21.7
Midwest 209 29.4
Southw est 64 9 .0
Rocky Mountain 22 3.1
Pacific 89 12.5
n = 708 99.6%
Residence
Own Home 581 81 .7
Rental Residence 99 13.9
Retirem ent Complex 12 1 .7
O th e r 19 2 .7
n = 711 100¥~
M arital Status
N ever M arried 33 4 .6
M a rried 444 62.4
Widowed 149 21.0
Divorced 77 10.8
Separated 8 1.1
n = 711 100%
Household Size
One 180 25.3
Two 394 55.4
T h re e 89 12.5
Four or more 47 6 .6
n = 710 99.9%
Age
50-59 158 26.1
60-69 263 39.7
70-79 104 15.6
80+ 17 2 .4
No age given 112 15.8
711 1OU?
38
T a b le 2 (co n tin u ed )
C h a ra cte ris tic Frequency Percent
Education
Some High School 47 6 .6
High School 190 26.7
Some College 279 39.2
Bachelor's Degree 112 15.8
M aster's Degree 56 7 .9
P h . D . , E d .D . , J . D . , M .D . 18 2.5
O ther 7 1 .0
n = 709 99.9%
U rbanization
Rural 156 21.9
U rban 219 30.8
Suburban 324 45.6
n = 697 98.3%
Retirem ent Status

R etired 419 58.9
Not R etired 283 39.8
n = 702 98.7%
Employment Status
Not employed 413 58.2
Employed p a rt-tim e 100 14.1
Employed fu ll-tim e 196 27.6
n = 709 993%
G ender
Female 512 7 2.0
Male 188 26.4
n = 700 98.5%
Occupation
Professional 117 16.5
Business 192 27.0
Teaching 70 9 .8
S u p p o rt 126 17.7
Semiskilled W orker 67 9 .4
Communication 15 2.1
Homemaker 73 10.3
O th er 42 5 .9
n = 702 98.7%
39
l able 2 (continued)
C h a ra cte ris tic Frequency Percent
Household Income
$10,000 or below 62 8 .7
$10,000-$14,999 55 7 .7
$15,000~$19,999 91 12.8
$20,000-$29,999 155 21 .8
$30,0 0 0 -$ 4 9 ,999 175 24.6
$ 50,000-$69,999 87 12.2
$70,000 or above 58 8 .2
n = 683 96.1
Sources o f Income
Social S ec u rity 377 53.0
R etirem ent Plan 329 46.3
My Own Work 278 39.1
Savings Account 252 25.4
Investm ents 252 25.4
Spouse's Work 177 24.9
O th e r Sources 68 9 .6
Rental P roperties 67 9 .4
G ifts from C h ild ren 13 1 .8
40
household. Household size for this sample was smaller than the U .S .
average o f 2.67 people (S ta tis tica l A b s tra c t, 1987). S ix ty -tw o p ercent
o f th e respondents were m a rrie d , a fig u re consistent w ith both the
U .S . average (63 p e rce n t) (S ta tis tica l A b s tra c t, 1 9 8 7 ), and the p ro file
of th e 50 Plus su b scrib er (66 p e rc e n t). T h e percentage of those
widowed (21 p e rc e n t) was also consistent w ith the 50 Plus p ro file
(1913 p e rc e n t) but was much h ig h e r than the U .S . average of
7 .9 p e rce n t. T h is discrepancy can perhaps be explained by the fa c t
th a t the sample rep resen ted an older segment o f the population. O nly
11.9 p e rce n t w ere divorced or s ep arated , a fig u re s lig h tly h ig h e r than
th e U .S . average o f 7 .6 p e rce n t and re la tiv e ly consistent w ith the 50
Plus p ro file o f 9 .3 p e rce n t.
Education level o f the respondents was much h ig h e r than the U .S .
a ve ra g e. T h ir ty -n in e percen t of the sample attended college versus
16.3 p e rce n t (S ta tis tica l A b s tra c t, 1987) and 27.2 percen t earned a
Bachelor's degree or h ig h e r. H ow ever, the education level of the
sample is sim ilar to the 50 Plus s u b sc rib e r p ro file , w ith 45 p ercent
h aving attended college and 25 p ercent having earned a Bachelor's
degree or h ig h e r.
O ccupational groups most h eavily represented in this sample w ere
business (27 p e r c e n t), professional, including occupations such as
d o c to r, la w y e r, o r social w o rk e r (1 6 .5 p e rc e n t), and s u p p o rt, including
occupations such as bookkeeper, s e c re ta ry or re ce p tio n is t. Ten
p ercent o f the respondents classified themselves as homemakers. The
heavy re p res e n ta tio n o f th e business and professional occupations is
41
re flec te d in th e afflu en ce o f the sample as a w hole. Median income was
$ 2 5 ,0 0 0 , a fig u re s lig h tly h ig h e r than th e U .S . average o f $23,618 fo r
the U .S . population. A d d itio n a lly , 45 p ercen t o f th e sample reported
incomes o f $30,000 a y e a r or h ig h e r. Because the U .S . Census groups
income levels d iffe r e n tly , specific comparisons are d iffic u lt to d ra w .
H ow ever, 20.1 p ercen t of the U .S . population (S ta tis tica l A b s tra c t,
1987) rep o rted income o f $10,000 a y e a r or less versu s only 8 .7 percen t
fo r this g ro u p . Incomes o f $50,000 a y e a r or h ig h e r w ere found in
14.8 p ercent o f the U .S . p o pulation, while the incidence o f th is income
level fo r this sample was 2 0.4 p e rc e n t. T h e re la tiv e affluence o f the
sample used fo r this s tu d y was a p p a re n t in the p ro file o f th e 50 Plus
s u b s c rib e r (T a b le 1, p . 2 8 ), w ith the results o f th is s tu d y substan
tia tin g the original p ro file .
Sources of income re p o rte d by the respondents v a rie d w id ely .
Social s e c u rity (53 p e r c e n t), re tire m e n t plan (4 6 .3 p e rc e n t) and my own
w ork (39.1 p e rc e n t) w ere the most fre q u e n tly re p o rte d sources. These
resu lts were not s u rp ris in g because over h a lf the respondents
(5 8 .9 p e rc e n t) w ere r e tir e d , so it is logical th a t social s e c u rity and
re tire m e n t plans would be the most fre q u e n tly re p o rte d income sources.
O f the 38 p ercen t still em ployed, 2 7.6 p ercen t w ere employed fu ll time
and 14.1 p ercen t w ere employed p a rt-tim e outside the home.
Developm ent o f the L ife style Factors
It was expected th a t the 59 life s ty le items in Section 2 o f the
q u e stio n n aire , consisting o f statem ents about a c tiv itie s , in te res ts and
42
opinions, would y ie ld several factors from th e in itia l facto r analysis.
Each o f th e life s ty le statem ents was measured by a six point L ik e rt
scale to which respondents indicated degree o f agreem ent or disag ree
m ent, one indicating strong disagreem ent and six indicating strong
agreem ent. A fa c to r analysis using th e p rin c ip a l components method
and varim ax rotation was computed on th e 59 life s ty le items in Section 2
of the q u e stio n n aire . To reduce th e number of life s ty le dimensions
exam ined, a correlatio n m atrix was generated and then a fa c to r analysis
was used to create p a tte rn s o f factor loadings to aid in the in te rp re
tation of the life s ty le dim ensions. Seven o f the e ig h t life s ty le factors
yielded two or more life s ty le items loading at .47 or h ig h e r. The
e ig h th fa c to r, which had no items th a t loaded a t .47 or h ig h e r, was
labeled Prices Conscious Shopper and used in th e initial analyses b u t
was later dropped because o f the low facto r loadings. Descriptions o f
the seven life s ty le factors and the items th a t had the hig h est factor
loadings fo r each fa c to r are presented in T a b le 3. These seven
life s ty le factors w ere used as dependent v ariab les in fu r th e r statistical
analysis. S u b s eq u e n tly , fa c to r scores w ere gen erated fo r each of the
e ig h t fa c to rs . These calculations were from the SAS score pro ced u re.
L ifestyle Factors
Factor one was labeled In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C o n fid e n t. Factor
loadings on items ranged from .67 to .4 7 . Respondents who scored
high on this factor w ere venturesom e, confident o f th e ir abilities and
43
T a b le 3. L ife style factors e x tra c te d from life sty le items.
L ifestyle Factors Factor Loadings
(1 ) In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C onficent
1 th in k 1 have more s elf confidence than
most people. .67
1 have not y e t reached the peak o f my mental
a b ility . .61
1 am more independent than most people. .58
1 th in k 1 have a lot o f personal a b iilty . .53
1 like to t r y new and d iffe re n t th in g s . .48
(2 ) Sim plicity P rone/C h ange Averse

Society is changing too fa s t fo r me. .58
In g e n e ra l, things are too complicated to d a y . .50
Products are too complicated to d a y . .48
(3 ) Recreational Shopper
1 go shopping fo r recreatio n . .72
1 often go shopping w ithout a n yth in g d e fin ite
in mind to b u y . .65
Shopping gives me a chance to g e t out and do
something. .64
(4 ) Physically Fit
1 re a lly d o n 't have any physical problem s. .54
1 am g e n era lly happy w ith the shape I'm in
p h y s ic a lly . .52
(5) Fashionably Dressed

It is im portant th a t my clothes be o f the
latest s ty le . .49
W earing the rig h t clothes is im portant fo r
acceptance. .48
(6 ) Community Involvem ent

1 am an a ctive member o f more than one social or
C hurch o rg an izatio n . .73
1 am an a ctive member of more than one civic
o rg a n izatio n . .71
1 like to w ork on community projects. .61
(7) Education
1 th in k it is im portant to have a good education. .53
A college education is v e ry im portant fo r success
in today's w o rld . .52
44
optim istic about the fu tu re . Examining a d iffe re n t dim ension, facto r
two was labeled Sim plicity P rone/C h ange A v e rs e , w ith facto r loadings
from .58 to .4 8 . Respondents scoring high on this facto r fe lt th a t
society was changing too fa s t and was becoming too complex.
Factor th re e , labeled Recreational S h o p p er, had fa c to r loadings
ran g ing from .72 to .6 2 . Subjects who enjoyed shopping as a form of
recreational a c tiv ity , such as going shopping w ithout an yth in g d e fin ite
in mind to b u y , scored high on this fa c to r.
Factor fo u r was labeled Physically F it and had factor scores o f .54
and .5 2 . Respondents who expressed a positive a ttitu d e tow ard health
and a satisfaction tow ard th e ir physical condition scored high on this
fa c to r. Factor fiv e also examined a ttitu d e s tow ards one's physical
appearance and was labeled Fashionably D ressed. Factor loadings on
items w ere .48 and .4 9 . Those exp ressin g agreem ent th a t w earing
fashionable clothing was im portant scored high on this fa c to r.
Factor s ix , labeled Community In vo lvem en t, had facto r loadings
ra ng ing from .73 to .6 1 . Respondents who w ere involved in c iv ic ,
social or church organizations scored high on this fa c to r.
Factor seven, labeled E ducation, exam ined the importance of a
good education fo r success. Factor loadings were .53 and .5 2 .
Respondents who placed a high value on education scored high on this
fa c to r.
45
Retail Patronage B ehavior Indices
P rio r to analyzing retail patronage b e h a v io r, the tw e n ty store
c h ara c te ris tic s in Section 1 w ere collapsed into four indices by
assigning an equal lin ea r w eight to each item included in th e in d e x .
Each index measured a d iffe re n t c h a ra c te ris tic o f re ta il stores and the
deg ree o f its im portance to the respond ents. These indices a re sim ilar
to those used by Lum pkin, G reenberg and G oldstucker (1985) in th e ir
s tu d y o f m arketplace needs o f the e ld e rly . T h e fir s t in d e x , In -S to re
Convenience and Physical Environm ent focused on the im portance o f the
in te rio r environm ent of a store such as ease of fin d in g items and
know ledgeable salespeople. Items 6, 7 , 9 and 15 comprised this in d e x .
Th e second in d e x . S tore Location and M obility examined the im portance
o f out of store services such as p a rk in g and d e liv e ry to home. T h is
index included items 10, 11, 12, 14 and 19. In d ex th re e , P ric e /Q u a l
it y , focused on m erchandise c h a ra c te ris tic s such as price and b ra n d
name as well as store re p u ta tio n . Items 1, 2 , 3 , 4 , 5, 16, 17, 18 and
20 w ere included in th is in d e x. Special needs was the fo u rth index and
its focus was the im portance of unique c h ara c te ris tic s desired by
consumers o v er 50 such as senior c itize n discounts. Items 8 and 13
comprised this in d e x .
Developm ent o f the Fashion Opinion Leadership Index
Fashion opinion leadership was measured by a series o f tw e n ty
statem ents in Section 4 of the questionnaire asking the respondents to
show th e ir degree o f agreem ent or disagreem ent w ith each statem ent.
46
S trong disagreem ent was indicated by a one, strong agreem ent was
indicated by a fiv e . Each o f th e 20 items w ere assigned equal linear
w e ig h ts , the sum o f which produced a fashion opinion leadership index
fo r each respondent. Items 6, 15, 16, 17, and 18 w ere n e g ative ly
w orded and w ere re v e rs e scored p rio r to developing the in d e x .
Influence o f Dem ographics, L ife style and Retail

Patronage B ehavior on Fashion Opinion Leadership
Null Hypothesis 1
No s ig n ific a n t relationship exists between the fashion opinion leadership
o f m ature consumers and: (a ) dem ographics, (b ) life s ty le , (c ) retail
patronage behavior
To te s t this hypo th esis, a series o f mathematical models w ere used.
Dem ographics, life s ty le and re ta il patronage behavior w ere used as
ind ep endent v ariab les in these models. Fashion opinion leadership was
th e d ependent v a ria b le .
Dem ographics. T h e orig in al mathematical model was fitte d via the
SAS procedure PROC GLM. It was used to te s t the re la tio n s h ip o f
dem ographics to fashion opinion lead ersh ip . This model is listed below:
Model 1
Y.. = u + s. + o. + a. + i , + r +e + i + sex + e... .

