Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 67 (2022) 102991

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jretconser

Consumer orientations of secondhand fashion shoppers: The role of

shopping frequency and store type
Freya Evans a, Louise Grimmer a, *, Martin Grimmer b
a
Tasmanian School of Business and Economics, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
b
Office of the Provost, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: As demand for secondhand fashion grows, the objective of this study is to examine consumer orientations of
Secondhand shopping secondhand shoppers to determine whether they differ by shopping frequency, and store type. Hypotheses were
Consumer orientation developed for orientations of frugality, ecological-consciousness, materialism, nostalgia-proneness, style-con­
Retail marketing
sciousness and fashion-consciousness. A quantitative online survey of female-identifying participants (N = 515)
was administered. All consumer orientations, except materialism, varied according to secondhand shopping
frequency and store type. Orientations generally increased with shopping frequency. Nostalgia-proneness was
associated with shopping at thrift stores, ecological-consciousness was associated with consignment stores and
markets, and style-consciousness was consistent across shoppers for all store types.

1. Introduction
More and more shoppers are turning towards secondhand retail
stores and platforms to purchase fashion goods (Abbes et al., 2020;
Corvo, 2020; Masige, 2020; Park & Martinez 2020; Paul and Rose­
nbaum, 2020; ThredUP 2021). Globally, the online secondhand market
is predicted to grow from $7 billion in 2019 to $36 billion by 2024
(Masige, 2020). The number of independently owned, fashion-forward,
curated secondhand stores is increasing as the stigma and barriers to
secondhand shopping decrease (Zaman et al., 2019). Whilst secondhand
shopping and consumer motivations have received scholarly attention
(e.g., Ferraro et al., 2016; Guiot and Roux, 2010; Machado et al., 2019;
Medalla et al., 2020; Padmavathy et al., 2019; Yan et al., 2015), there is
less research examining the orientations of secondhand shoppers across
multiple store types (Zaman et al., 2019). The purpose of this study
therefore is to explore how consumer orientations differ in terms of
secondhand shopping frequency and secondhand store type.
Consumers are now accustomed to continual new trends, constant
fashion changes and the perpetual availability of new products (Gupta
et al., 2019), facilitated predominantly by ‘fast fashion’ (Becker, Leif­
hold & Iran, 2018). ‘Fast fashion’ and just-in-time production involves
rapidly reproducing current trends, generating large volumes of cheap,
poor-quality apparel (Harris et al., 2016; Kim et al., 2021; Pookulangara
and Shephard, 2013), and fast fashion retailers such as H&M, Zara and
Uniqlo produce new lines of cheap fashion every two to three weeks
(Park et al., 2016). The mass production of fashion garments by the
clothing and textile industries has a detrimental social and environ­
mental impact throughout the entire supply chain (Becker-Leifhold and
Iran, 2018; Gupta et al., 2019; Ramkumar et al., 2021; Stanescu, 2021),
and the fashion industry’s focus on efficiency, productivity and profit­
ability, often ignores the ecological and social consequences of current
manufacturing and consumption practices (Kim et al., 2021).
Purchasing secondhand clothing is an alternative response to the
problems associated with fast fashion and the fashion industry more
broadly. Secondhand shopping allows consumers to avoid conventional
fashion channels and thereby reduce some of the waste produced by the
fashion industry (Lo et al., 2019; Stanescu, 2021). The main types of
retailers of secondhand clothing are thrift stores, consignment stores,
markets and online platforms (Bardhi and Arnould, 2005; Zaman et al.,
2019). Thrift stores are non-profit retail outlets selling donated clothes
with profits being passed to fund humanitarian causes or charitable
work (Seo and Kim, 2019; Zaman et al., 2019). Consignment stores are
privately-owned, for-profit businesses selling clothes provided by a
third-party seller (often individuals selling their used closing) and are
usually highly ‘curated’ with high-quality items (Seo and Kim, 2019;
Zaman et al., 2019). Markets are organised gatherings of individual
stallholders selling curated, unique and unpredictable secondhand
goods, including street markets or flea markets (Bardhi and Arnould,

* Corresponding author. Tasmanian School of Business and Economics University of Tasmania, Private Bag 84, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia.
E-mail address: Louise.Grimmer@utas.edu.au (L. Grimmer).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.102991
Received 31 October 2021; Received in revised form 14 February 2022; Accepted 14 March 2022
Available online 19 March 2022
0969-6989/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
F. Evans et al.
2005; Ferraro et al., 2016; Guiot and Roux, 2010). Online stores are
ecommerce platforms selling a wide range of items, and offering users
the ability to search, buy, sell and interact with others through the
platform (Abbes et al., 2020; Kim et al., 2021; Padmavathy et al., 2019;
Zaman et al., 2019). Due to changes in consumer behaviour and re­
strictions on physical shopping resulting from COVID-19, online
secondhand clothing retailers have experienced higher levels of growth
than physical stores (Kim et al., 2021), also because these platforms offer
extra convenience for consumers who wish to shop from home (Ram­
kumar et al., 2021). According to the 2021 Resale Report, global reve­
nue for resale platforms such as online websites and physical
consignment stores are predicted to double in the next five years, which
is 11 times faster than the broader retail clothing sector (ThredUP 2021).
As discussed earlier, secondhand shopping is a growing global phe­
nomenon. Drivers for secondhand shopping have been the focus of
consumer and retail studies (e.g., Bae and Yan, 2018; Ferraro et al.,
2016; Guiot and Roux, 2010; Machado et al., 2019; Zaman et al., 2019),
but there are still gaps in knowledge in terms of the motivations, and
specifically the consumer orientations, of secondhand shoppers. This
study aims to address how marketers and retailers can encourage more
consumers to visit secondhand stores through a greater understanding of
consumer orientations. As sustainability and alternative shopping
methods become more popular, the drivers of this type of purchasing
behaviour are of increasing interest to practitioners and scholars (Bae
and Yan, 2018; Medalla et al., 2020; Norum and Norton, 2017; Zaman
et al., 2019).
This study makes a number of important contributions. First, the
study aims to extend current understanding of why some consumers
embrace, and others avoid, secondhand shopping. In this regard, this
research explores the differences between consumers who do not engage
in secondhand shopping and those who engage with varying frequency,
in terms of consumer orientations. The current study responds to the call
to examine both shoppers and non-shoppers in secondhand shopping
motivation research (Ferraro et al., 2016). Second, by examining con­
sumer shopping behaviour across secondhand store formats, such as
thrift stores, consignment stores and markets, and online platforms
(Hur, 2020), the current study will examine consumer orientations
across both shopping frequency and store type. Third, whilst much of the
prior research in this field has been conducted in the United States,
Europe and Asia, this study contributes to the literature through
examining consumption practices in an Australian retail context. Over­
all, the study’s findings will contribute to the literature on secondhand
consumption, consumer orientations and retail marketing. Finally, in
practical terms, the study’s findings will enable different types of
secondhand clothing retailers to target marketing communications more
effectively to different types of consumers, to encourage them to better
engage in secondhand shopping.
The research answers two research questions:
1. Does consumer orientation differ according to secondhand shopping
frequency?
2. Does consumer orientation differ according to secondhand store
type?
Hypotheses. relating to each of these research questions will be pre­
sented throughout the literature review which follows.
2. Literature review
2.1. Secondhand shopping
Guiot and Roux (2010) define secondhand shopping as ‘the acqui­
sition of secondhand objects through methods and places of exchange
that are generally distinct from those for new products’ (p. 356). This
2
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 67 (2022) 102991
type of shopping involves buying products previously owned or used,
and then on-sold, typically for lower prices than new (Fernando et al.,
2018; Padmavathy et al., 2019). Fashion products, which are quickly
outdated, account for most of the items donated to, or purchased by,
secondhand retailers (Seo and Kim, 2019).