ij i j k Jl m n o p ijklmnopq
W here,
Y .. = ith observed value of degree of fashion opinion
leadership fo r th e jth person
u = population mean
s. = e ffe c t o f ith m arital status

i
47
o. = e ffe c t of jth occupation
a = e ffe c t of k th age
k
= e ffe c t of Ith urbanization
r = e ffe c t of mth retirem en t status

m
= e ffe c t o f nth education level
e ffe c t o f oth income level
e rro r
ijklmnopq
M arital s ta tu s , occupation, ag e, u rb a n izatio n , re tire m e n t s ta tu s ,
education le v e l, income and sex w ere included in the o rig in al model as
classification v a ria b le s . G eographic region and sources o f income were
not included in the original model because th e y were not th o u g h t to be
p red icto rs o f fashion opinion leadersh ip.
P rio r to analysis, several demographic categories w ere collapsed to
fa c ilita te analysis. M arital status was collapsed into th re e categories
from fiv e : s in g le , m arried and widowed. Education was collapsed into
fiv e categories from seven: some high school, high school, some
college. Bachelor's d e g ree . Beyond Bachelor's deg ree. Occupation was
collapsed into seven categories from e ig h t, w ith the only change being
combining Communication occupations w ith Business occupations. Age
was collapsed from 37 categories to fo u r (5 0 -6 0 , 6 1 -7 0 , 7 1 -8 0 , 8 1+).
In itia l results indicated th a t occupation, and sex w ere s ig n ific a n t
p red icto rs (p < .0 1 ) . The variables occupation, sex, income and
u rb an izatio n w ere retained in the subsequent model. M arital s ta tu s ,
re tirem e n t s ta tu s , and education level w ere dropped from fu rth e r
a n alysis. Results of th is analysis are presented in T a b le 4.
48
T ab le 4. Analysis of variance o f demographics and fashion opinion

lead ersh ip .
Source df Ms F value P R square
A AA4
Model 28 499.78 2.51 . UUU 1 .1198
E rro r 517 198.90
Total 545
M arital Status 2 .25 .78

Occupation 6 3 .4 2 .003
Age 3 .19 .90
U rb an izatio n 3 1 .07 .36
Retirem ent Status 2 .44 .65
Education 4 .77 .54
Income 7 1 .43 .19
Sex 1 35.78 .0001
T he results o f the second model showed th a t sex and occupation
w ere the most s ig n ific a n t p redicto rs of fashion opinion leadership
(p < .0 1 ) . Table 5 displays the results of th is analysis. Females had
s ig n ific a n tly hig h er opinion leadership mean scores than did males
T able 5. Analysis o f variance of selected demographics and fashion

opinion leadersh ip.
Source df Ms F: value P R square
Model 21 616.58 3.11 .0001 .1074

E rro r 542 198.51
Total 563
Occupation 6 3 .1 0 .005
Age 3 .38 .77
U rb anizatio n 3 1.06 .37
Income 7 1 .67 .11
Sex 2 23.12 .0001
49
(T a b le 6 ) . While e a rlie r research studies have in v estig ated both male
and female samples, only single sex samples have been used in the
p a st, so comparisons w ith previous research are d iffic u lt. In tu itiv e ly ,
this finding is logical, because in g e n e ra l, women tend to be more
interested in fashion than men.
Table 6. Least squares means fo r sex and fashion opinion leadersh ip.
Sex Mean S tandard E rro r
Female 58.96 1.53

Male 48.67 1.94
In exam ining occupation and fashion opinion lead ersh ip ,
respondents involved in business and communication occupations had the
highest mean score (5 6 .7 4 plus or minus 2.3 6 p o in ts) fo r fashion
opinion lea d e rs h ip , w hile s u p p o rt w orkers and homemakers had the
lowest (4 9 .9 2 plus or minus 2.62 points and 49.99 plus or minus 2.81
points, re s p e c tiv e ly ) (T a b le 7 ) . With the exception of sem iskilled
w o rk e rs , the h ig h e r the mean score, th e h ig h e r th e status o f the
occupation. T h is fin d in g is sim ilar to Summers (1970) who found th a t
fashion opinion leaders w ere concentrated in segments th a t had hig h er
occupational status and income.
T he p re d ic tiv e a b ility of the dem ographic v aria b les appears to be
ra th e r lim ited. The R -s q u a re value of the model is .1 0 7 , indicating
th a t only 10.7% of the v aria tio n in fashion opinion leadership is
explained by the model (T a b le 5 ). T h e re fo re , one must be cautious
50
T a b le 7. Least squares means fo r occupation and fashion opinion

lead ersh ip .
Occupation Mean S tan d ard E rro r
S u p p o rt (S e c re ta ry , e tc .) 49.92 2.62
Homemaker 49.99 2.81
Teaching 52.04 2.83
O th er 54.40 3.14
Professional 54.32 2.61
Sem iskilled w o rk e r 55.78 2.85
Business and Communication 56.74 2.36
when using dem ographic variables as p re d icto rs of fashion opinion
lead ersh ip .
L ifestyle
To te s t the relationship o f life s ty le to fashion opinion lea d e rsh ip ,
the seven factors developed from the facto r analysis (In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf
C o n fid e n t, S im plicity P rone/C h ange A v e rs e , Recreational S hopper,
P hysically F it, Fashionably D ressed , Community Involvem ent, and
E d u c a tio n ), age and sex were used as the independent v aria b les in a
series of mathematicai models. Age and sex w ere retained as
classification v a ria b le s .
T h e following model was fitte d via the SAS p rocedu re PROC GLM
and was used to examine the re la tio n s h ip between fashion opinion
leadership and life s ty le .
Model 2
Y ij = 3 + b 1X1 + b2X2 + b3X3 + b4X4 + b5X5 + b6X6 + b7X7 + Si +

6;
51
W here,
Y.. = ith observed value o f degree o f fashion opinion leadership
fo r the jth person
a = Y in te rc e p t, the pred icted value of Y , when x^. x^. = 0
b ^ ...b y = p a rtial regression coefficients
x .j. x 7j = are the continuous v aria b le s : In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C onfi
d e n t, Sim plicity P ro n e/C h an g e A v e rs e , Recreational
S hopper, P hysically F it, Fashionably D ressed, Community
Involvem ent, E ducation.
Sj = e ffe c t o f ith sex *
e. = e rro r
i
Results are shown in Tables 8, 9 and 10. Table 8 displays the
resu lts o f the fir s t model which included sex and life s ty le factors as
p re d ic to r v aria b les . S ex, and the life sty le dimensions In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf
C o n fid e n t, Recreational S h opper, Fashionably D ressed, and Community
Involvem ent were all s ig n ific a n t pred icto rs o f fashion opinion leadership
(p < .0 1 ) . Four o f the p re d ic to r variables w ere s ig n ific a n t at the .0001
level. Education and P hysically F it w ere not s ig n ific a n t p red icto rs and
w ere dropped from subsequent analyses. In T able 9 , the results of the
second regression model using sex and life s ty le dimensions are shown.
A g a in , s ex , and the life s ty le dimensions o f In d e p e n d e n t/S e if C o n fid e n t,
Recreational S hopper, Fashionably Dressed and Community Involvem ent
w ere s ig n ific a n t p red icto rs of fashion opinion leadership at th e
p < .01 level. The R -s q u a re fo r this model is .23 1 4, indicating th a t
approxim ately 23% o f the v a ria tio n in fashion opinion leadership can be
explained by this model (T a b le 9 ) .
52
T able 8. Analysis of v arian ce of sex, life sty le factors and fashion

Model 8 3729.98 21.99 .0001 .2320

E rro r 581 169.65
Total 589
Sex 1 18.64 .0001

In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C onfident 1 29.98 .0001
S im plicity Prone 1 2.75 .10
Recreational Shopper 1 58.70 .0001
Physically Fit 1 .00 .97
Fashionably Dressed 1 29.94 .0001
Community Involvem ent 1 7.46 .01
Education 1 .86 .41
T ab le 9. Analysis o f variance of sex, selected life s ty le factors and

fashion opinion lead ersh ip .
Model 6 4953.97 29.27 .0001 .2314

E rro r 583 169.27
Total 589
Sex 1 18.70 .0001

In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf Confident, 1 30.71 .0001
Sim plicity Prone 1 2.64 .11
Community Involvem ent 1 7.5 4 .01
53
T able 10. A nalysis o f v arian ce o f age, selected life s ty le factors and

fashion opinion leadersh ip.
Model 6 3637.86 15.97 .0001 .1726

E rro r 574 182.26
Total 580
Age 1 5.84 .02

Physically F it 1 .05 .83
A second mathematical model was used to examine the relationship
of life sty le to fashion opinion lead ersh ip . Age was retained as a
classification v a ria b le and was d ivid ed into two categories (50 -6 4 and
65 0 . The following model was fitte d using the SAS procedu re PROC
GLM:
Model 3
Y .. = a + b .x , + b_x_ + b_x_ + b .x ., + bcx_ + a. + e.

ij 11 22 33 44 55 i i
W here,
Y .. = ith observed value o f degree o f fashion opinion leadership
fo r the jth person
a = Y in te rc e p t, th e p redicted value o f Y , when x . . x,.. = 0

I I • • • 31
b j . . . b g = p a rtial regression coefficients
x.j. x^. = continuous v aria b les : In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C o n fid e n t,
S im plicity P rone, Recreational S h o p p er, Physically F it,
Community Involvem ent.
54
a. = e ffe c t o f ith age
e. = e rr o r
1
Age and th e life s ty le dimensions In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C o n fid e n t, Sim plicity
P ro n e/C h an g e A v e rs e , Recreation S hopper, P hysically F it, and
Community Involvem ent w ere used as p re d ic to r v a ria b le s . Four o f the
six p re d ic to r v a ria b le s w ere found to be s ig n ific a n t a t the p < .01 level
(re s u lts are shown in T a b le 1 0): Age (p < .0 1 9 5 ), In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf
C o nfident (p < .0 0 0 1 ), Recreational Shopper (p < .0 0 0 1 ), and
Community Involvem ent (p < .0 0 0 3 ). One age c a te g o ry , those 65 and
o v e r, was found to have an in v ers e re la tio n s h ip w ith fashion opinion
lea d e rsh ip , in d ica tin g th a t as one ages, one is less lik e ly to be an
opinion lead er. T h is fin d in g can perhaps be explained by the fa c t th a t
by this age most have le ft the w orkplace and th e re fo re have less
contact w ith people on a re g u la r basis.
The re su lts o f these analyses a re consistent w ith the findings of
T ig e r t and A rn o ld (1971) who found th a t fashion opinion leaders had
above averag e levels o f s e lf confidence and independence, w ere active
in the community and had an in te re s t in fashion. Reynolds and Darden
(1972) also found s e lf confidence to be a p re d ic to r o f opinion leadership
fo r s uburban housew ives. B ut D arden and Reynolds (1972) did not
fin d s elf confidence to be a p re d ic to r o f fashion opinion leadership fo r
males. Baum garten (1975) also found male opinion leaders to be socially
a c tiv e .
55
Retail Patronage B ehavior
The relationship o f re ta ii patronage behavior to fashion opinion
leadersh ip was tested by a mathematical model which included th e fo u r
re ta il patronage behavior indices. Store Convenience and M o b ility ,
In -S to re C onvenience, P ric e /Q u a lity , and Special Needs. These indices
w ere used as continuous v a ria b le s . T h e following mathematical model
was fitte d using the SAS PROC GLM pro ced u re.
Model 4
Y .. = a+ b, x . + b_x_ + b _ x , + b„x.. + e
ij 1 1 22 3 3 4 4
W here,
Y.. = ith observed value of degree o f fashion opinion leadership
fo r the jth person
a = Y in te rc e p t, the p redicted value o f Y , when x . xa = 0

I • • • 4
b ^ . . .b ^ = p a rtial regression coefficients
x .. x_. = continuous v aria b le s : Store C o n v e n ien c e /M o b ility ,

1 I• • • 2. 1
In -S to re Convenience, P ric e /Q u a lity , Special Needs
e = e rr o r
Th e resu lts are presented in T able 11. O nly P ric e /Q u a lity was found
to be a s ig n ific a n t p re d ic to r o f fashion opinion leadership (p < .0 1 ) .
H o w ever, this re s u lt must be in te rp re te d cau tio u sly , given the fa c t th a t
the R -s q u a re fo r the e n tire model is only .0 2 5 4 , meaning th a t less than
.2% o f th e v a ria tio n in fashion opinion leadership can be explained by
the model. Th u s none o f th e four re ta il patronage indices are useful
p re d icto rs of fashion opinion leadersh ip.
Based on these analyses, two dem ographic c h aracteristics (sex and
occupation) and fo u r life s ty le dimensions (In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C o n fid e n t,
56
T able 11. Analysis o f v aria n ce o f re ta il patronage behavior and fashion