Over the past 10 years there has been rapid growth in secondhand
product consumption and growing popularity (Bae and Yan, 2018;
Ferraro et al., 2016; Machado et al., 2019; Zaman et al., 2019). The used
clothing market has become a multi-billion-dollar industry globally,
with further growth forecast (Mohammad et al., 2021). Increasing levels
of environmental-consciousness and interest in sustainability have also
impacted consumers’ consumption habits, attitudes and perceptions
towards secondhand clothing (Bae and Yan, 2018; Kim et al. 2021 ;
Mohammad et al., 2021; Zaman et al., 2019). In addition, the perceived
fashionability and stylishness of secondhand clothing has increased,
making it more attractive to a variety of consumers (Ferraro et al., 2016;
Machado et al., 2019; Zaman et al., 2019). Consumers have different
needs, motivations and purchase behaviours (Wagner and Rudolph,
2010), and their choice of secondhand shopping channel reflects this
(Guiot and Roux, 2010; Zaman et al., 2019), with different shoppers
choosing different retail outlets, such as thrift stores, consignment
stores, markets or online platforms (Bardhi and Arnould, 2005; Zaman
et al., 2019).
2.2. Barriers to secondhand shopping
While there are many reasons and motivations for consumers to shop
for secondhand clothing, barriers remain (Fernando et al., 2018; Harris
et al., 2016; Hur, 2020; Kim et al., 2021; Lee et al., 2021; Lo et al., 2019;
Yan et al., 2015). Additionally, despite many people having ‘eco-­
friendly’ ideals and values, their purchasing behaviour does not always
reflect these attitudes (Cervellon et al., 2012; Grimmer and Bingham,
2013). According to Kim et al. (2021), psychological barriers occur
when buying used products which has likely slowed the widespread
adoption of more sustainable fashion movements such as secondhand
shopping. These barriers include concerns about perceived poor product
quality, lack of cleanliness of the store and products, outdated or un­
fashionable styles, lack of transparency about the provenance of prod­
ucts and an association between used clothing and social acceptance
(Hur, 2020; Lee et al., 2021).
Harris et al. (2016) suggest sustainable clothing consumption bar­
riers can be external and internal. External barriers include price, lack of
access or infrastructure, social or cultural norms, lack of styles or sizes
and poor product presentation in secondhand stores. Grimmer et al.
(2016) similarly identify situational barriers for ethical shopping that
are external to the consumer, such as time available for shopping, travel
distance, ease of purchase and convenience (see also Belk, 1975). In­
ternal barriers, on the other hand, involve a lack of environmental
concern, low or conflicting motivations, negative attitudes towards, and
beliefs about, sustainability, and perceptions clothing will be less stylish,
poor fitting or uncomfortable (Harris et al., 2016).
2.3. Consumer motivations and orientations
Guiot and Roux (2010) define motivations as the ‘determinants of a
person’s actions, including wishes, needs, emotions, feelings, passions,
areas of interests, beliefs, life values, fantasies, imaginary representa­
tions, personal complexes, conditioning, habits, deep-seated attitudes,
opinions, and aspirations’ (p. 384). More recently, Padmavathy et al.
(2019) use the definition: ‘[a] set of goals that are directed towards
specific gratification and satisfaction’ (p. 21). Motivation concerns why a
behaviour is carried out and thus may represent the reason for a
behaviour (Hoyer et al., 2018; Quester et al., 2010). In this regard,
motivation includes the trigger for a behaviour, where the behaviour is
directed, and the compulsion to carry on the behaviour until the moti­
vation is achieved. There may also be multiple motivations for a
F. Evans et al.
behaviour, some overt and some hidden (Piacentini and Mailer, 2004),
which can also vary according to the shopping situation (Grimmer,
2021). In this regard, various secondhand shopping motivations have
been considered, for example, economic, recreational, critical and
fashion (Bardhi and Arnould, 2005; Ferraro et al., 2016; Guiot and Roux,
2010). This approach reflects a content (versus a process) theory of
motivation in that various reasons are posited for secondhand shopping
behaviour (Hoyer et al., 2018). Consumer orientation, on the other
hand, is defined by Zaman et al. (2019) as the ‘inclination of individuals
to embrace an expected behaviour reflecting consumers’ values and
beliefs, as well their cognitive motivations to obtain certain end goals’
(p. 165). Consumers’ purchase intentions, decisions and motives are
influenced by values (Pravet and Holmlund, 2018) and orientations
(Zaman et al., 2019). Consumer orientations can thus be considered as a
reflection, or an expression, of motivations, in that they drive the
behaviour of consumers. Zaman et al. (2019) identified six types of
orientation: frugality, style-consciousness, ecological-consciousness,
materialism, nostalgia-proneness, and fashion-consciousness.
2.3.1. Frugality
Frugality is described as a ‘lifestyle’ trait (Lastovicka et al., 1999) and
refers to the desire to save money by using resources effectively (Fer­
nando et al., 2018; Zaman et al., 2019) as well as to a voluntary pref­
erence to live a frugal lifestyle (Lee, 2016). Frugality involves being
restrained in acquiring products and services and using goods with care
to achieve long term goals such as saving money or conserving resources
(Bove et al., 2009; Fernando et al., 2018; Goldsmith et al., 2014) and this
is often linked with secondhand shopping behaviour. Frugal consumers
are less likely to be interested in recreational shopping as they tend to
take time in making purchases, and they may also be less materialistic,
impulsive or compulsive than other shoppers (Fernando et al., 2018;
Zaman et al., 2019). Cervellon et al. (2012) found secondhand con­
sumption is strongly linked to frugality. As used goods at thrift stores are
often substantially cheaper than new items, this avenue of shopping is
appropriate for frugal consumers (Lo et al., 2019). Hence, the following
hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 1a. Frequent secondhand shoppers will have higher
frugality scores than non- or infrequent shoppers.
Hypothesis 2a. Thrift store shoppers will have higher frugality scores
than (a) online store shoppers, (b) consignment store/market shoppers
and (c) non-shoppers.
2.3.2. Ecological-consciousness
Ecological-consciousness, in the context of this study, refers to an
awareness of the impact of clothing manufacture and consumption on
the environment (Zaman et al., 2019). Consumers’ level of awareness of
the consequences of their shopping choices may increase their likelihood
of participating in sustainable purchasing behaviour (Mohammad et al.,
2021). Accordingly, Zaman et al. (2019) found ecological-consciousness
orientation to be high for online secondhand shoppers and suggested
this is because online shopping can offer more sustainable options and
promote less wasteful packaging. According to Yan et al. (2015), those
who identify with being ‘green’ or environmentally-conscious are more
likely to shop at secondhand stores and thrift stores. These shoppers may
be more concerned with the environmental impact of their purchasing
and reducing waste, than with style or fashion, therefore, consignment
stores are not as appealing (Zaman et al., 2019). Thus, the following
hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 1b. Frequent secondhand shoppers will have higher
ecological-consciousness scores than non- or infrequent shoppers.
Hypothesis 2b. Thrift store shoppers and online store shoppers will
have higher ecological-conscious scores than (a) consignment store/
market shoppers and (b) non-shoppers.
3
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 67 (2022) 102991
2.3.3. Materialism
Materialism refers to the importance consumers assign to the
acquisition and ownership of material goods to achieve major life goals
or desired states (Gupta et al., 2019; Richins and Dawson, 1992; Zaman
et al., 2019). Higher levels of materialism mean people associate per­
sonal success with material belongings (Zhang and Kim, 2013) and have
a belief that possessions will lead to greater happiness or life satisfaction
(Richins, 2004). Similarly, shoppers who are more materialistic often
obtain pleasure from buying clothes and have higher levels of fashion
involvement or fashion-consciousness, as discussed below (Cervellon
et al., 2012; Gupta et al., 2019). Zaman et al. (2019) found levels of
materialism were lower for thrift shoppers, but this finding is not ex­
pected from those who shop online or by consignment. The following
hypotheses are therefore proposed:
Hypothesis 1c. Frequent secondhand shoppers will have lower
materialism scores than non- or infrequent shoppers.
Hypothesis 2c. Thrift store shoppers will have lower materialism
scores than (a) online secondhand platform shoppers, (b) consignment
store/market shoppers and (c) non-shoppers.
2.3.4. Nostalgia-proneness
Nostalgia is the longing or fondness for the past, and possessions
associated with earlier times (Holbrook, 1993). Nostalgia is also
described as ‘a preference (general liking, positive attitude or favorable
affect) toward objects (people, places, experiences, or things) from when
one was younger, or from times about which one has learned vicari­
ously, perhaps through socialization or the media’ (Fairley, 2003, pp.
287–288). Nostalgia is considered a preference or desire to find and
obtain items from the past which may evoke certain emotions and allow
people to interact with history (Cervellon et al., 2012; Machado et al.,
2019; Zaman et al., 2019). People who are prone to nostalgia have a
preference towards objects that were previously popular or fashionable
(Kessous, 2015; Schindler and Holbrook, 2003) and have a desire to
shop for items evoking memories or feelings from earlier and/or better
times, or which hold historical importance (Holbrook, 1993; Machado
et al., 2019; Zaman et al., 2019). Cervellon et al. (2012) found nostalgia
and fashion involvement can be strong drivers for those who favour
shopping for vintage or secondhand clothing. Zaman et al. (2019) found
nostalgia proneness was high for consignment/market and online
shoppers. Hence, the following hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 1d. Frequent secondhand shoppers will have higher
nostalgia proneness scores than non- or infrequent shoppers.
Hypothesis 2d. Consignment store/market shoppers and online
secondhand platform shoppers will have higher nostalgia proneness
scores than (a) thrift store shoppers and (b) non-shoppers.
2.3.5. Style-consciousness
Style-consciousness refers to the desire to express a unique person­
ality through clothing (Zaman et al., 2019). According to Ki et al.
(2017), style-conscious consumers shop for goods which will satisfy
their own personal style or values. Clothing style is considered as being
any distinctive model of tailoring; it may also reflect people’s long-term
individual identity (Gupta et al., 2019; Harris et al., 2016). These con­
sumers seek authenticity and originality and avoid mainstream trends
(Ferraro et al., 2016). Style-conscious shoppers often keep their clothes
longer and therefore look for durable, high-quality items (Gupta et al.,
2019). Harris et al. (2016) suggest focusing on ‘style’, rather than
fashion, results in more sustainable shopping behaviour. Zaman et al.
(2019) found style-conscious consumers were likely to shop secondhand
due to the availability of unique and good quality pieces. Thrift stores
are perceived by these consumers as stocking clothing that is of lesser
quality compared with other secondhand channels - consignment stores,
markets or online platforms (Hur, 2020; Zaman et al., 2019). Thus, the
following hypotheses are proposed:
F. Evans et al. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 67 (2022) 102991

Hypothesis 1e. Frequent secondhand shoppers will have higher style- Table 1
consciousness scores than non- or infrequent shoppers. Sample characteristics.

Hypothesis 2e. Consignment store/market shoppers and online Age

Mean: 44.55 Median: 42 Mode:
shoppers will have higher style-consciousness scores than (a) thrift store 29
shoppers and (b) non-shoppers. SD: 16.349 Household
income
2.3.6. Fashion-consciousness Frequency % Frequency %
18–20 28 5.4 Under 66 12.8
Fashion-consciousness refers to seeking out new clothes to keep up
$25,000
with current fashion trends (Zaman et al., 2019). Fashion consciousness 21–29 86 16.7 $25,001- 114 22.1
has been examined in relation to secondhand shopping behaviour (e.g., $50,000
Ferraro et al., 2016; Gupta et al., 2019; Lo et al., 2019; Medalla et al., 30–39 106 20.6 $50,001- 97 18.8
2020; Seo and Kim, 2019; Zaman et al., 2019). ‘Fashion’ is the look or $75,000
40–49 106 20.6 $75,001- 82 15.9
design that is generally popular at any given time and can be influenced $100,000
by current political, economic or social events; in addition, fashion has 50–59 93 18.1 $100,000- 65 12.6
an element of the ‘new’ and novelty, and it constantly evolves (Gupta $150,000
et al., 2019). According to Sproles and Kendall (1986), consumers with 60 or older 96 18.6 $150,001 or 45 8.7
more
high levels of fashion-consciousness enjoy the excitement and pleasure
Prefer not to 46 8.9
of seeking out new items and keeping up with current fashion trends. answer
This is not the same as style-consciousness which is about long-term
individual identity. Zaman et al. (2019) found fashion-consciousness
was high among online and consignment shoppers. Thrift stores are Employment Location/
Status Region
usually perceived as having a lack of fashionable clothing as they often
Frequency % Frequency %
offer previous seasons’ fashions (Harris et al., 2016; Hur, 2020). The Employed, part 118 22.9 Metro 384 74.6
following hypotheses are therefore proposed: time
Employed, full 149 28.9 Regional 131 25.4
Hypothesis 1f. Frequent secondhand shoppers will have lower time
fashion-consciousness scores than non- or infrequent shoppers. Not employed, 43 8.3
looking for
Hypothesis 2f. Consignment store/market shoppers and online work
secondhand platform shoppers will have higher fashion-consciousness Not employed, 54 10.5 Location/
scores than (a) thrift store shoppers and (b) non-shoppers. not looking State
for work
Student 32 6.2 Frequency %
3. Method Retired 99 19.2 ACT 8 1.6
Other 20 3.9 NSW 148 28.7
3.1. Sample NT 4 0.8
Marital Status QLD 94 18.3
Frequency % SA 43 8.3
This study surveyed 515 female-identifying Australians aged 18 Single; never 151 29.3 TAS 22 4.3
years or older, chosen because females generally show higher levels of married
interest in secondhand fashion shopping and are often the primary Married 195 37.9 VIC 140 27.2
clothing purchasers within households (Cervellon et al., 2012; Norum In a de-facto 76 14.8 WA 56 10.9
relationship
and Norton, 2017). Using an online research panel provider, a sample
Separated, but 19 3.7
was selected, matched with the broader Australian population in terms now divorced
of age and spread across the Australian states and territories. Quota Divorced 57 11.1
sampling continued until a suitable number of responses were collected Widowed 17 3.3
from participants across age and location categories and in terms of
Highest Level of Education
secondhand shopping frequency (Neuman, 2013). The latter measure Frequency %
guaranteed that there was a relatively even proportion of participants Did not complete high school to Year 10 17 3.3
who had shopped for secondhand clothes and accessories in the previous Completed high school to Year 10 60 11.7
six months over varying frequencies. Sample characteristics are pre­ Completed high school to Year 12 94 18.3
Trade qualifications or apprenticeship or TAFE 147 28.5
sented in Table 1.
Certificate/Diploma
Bachelor’s degree (incl. Honours) 147 28.5
Coursework Postgraduate Certificate, Diploma or 37 7.2
3.2. Research design, survey development and procedure
Master’s Degree
Research Master’s Degree or PhD 13 2.5
The study used a between subjects’ design, with two independent
variables and six dependent variables (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007).
The first independent variable was frequency of secondhand shopping, nostalgia-proneness, and fashion-consciousness. The original wording
defined as how often participants had purchased secondhand clothing or was adapted for some scales to make them more relevant to this study on
accessories over the previous six months: 1) never, 2) once or twice, 3) secondhand shopping. There were six frugality items, sourced from
three to five times, and 4) more than five times. The second independent Lastovicka et al. (1999, p. 89); six items for style-consciousness from Ki
variable was the type of store participants mostly shopped in for et al. (2017, p. 732); six ecological-consciousness items from Kim and
secondhand clothes or accessories: (1) thrift stores, (2) consignment Damhorst (1998, p. 130); seven materialism items from Richins (2004,
stores and markets, (3) online platforms, as well as (4) if they do not p. 217); seven nostalgia-proneness items from Holbrook (1993, p. 249),
shop for secondhand clothes at all. and five fashion-consciousness items from Sproles and Kendall (1986, p.