Model 4 975.48 4.61 .0011 .0254

E rro r 706 211.79
Total 710
Store C onvenience/M obility 1 .57 .45

In -S to re Convenience 1 .33 .57
P ric e /Q u a lity 1 6.71 .01
Special Need 1 .68 .41
Recreational S hopper, Fashionably D ressed, Recreational S hopper,
Community Involvem ent) w ere found to be s ig n ific a n t p re d icto rs of
fashion opinion leadersh ip. The re ta il patronage behavior indices w ere
not useful pred icto rs of fashion opinion lead ersh ip . T h e re fo re ,
Hypothesis one was re je c te d .
In flu en ce o f Fashion Opinion Leadership

on Retail Patronage B ehavior
Null Hypothesis 2
Retail patronage behavior o f m ature consumers is not a p re d ic to r of
fashion opinion le a d e rs h ip .
To te s t th is h yp o th e s is , a series o f fo u r mathematical models w ith
the fo u r re ta il patronage behavior indices and the fashion opinion
leadership index were used to determ ine i f fashion opinion leadership
was a p re d icto r o f re ta il patronage behavior (continuous v a ria b le s ). In
these analyses, fashion opinion lead ersh ip , also a continuous v a ria b le ,
was used as the independent v a ria b le .
57
The following models w ere fitte d via th e SAS procedu re PROC
GLM:
Model 5
Y j. = a + + e
W here,
Y .. = ith observed value of degree of im portance of in -s to re
convenience fo r the jth person
a = Y in te rc e p t, the pred icted value o f Y , when x 1 = 0
b.j = p a rtial regression coefficien t
x1 = e ffe c t o f fashion opinion leadership
e = e rr o r
Model 6
Y j. = a + b jX j + e
W here,
Y.. = ith observed value o f degree o f im portance o f p ric e /q u a lity
relationship fo r the jth person
a = Y in te rc e p t, th e pred icted value o f Y , when = 0
bj = p a rtial regression coefficient
Xj = e ffe c t o f fashion opinion leadership
e = e rro r
58
Model 7
Y .. = a + b .^ + e
n
W here,
Y.. = ith observed value of degree o f im portance o f Special Needs
fo r the jth person
a = Y in te rc e p t, th e pred icted value o f Y , when x^ = 0
b1 = p a rtia l regression coefficient
x1 = e ffe c t o f fashion opinion leadership
e = e rr o r
Model 8
Y.. = a + b1x l + e
ii
W here,
ith observed value o f degree o f im portance of store location
and m obility fo r th e jth person
a = Y in te rc e p t, the pred icted value o f Y , when x^ = 0
b1 = p a rtia l regression coefficient
x^ = e ffe c t o f fashion opinion leadership
e = e rro r
Table 12 presents th e re su lts of the model used to analyze the
relationship between fashion opinion leadersh ip and in -s to re
convenience. Fashion opinion leadership was found to be a s ig n ific a n t
p re d ic to r of those placing a high value on in -s to re convenience.
However the R -s q u a re value o f .0105 indicates th a t less than .1% of the
varian ce in in -s to re convenience can be explained by fashion opinion
lea d e rsh ip , and is th e re fo re not a useful p re d ic to r.
59
T ab le 12. A nalysis o f v arian ce of fashion opinion leadership and

in -s to re convenience.
Model 1 53.29 7.59 . 0060 . 0105

E rro r 709 7 .02
T otal 710
The results of th e analysis of fashion opinion leadership and
p ric e /q u a lity relationships are presented in T a b le 13. Fashion opinion
leadership was found to be a s ig n ific a n t p re d ic to r of p ric e /q u a lity
aspects o f re ta il patronage behavior (p < .0 0 1 ). A g a in , it is not a
useful p re d ic to r because of the low R -s q u a re value (.0231 ) .
T ab le 13. A nalysis of v arian ce of fashion opinion leadership and

p r ic e /q u a lity .
Source df Ms F value p R square
Model 1 363.98 16.80 .0001 .0231

E rro r 709 21 .66
Total 710
In T able 14 the results of the analysis of fashion opinion
leadership and special needs are d is p la y ed . Fashion opinion leadership
was not found to be a s ig n ific a n t p re d ic to r o f special needs c h a ra c te r
istics o f re ta il patronage behavior (p < .3 5 ) .
T a b le 15 presents th e results o f th e analysis o f fashion opinion
leadersh ip and store location and m o b ility. Similar to th e o th e r models,
fashion opinion leadersh ip was found to be a s ig n ific a n t p re d ic to r of
this re ta il patronage c h a ra c te ris tic (p < .0 0 1 6 ). H ow ever, the low
60
T ab le 14. A nalysis of variance of fashion opinion leadership and

special needs.
Model 1 3.12 .84 .36 .0011

E rro r 709 3.70
Total 710
T ab le 15. A nalysis of variance of fashion opinion leadership and store

location and m obility.
Model 1 170.39 10.00 .0016 .0139

E rro r 709 17.03
Total 710
R -s q u a re (.0 1 3 9 ) indicates th a t so little o f the v aria tio n is explained
th a t it is not a useful p re d ic to r.
On the basis of these fin d in g s , Hypothesis two cannot be re jected .
Influence o f Sex on Demographics and L ifestyle

o f Fashion Opinion Leadership
Hypothesis 3
G ender of m ature fashion opinion leaders is not re la te d to
(a ) dem ographics, (b ) life s ty le . (c ) retail patronage behavior.
Dem ographics. To te s t this h y p o th esis, a series o f mathematical
models w ere used w ith fashion opinion leadership as the dependent
v a ria b le , and occupation, age, u rb a n iza tio n , income and sex as the
independent v a ria b le s . To determ ine if a s ig n ific a n t relationship
existed between sex and the demographics of opinion leaders.
61
in teractio n terms w ere included in the model. The interaction terms
w ere included to te s t w h eth er the slopes of the variables sex and
occupation, sex and age, sex and urban izatio n and sex and income w ere
p a ra lle l. The models w ere fitte d via the SAS procedure PROC GLM.
T h e fir s t model is represented below.
Model 9
Y .. = u + o. + a. + u. + i. + sex + o*sex. + a*sex. +

ij i j k I m im jm
u*sex. + i*sex. + e... .

xm Im ijklmn
W here,
Y .. = ith observed value o f degree o f fashion opinion leader
ship fo r th e jth person
u = population mean
Oj = e ffe c t o f ith occupation
a^ = e ffe c t o f jth age
u. = e ffe c t o f k th urbanization
k
ij = e ffe c t o f Ith income
sex = e ffe c t o f mth sex

m
o*sex. = e ffe c t o f imth in teractio n
im
a*sex. = e ffe c t o f jmth interaction
jm '
u *s ex . = e ffe c t o f kmth interaction
km
i*se x . = e ffe c t o f Imth interaction
Im
e... . = e rro r
ijklmn
Results of this analysis are presented in T able 16. None of th e
in teraction terms were found to be s ig n ific a n t, thus indicating th a t no
relationship exists between male and female opinion leaders and th e ir
dem ographics.
62
T ab le 16. A nalysis o f V ariance o f demographics by sex and fashion

Model 46 357.66 1.78 .002 .1364

E rro r 517 201.33
Total 563
Occupation 6 1.99 .06

Age 3 .16 .93
U rbanizatio n 3 1.15 .33
Income 1 1 .36 .22
Sex 2 1 .77 .17
Occupation x Sex 10 .64 .73
Age x Sex 5 1 .06 .37
U rb an izatio n x Sex 3 .37 .69
Income x Sex 7 .34 .94
L ife s ty le . E ight life s ty le fa c to rs , sex and th e interaction terms
served as the independent v ariab les in th is model. Fashion opinion
leadership was th e dependent v a ria b le . The life s ty le factors included:
In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C o n fid e n t, Sim plicity P rone/C h ange A v e rs e ,
Recreational S h opper, Physically F it, Fashionably D ressed, Community
In vo lvem en t, E ducation, Price Conscious S hopper. The interaction
term s w ere included to determ ine i f the lin ear slopes o f th e life sty le
factors x sex w ere p a ra lle l. T h e model used was:
Model 10
Y .. = a + sex. + b. x , + b_x_ + b_x_ b.-X., + bcx c + bcx c +

IJ I 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 b b b b
b-,x., + b _ x 0 + x *sex. + x *sex. + x * s e x . + x *sex. +

7 7 8 8 1 i 2 I 3 i 4 i
x *sex. + x *sex. + x_,*sex. + x „*se x . + e.

5 i 6 i 7 i 8 i i
63
W here,
Y .. = ith observed value o f degree o f fashion opinion leader
ship fo r the jth person
a = Y in te rc e p t, the pred icted value o f Y , when x .. x s; =

II • • • OI
b1 bg = p a rtia l regression coefficients
sex. = e ffe c t o f ith sex
x .. x„. = continuous v aria b les : In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C o n fid e n t,

11 • • • OI
Sim plicity P rone, Recreational S h o p p er, Physically F it,
Fashionably D ressed, Community In v o lv e m en t, Education,
Price/C onscious Shopper.
x * s e x . . . . x *sex. = e ffe c t o f interactions

1 i 8 i
e. = e rro r
i
None of th e in te rac tio n term s were s ig n ific a n t p re d ic to rs o f fashion
opinion lead ersh ip . T h is fin d in g suggests th a t life s ty le s o f opinion
leaders do not d iffe r by s ex . Results are presented in T ab le 17.
Retail patronage b e h a v io r. Retail patronage behavior was not
analyzed any fu r th e r because the four re ta il patronage behavior indices
did not prove to be useful p re d icto rs o f fashion opinion leadership in
the in itial analyses. Based on these fin d in g s , H ypothesis th re e cannot
be rejected.
64
T ab le 17. A nalysis o f V ariance o f life s ty le by sex and fashion opinion

lea d e rsh ip .
Model 26 1460.27 3.65 .0001 .2474

E rro r 684 168.79
Total 710
Sex 2 9.41 .0001

In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C onfident 1 .13 .72
Sim plicity Prone 1 .08 .77
Recreational Shopper 1 .06 .80
Physically Fit 1 .01 .91
Community Involvem ent 1 .17 .68
Education 1 .67 .41
Price Conscious Shopper 1 .15 .70
In dep en d en t x Sex 2 .17 .84
S im plicity x Sex 2 2.1 4 .12
Recreational x Sex 2 .05 .96
Physically F it x Sex 2 .09 .92
Fashionably x Sex 2 .27 .76
Community x Sex 2 .03 .97
Education x Sex 2 .45 .64
Price x Sex 2 .18 .83
65
Influence o f Age on Dem ographics, Lifestyle and Retail

Patronage (Behavior o f Fashion Opinion Leaders
Hypothesis 4
M ature fashion opinion leaders 50-64 do not d iffe r from m ature fashion
opinion leaders 65-70 on (a ) dem ographics, (b ) life sty le and (c ) retail
patronage b e h a v io r.
Dem ographics. P rio r to analysis, age was collapsed from four
categories (5 0 -6 0 , 6 1 -7 0 , 7 1 -8 0 , 80+) to two categories (50-64 and 65+).
A mathematical model was used to test th e hypothesis th a t no s ig n ific a n t
relationship exists between age, demographics and fashion opinion
lead ersh ip . O ccupation, sex, urbanization and income w ere the
dem ographics used as independent v a ria b le s . M arital s ta tu s , education
and re tirem e n t status w ere dropped from th e analysis because th e y were
not found to be s ta tis tic a lly s ig n ific a n t in the in itial analysis;
geographic region and sources o f income w ere n ever used as p red icto rs
of fashion opinion lea d e rsh ip . In te rac tio n terms w ere included to
determ ine if th e re was a s ig n ific a n t relationship between the demo
g raphics of p re - and p o stretirem ent age respondents and fashion
opinion lead ersh ip . T h is model is presented below:
Model 11
= u + o. + aqe. + u, + i, + sex + o*age.. + u*age, . +

i j k I m ij a kj
W here,
Y.. = ith observed value o f degree o f fashion opinion lead er

'J
ship fo r the jth person
o. = e ffe c t o f ith occupation
66
age: — e ffe c t of jth age

J
= e ffe c t of kth urban izatio n

uk
= e ffe c t of Ith income
*l
sex = e ffe c t of mth sex

m
o*age.. = e ffe c t o f ijth interaction
a ij
u *a g e kj = e ffe c t of k jth interaction
i*age,j = e ffe c t of Ijth interaction
sex*age . = e ffe c t o f mjth interaction

3 mj
-
e rro r
e ijklmn
The results are presented in T a b le 18. None o f th e interaction
terms w ere s ig n ific a n t and w ere dropped from the model. T h is
indicates th a t no s ig n ific a n t relationship exists between th e
dem ographics o f p re - and p o stretirem en t age respondents and fashion
T able 18. Analysis o f V aria n c e o f demographics by age and fashion