The dependent variables were the six types of consumer orientation 272). See Table 2 below for the items. All responses were answered using
discussed earlier, with items derived from pre-existing scales measuring a 7-point Likert scale (1 for ‘Strongly Disagree’ to 7 for ‘Strongly Agree’)
frugality, style-consciousness, ecological-consciousness, materialism, (Neuman, 2004). Item priming effects were minimised by having all

4
F. Evans et al.
Table 2
Factor analysis and Cronbach’s alpha.
Scale Items
Frugality
If you take good care of your possessions, you will
definitely save money in the long run.
There are many things that are normally thrown
away that are still quite useful.
Making better use of my resources makes me feel
good.
If you can re-use an item you already have, there’s
no sense in buying something new.
I believe in being careful in how I spend my
money.
There are things I resist buying today so I can save
for tomorrow.
Style-Consciousness
I buy secondhand clothing to emphasize my own
style.
I buy secondhand clothing to reflect my personal
taste and interests.
I buy secondhand clothing because it suits my
personality.
I buy secondhand clothing for its timeless style.
I buy secondhand clothing for its long-lasting
quality.
I buy secondhand clothing to wear for a long time.
Ecological-Consciousness
I buy clothing made from recycled material.
I avoid clothing products because of
environmental concerns.
I select apparel that you can wear over a longer
term compared to trendy clothing that goes out
of style quickly.
I buy clothing made of organically grown natural
fibres.
I buy clothing with low impact or no dye
processing.
I buy clothing with environmentally friendly
labelling or packaging techniques.
Materialism
I usually buy only the things I need.
I try to keep my life simple, as far as possessions
are concerned.
The things I own aren’t all that important to me.
I enjoy spending money on things that aren’t
practical.
Buying things gives me a lot of pleasure.
I like a lot of luxury in my life.
I put less emphasis on material things than most
people I know.
Nostalgia-Proneness
They don’t make ’em like they used to.
Things used to be better in the good old days.
Products are getting shoddier and shoddier.
Technological change will ensure a brighter
future.
We are experiencing a decline in the quality of
life.
Steady growth in the economy has brought
increased human happiness.
Modern business constantly builds a better
tomorrow.
Fashion-Consciousness
I usually have one or more outfits of the very
newest style.
I keep my wardrobe up-to-date with the changing
fashions.
Fashionable, attractive styling is very important
to me.
To get variety, I shop at different stores and
choose different brands.
It’s fun to buy something new and exciting.
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 67 (2022) 102991
items presented in randomised order (Feldman and Lynch, 1988), also a
procedural remedy for common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003). An
Factor Loadings А introductory statement explained the nature of the research and stated
that all responses were deidentified and thus anonymous.
0.880
0.820
4. Results
0.778
4.1. Data preparation and preliminary analyses
0.855
0.803 Data were analysed using SPSS Version 24. Initial descriptive sta­
tistics were conducted on the 37 items that made up the six consumer
0.833 orientation dependent variables to assess normality in terms of skewness
and kurtosis, and all items fell within an acceptable range as suggested
0.678
by Hair et al. (2010). A factor analysis was subsequently conducted to
0.951 check validity and internal consistency of the items in the dependent
0.895 variables and determine if they measured the orientations to which they
were supposed. Table 2 shows the factor loadings and Cronbach’s alpha
0.919
scores for each orientation. Most of the items loaded well on their
0.916 related factor, that is, over 0.5 (George and Mallery, 2003), while some
were omitted from any further analysis, for example, the
0.910 ecological-consciousness scale item ‘I select apparel that you can wear
0.882
over a longer term compared to trendy clothing that goes out of style
0.856 quickly’ (Factor loading value = 0.472). Table 2 also shows items that
0.884 loaded on different or more than one factor, for example, some for the
0.783 materialism and nostalgia-proneness scales. It was decided not to use
0.821 these items.
0.472
All of the consumer orientations showed acceptable reliability, with
Cronbach’s Alpha scores above the standard 0.7 cutoff (as recalculated
for materialism and nostalgia-proneness due to items being removed)
0.863 (see Nunnally, 1978). The consumer orientation scales were also tested
for normality, and all were acceptable (Hair et al. 2010). However, the
0.890
distribution for the frugality scale did show a large outlier for ‘7 Strongly
0.897 Agree’ (n = 118) which nevertheless skewed the distribution and was
omitted for subsequent data analysis.
0.637 The independent variables were examined to ensure that the sample
(0.744)
was evenly distributed across the relevant groups and could be used for
0.746
0.808 analysis. The shopping frequency variable had a relatively even distri­
bution across: 1) Never (n = 99), 2) Once or twice (n = 116), 3) Three to
0.701 five times (n = 104), and 4) More than five times (n = 78). Store type,
0.836
however, showed that there were a large number who had shopped at
0.724 thrift stores (n = 299), compared with smaller numbers for the rest of the
0.782 secondhand store types (Consignment Store n = 23, Secondhand Mar­
0.687 kets n = 40, Online Platforms n = 81, Other n = 9). Those who do not
shop secondhand was another category (n = 63). Consignment stores
0.720
and secondhand markets were thus consolidated into one category
(0.757)
0.672 called ‘Consignment/Markets’ (n = 63). The responses under ‘Other’
0.738 could also be reassigned to their relevant category. For example, two
0.695 responses that stated ‘Ebay’ and ‘Facebook Marketplace’ were added to
− 0.493 0.661
‘Online Platforms’.
0.642
4.2. Consumer orientation and shopping frequency
− 0.473 0.731
Hypothesis testing was conducted using Multivariate Analysis of
− 0.534 0.676
Variance (MANOVA), with the shopping frequency as the independent
0.872 variable in this instance, and consumer orientations as the dependent
0.863 variables. The assumption of homogeneity of variance across the four
shopping frequency groups was supported for frugality, ecological-
0.896
consciousness, nostalgia-proneness, and fashion-consciousness using
0.875 Levene’s statistic. However, the assumption was not supported for style-
consciousness, and materialism. According to Tabachnick and Fidell
0.720 (2007), MANOVA is robust to violations of this assumption when the
group sizes are not greatly different, as is the case here.
0.688
There was a significant difference between the shopping frequency
groups in terms of the consumer orientations (F(18,1431.67) = 13.34, p
< .001; Wilk’s Λ = 0.65, partial η2 = 0.14). Thus, further testing of
between subjects’ effects was carried out to investigate these
5
F. Evans et al.
differences. There was a significant difference between the shopping
frequency groups in terms of frugality (F(3,393) = 5.580, p < .001).
Least significant difference post-hoc testing showed that there is a sig­
nificant difference in levels of frugality between those who shopped in
secondhand stores in the last six months three to five and more than five
times, and those who only shopped once or twice or never. Those who
frequently shop for secondhand clothing and/or accessories show higher
frugality than infrequent or non-shoppers. Fig. 1 shows the results for all
consumer orientations over the shopping frequency categories.
There was a significant difference between the shopping frequency
groups in terms of ecological-consciousness (F(3,511) = 5.250, p <
.001). Post-hoc testing showed that there is a significant difference in
levels of ecological-consciousness between all those who shopped in
secondhand stores and those who said they never did. Those who
participated in secondhand shopping had higher levels of ecological-
consciousness than those who did not.
There was no difference between the shopping frequency groups in
terms of materialism (F(3,511) = 1.070, p > .05). Thus, frequent and
infrequent or non-secondhand shoppers did not vary in their level of
materialism.
There was a significant difference between the four shopping fre­
quency groups in terms of nostalgia-proneness (F(3,511) = 6.449, p <
.001). Post-hoc testing showed that there is a significant difference in
levels of nostalgia-proneness between those who have shopped in
secondhand stores in the last six months three to five and more than five
times, and those who only shopped once or twice or never. Those who
frequently shop for secondhand clothing and/or accessories show higher
nostalgia proneness scores than infrequent or non-shoppers.