Model 38 421.13 2.11 .0002 .1359

E rro r 509 199.91
Total 574
Occupation 6 2.8 8 .01

Age 3 .29 .83
U rb an izatio n 3 1 .04 .37
Income 7 1 .33 .32
Sex 1 38.44 .0001
Occupation x Age 7 .73 .63
Income x Age 7 1 .22 .29
U rb an izatio n x Age 3 .50 .68
Sex x Age 1 .56 .45
67
L ife s ty le . The e ig h t life s ty le fa c to rs , age and th e interaction
terms served as the independent variables in the model:
Model 12
Y .. = a + age. + b, x , + b_x~ + b .x _ + b-.x., + b_x_ + b .x ,, +

ij a i 11 22 33 44 66
byx y + b8x 8 + x 1*age. + x 2*agej + x 3*age. + x ^ a g e j +
Xg*agej + Xg*age. + xy*age. + x „*a g e j + ej
W here,
Y .. = ith observed value of degree o f fashion opinion leader
ship for the jth person
a = Y in te rc e p t, the pred icted value of Y , when x^. Xg.
= 0
b ^ ...b g = p a rtial regression coefficients
age; = e ffe c t of ith age
x.j. Xg. = continuous v aria b les : In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C o n fid e n t,
S im plicity P rone, Recreational S h o p p e r, Physically F it,
Fashionably D ressed, Community In vo lvem en t, Education,
Price/C onscious Shopper,
x ^ a g e j . . .X g*agej = e ffe c t o f interactions
e. = e rro r
i
The interactions tested th e hypothesis th a t the slopes o f th e lines for
age x life sty le factors are p a ra lle l.
The re s u lts , presented in Table 19, show th a t none of the
in teractions terms proved to be s ig n ific a n t p re d icto rs o f fashion opinion
lead ersh ip . These terms w ere dropped from th e model. L ifestyie of
fashion opinion leaders does not d iffe r by p r e - and p o stretirem en t age.
68
T able 19. A nalysis o f V ariance o f life s ty le by age and fashion opinion

lead ersh ip .
Model 17 1724.17 10.94 .0001 .2298

E rro r 572 171.65
Total 589 *
Age 1 3.71 .05

Physically Fit 1 57.63 .0001
Fashionably Dressed 1 .03 .86
Education 1 .32 .57
Price Conscious Shopper 1 .12 .73
In d ep endent x Age 1 .04 .84
S im plicity x Age 1 .05 .83
Recreational x Age 1 .00 .99
Physically F it x Age 1 1 .63 .20
Fashionably x Age 1 .05 .83
Community x Age 1 .23 .63
Education x Age 1 .38 .54
Price x Age 1 .14 .71
69
Retail patronage b e h a v io r. No fu r th e r analyses o f re ta il patronage
attem pted because the fo u r retail patronage behavior characteristics
w ere not useful p red icto rs o f fashion opinion leadership in the initial
analyses.
Based on these fin d in g s . Hypothesis four cannot be re je c te d .
C o rrelation Between Fashion Opinion Leadership

and Reported Influence o f Y ounger Consumers
Hypothesis 5
No correlatio n exists between fashion opinion leadership and reported
influence o f younger consumers.
To determ ine the s tre n g th of the relationship between fashion
opinion leadership and reported influence of y o unger consum ers, the
SAS procedure PROC CORR was used. Items 11, 17, 19 and 20 from
section fo u r o f the questionnaire and the scores from fashion opinion
leadership index w ere used to generate a c o rrelatio n m a trix . These
fo ur items dealt w ith w hether the respondents fe lt th e y influenced
people 15-20 years y ounger than themselves in purchase decisions.
Results are rep o rted in T a b le 20. All of the fo u r items were
p o sitively c o rrela te d w ith fashion opinion lead ersh ip . All of the
T a b le 20. C orrelation coefficients for fashion opinion leadership and

re p o rte d influence o f younger consumers.
Item 11 Item 17 Item 19 Item 20
Fashion Opinion .59966 .48253 .55353 .58721

Leadership .0001 .0001 .0001 .0001
Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
70
c orrelations w ere s ig n ific a n t at the p < .0001 level. The positive
correlations indicate th a t those scoring high in fashion opinion
leadersh ip also tended to score high in re p o rte d influence o f y ounger
consumers. T h is fin d in g lends su p p o rt to the hypothesis presented by
S kelly (1986) th a t consumers over 50 serv e as opinion leaders and
inform ation sources for y o unger consumers.
Based on these fin d in g s . Hypothesis 5 is rejected .
71
C H A PTE R V
SUMMARY, C O N C LU S IO N S , IM P L IC A T IO N S AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The purpose of th is s tu d y was to evaluate fashion opinion
leadership in consumers o v er f if t y and to id e n tify the dem ographics,
life s ty le dimensions and re ta il patronage behavior o f the m ature fashion
opinion lead er. Fashion opinion leadership focuses on th e d iffu s io n
process of new products and th e ways in which inform ation about these
new products is communicated th ro u g h a social system . It is postulated
th a t the personal influence of c ertain individuals (opinion leaders)
fa cilitates the diffu sio n process o f innovations. T h e conceptual model
used in this research was E. M. Rogers (1983) diffu sio n o f innovations.
T h is model id e n tifies th e c h ara c te ris tic s of innovations: re la tiv e
a d v a n ta g e , co m p atib ility , co m p lexity, tria la b ility and o b s e rv a b ility and
then outlines the ways in which innovations are communicated
th ro u g h o u t a social system w ithin a given time fram e. The
in terp erso n al communication channel is the stage o f the model th a t this
research focused on. An opinion leader is someone who is able to
influence o th e r in d ivid u a ls a ttitu d e s or o v e rt behavior in fo rm a lly , in a
desired way w ith re la tiv e fre q u e n c y (R o g e rs , 1983, p . 2 7 ). It has
been suggested th a t id e n tifica tio n o f opinion leaders m ight fa c ilita te the
communication of innovations by ta rg e tin g promotional campaigns to
them .
72
Fashion opinion leadership research has focused p rim a rily on
college students (B a u m g a rte n , 1975; C h o w d h a ry , 1984; Kim and
S c h ra n k , 1982; Lennon and D a v is , 1987; M e y ers , 1971; Polegato and
Wall, 1980; S chrank and G ilm ore, 1973) or on consumers 25-44 years of
age (D ard en and R eynolds, 1972; F eick, Price and H ig ie , 1986; King
and Summers, 1970; M yers and R obertson, 1972; Reynolds and D a rd e n ,
1972; Robertson and M y e rs , 1969; Summers, 1970; T a t , 1 9 8 4 ), how ever,
none of the research on fashion opinion leadership has focused
specifically on consumers over 50 years of age. Many aspects of
fashion opinion leadership have been s tu d ie d , including demographics
(C h o w d h a ry , 1984; F eick, Price and H ig ie , 1986; M e y ers , 1971; Myers
and Robertson, 1972; Summers, 1 97 0 ), perso n ality (K in g and S proles,
1973; Robertson and M y e rs , 1 96 9 ), p ro d u c t knowledge (K ing and
Summers, 1970; M yers and R obertson, 1971; Summers, 1 9 7 1 ), life sty le
(Reynolds and D a rd e n , 1972; T ig e r t and A rn o ld , 1971) and inform ation
seeking behavior (Polegato and Wall, 1980). No studies to date have
focused on id e n tify in g opinion leadership in th e m ature consumer
segment and none have examined the relatio n sh ip of fashion opinion
leadership to retail patronage b e h av io r. Because consumers over 50 are
becoming such an im portant dem ographic segm ent, both in numbers and
in purchasing pow er, it is im portant to id e n tify some of th e ir
c h a ra c te ris tic s .
A mailing lis t o f 2003 random ly selected subscribers to 50 Plus
magazine was acquired for th is s tu d y . 50 Plus is a news and service
73
magazine fo r and about a c tiv e , a fflu e n t older men and women. The
sample included both males and females.
A self-ad m in istered q u e stio n n aire , th irte e n pages in le n g th , was
sent to the sample. T h is instru m en t was d iv id e d into five sections
(A p p e n d ix ) and its design was based on th e Total Design Method
described by Dillman (1 9 7 8 ). The fiv e sections included: store
c h a ra c te ris tic s , life s ty le , p a rticip a tio n in a c tiv itie s , fashion opinion
leadership and dem ographics.
Data w ere obtained from 711 m ature consum ers, constituting
35 p ercen t o f the sample. Respondents included 512 females and 188
males from all six geographic regions o f the U nited S tates, w ith the
N o rth ea s t, M idw est, and South being most h eavily re p res e n te d . The
m ajority were m arried and lived in two person households. E ig h ty-o n e
p ercen t owned th e ir own home. S ix ty -fiv e p e rce n t o f the sample had
some college education w ith 45 p ercent having a household income of
$30,000 a y e a r or more.
A summated scale of the tw e n ty fashion opinion leadership
questions was used to determ ine degree o f fashion opinion leadership.
Retail patronage behavior was measured by summated indices of 20
L ik e rt scale questions. Each aspect was designed to measure a
d iffe re n t index of re ta il patronage b e h av io r.
L ifestyle was measured by responses to 59 items scored on a 6
point L ik e rt scale. P rincipal components o f facto r analysis was
computed using the 59 life s ty le items to determ ine which variables were
related to each o th e r. The facto r analysis resu lted in seven life sty le
74
factors which were used as the independent v ariab les fo r th e a n alysis.
These factors included:
Factor 1. In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C onfident
Factor 2. Sim plicity P ro n e/C h an g e A verse
Factor 3. Recreational Shopper
Factor 4. Physically Fit
Factor 5. Fashionably Dressed
Factor 6. Community Involvem ent
Factor 7. Education
Using the factor loading scores, a mathematical model was fitte d
via the SAS procedure PROC GLM and was used to determ ine if a
relatio nship existed between fashion opinion leadership and life s ty le .
S ig n ific a n t relationships w ere found between life s ty le and fashion
opinion lead ersh ip . S pecifically these relationships included:
In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C o n fid e n t, Fashionably D ressed,
Recreational Shopper and Community
Involvem ent life s ty le dimensions w ere s ig n ifican t
p redicto rs of fashion opinion leadership when
sex was included in the regression model.
In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C o n fid e n t, Recreational Shopper
and Community Involvem ent life s ty le dimensions
were s ig n ific a n t p re d icto rs of fashion opinion
leadership when age was included in th e
regression model.
75
P o stretirem ent age was found to have an inverse
relatio n sh ip w ith opinion lea d e rsh ip .
To determ ine if age e ffe c ted th e life s ty le of fashion opinion
lea d e rs, a lin ear model which included th e in teractio n terms was used.
L ife style factors and th e in teractio n term s served as the independent
v a ria b le s . No s ig n ific a n t relationships w ere fo u n d , indicating th a t
life s ty le o f fashion opinion leaders does not v a ry w ith age.
A mathematical model was used to determ ine i f sex effected the
life s ty le o f fashion opinion leaders. To s tu d y this re la tio n s h ip , the
in te rac tio n terms w ere included in th e model. No s ig n ific a n t re la
tionships w ere found indicating th a t life s ty le o f fashion opinion leaders
does not v a ry by sex.
Regression analysis was used to te s t the relationship of
dem ographics to fashion opinion lea d e rsh ip . Two dem ographic
c h a ra c te ris tic s : sex and occupation w ere found to be s ig n ific a n t
p re d icto rs o f fashion opinion lead ersh ip . S pecifically:
Females w ere found to have h ig h e r opinion
leadership mean scores than males.
Those involved in business and communication
occupations had th e highest opinion leadership
mean scores, w hile s u p p o rt w o rkers and
homemakers had th e lowest mean scores.
76
In g e n e ra l, the h ig h e r the occupational s ta tu s , the
h ig h e r the mean score of fashion opinion
leadersh ip.
To determ ine if th e demographics of fashion opinion leaders
d iffe re d by s e x , a lin ear model was fitte d and included th e interaction
terms (occupation, ag e, u rb a n iz a tio n , income by sex) in the model.
None o f th e in teractio n term s w ere s ig n ific a n t p re d icto rs of fashion
opinion lea d e rsh ip , indicating th a t no diffe re n ce s existed in th e
dem ographics o f m ature male and female fashion opinion leaders.
To discern if the demographics o f m ature fashion opinion leaders
d iffe re d by age p r e - and p o s tre tire m e n t, a mathematical model w ith the
in teraction terms (occupation, u rb a n iza tio n , income, sex by age)
included was fitte d . No s ig n ific a n t relationships were found w ith the
in teractio n term s, indicatin g th a t no s ig n ific a n t diffe re n ce s existed in
the demographics o f p r e - and p o stretirem en t fashion opinion leaders.
T h re e of the fo u r indices of re ta il patronage b e h av io r— store
location and m o b ility, in -s to re convenience, and price q u a lity
relatio n sh ip s— were found to be s ta tis tic a lly s ig n ific a n t p re d icto rs of
opinion lea d e rsh ip , but explained so little o f the v arian ce th a t they
w ere not useful p re d ic to rs .
A correlation m a trix was generated on using the fashion opinion
leadership index (item s 11, 17, 18 and 19 of Section 4 of the
q u e stio n n aire ) to determ ine if those scoring high in fashion opinion
77
leadership tended to re p o rt influencing y o unger consumers more
fre q u e n tly than those scoring low. All correlations w ere positive and
s ta tis tic a lly s ig n ific a n t, indicating th a t the h ig h e r the fashion opinion
leadership score, th e g re a te r the degree to which h e /sh e reports
influencing younger consum ers.
Conclusions
T h e re are fashion opinion leaders in the m ature consumer segment.
T h e best pred icto rs o f this phenomenon were the life s ty le dimensions of
In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C o n fid e n t, Fashionably D ressed, Recreational S hopper,
and Community Involvem ent. These fin d in g s were sim ilar to the
fin d in g s of o th e r stu d ie s, fo r example T ig e r t and A rnold (1972) and
Reynolds and Darden (1972) also found fashion opinion leaders to be
s e lf c o n fid e n t. Baum garten (1975) found male fashion opinion leaders to
be socially active and Summers (1970) and Tat (1984) found opinion
leaders to have a strong in te re s t in fashion. One would expect these
to be ch ara c te ris tic s of fashion opinion leaders regardless of age
because, in o rd e r to serve as a communication c h an n el, one must have
some sort o f re g u la r social interaction (community in v o lv e m en t), have an
in te re s t in new products (fashionably dressed) and be confident enough
to communicate w ith others (in d e p e n d e n t/s e lf c o n fid e n t). A life s ty le
dimension not p re vio u s ly examined w ith re g a rd to fashion opinion
leadership was the Recreational Shopper dimension. T h is may be a
unique c h a ra c te ris tic o f th e m ature fashion opinion leader. Those over
50, w ith few er financial and fam ily obligations, may fin d themselves w ith
78
more leisure time and more d is c re tio n a ry income to spend shopping fo r a
new life s ty le . C e rta in ly those 65 and over have more leisure time a fte r
r e tirin g and may spend some o f this time shopping. Shopping malls are
recognizing this g ro u p as a prime ta rg e t fo r special program s and
a c tiv itie s such as e a rly morning w alking fo r fitness program s.
While dem ographics w ere not strong p re d icto rs o f fashion opinion
lead ersh ip , two c h a ra c te ris tic s , age and occupation, w ere s ig n ifican t
p re d ic to rs . Sex was s ig n ific a n t in e v e ry model in which it was
in clu ded. T h e results of this study show th a t females are more like ly
to be fashion opinion leaders than a re males. T h is fin d in g does not
mean th a t male fashion opinion leaders do not e x is t, and could be due
in p a rt to the fa c t th a t 72 p ercent o f the sample was female. The
fashion opinion leadership scale contained 10 questions about fashion
and 10 questions about new p ro d u c ts . It may be th a t while males
perceive themselves as opinion leaders fo r new products they do not
perceive themselves as opinion leaders fo r fashion. Because this is the
fir s t s tu d y on opinion leadership th a t included both males and females
in the sample, fu r th e r replication is needed.
Occupational status was the oth er s ta tis tic a lly s ig n ifican t
dem ographic p re d ic to r of fashion opinion lead ersh ip . G enerally the
hig h er the occupational s ta tu s , the h ig h e r the mean score in fashion
opinion lead ersh ip . H ow ever, the fa c t th a t sem iskilled w o rkers had the
second highest mean score suggests th a t fashion opinion leadership
exists w ithin socioeconomic groups and is not m erely a phenomena of
high socioeconomic s ta tu s .
79
When age was d ivid ed into two categories 50-64 and 65 and o v e r,
it also became a s ig n ific a n t p re d ic to r of fashion opinion lead ersh ip .
One in te re s tin g fin d in g is th a t p ostretirem ent age was in v e rs e ly related
to fashion opinion lead ersh ip . T h is could be explained by the fa c t th a t
th is age g ro u p is no longer in the w ork force in te ra c tin g w ith the same
g ro u p o f people on a re g u la r basis. R etirem ent relaxes the need to
conform to a c ertain set o f standards which in tu rn may decrease the
need fo r opinion leaders to guide decision m aking. T h is does not
suggest th a t the 65 plus consumer is no longer a c tiv e or in v o lv e d ,
m erely th a t conform ing to g ro u p norms may become less im p o rtan t,
th e re fo re decreasing the need fo r opinion leaders.
Fashion opinion leaders in the m ature consumer segment did not
appear to v a ry on th e ir dem ographic or life s ty le c h ara c te ris tic s when
age and sex w ere taken into consideration. So male and female m ature
opinion leaders could be expected to have sim ilar dem ographic and
life s ty le p ro file s , as would p re - and p o stretirem en t m ature opinion
leaders.
A p p a re n tly , m ature fashion opinion leaders do not have re ta il
patronage behavior th a t is any d iffe re n t from th a t of any oth er
consumer 50 years o f age and o v e r. T h is fin d in g was unexpected and
disap pointing given the fa c t th a t the Recreational S hopper life s ty le
dimension was a p re d ic to r o f fashion opinion leadersh ip indicating th a t
shopping is an im portant a c tiv ity to th is g ro u p . It was expected th a t
being an opinion leader would p ro v id e some explanation of retail
patronage c h ara c te ris tic s because fashion opinion leaders in general
80
tend to adopt products at an e a rlie r stage in the pro d u ct lifecycle and
are th o u g h t to have d iffe re n t shopping behavior than o th e r g ro u p s .
The relationship between fashion opinion leadership and re p o rte d
influence o f younger consumers had n e ve r been exam ined. T h e fin d in g
o f th is s tu d y indicates th a t the h ig h e r the fashion opinion leadership
score, th e h ig h e r the score in re p o rte d influence of y ounger
consumers. T h is fin d in g suggests th a t m ature fashion opinion leaders'
scope of influence may extend beyond th e ir peers to the 30-49 y e a r old
consumer. T h e m ature opinion leader could be more im portant to the
d iffu sio n o f new products than o rig in a lly th o u g h t because not only has
this g ro u p dem onstrated a g re a t deal o f purchasing pow er, b u t they
believe th a t th ey influence the consumer g ro u p th a t most businesses
activ e ly p u rs u e — the 30-49 y e a r old consumer. While re p o rte d behavior
is not necessarily actual b e h a v io r, the fin d in g indicates th a t fu r th e r
in vestig atio n is w a rra n te d .
Lim itations
1. T h e s u rv e y sample, obtained from a su b sc rib e r list to 50 Plus
m agazine, was b e tte r educated and more a fflu e n t than th e general
po pulation. T h e re fo re , th e fin d in g s may not be generalizable to all
consumers over 50 years o f age.
2. Almost 16 p e rce n t o f the sample did not id e n tify th e ir age.
T h e re fo re , age may have d iffe re n t impact on fashion opinion leadership
than indicated by this s tu d y .
81
3. All of the v aria b les (dem ographics, life sty le and retail
patronage beh avio r) accounted fo r a re la tiv e ly small amount of the
varian ce in fashion opinion lead ersh ip . This suggests th a t th e re are
o th e r factors th a t will be b e tte r pred icto rs of fashion opinion
lead ersh ip .
4. The sample composition o f 72 p ercen t female and 26 p ercent
male may have been responsible fo r the significance of sex as a
p re d ic to r v aria b le fo r fashion opinion leadersh ip.
5. The measure used fo r fashion opinion leadership was a measure
o f s e lf-p e rc e p tio n , not actual b e h av io r.
Im plications
The m ature consumer should not be ignored in m arketing plans and
prom otions. in this day o f com petitive re ta ilin g , they re p re s e n t an
a fflu e n t and re ce p tiv e m arket to products th a t meet th e ir needs.
Blackwell and T a ia rz y k (1983) id e n tified an a fflu e n t "super class" of
those w ith incomes o f $50,000 or more as one o f the fastest grow ing
segments o f the 1980's. T h is "super class" is expected to comprise
5 p ercen t of the United States population by 1990. it is in te re s tin g to
note th a t 20.2 p ercen t o f this sample had a household income of $50,000
a y e a r or more.
Within th is a fflu e n t g ro u p o f m ature consumers fashion opinion
leaders do e x is t. M ature fashion opinion leaders do appear to have
some c h aracteristics th a t businesses can id e n tify and use to ta rg e t
prom otions. T h is s tu d y found several life s ty le dimensions
82
(In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C o n fid e n t, Recreational S h o p p er, Fashionably
D ressed, and Community Involvem ent) to be p re d icto rs of fashion
opinion leadersh ip. R etailers and o th e r consumer p ro d u c t businesses
can use these life s ty le dimensions as a basis fo r m arketing and
promotional s tra te g ie s . To appeal to the Recreational S h o p p er, re ta ile rs
should consider increasing the num ber and fre q u e n cy of store
sponsored a ctiv itie s designed to draw in this g ro u p . Promotions and
advertisem ents ta rg e te d to this group could emphasize shopping as a
leisure time a c tiv ity .
To ta rg e t th e In d e p e n d e n t/S e lf C onfident p erson, promotions could
emphasize in d iv id u a lity , using older models so th a t th e m ature group
will id e n tify w ith w hat is being a d v e rtis e d . M erchandise mix should
p ro vide c u rre n t styles which are less extrem e b u t nevertheless similar
to w hat is o ffere d to y o unger consumers. C orp o rate sponsorship of
local community projects may be a way to reach the m ature opinion
leader because this research found them to be a c tiv e ly involved in
c h u rc h , social and civic organizations.
This research also suggests th a t opinion leaders e x is t across
socioeconomic g ro u p s . T h e re fo re , it is im perative th a t re ta ile rs "do
th e ir homework" and c a re fu lly research the c h ara c te ris tic s of th e ir
ta rg e t m arkets. L ife style dimensions provide a b e tte r explanation of
fashion opinion leadership than do demographics and shouid be included
in any m arket research th a t is conducted.
Vv'hile women are more like ly to be fashion opinion leaders than
men, it should not be assumed th a t no male opinion leaders e x is t.
83
E ffo rts should be made to reach male as well as female opinion leaders
th ro u g h the channels previously suggested.
Recommendations
To increase th e re tu rn ra te , it is suggested th a t the length o f the
instrum ent be decreased. T h is in strum ent was 13 pages long and it is
probable th a t the length p re ve n te d some people from respond ing. The
re ta il patronage behavior questions (Section 1) could be dropped from
the questionnaire because re ta il patronage behavior was not found to be
a useful p re d icto r o f fashion opinion lead ersh ip . I f the length o f the
questionnaire was to be kept the same, the number of life sty le
dimensions included could be increased because life s ty le was th e best
p re d icto r of fashion opinion lead ersh ip .
Findings from th is s tu d y suggest areas fo r fu r th e r s tu d y . To
examine the relationship between generalized opinion leaders and
product specific opinion leaders among m ature consum ers, questions
about specific products could be included in the q u e stio n n aire . The
ch ara c te ris tic s of both p ro d u c t specific opinion leaders and general
opinion leaders could be examined fo r sim ilarities and d iffe re n ce s .
Id e n tify in g th e media consulted by various types o f opinion leaders
p rio r to making a purchase is another fa c et o f opinion leadership th a t
could be exam ined.
To fu r th e r explore the influence o f older m ature opinion leaders on
you ng er consum ers, sample including consumers 25-49 years of age as
well as consumers 50 years o f age and o v er could be used. Each group
84
could be asked to id e n tify who serves as an influence in a v a rie ty of
purchase s itu a tio n s , w ith these responses then being compared to
determ ine if th e older consumers a re indeed re p o rte d to be opinion
leaders fo r the y o unger consumers and fo r w hat p ro d u c ts .
A lthough s ig n ific a n t relationships w ere found between fashion
opinion leadersh ip and dem ographics and life s ty le dim ensions, the
amount o f v arian ce explained by the regression models was low. More
research is needed to id e n tify b e tte r p re d icto rs of fashion opinion
leadership in the m ature consumer segm ent. Some possible areas to
e xp lo re are perceived pro d u ct e x p e rtis e , position w ithin a social g ro u p
and amount o f media e xp o su re.
L IS T OF REFERENCES
86
L IS T OF REFERENCES
A lla n , C . B. (1981, A p r i l ) . O ve r 55: Growth m arket o f the '80s.

Nation's Business, 26-32.
Assael, H. (1 9 84 ). Consumer Behavior and M arketing A c tio n . 2nd

edition. Boston: Kent Publishing.
Baum garten, S. A . (1 9 7 5 ). T h e innovative communicator in th e d if f u

sion process. Journal o f M arketing Research, 11 , 12-18.
B e r g e r , J. (1985, 25 N ov e m ber). T h e new old: where the economic

action is. Business WEek, 138.
B ivens, J. (1984, A u g u s t) . Senior citizen m arketing: S hattering

stereotypes. Chain Store Age E x e c u tiv e , 17-20.
Blackwell, R. and T a l a r z y k , W. W. (1983, W in te r). Lifestyle retailing:

Competitive strategies for the 1980's. Journal of R e ta ilin g , 5 9 ( 4 ) ,
7 -2 7 .
B r e t t , J. E. and Kernaleguen. (1 9 75 ). Perceptual and personality

variables related to opinion leadership in fashion. Perceptual and
Motor S k ills , 40, 775-779.
B ru c e , G. D. and W itt, R. E. (1 9 70 ). Personality correlates of

innovative buying behavior. Journal o f M arketing Research, 7_,
259-60.
Cassill, N. L. (1 9 8 6 ). T h e influence o f female consumers' employment

orientation on lifestyle and evaluative c rite ria o f a p p are l. Doctoral
dissertation. The U n iv e rs ity o f Tennessee, Knoxville.
Celanese Fibers. (1 9 87 ). T h e new gold market: A major opportu nity

in the marketing of women's a p p a r e l. M a rk et research re p o rt.
C h o w d h a ry , U. (1 9 8 4 ). Fashion process as related to media exposure,

social participation and a ttitu d e toward change among college
women in Ind ia. Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State U n iv e rs ity ,
1984. Dissertation A bs tra cts In te rn a tio n a l.
C onne r, R. C. (1984, 10 Decem ber). Why do agencies ignore the

mature market? T e levision-R adio A g e , 141.
Cosmas, S. C. (1 9 82 ). Lifestyle and consumption p a tte rn s . Journal

of Consumer R esearch, 8^, 453-5.
D a rd e n , W. R. and Reynolds, F. D. (1 9 7 2 ). P redicting opinion

leadership for men's apparel fashions. Journal o f Marketing
Research, 9, 324-328.
87
D avis, L. L. and Lennon, S. J. (1 9 85 ). S e lf-m onitoring, fashion

opinion readership and attitudes toward clothing in The Psychology
o f Fashion (M . R. Solomon, e d . ) , pp. 177-182, Lexington, MA:
Lexington Books/DC Health.
Dillman, D. A . (1 9 7 8 ). Mail and Telephone S urve y s: T h e Total Design

M ethod. New Y o r k : John Wiley and Sons.
Douglas, S. P. and U r b a n , C . D. (1 9 77 ). Lifestyle analysis to profile

women in international m arkets. Journal o f M a r k e tin g , 41 , 46-54.
Feick, L. F . , Price, L. L. and H igie, R. A . (1 9 86 ). People who use

people: the oth e r side o f opinion leadership in Advances in
Consumer Research (R ic h a rd J. L u tz , e d . ) , p p . 3 01 -5 , Provo,
UT^ Association for Consumer Research.
G atignon, H. G. and Roberston, T . S. (1 9 8 5 ). A propositional inven

to ry for new diffusion research. Journal of Consumer Research,
11_, 849-867.
Gelb, B. D. (1 9 7 8 ). Exploring the g r a y m arket segment. MSU

Business T o p ic s , 26 ( S p r i n g ) , 41-46.
Gilman, H . (1986, 23 A p r i l ) . M arketers court older consumers as

balance o f buying power s h ifts . Wall S tre e t j o u r n a l , 35.
G r a n o v e tte r, M. S. (1 9 7 3 ). T h e s tre n g th o f weak ties. American

Journal o f Sociology, 78, 1360-1380.
H am burg, M. (1 9 7 0 ). Statistical analysis for decision m akin g . New

Y o r k : H a rc o u rt, Brace S World, Inc.
Jacoby, J. (1 9 7 4 ). T h e construct v a lid ity of opinion leadership.