There was a significant difference between the four shopping fre­
quency groups in terms of style-consciousness (F(3,511) = 62.132, p <
.001). Post-hoc testing showed that there is a significant difference in
levels of style-consciousness between those who shopped in secondhand
stores in the last six months more than five times, three to five, one or
twice and never. Those who more frequently shop for secondhand
clothing and/or accessories show higher style-consciousness scores than
less frequent and non-shoppers.
Finally, there was a significant difference between the four shopping
frequency groups in terms of fashion-consciousness (F(3,511) = 5.597,
p < .001). Post-hoc testing showed that there is a significant difference
Fig. 1. Consumer orientations and secondhand shopping frequency.
6
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 67 (2022) 102991
in levels of fashion-consciousness between those who have shopped in
secondhand stores in the last six months once or twice, and those who
shopped more than five times, three to five, and never. Those who
infrequently shop for secondhand clothing and/or accessories show
higher fashion-consciousness scores than more frequent and non-
shoppers.
4.3. Consumer orientation and store type
For this MANOVA, store type is the independent variable, and con­
sumer orientations are again the dependent variables. The assumption of
homogeneity of variance across the four store type groups was also
tested for each variable, and was supported for frugality, ecological-
consciousness, materialism, nostalgia-proneness and fashion-
consciousness. The assumption was not supported for style-
consciousness, but as stated earlier, MANOVA is relatively robust to
such violations.
There was a significant difference between the store types in terms of
the consumer orientations (F(18,1431.67) = 14.07, p < .001; Wilk’s Λ
= 0.63, partial η2 = 0.14). Thus, further testing of between subjects’
effects was carried out to investigate these differences. There was a
significant difference between the store types in terms of frugality (F
(3,393) = 12.225, p < .001). Post-hoc testing showed that there is a
significant difference in levels of frugality between those who shop at
thrift stores or online platforms and those who shop at consignment
stores and markets or those who do not shop. Those who shop at thrift
stores and online show higher frugality scores than those who shop at
consignment stores and markets or do not shop for secondhand clothing
and/or accessories. Fig. 2 shows the results for all consumer orientations
over the store type categories.
There was a significant difference between store types in terms of
ecological-consciousness (F(3,511) = 8.082, p < .001). Post-hoc testing
showed that there is a significant difference in levels of ecological-
consciousness between those who shop at consignment stores and
markets or online platforms and those who shop at thrift stores and do
not shop secondhand. Those who shop at consignment stores and mar­
kets and online platforms show higher levels of ecological-consciousness
than those who shop at thrift stores, which is still significantly higher
than those who do not shop at all.
F. Evans et al.
Fig. 2. Consumer orientations and secondhand store type.
There was no difference between the secondhand store types in terms
of levels of materialism (F(3,511) = 0.586, p > .05). Thus, shoppers of
thrift stores, consignment stores and markets, online platforms, and
those who do not shop, do not vary in their level of materialism.
There was a significant difference between the store types in terms of
nostalgia-proneness (F(3,511) = 6.686, p < .001). Post-hoc testing
showed that there is a significant difference in levels of nostalgia-
proneness between those who shop at thrift stores or online platforms
and those who shop at consignment stores and markets or do not shop.
Those who shop at thrift stores and online platforms shows higher levels
of nostalgia-proneness than those who shop at secondhand consignment
stores and markets or do not shop secondhand, with the latter two
groups not differing significantly.
There was a significant difference between the store types in terms of
style-consciousness (F(3,511) = 44.222, p < .001). Post-hoc testing
showed that there is a significant difference in levels of style-
consciousness between those who shop at thrift stores, consignment
stores and markets or online platforms, and those who do not shop
secondhand. Those who shop secondhand via any store type show
higher levels of style-consciousness than those who do not shop
secondhand.
There was a significant difference between the store types in terms of
fashion-consciousness (F(3,511) = 15.407, p < .001). Post-hoc testing
showed that there is a significant difference in levels of fashion-
consciousness between those who shop at consignment stores and
markets or online platforms and those who shop at thrift stores or those
who do not shop secondhand. Those who shop at consignment stores
and markets, or online platforms show higher levels of fashion-
consciousness than those who shop at thrift stores and those who do
not shop, with the latter two groups not differing significantly.
5. Discussion
This study explored how the orientations of secondhand consumers
differ in terms of shopping frequency and secondhand store type. Con­
sumer orientations were found to differ among secondhand shoppers
and non- or infrequent shoppers. Higher levels of frugality, ecological-
consciousness, nostalgia-proneness, and style-consciousness are associ­
ated with frequent secondhand shopping behaviour, with fashion-
7
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 67 (2022) 102991
consciousness higher for infrequent shoppers. The study also found
materialism does not differ according to frequency of secondhand
shopping. Findings also show consumer orientations differ among
shoppers of different secondhand store types. Frugality and nostalgia-
proneness are associated with shopping at thrift stores. Frugality,
ecological-consciousness, nostalgia-proneness and fashion-
consciousness are associated with shopping on online platforms.
Ecological-consciousness and fashion-consciousness are associated with
consignment stores/markets. In addition, higher levels of style-
consciousness are associated with shopping at all secondhand store
types (thrift stores, consignment stores/markets and online platforms).
The findings for the materialism orientation did not show any significant
difference in where consumers shop. The findings are discussed in the
following section.
5.1. Frugality
Higher levels of frugality are associated with more frequent
secondhand shopping behaviour. Thus, Hypothesis 1a is supported. This
finding aligns with previous research by Cervellon et al. (2012) and
Zaman et al. (2019), confirming the connection between frugality and
secondhand shopping frequency. It is not surprising consumers with
higher levels of frugality are more likely to be frequent secondhand
shoppers because this shopping practice enables them to budget, save
money and obtain quality goods at cheaper prices (Cervellon et al.,
2012; Guiot and Roux, 2010; Lee et al., 2021; Medalla et al., 2020). This
finding confirms the connection between frugality as an orientation of
secondhand shoppers, and the economic motivation for this shopping
practice (Guiot and Roux, 2010; Hur, 2020; Seo and Kim, 2019). Find­
ings also demonstrate higher levels of frugality are associated with
shopping at thrift stores and online platforms, compared with consign­
ment stores and markets, and those who do not shop secondhand. Thus,
Hypotheses 2a is partially supported: thrift store shoppers do not show
higher frugality scores than online secondhand platform shoppers (2a
(a)), but do have higher frugality scores than consignment store/market
shoppers (2a(b)), and non-shoppers (2a(c)). These findings align with
previous research by Cervellon et al. (2012) and Zaman et al. (2019).
However, they contrast with research by Fernando et al. (2018), who
found that frugality is less associated with online shoppers. It was
F. Evans et al.
expected higher levels of frugality would link with shopping in thrift
stores and online platforms due to the lower prices that are usually
associated with these channels (Seo and Kim, 2019; Zaman et al., 2019).
Thrift stores have the lowest price points and have historically been
targeted towards consumers with fewer financial resources (Seo and
Kim, 2019). There is a clear economic benefit associated with these store
types which allow frugal consumers to save money on used clothing (Lo
et al., 2019). Online platforms may also be popular with frugal con­
sumers because they enable users to search for items at specific price
points. Consignment stores/markets are not necessarily closely associ­
ated with cheaper priced items, so it is understandable that these
channels are show lower frugality scores (Zaman et al., 2019).
5.2. Ecological-consciousness
Higher levels of ecological-consciousness are associated with
secondhand shopping behaviour. Thus, Hypothesis 1b is supported. This
aligns with previous research by Bae and Yan (2018), Ferraro et al.,
(2016), Yan et al. (2015), and Zaman et al. (2019), confirming the
connection between ecological-consciousness and secondhand shopping
frequency. Secondhand shopping allows consumers to be part of a more
‘circular’ consumption system that reuses goods instead of disposing of
them (Machado et al., 2019; Medalla et al., 2020). A consumer who is
aware and conscious of the environmental and social impact of the
fashion industry may adjust their purchase behaviour to reduce their
personal environmental footprint (Lo et al., 2019; Zaman et al., 2019).