Public Opinion Q u a r t e r l y , 38 , 81-89.
K e r lin g e r, F. N. (1 9 6 4 ). Foundations of Behavioral Research. New

Y o rk : Holt, R in e h art and Winston.
Kim, Jae-on and M u e ller, C . W. (1 9 78 ). Introduction to factor

analysis: what it is and how to do i t . B ev erly Hills, CA: Sage
Publications.
Kim, M. and S c h ra n k , H. (1 9 8 2 ). Fashion leadership among Korean

women. Home Economics Research J o u rn a l, 1JH3), 227-234.
K ing, C. W. and Summers, J. 0 . (1 9 70 ). O verlap o f opinion leader

ship across consumer product categories. Journal of Marketing
Research, 7 , 4 3-50.
88
K in g , C . W. and Sproles, G. S. (1 9 7 3 ). Predictive efficacy of

psychopersonality characteristics in fashion change agent
ide ntifica tion. Proceedings of the American Psychological
A ssociation, Montreal, Canada, 3 , 841 -2 .
K in g , C . W. and R ing, L. (1 9 7 9 ). Fashion the o ry : the dynamics of

s ty le , ta s te , adoption and d iffu s io n . Proceedings of the
Association o f Consumer Research Annual M e e tin g , 13-16.
K o tle r, P. and Zaltman, C . (1 9 7 6 ). T a rg e tin g prospects for a new

p ro d u c t. Journal o f A d v e rtis in g R e search, 16 , 7 -1 8 .
Lam bert, Z. V . (1 9 7 9 ). An investigation of older consumers unmet

needs and wants at the retail level. Journal o f R e ta ilin g , 55
( W in t e r ) , 35-57.
L e h r e r , L. (1986, 18 F e b r u a r y ) . More m arketers seek to ta r g e t people

o v er 50. Wall S tre e t J o u rn a l, 35.
Lennon, S. J. and D avis, L. L. (1 9 8 7 ). Individual differences in

fashion orientation and cognitive complexity. Perceptual and Motor
S k ills , 64, 327-330.
L in d e n , F. (1986, F e b r u a r y ) . Midlife and Beyond: the $800 billion

m arket. American Demographics, 4.
L ip p itt, G. L, (1 9 7 3 ). Visualizing Change: Model Buiiding and the

Change Process. F a ir f a x , V A : N T L Learning Resources Corp.
L um pkin, J. R . , G re e n b e rg , B. A . and C o ld s tu c k e r, J. L. (1 9 8 5 ).
M arketplace needs of the e ld e rly : determ inant a ttrib u te s and store
choice. Journal of R e ta ilin g , 61^(2), 75-105.
Lum pkin, J. R. and G r e e n b e rg , B. A . (1 9 8 2 ). Apparel shopping

p a tte rn s o f the e ld e r ly . Journal o f R e ta ilin g , 5j5(4), 68-89.
M arcus, A . S. and B a ue r, R. A . (1 9 6 4 ). Yes: there are generalized

opinion leaders. Public Opinion Q u a r t e r l y , 2 8 , 628-32.
M a rk etin g N ew s. (1985, 22 N ov e m ber). Panelists shed light on diverse

e ld e rly m a rk e t, 31, 35.
Mason, J. B. and B eard en, W. O. (1 9 7 8 ). Profiling the shopping

behavior of old people. The G eron tologist, 1 8 , 454-461.
M attson, B. E. (1 9 8 2 ). Situational influences on store choice.

Journal of R e ta ilin g , 5 8 ( 3 ) , 46-58.
Montgom ery, D . B. and S ilk , A . J. (1 9 7 1 ). Clusters o f consumer

interests and opinion leaders spheres of influence. Journal of
M a rk etin g Research, )5, 317-321.
89
M y e rs , C . A . (1 9 7 1 ). Fashion opinion leadership and fashion adoption

in relation to social p a rtic ip a tio n , and favorableness toward new
styles in u n iv e r s ity women's clothing. Unpublished Master's
thesis, Michigan state U n iv e r s ity , E. Lansing.
M y e rs , J. H. and Robertson, T . S. (1 9 72 ). Dimensions o f opinion

leadership. Journal o f M arketing Research, 9^ ( F e b r u a r y ) , 41-46.
M y e rs , J. H. and Robertson, T . S. (1 9 7 4 ). S ta b ility of self

designated opinion leadership. In S. Ward and P. W right ( E d s . ) .
Advances in Consumer R esearch. Chicago: Association for
Consumer Research.
P e tre , P. (1986, 31 M a r c h ). M arketers mine for gold in the old.

F o r tu n e , 70.
Polegato, R. and Wall, M. (1 9 8 0 ). Information seeking by fashion

opinion leaders. Home Economics Research J o u rn a l, 8, 327-338.
Reynolds, F. D. and D a rd e n , W. (1 9 7 2 ). P redicting opinion

leadership for women's clothing fashion. Combined Proceedings:
M arketing Education and the Real World and Dynamic M arketing in
a Changing World. Chicago: American M arketing Association,
434-438.
R eynolds, F. D . , C r a s k , M. R. and Wells, W. D . (1 9 7 7 ). T h e modern

feminine lifestyle. Journal o f M a r k e tin g , 4 ^ ( 3 ) , 38-45.
Reynolds, F. D. and D a rd e n , W. R. (1 9 72 ). In te rm a rk e t patronage:

A psychographic s tudy of consumer outshoppers. Journal of
M a r k e tin g , 3 6 ( 4 ) , 5 0-54.
Reynolds, F. D. and D a rd e n , W. R. (19 74 ). Construing lifestyle and

psychographics. In W. D . Wells (E d .)., Lifestyle and
Psychographics, 7 1 -9 6 . Chicago: American M arketing Association.
R eynolds, F. D . , D a rd e n , W. R. and M a r tin , W. S. (1 9 7 4 ). The

store loyal consumer: a lifestyle analysis. T h e Journal of
R e ta ilin g , 5 0 , 7 3-84 .
Robertson, T . S. and M y e rs , J. H. (1 9 69 ). Personality correlates of

opinion leadership and innovative buying behavior. Journal of
M arketing R e s ea rch , £ , 164-168.
Robertson, T . S. (1 9 7 1 ). Innovative Behavior and Communication.

New Y o rk : Holt, R in e h art and Winston, Inc.
Rogers, E. M. (1 9 7 6 ). New product adoption and d iffu s io n . Journal

of Consumer Research, 2, 290-301.
90
S anoff, A . P. (1984, 19 M a r c h ). A m aturing society (10 forces

reshaping A m e rica ). U . S . News and World R e p o r t, 9 6 , 40.
Schiffman, L. G . , Dash, J. F. and Dillon, W. R. (1 9 77 ). The

contribution of store image characteristics to store ty p e choice.
Journal of R e ta ilin g , 5 3 , 3 -14.
S c h ra n k , H. L. and Gilmore, L. (1 9 7 3 ). Correlates o f fashion

leadership: Implications for fashion process th e o ry . Sociological
Q u a r t e r l y , 1 4 , 534-43.
S c h ra n k , H. L . , Sugawara, A . , and Kim, M. (1 9 82 ). Comparison of

Korean and American fashion leaders. Home Economics Research
J o u r n a l, J 0 ( 3 ) , 235-240.
S chu tz, H. G . , B a ir d , P. C. and Hawkes, G. R. (1 9 7 9 ). Lifestyles

and Consumer Behavior of O ider Am ericans. New Y o rk : Praeger
Publishers.
S ilk , A. J. (1 9 7 1 ). Response set and the measurement of

self-designation opinion leadership. Public Opinion Q u a rte r ly , 35,
383-397.
S k e lly, F. R. (1985, A u g u s t). There is life a fte r 49. Madison

A v e n u e , 15-18.
Statistical analysis systems manual. (1 9 85 ). C a r y , NC: SAS In s titu te .
Summers, J. 0 . (1 9 7 0 ). T h e id e n tity of women's clothing fashion

opinion leaders. Journal of Marketing R e s ea rch, 11 , 178-85.
Summers, J. O. (1 9 7 1 ). Generalized change agents and

innovativeness. Journal of M arketing R e s ea rch, 8, 313-316.
T a t, P. K. (1 9 8 4 /8 5 ). Opinion leadership in black female buying

behavior. M id -A tla n tic Journal o f Business, 23 ( W in t e r ) , i i - 2 0 .
T i g e r t , D . J. and A rn o ld , S. J. (1 9 71 ). Profiling self-designated

opinion leaders and self-designated innovators thro u g h life -style
research. In D. M. G ard n er (E d .), Proceedings Second
Conference: Association for Consumer Research (p p . 425-445).
Ann A r b o r , Michigan: Association for Consumer Research.
Tim s, M ary K. (1 9 8 4 ). Readability of retail p rin te d items and shop

ping behavior o f socially active older women shoppers of apparel.
Doctoral dis se rta tion. T h e U n iv e rs ity of Tennessee, Knoxville.
T o n g re n , H. N. (1 9 8 1 ). Retailing to older consumers. Proceedings of

the Southern M ark etin g Association, pp. 93-96.
91
T r a c y , E. J. (1985, 14 O c to b e r). T h e gold in the g r a y : Madison

Avenue is discovering the over 50 crowd. F o rtu n e , 137.
T u r n b u l l , P. W. and Meenaghan, A . (1 9 80 ). Diffusion o f innovation

and opinion leadership. European Journal o f M a r k e tin g , 14, 3 -33.
U .S . Departm ent of Commerce Bureau o f the Census. (1 9 87 ).

Statistical A b s tra c t o f the United States 1987. Washington, D . C . :
U .S . Government P rin ting Office.
Wells, W. D. (1 9 7 4 ). Lifestyle and P sychographics. Chicago:

American M arketing Association.
Wells, W. D . (1 9 75 ). Psychographics: A critical re v ie w . Journal of

M arketing R esearch, 12, 196-213.
Zaltman, G. and S t i f f , R. (1 9 7 3 ). Theories of d iffusion. In S. Ward

and T . S. Roberston ( E d s . ) , Consumer Behavior: Theoretical
Sources (p p . 4 16 -4 6 8). Englewood C liffs , N . J . : P re n tic e -H a ll,
Inc.
APP EN D IX
93
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE

u ,, KNOXVILLE
May 22, 1987
Dear Consumer:
Have you ever f e l t that once you reached a certain age businesses do
not seem to be as responsive to your needs and wants? Do you ever
have problems finding new products th at you want to buy because
everything seems geared to a much younger customer? We a l l want to
feel as I f we are valued customers, regardless o f our age. The
University o f Tennessee-Knoxville is Interested 1n Identifyin g the
interests In new products and fashions of consumers over 50 years of
age. This research focuses on your I n te re s t in clothing fashions and
College of other types o f new products.
Hum an Ecology
You are a part o f a c a re f u lly selected sample o f consumers being asked
Textiles,
to give t h e i r opinion this topic. I would g re a tly appreciate i t I f
Merchandising
you would complete the enclosed questionnaire and return i t 1n the
and Design
self-addressed stamped envelope.- I t w i l l take approximately 20
minutes to complete the questionnaire.
You are assured o f complete c o n f id e n t i a l it y . The questionnaire has an

id e n t i f i c a t i o n number fo r mailing purposes only. This is so your name
can be checked o f f the mailing l i s t when your questionnaire 1s
returned. Your name w i l l never be placed on the questionnaire. The
numbers in parentheses on the questionnaire are fo r keypunching
purposes only.
The re sults o f this research w i l l be made av a ila b le to r e t a i l stores

and consumer product companies so th at they may become more aware of
what is important to you when buying fashions and other new products.
You may receive a summary of the re su lts by w ritin g “copy of results
requested" on the back o f the return envelope and p rin tin g your name
and address below i t . Please do not put this information on the
questionnaire i t s e l f .
Please return the completed questionnaire by June 8 , 1987. Should you

have any questions regarding this study, please fee l free to contact
me a t (615) 974-2141. Thank you in advance f o r your i n te re s t and
time.
Sincerely,
P a t r ic ia T. Huddleston Imogen? Ford, Ph.D.

Ph.D. Candidate Professor
Major Research Adviser
Enclosure
A pparel/In terio r Design/M erchandising/Textile Science

1215 West Cumberland Avenue, Room 2 3 0 /Knoxville, Tennessee, 37996-1900/(615) 974-2141
June 9, 1987
Two weeks ago a questionnaire was sent to you re g ard in g your

opinion about new products.
I f you have already completed and re tu rn e d it , please accept my

sincere th a n k s. I f not, please do so today. Because it has been sent
to only a small but re p res e n ta tive sample, it is extrem ely im portant that
yours be included in the sample. Th is will insure th a t the results will
accurately reflect the opinions o f consumers over 50 years o f age.
S in ce re ly ,
Patricia Huddleston
Doctoral Candidate
T h e U n iv e rs ity of Tennessee
95
(PLEASE TIFK OM THIS FCRH) FORM A CHPA 3 f t ) ~ f9

-(in stru ctio n s on reverse C e rtific a tio n o f Execution froa Review Received ik D 4 ft in<n
side o£ th is fora) f o r Research Involving Ht—»n Subjects in ORC u
A. PROJECT DIRECXDR(s) and/or CO-DIRECIOR(s): (For studGnt projects, l i s t both the student and the advisor)
Stu d e n t: P a tric ia T. H u d dleston ; A d viso r: D r. Imogene Ford

b . OQKFLE3Z k a i u m o a d d r e s s and reoK E m m b i x or p i / r o « n i 230 J e s s ie
co - p z / f d : H a r r i s B ld g .
974-2141 C o l l e g e o f Human E co log y
c. T m E OF project-. K n o x v i l l e , TN 37996-1900
F a s h io n O p in io n L e a d e r s h i p and t h e M a tu re Consumer: D e m o g r a p h ic s , L i f e s t y l e
d . d e p a k d u m i : and R e t a i l P a tr o n a g e B e h a v i o r
T e x t i l e s , M e r c h a n d i s in g and D e sign
E. EXZEKKAL FHVDMC AGEMCZ AMD ID BtKBER ( i f applicable):
F. tXAKt SUBJOSSICH DEADLZXE ( i f applicable): NA
G. STARTING DATE: "Upon c e r tific a tio n by Director o f Research Compliances"

(NO RESEARCH MAX BE DOTIAHD UNTIL CH30TFICAXICW IS GRANIED)
H. ESTIMATED COMPLEXION DAZE:

(Include a l l aspects of research and f in a l write-up) J u ly , 1°87
I. Object!ve(s) o f Project: (see Section 8.4 o f GUIDE)
To q u a n t i f y o p i n i o n l e a d e r s h i p i n t h e m ature ( o v e r 5 0 ) consumer segm ent.

To d e v e lo p a d e m o g ra p h ic , l i f e s t y l e and r e t a i l p a t r o n a g e b e h a v i o r
p r o f i l e o f m a ture o p i n i o n l e a d e r s . To a n a l y z i ; d i f f e r e n c e s between
o p i n i o n l e a d e r s , n o p l e a d e r s , male and fe m a le o p i n i o n l e a d e r s and p re
and p o s t r e t i r e m e n t o p i n i o n l e a d e r s .
II. Subjects: (see Section 8.5 o f GUIDE)
A p a r t i a l s u b s c r i b e r l i s t w i l l be o b t a i n e d from 50 P lu s m a g a z in e . T his
l i s t o f male and f e m a le s u b s c r i b e r s o v e r 50 r e p r e s e n t s a random
sample o f 2000 s u b s c r i b e r s t o 50 P l u s . Persons i n v o l v e d w i l l spend
a p p r o x i m a t e l y 30 m in u t e s c o m p l e t i n g th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e .
H I. Methods or Procedures: (see Section 8.6 of C37IBE)

The s u rv e y r e s e a r c h method w i l l be used. The s i x t e e n page q u e s t i o n n a i r e
w i l l c o n t a i n L i k e r t - t y p e q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n in g o p i n i o n l e a d e r s h i p , l i f e s t y l e
and r e t a i l p a t r o n a g e b e h a v i o r . A d d i t i o n a l q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n in g d em ographic
i n f o r m a t i o n w i l l be i n c l u d e d . Respondents w i l l be g iv e n t h e o p t i o n o f
i d e n t i f y i n g a p ers on who i n f l u e n c e s t h e i r purch as e d e c i s i o n s .
Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w i l l be s e n t t o t h e p e o p le i d e n t i f i e d by t h e f i r s t s a m p le.
A l l i n s t r u m e n t s w i l l have an i d e n t i f i c a t i o n number f o r m a i l i n g purposes
so t h e r e s p o n d e n t ' s name can be checked o f f t h e m a i l i n g l i s t . The
s u b j e c t ' s name w i l l n e v e r be p l a c e d on th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e . D r. W i l l i a m
Sanders w i l l a s s i s t in t h e s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s . Dr. Imogene Ford i s
th e a d v i s o r .
IT . CAHDOKY(e) for exempt keseakch PER AS CFR 46: _(see reverse side fo r categories)
CcSTITICA IIon: The research described herein is in compliance with 45 CFR 46 101(b) and presents
.^subjects with no more than minimal r is k as defined by applicable regulations
Investigator
ttaacTf ^ ^ ~ SignAti
Advisor
me*
Name' <J ' ^fliggiai
Dept. Bead ^ — .___
Name J&g
CEm nCATIO N BY DIRECTOR,
OFFICE OF RESEARCH COMPLIANCES I Q - --■ ± z i3 = 2 2 .
feme' Sfcgnat:
REVISED 6/86
96
1 9 8 7 CONSUMER SURUEV
DEPARTMENT OF TEXTILES, M E R CH AN DISING RND DESIGN

THE U N IVE R SITY OF TENNESSEE-KNOHUILLE
KNO HUILLE, TENNESSEE 3 7 9 9 6 - 1 9 0 0
Please answer all the questions. If you wish to coment on any questions
or qualify your answers, please feel free to use the space in the margins.
YOUR CONTRIBUTION TO THIS STUDY IS GREATLY APPRECIATED!!
97
H J\
______ V 4/
Card 1 (5)
SECTION 1
This questionnaire is concerned with your interest in all types of new
products such as appliances, electronics and clothing. Listed below are
various services or characteristics that a store might have. Please circle
the number that best indicates the DEGREE OF IMPORTANCE of EACH ITEM
when shopping.
1= Not important
2= Below Average Importance
3= Average Importance
4= Above Average Importance
5= Very Important
Store Service or Characteristic Nl Al VI
1. Product quality 1 2 3 4 5 (6)
2. Attractive prices 1 2 3 4 5 (7)
3. Variety in one store 1 2 3 4 5 (8)
4. Store reputation 1 2 3 4 5 (9)
5. Well known brands of products 1 2 3 4 5 (10)
6. Readable labels or tags on products 1 2 3 4 5 (11)
7. Knowledgeable salespersons 1 2 3 4 5 (12)
8. Salesperson your own age 1 2 3 4 5 (13)
9. Convenient/fast checkout 1 2 3 4 5 (14)
10. Delivery to home 1 2 3 4 5 (15)
11. Convenient parking 1 2 3 4 5 (16)
O
12. Store location close to home 1 2 Sj 4 5 (17)
13. Discount for senior citizens 1 2 3 4 5 (18)
98
Store Service or Characteristic Nl Al VI
14. Variety of stores close together 1 2 3 4 5 (19)
15. Ease of finding items 1 2 3 4 5 (20)
16. Sales (marked down prices) 1 2 3 4 5 (21)
17. Credit or credit card availability 1 2 3 4 5 (22)
18. Acceptance of bankcards (VISA, 1 2 3 4 5 (23)

Mastercard)
19. Availability of advertised products 1 2 3 4 5 (24)
20. Ability to return unsatisfactory 1 2 3 4 5 (25)

products.
Now for the particular store you SHOP MOST OFTEN, please circle the number
that best indicates how well that store provides that service or has that
characteristic.
1= Not at all
2= Somewhat
3= Very much so
Store service or characteristic Not Some Very
1. Quality products 1 2 3 (26)
2. Attractive prices 1 2 3 (27)
3. Variety in one store 1 2 3 (28)
4. Store reputation 1 2 3 (29)
5. Carries well known brands of products 1 2 3 (30)
6. Readable labels/tags on products 1 2 3 (31)
7. Has knowledgeable salespeople 1 2 3 (32)
8. Has salespeople your own age 1 2 3 (33)
99
Store service or characteristic Not Some Very
9. Convenient/fast checkout 1 2 3 (34)
10. Delivery to home 1 2 3 (35)
11. Convenient parking 1 2 3 (36)
12. Store location is close to home 1 2 3 (37)
13. Discount for Senior Citizens 1 2 3 (38)
14. Variety of stores close together 1 2 3 (39)
15. Items are easy to find 1 2 3 (40)
16. Sales (marked down prices) 1 2 3 (41)
17. Credit or credit card availability 1 2 3 (42)
18. Accepts bankcards (VISA, 1 2 3 (43)

Mastercard)
19. Availability of advertised products 1 2 3 (44)
20. Ability to return unsatisfactory 1 2 3 (45)

products.
Please answer the following questions by circling the appropriate number.
21. When shopping for wearing apparel I most frequently shop at (circle one):
DEPARTMENT STORE........................................... 1
SPECIALTY STORE............................................... 2
DISCOUNT STORE................................................ 3
CHAIN STORE (SEARS. PENNEYS)......................... 4
OFF PRICE STORE OR OUTLET STORE.....................5
CATALOG/MAIL ORDER......................................... 6
OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)______________________ 7 (46)
22. When shopping for major appliances, I most frequently shop at a:

DEPARTMENT STORE.....................................1
APPLIANCE STORE.........................................2
DISCOUNT STORE.......................................... 3
CHAIN STORE (SEARS. PENNEY'S)................... 4
OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)_______________________ 5 (47)
100
23. When shopping for electronics (stereos, televisions, VCR's, etc), I

most frequently shop at:
DEPARTMENT STORE....................................... 1
APPLIANCE STORE.......................................... 2
DISCOUNT STORE............................................3
CHAIN STORE (SEARS, PENNEVS).................... .4
OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)_______________________ 5 (48)
SECTION 2
This section includes statements about your activities, interests and
opinions. Circle the appropriate number indicating your AGREEMENT OR
DISAGREEMENT with each statement. The numbers from 1-6 are as follows:
1= I Strongly Disagree with the statement

2- I Generally Disagree with the statement
3= I Slightly Disagree with the statement
4= I Slightly Agree with the statement
5= I Generally Agree with the statement
6= I Strongly Agree with the statement
STRONGLY STRONGLY
Activities, Interests, Opinions DISAGREE AGREE
1. I often combine shopping with 1 2 3 4 5 6 (49)

lunch or dinner.
2. What happens to me is my own 1 2 3 4 5 6 (50)
doing.
3. I shop a lot for specials 1 2 3 4 5 6 (51)
4. I feel that I cope well with 1 2 3 4 5 6 (52)

everyday life.
5. I go shopping for recreation. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (53)
6. Men are smarter than women. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (54)
7. I often go shopping without 1 2 3 4 5 6 (55)

anything definite in mind to buy.
8. I like to work on community 1 2 3 4 5 6 (56)
projects.
9. In general, things are just too 1 2 3 4 5 6 (57)
complicated today.
10. Shopping gives me a chance to 1 2 3 4 5 6 (58)
get out and do something.
101
STRONGLY STRONGLY
11. I am often treated unfairly when 1 2 3 4 5 6 (59)

I go shopping.
12 . I am more independent than most 1 2 3 4 5 6 (60)
people.
13. I think I am a better shopper 1 2 3 4 5 6 (61)
than most.
14. Products are too complicated 1 2 3 4 5 6 (62)
today.
15. Wearing the right clothes is 1 2 3 4 5 6 (63)
important for acceptance.
16. Compared to others my age 1 2 3 4 5 6 (64)
I see a doctor more often.
17. I could buy more things if I 1 2 3 4 5 6 (65)
could get more credit.
18. I am worse off financially than 1 2 3 4 5 6 (66)
I was a year ago.
19. I think I have a lot of personal 1 2 3 4 5 6 (67)
ability.
20. Compared to others my age, I 1 2 3 4 5 6 (68)
take less medicine.
21. I'm not as active as I used to be 1 2 3 4 5 6 (69)
because of fewer friends or relatives.
22. You can save a lot of money by 1 2 3 4 5 6 (70)
shopping around.
23. Many of the unhappy things in 1 2 3 4 5 6 (71)
people's lives are partly due to
bad luck.
24. As I grow older, things seem 1 2 3 4 5 6 (72)
better than I thought they would.
25. Society is changing too fast for me. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (73)
26. I think I have more self 1 2 3 4 5 6 (74)

confidence than most people.
27. I like to try new and different 1 2 3 4 5 6 (75)
things.
28. I have not yet reached the 1 2 3 4 5 6 (76)
peak of my mental ability.
29. I like to shop where the clerks 1 2 3 4 5 6 (77)
know my name.
102
STRONGLY STRONGLY
30. I am an active member of more 2 3 4 5 6 (78)

than one civic organization.
31. I iook for low prices whenever 2 3 4 5 6 (79)
I shop.
32. It is important that my clothes 2 3 4 5 6 (80)
be of the latest style.
(1-4)
Card 2 (5)
33. I'm an active member of more than 2 3 4 5 6 (6)

one social or church organization.
34. I exercise to keep myself 2 3 4 5 6 (7)
physically fit.
35. i buy many things with a 2 3 4 5 8 (8)
credit card or charge card.
36. I'm not as active as I used to 2 3 4 5 6 (9)
be because I have no
transportation.
37. I am generally happy with the 2 3 4 5 6 (10)
shape I'm in physically.
38. I feel my age, but it does not 2 3 4 5 6 (11)
bother me.
39. I will probably be better off fin 2 3 4 5 6 (12)
ancially a year from now than I am now.
40. When I shop for clothes, I 2 3 4 5 6 (13)
choose the store first and
then decide on the brand to buy.
41. These are the best years of my 2 3 4 5 6 (14)
life.
42. I can generally buy what I 2 3 4 5 6 (15)
need but no extras.
43. I really don't have any physical 2 3 4 5 6 (16)
problems.
44. When I make plans, I am certain 2 3 4 5 6 (17)
I can make them work.
45. Most women need a career as 2 3 4 5 6 (18)
well as a family.
46. The husband should be the 2 3 4 5 6 (19)
103
STRONGLY STRONGLY
47. My days seem to follow a 1 2 3 4 5 6 (20)