This confirms the connection between ecological-consciousness as an
orientation of secondhand shoppers, and the critical motivation for this
shopping practice (Guiot and Roux, 2010). Higher levels of
ecological-consciousness are also associated with shopping at consign­
ment stores/markets and online platforms, compared with thrift stores
and those who do not shop secondhand (which is significantly less than
the former). Thus, Hypothesis 2b is partially supported: thrift store and
online secondhand platform shoppers do not show higher
ecological-consciousness scores than consignment store/market shop­
pers (2b(a)), but do have higher ecological-consciousness scores than
non-shoppers (2b(b)). These findings align with those from Zaman et al.
(2019) who found these shoppers were more likely to shop for second­
hand products online (see also Ferraro et al., 2016; Guiot and Roux,
2010; Lo et al., 2019; Machado et al., 2019; and Medalla et al., 2020). It
was not expected higher levels of ecological-consciousness would be
associated with shopping at consignment stores/markets and online
platforms, rather that thrift stores would be more popular among these
consumers due to critical motives and wanting to reduce the waste
produced by the fashion industry (Guiot and Roux, 2010). This finding
may be because ecologically-conscious consumers want to reduce their
consumption by buying fewer, but higher quality, pieces that will last
longer, and these are likely to be perceived as easier to find than at other
secondhand store types. It was expected these consumers would be more
likely to shop secondhand than not shop (Lee et al., 2021).
5.3. Materialism
No significant difference was found according to secondhand shop­
ping frequency in terms of levels of materialism. Thus, Hypothesis 1c is
not supported. This does not align with previous research by Cervellon
et al. (2012), and Zaman et al. (2019), who found lower levels of
materialism associated with secondhand shopping, arguing that con­
sumers who are less materialistic place less importance on obtaining
new material goods and are satisfied with purchasing secondhand
products instead (Zaman et al., 2019). On the other hand, what may be
at play here is that materialism could result in impulse buying from any
store type – new and secondhand – and the pleasurable experience that
comes from any type of shopping experience may not differ for new
versus secondhand shopping (Cervellon et al., 2012; Gupta et al., 2019).
No significant difference was found between secondhand store types and
8
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 67 (2022) 102991
levels of materialism. Thus, Hypothesis 2c is not supported. This does
not support research by Zaman et al. (2019), who found lower levels of
materialism to be associated with shopping at thrift stores. Those with
higher levels of materialism may believe material belongings symbolise
success, and therefore used clothing bought from any retail setting may
not be appealing for these consumers (Gupta et al., 2019).
5.4. Nostalgia-proneness
Higher levels of nostalgia-proneness are associated with frequent
secondhand shopping behaviour. Thus, Hypothesis 1d is supported. This
finding aligns with previous research by Cervellon et al. (2012),
Machado et al. (2019), Medalla et al. (2020), and Zaman et al. (2019). A
fondness for authentic items from the past appears to lead consumers to
seeking them out through secondhand retail channels (Holbrook, 1993).
These consumers may be more interested in the shopping ‘adventure’
and the ‘hunt’ for authentic or special items from a certain era, thus
confirming the link between nostalgia-proneness as an orientation of
secondhand shoppers, and the recreational motivation for this shopping
practice (Guiot and Roux, 2010). Higher levels of nostalgia-proneness
are also associated with shopping at thrift stores and online platforms,
compared with consignment stores/markets and those who do not shop
secondhand. Thus, Hypothesis 2d is partially supported: consignment
store/market shoppers and online secondhand platform shoppers did
not have higher nostalgia-proneness scores than thrift store shoppers (2d
(a)), but online secondhand platform shoppers did have higher scores
than non-shoppers (2d(b)). These findings differ from Zaman et al.
(2019) and Cervellon et al. (2012), who found other secondhand
shopping channels, such as consignment and online platforms were
more popular with those who have higher levels of nostalgia-proneness.
It was expected higher levels of nostalgia-proneness would be associated
with shopping on online platforms; however, it was not expected that it
would be associated with shopping in thrift stores. It may be that online
marketplaces allow consumers to obtain specific items and products can
searched by era.
5.5. Style-consciousness
Higher levels of style-consciousness were associated with frequent
secondhand shopping behaviour. Thus, Hypothesis 1e is supported. This
aligns with previous research by Ferraro et al. (2016), Gupta et al.
(2019), Harris et al. (2016), and Machado et al. (2019), who contended
that style-conscious consumers are more interested in finding unique
clothing items to reflect their own identity and individuality (Gupta
et al., 2019; Harris et al., 2016). Secondhand shopping offers the op­
portunity to buy ‘one-off’ and unique pieces, as opposed to fast-fashion
and conventional retail channels selling multiple ‘mainstream’ items
(Harris et al., 2016; Kim et al., 2021). Style-conscious consumers differ
from fashion-conscious consumers because style is more concerned with
presenting a personalised identity, whereas fashion is focused on what is
currently on-trend in general society (Zaman et al., 2019). Secondhand
stores typically do not offer current trends and styles, but a range of
clothing from various fashions and periods of time. This variety gives
style-conscious consumers more freedom to be creative and develop
their own sense of self through clothing (Ferraro et al., 2016; Zaman
et al., 2019). This finding confirms the link between style-consciousness
as an orientation of secondhand shoppers, and the recreational motiva­
tion for this shopping practice (Guiot and Roux, 2010). Higher levels of
style-consciousness are associated with shopping at all secondhand store
types (thrift stores, consignment stores/markets and online platforms),
compared with those who do not shop secondhand. Thus, Hypothesis 2e
is partially supported: consignment store/market shoppers and online
secondhand platform shoppers do not have higher style-consciousness
scores than thrift store shoppers (2e(a)), but have higher scores than
non-shoppers (2e(b)). This aligns with past research suggesting
style-conscious shoppers enjoy shopping secondhand (Ferraro et al.,
F. Evans et al.
2016; Gupta et al., 2019; Harris et al., 2016; Zaman et al., 2019). It was
expected that higher levels of style-consciousness would be associated
with shopping via consignment stores/markets and online platforms.
The findings show, however, they are just as likely to shop at thrift
stores, perhaps because secondhand shopping, in any form, enables
shoppers to find more unique and one-off pieces (Cervellon et al., 2012;
Guiot and Roux, 2010; Yan et al., 2015).
5.6. Fashion-consciousness
Finally, higher levels of fashion-consciousness are associated with
infrequent secondhand shopping behaviour versus more frequent and
non-shoppers. Thus, Hypothesis 1f is not supported. Many previous
scholars have suggested fashion-consciousness concerns purchasing new
items instead of secondhand (Ferraro et al., 2016; Gupta et al., 2019; Lo
et al., 2019; Medalla et al., 2020). In the current study, infrequent
secondhand shoppers still demonstrated fashion-consciousness. This
does align with the fashion motive, identified by Ferraro et al. (2016),
who proposed there is an element of fun and fashionability involved
with the secondhand shopping experience. The rise in popularity of
secondhand shopping and increase in different store types may have
resulted in consumers with fashion orientation becoming more aware
and interested in this purchasing option. It may also be the case that
infrequent shoppers, versus more frequent shoppers and non-shoppers,
are ‘dabblers’, showing an interest in, but not a dedication to, second­
hand shopping. Higher levels of fashion-consciousness are also associ­
ated with shopping at consignment stores/markets and online platforms,
compared with thrift stores or those who do not shop secondhand. Thus,
Hypothesis 2f is supported: consignment store/market shoppers and
online secondhand platform shoppers have higher
fashion-consciousness scores than thrift store shoppers (2f(a)), and
non-shoppers (2f(b)). These findings align with previous research con­
ducted by Zaman et al. (2019), who found fashion-conscious consumers
are more likely to shop at consignment stores or use online platforms.
These channels are more curated with higher quality pieces that may
sometimes feature current trends. The searchability of online platforms
also allows consumers to find specific pieces that are more relevant their
desired fashion.
6. Concluding remarks
6.1. Contribution and implications
There are a number of theoretical implications derived from the
study. Broadly, the findings contribute to existing knowledge and
scholarly literature on secondhand shopping behaviour and consumer
orientations (Ferraro et al., 2016; Zaman et al., 2019). Specifically,
findings show consumer motivations are linked to orientations,
demonstrating that the latter may reflect or express an underlying drive
(Machado et al., 2019; Medalla et al., 2020; Padmavathy et al., 2019;
Yan et al., 2015); for example, nostalgia-proneness as an expression of a
recreational motive (Guiot and Roux, 2010). In terms of the specific
consumer orientations, the study was able to show why secondhand
consumers shopped with varying frequency, and at which type of store
format (Hoyer et al., 2018; Hur, 2020). Additionally, in responding to
the call for studies to examine both shoppers and non-shoppers of
secondhand fashion (Ferraro et al., 2016), the study enabled an infer­
ence to be made as to why shoppers did not shop secondhand, thus
revealing information about some of the internal barriers to secondhand
shopping (Harris et al., 2016). Similar to previous studies (Cervellon
et al., 2012; Zaman et al., 2019), the findings regarding a frugality
orientation demonstrate the connection this orientation has with
secondhand shopping, particularly in the context of thrift stores. How­
ever, this study’s findings regarding frugality and online shopping differ
from previous research (Fernando et al., 2018), in that consumers with
higher levels of frugality were found to shop via online platforms as well
9
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 67 (2022) 102991
as at thrift stores. Findings also show nostalgia-proneness is more
common among thrift store shoppers, which differs from previous
research suggesting nostalgic consumers would be more likely to shop at
secondhand store types other than thrift stores (Zaman et al., 2019).
Finally, style-consciousness was also shown to be a common orientation
among frequent secondhand shoppers, across all store types. This is
contrary to previous research which found style-conscious consumers
perceived thrift stores as a less attractive store choice with lesser quality
items compared with other store types (Hur, 2020; Zaman et al., 2019).
In addition to theoretical contributions, the research also suggests
key recommendations for secondhand retailers and marketers. First, the
findings show consumers with higher levels of frugality and nostalgia-
proneness require greater encouragement to consider shopping at
consignment stores, markets and online platforms. In this regard, mar­
keting communication policies should center around the fact that,
similar to thrift stores, the other store types also offer products with low
prices (to appeal to frugal shoppers), and in addition, these stores also
stock rare, unique and special vintage pieces (to appeal to nostalgic
shoppers). Through better targeting, retailers and marketers will be able
to more effectively appeal to consumers with higher levels of frugality
and nostalgia-proneness and encourage them to consider broadening
their selection of secondhand store types. Second, thrift store managers
may consider developing marketing messages to target ecological and
fashion-conscious consumers. In this regard, the use of marketing
communications highlighting the environment benefits of secondhand
fashion shopping (to appeal to ecologically conscious shoppers) and
marketing stores as stocking items that reflect current fashion styles (to
appeal to fashion-conscious shoppers) will help attract these types of
consumers to consider shopping in thrift stores. Overall, this research
provides clear evidence of the different types of secondhand fashion
consumer orientations and preferred store types, and this information
can be used by retailer managers and marketers to create appropriate
marketing messages for different consumers.
Non-secondhand fashion retailers could also benefit from the
increasing consumer interest in secondhand shopping and extending
their knowledge of the types of consumers who are participating in this
shopping practice. Consumer interest in the notions of ‘reuse, repair,
recycle and repurpose’ is increasingly being reflected in the offerings of
non-secondhand retailers (across different sectors, including fashion)
with retail brands introducing product rental services, repair options,
and resale of used items. Further, fashion retailers are designing on-
trend offerings including ‘re-loved’ clothing lines or limited-edition
special vintage pieces to appeal to secondhand clothing consumers.
6.2. Limitations and future research
The main limitation of the study is the population (secondhand
shoppers and non-shoppers) is restricted to female-identifying con­
sumers, aged 18 years or over. As with previous studies (e.g., Cervellon
et al., 2012; Norum and Norton, 2017), females were selected due to
their higher level of participation and interest in fashion shopping,
particularly secondhand shopping. A further limitation is the time
period in which is study was conducted, that is, during the COVID-19
pandemic when purchase practices may have changed due to lock­
downs and physical shopping restrictions. Data were collected through
an online data provider using respondents who are members of their
consumer research panel. This means consumers who are not members
of the panel were excluded. Lastly, as the data were collected in
Australia, the results may only be relevant within similar economies. To
address these limitations, suggestions for future research include
expanding the study’s framework for other types of secondhand prod­
ucts (e.g., furniture, cars, memorabilia) which would enable the inclu­
sion of male-identifying consumers. Future studies could also investigate
the most appropriate marketing messages for different store types
designed to appeal to different type of secondhand shoppers. Finally,
further studies could be conducted in other countries/cultures to
F. Evans et al.
investigate differing orientations and the impact on secondhand shop­
ping behaviour, for example, on luxury secondhand items (Nwankwo
et al., 2014).
6.3. Conclusion
This research aimed to extend knowledge about consumer orienta­
tions and secondhand shopping behaviour. Consumer orientations were
found to differ among frequent secondhand shoppers and non- or
infrequent shoppers, with consumers with higher levels of frugality,
nostalgia-proneness and style-consciousness more likely to be frequent
secondhand shoppers. Thrift stores were popular among those with
higher levels of frugality and nostalgia-proneness. Other secondhand
store types were more popular among those with higher levels of
ecological-consciousness and fashion-consciousness. Style-conscious
shoppers were likely to shop across all secondhand store types. These
findings show that while there are similarities between secondhand
shoppers, there are also differences based on shopping frequency and
preferred secondhand store type. This study has provided important
insights into secondhand shopper orientations, shopping frequency and
choice of secondhand store type. The findings contribute to retail mar­
keting and consumer behaviour literature and provide practical sug­
gestions for retail managers and marketers.
References
Abbes, I., Hallem, Y., Taga, N., 2020. Second-hand shopping and brand loyalty: the role
of online collaborative redistribution platforms. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 52,
101885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101885.
Bae, S.Y., Yan, R., 2018. Comparison between second-hand apparel shoppers versus non-
shoppers: the perspectives of consumer ethics. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Educ. 13 (9),
727–736.
Bardhi, F., Arnould, E.J., 2005. Thrift shopping: combining utilitarian thrift and hedonic
treat benefits. J. Consum. Behav. 4 (4), 223–233.
Becker-Leifhold, C., Iran, S., 2018. Collaborative fashion consumption – drivers, barriers
and future pathways. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. 22 (2), 189–208.
Belk, R.W., 1975. Situational variables and consumer behavior. J. Consum. Res. 2 (3),
157–164.
Bove, L.L., Nagpal, A., Dorsett, A.D.S., 2009. Exploring the determinants of the frugal
shopper. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 16 (4), 291–297.
Cervellon, M.C., Carey, L., Harms, T., 2012. Something old, something used:
determinants of women’s purchase of vintage fashion vs second-hand fashion. Int. J.
Retail Distrib. Manag. 40 (12), 956–974.
Corvo, S., 2020. ‘How Second-Hand Stores Are Adapting to Increasing Fast-Fashion
Donations’, ABC News, 8 March viewed 10 October 2021. www.abc.net.au/news/20
20-03-08/fast-fashion-versus-op-shops/12034424.
Fairley, S., 2003. In search of relived social experience: group-based nostalgia sport
tourism. J. Sport Manag. 17 (3), 284–304.
Fernando, A.G., Sivakumaran, B., Suganthi, L., 2018. Comparison of perceived
acquisition value sought by online second-hand and new goods shoppers. Eur. J.