definite routine-eating meals
at the same time each day.
48. I went out to breakfast instead of 1 2 3 4 5 6 (21)
having it at home at least
once last year.
49. I like to feel attractive to 1 2 3 4 5 6 (22)
members of the opposite sex.
50. All men should be clean shaven 1 2 3 4 5 6 (23)
every day.
51. I like to think I am a bit of a 1 2 3 4 5 6 (24)
swinger.
52. I would feel lost if I were 1 2 3 4 5 6 (25)
alone in a foreign country.
53. I would like to take a trip around 1 2 3 4 5 6 (26)
the world.
54. I would like to spend a year in 1 2 3 4 5 6 (27)
London or Paris.
55. I like to pay cash for every 1 2 3 4 5 6 (28)
thing I buy.
56. I think it is important to have 1 2 3 4 5 6 (29)
a good education.
57. A college education is very 1 2 3 4 5 6 (30)
important for success in today's world.
58. There is too much emphasis 1 2 3 4 5 6 (31)
on sex today.
59. I think the Women's Liberation 1 2 3 4 5 6 (32)
movement is a good thing.
SECTION 3
Please circle the number that best describes your participation in the
activity during the past year. The HIGHER the number, the more you engaged
in that activity. The numbers 1-6 are as follows:
1= I never engaged in that activity
2= I seldom enoaaed in that activity
3= I sometimes engaged in that activity
4= I fairly often engaged in that activity
5= I once a week engaged in that activity
6= I 2-3 times a week engaged in that activity
104
Activity Never 2-3 Times/wk
1. Went to the movies. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (33)
2. Read science fiction. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (34)
3. Visited an art gallery and/or 1 2 3 4 5 6 (35)

museum.
4. Gave a speech. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (36)
5. Attended school. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (37)
6. Attended church. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (38)
7. Attended a concert. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (39)
8. Completed a crossword puzzle. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (40)
9. Flayed cards. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (41)
10. Went swimming. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (42)
11. Went bowling. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (43)
12. Went to a club meeting. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (44)
13. Deposited money in a savings 1 2 3 4 5 6 (45)

account.
14. Had wine with dinner. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (46)
15. Gave or attended a dinner party. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (47)
16. Took an airplane trip for personal 1 2 3 4 5 6 (48)

reasons.
17. Used a charge card. 1 2 3 4 5 6 (49)
1 8 . Went jogging/walking 1 2 3 4 5 6 (50)
19. Returned an unsatisfactory product 1 2 3 4 5 6 (51)
105
SECTION 4
Please answer each question as honestly as possible by circling the answer
which best expresses your AGREEMENT OR DISAGREEMENT with each topic.
There are no right or wrong answers.
1- Strongly Disagree
2= Moderately Disagree
3= Neither Disagee or Agree
4= Moderately Agree
5= Strongly Agree
STRONGLY STRONGLY
New product information DISAGREE AGREE
1. I generally pass along fashion 2 3 4 5 (52)

information to others.
2. Others consult me for inform 2 3 4 5 (53)
ation about the latest fashion trends.
3. I believe I arn a very good source 2 3 4 5 (54)
of information about new products.
4. My friends ask for my opinions 2 3 4 5 (55)
about new clothing styles
5. I am more likely than most of my 2 3 4 5 (56)
trends to be asked for advice about
new products.
6. I do more listening than talking 2 3 4 5 (57)
during conversations about
new clothing styles.
7. It is important to share one's 2 3 4 5 (58)
opinion about new styles with others.
8. When it comes to new products I am 2 3 4 5 (59)
among the most likely of my friends
to be thought of as an advice giver.
9. My friends think of me as a 2 3 4 5 (60)
knowledgeable source of information
about fashion trends.
1 0 . 1 recently convinced someone to 2 3 4 5 (61)
change an aspect of his/her appearance
to something more fashionable.
11. My children come to me first 2 3 4 5 (62)
when they want information
about fashion.
106
STRONGLY STRONGLY
New product information DISAGREE AGREE
1 2 . 1believe in sharing with others 1 2 3 4 5 (63)

what I know about new products.
1 3 . 1like to help others make 1 2 3 4 5 (64)
decisions about fashion.
14. I am the first to be asked for 1 2 3 3 5 (65)
an opinion about a new product.
15. People bypass me as a source 1 2 3 4 5 (66)
of information about new products.
16. I dislike discussing clothes and 1 2 3 4 5 (67)
and fashion.
17. People 15-20 years younger than I 1 2 3 4 5 (68)
never ask for my opinion about
new products.
18. I am never the fl'S ito be asked 1 2 3 4 5 (69)
for an opinion about a new product.
13. People younger than I often corns 1 2 3 4 5 (70)
to me for advice about new products.
20 . People 15-20 years younger 1 2 3 4 5 (71)
than I often consult me for
information about a new product.
SECTION 5
The following questions are for statistical purposes. Circle the appropriate
number for each.
1. Where do you reside?

IN OWN HOME.............................. 1
RENTAL RESIDENCE...................2
RETIREMENT COMPLEX............. 3
OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)________ (72)
2. What is your marital, status?

NEVER MARRIED...............................1
MARRIED............................................2
WIDOWED..........................................3
DIVORCED..........................................4
SEPARATED....................................... 5 (73)
10
107
3. In what year were you b o m ? ____________________________ (74-75)
4. How many (including yourself) are living in your home at the present
time?
ONE......................................................1
TWO..................................................... 2
THREE.................................................. 3
FOUR.................................................... 4
FIVE....................................................... 5
SIX OR MORE 6 (76)
5. What is the highest level of education you have completed?

SOME HIGH SCHOOL............................. 1
HIGH SCHOOL........................................2
SOME COLLEGE.....................................3
O A . * 'i i n
rM T O r\trr * r7 C C
bAwncLwno unionize......................... A
MASTER'S DEGREE................................ 5
Ph.D., Ed.D., J.D., M.D.............................6
OTHER PROFESSIONAL DEGREE (PLEASE SPECIFY)
____________________________ (77)
6. In which geographical region of the United States do you live?

NORTHEAST........................................ 1
SOUTH.................................................. 2
MIDWEST..............................................3
SOUTHWEST.........................................4
ROCKY MOUNTAIN............................... 5
PACIFIC....................... 6
7. What best describes where you live?

1 RURAL 2 URBAN 3 SUBURBAN (78)
8. Are you retired? 1 NO 2 YES (79)
9. Do you presently work outside the home?

NO........................... 1
YES, I WORK PART/TIME OUTSIDE THE HOME..............................2
YES, I WORK FULL TIME OUTSIDE THE HOME................................ 3 (80)
(1-4)
Card 3 (5)
11
108
10. What is your occupation? (If retired, what was your occupation prior to
your retirement?) Circle the appropriate OCCUPATION.
PROFESSIONAL...................................................................................... 1
DOCTOR
DENTIST
LAWYER
SOCIAL WORKER, NURSE, COUNSELOR
BUSINESS.................................................................................................2
SALES
MIDDLE MANAGEMENT
JUNIOR EXECUTIVE
SENIOR EXECUTIVE
OWNER/MANAGER
TEACHING................................................................................................ 3
PROFESSOR/TEACHER
LIBRARIAN
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
SUPPORT...................................................................................................4
SECRETARY/BOOKKEEPER
OFRCE MANAGER
RECEPTIONIST
SEMI-SKILLED WORKER.......................................................................... 5
COMMUNICATION..................................................................................... 6
WRITER, JOURNALIST, ARTIST
MEDIA SPECIALIST (ADVERTISING CREATIVE)
HOMEMAKER...........................................................................................7
OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)__________________ ,___________8 (6)
11. What are your chief sources of income? Circle all that apply.
MY OWN WORK........................................... 1
SPOUSE'S WORK........................................ 2
SOCIAL SECURITY......................................3
RETIREMENT PLAN.................................... 4
SAVINGS ACCOUNT.................................... 5
RENTAL PROPERTIES.................................6
GIFTS FROM CHILDREN..............................7
INVESTMENTS (STOCKS, BONDS)............8
OTHER SOURCES (PLEASE SPECIFY)
_________________________ 9
(7-15)
12
109
12. What was the total annual income for your household last year before
taxes?
$10,000 OR BELOW.....................................1
$10,001 -$14,999..........................................2
$15,000- $19,999........................................'.3
$20, 000- $29,999........................................ 4
$30,000- $49,999..........................................5
$50, 000- $69,999.........................................6
$70, 000 OR ABOVE......................................7 (16)
13. I am: 1 FEMALE 2 MALE (17)
Would you be willing to give me the name and mailing address of one person
that you frequently seek advice from before purchasing a new product? If
so, please print his/her name and address in the space below. I will be
sending a questionnaire to this person.
Name:
Street:
City, State, Zip: (18)
PLEASE MAIL YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE WHETHER YOU GIVE ME SOMEONE ELSE’S

NAME OR NOT!!
If there are any other comments you would like to make concerning new
products or fashions, please use this space, or the back of this booklet if
needed.
If you would like a copy of the results, please print your name and address
on the back of the return envelope (NOT on the questionnaire) and write
"Copy of Results Requested". I will see that you get it.
open 19-79 (80)
13
110
V IT A
Patricia Th e res e Huddleston was born in N e w ark , Ohio, on
A p ril 5, 1955. She attended St. V in c e n t- S t . M ary High School and
gra d u ated in June 1973. Ms. Huddleston ente red the U n iv e rs ity of
Dayton in A u g u s t 1973 and graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree
in home economics education in 1977.
A f t e r g ra d u a tio n , she accepted a teaching position in the D e p a rt
ment of Fashion Merchandising at Siena Heights College. While teaching
at Siena H e ig h ts , Ms. Huddleston worked on her Master of Science
degree in clothing and textiles at Michigan State U n iv e r s ity . This
degree was awarded in June 1981.
She then accepted another teaching position at Eastern Illinois
U n iv e rs ity in the Departm ent o f Home Economics. Her prim ary respon
s ib ility was teaching and developing courses related to merchandising.
In 1984, Ms. Huddleston was accepted into the doctoral program at
the U n iv e rs ity of Tennessee, K noxville, in the Departm ent of T e x tile s ,
Merchandising and Design. While a ttending the U n iv e rs ity of
Tennessee, she held a p a rt-tim e teaching assistantship and ta u g h t
m erchandising and microcomputer applications courses. She received
the Doctor o f Philosophy degree in human ecology in December 1987.
She is a member of the Association of College Professors of
Textile s and Clothing (A C P T C ) and the American M arketing Association
( A M A ). Ms. Huddleston is employed as an assistant professor in the
Departm ent of Human Environment and Design at Michigan State U n iv e r
sity in East Lansing, Michigan.

Fashion Opinion Leadership Amo PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fashion Opinion Leadership Amo PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INFORMATION TO USERS

The m ost advanced technology has been used to photo­

Oversize m aterials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re­

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been

Accessing the World's Information since 1938

300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA

Fashion opinion leadership am ong m ature consumers:

Huddleston, Patricia Therese, Ph.D.

1. Glossy photographs or pages_____

2. Colored illustrations, paper or print_______

3. Photographs with dark background_____

4. Illustrations are poor copy_______

5. Pages with black marks, not original copy

6. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of p ag e_______

7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages_______

8. Print exceeds margin requirements _ _ _ _ _

9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine_______

10. Computer printout pages with indistinct print_______

12. Page(s)___________ seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows.

13. Two pages numbered . Text follows.

14. Curling and wrinkled pages______

15. Dissertation contains pages with print at a slant, filmed as received_________

PATRO NAG E BEHAVIO R

Presented for the

T h e U n iv e rs ity of Tennessee, Knoxville

P atricia Th erese Huddleston

I am subm itting herew ith a d issertation w ritte n by Patricia Therese

We have read th is dissertation

Accepted fo r the Council:

I would like to th a n k my doctoral committee. D r. Imogene F o rd ,

D r . Jacquelyn DeJonge, D r . M ark Hector and D r . William F3. Locander

for th e ir guidance d u rin g my re se a rch . D r . F o rd , who has served as

my m entor, major professor and frie n d d u rin g my e n tire doctoral

program deserves special thanks fo r the time she devoted to guiding

me th ro u g h the research process.

My frie n d s a t UTK who served as my role models and my sup p o rt

system th ro u g h o u t my program also deserve my th a n k s — C a th y , H o ily,

M addy, M a ry , Nancy and S and y. T h e ir love and sense o f humor gave

me a sense o f balance to my life as a doctoral s tu d e n t.

I w ant to acknowledge the love and s u p p o rt I received from my

frie n d H ild re d . He was always th e re for me d u rin g each step o f the

process, w illing to lis te n , serve as a sounding board or to o ffe r gentle

advice when needed.

My fam ily (A n n , Bob, Jean, Joan, M a ry , T h e re s e , Julie and

A u n t S tan ) also provided me w ith encouragem ent, love and financial

su p p o rt th ro u g h o u t th is process. Special thanks to my mother who

places such a high value on education th a t she helped me fin a n c ia lly ,

a fte r paying fo r the college education o f my 6 sisters and b ro th e r.

I wish to th a n k the D epartm ent o f T e x tile s , M erchandising and

Design fo r its su p p o rt of my research th ro u g h the Ida A . Anders

I also th a n k 50 Plus magazine fo r p ro vid in g me w ith a mailing list

at no c h arg e . T h e y fu rn is h e d me w ith my sample.

The purpose o f this s tu d y was to evaluate fashion opinion leader­

style dimensions and re ta il patronage behavior o f th e m ature fashion

A random sample o f 2,003 consumers, ages 50 and over w ere sent

questionnaires re su ltin g in a 35 p ercent re tu rn ra te (n = 711) usable

T w e n ty questions using a fiv e point L ik e rt scale w ere used to

determ ine degree of fashion opinion leadership and re ta il patronage

b e h av io r. Factor analysis using the principal components method of

which life sty le variables w ere related to each o th e r. Linear models

w ere used to analyze th e life s ty le v a ria b le s , dem ographic and retail

p atronage behavior c h ara c te ris tic s .

Findings indicated th a t the best pred icto rs of fashion opinion

The m ost advanced technology has been used to photo

Oversize m aterials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re

The purpose o f this s tu d y was to evaluate fashion opinion leader

and occupation w ere found to be s ig n ific a n t p red icto rs o f fashion opin