Market. 52 (7/8), 1412–1438.
Feldman, J., Lynch Jr., J.G., 1988. Self-generated validity and other effects of
measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. J. Appl. Psychol. 73,
421–435.
Ferraro, C., Sands, S., Brace-Govan, J., 2016. The role of fashionability in second-hand
shopping motivations. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 32, 262–268.
George, D., Mallery, P., 2003. SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and
Reference, 11.0 Update, fourth ed. Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA.
Goldsmith, R.E., Reinecke Flynn, L., Clark, R.A., 2014. The etiology of the frugal
consumer. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 21 (2), 175–184.
Grimmer, L., 2021. Drivers and barriers for city shopping: perspectives from retailers and
consumers in regional Australia. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 61, 102526. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102526.
Grimmer, M., Bingham, T., 2013. Company environmental performance and consumer
purchase intentions. J. Bus. Res. 66, 1945–1953.
Grimmer, M., Kilburn, A.P., Miles, M.P., 2016. The effect of purchase situation on
realized pro-environmental consumer behavior. J. Bus. Res. 69 (5), 1582–1586.
Guiot, D., Roux, D., 2010. A second-hand shoppers’ motivation scale: antecedents,
consequences, and implications for retailers. J. Retailing 86 (4), 355–371.
Gupta, S., Gwozdz, W., Gentry, J., 2019. The role of style versus fashion orientation on
sustainable apparel consumption. J. Macromarketing 39 (2), 188–207.
Hair, J., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis,
seventh ed. Pearson Educational International, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Harris, F., Roby, H., Dibb, S., 2016. Sustainable clothing: challenges, barriers and
interventions for encouraging more sustainable consumer behaviour. Int. J. Consum.
Stud. 40, 309–318.
Holbrook, M., 1993. Nostalgia and consumption preferences: some emerging patterns of
consumer tastes. J. Consum. Res. 20 (2), 245–256.
10
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 67 (2022) 102991
Hoyer, W.D., MacInnis, D.J., Pieters, R., Chan, E., Northey, G., 2018. Consumer
Behaviour. Cengage Learning, South Melbourne, Australia.
Hur, E., 2020. Rebirth fashion: secondhand clothing consumption values and perceived
risks. J. Clean. Prod. 273 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122951 viewed 18
March 2021.
Kessous, A., 2015. Nostalgia and brands: a sweet rather than a bitter cultural evocation of
the past. J. Market. Manag. 31 (17–18), 1899–1923.
Ki, C., Lee, K., Kim, Y.K., 2017. Pleasure and guilt: how do they interplay in luxury
consumption? Eur. J. Market. 51 (4), 722–747.
Kim, H., Damhorst, M., 1998. Environmental concern and apparel consumption. Cloth.
Text. Res. J. 16 (3), 126–133.
Kim, N.L., Woo, H., Ramkumar, B., 2021. The role of product history in consumer
response to online second-hand clothing retail service based on circular fashion.
J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 60 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102457
viewed 5 August 2021.
Lastovicka, J.L., Bettencourt, L.A., Hughner, R.S., Kuntze, R.J., 1999. Lifestyle of the
tight and frugal: theory and measurement. J. Consum. Res. 26 (1), 85–98.
Lee, S.H., 2016. When are frugal consumers not frugal? The influence of personal
networks. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 30, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jretconser.2015.12.005.
Lee, S.E., Jung, H.J., Lee, K.H., 2021. Motivating collaborative consumption in fashion:
consumer benefits, perceived risks, service trust, and usage intention of online
fashion rental services. Sustainability 13 (4). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041804.
Lo, C., Tsarenko, Y., Tojib, D., 2019. To tell or not to tell? The roles of perceived norms
and self-consciousness in understanding consumers’ willingness to recommend
online secondhand apparel shopping. Psychol. Market. 36, 287–304.
Machado, M.A.D., Almeida, SOd, Bollick, L.C., Bragagnolo, G., 2019. Second-hand
fashion market: consumer role in circular economy. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. 23 (3),
382–395.
Masige, S., 2020. ‘Online Second-Hand Fashion Platforms Are Booming as Younger, More
Conscious Consumers Flex Their Spending Power’, Business Insider Australia, 19
November viewed 10 October 2021. www.businessinsider.com.au/online-secondhan
d-platforms-booming-australia-2020-11.
Medalla, M.E., Yamagishi, K., Tiu, A.M., Tanaid, R.A., Abellana, D.P.M., Caballes, S.A.,
Jabilles, E.M., Himang, C., Bongo, M., Ocampo, L., 2020. Modeling the hierarchical
structure of secondhand clothing buying behavior antecedents of millennials.
J. Model. Manag. 15 (4), 1679–1708.
Mohammad, J., Quoquab, F., Sadom, N.Z.M., 2021. Mindful consumption of second-
hand clothing: the role of eWOM, attitude and consumer engagement. J. Fash. Mark.
Manag.: Int. J. 25 (3), 482–510.
Nunnally, J.C., 1978. Psychometric Theory. McGraw Hill, New York, NY.
Neuman, W.L., 2004. Basics of Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative
Approaches. Pearson, Boston.
Neuman, W.L., 2013. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative
Approaches, seventh ed. Pearson, Essex, UK.
Norum, P., Norton, M., 2017. Factors affecting consumer acquisition of secondhand
clothing in the USA. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. 21 (2), 206–218.
Nwankwo, S., Hamelin, H., Khaled, M., 2014. Consumer values, motivation and purchase
intention for luxury goods. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 21 (5), 735–744.
Padmavathy, C., Swapana, M., Paul, J., 2019. Online second-hand shopping motivation:
conceptualization, scale development, and validation. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 51,
19–32.
Park, H.H., Choo, T.G., Ku, Y.S., 2016. The influence of shopping orientation on difficulty
discarding and disposal behavior of fashion products. Fash. Text. Res. J. 18 (6),
833–843.
Park, H., Martinez, CSJ, 2020. ‘Secondhand clothing sales are booming – and may help
solve the sustainability crisis in the fashion industry’, 17 November Conversation.
viewed 10 October 2021. https://theconversation.com/secondhand-clothing-sales
-are-booming-and-may-help-solve-the-sustainability-crisis-in-the-fashion-indust
ry-148403.
Paul, J., Rosenbaum, M., 2020. Retailing and consumer services at a tipping point: new
conceptual frameworks and theoretical models. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 54,
101977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101977.
Piacentini, M., Mailer, G., 2004. Symbolic consumption in teenagers’ clothing choices.
J. Consum. Behav. 3 (3), 251–262.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method
biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended
remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88 (5), 879–903.
Pookulangara, S., Shephard, A., 2013. Slow fashion movement: understanding consumer
perceptions – an exploratory study. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 20 (2), 200–206.
Pravet, I., Holmlund, M., 2018. Signing up for voluntary simplicity – consumer motives
and effects. Soc. Bus. Rev. 13 (1), 80–99.
Quester, P., Pettigrew, S., Hawkins, D., 2010. Consumer Behaviour: Implications for
Marketing Strategy, sixth ed. McGraw-Hill, North Ryde, Sydney.
Ramkumar, B., Woo, H., Kim, N.L., 2021. The cross-cultural effects of brand status and
social facilitation on enhancing consumer perception toward circular fashion
services. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 28 (4), 1254–1269.
Richins, M., 2004. The material values scale: measurement properties and development
of a short form. J. Consum. Res. 31 (1), 209–219.
Richins, M., Dawson, S., 1992. A consumer values orientation for materialism and its
measurement: scale development and validation. J. Consum. Res. 19, 303–316.
Schindler, R.M., Holbrook, M.B., 2003. Nostalgia for early experience as a determinant of
consumer preferences. Psychol. Market. 20 (4), 275–304.
Seo, M.J., Kim, M., 2019. Understanding the purchasing behaviour of second-hand
fashion shoppers in a non-profit thrift store context. Int. J. Fash. Des. Technol. Educ.
12 (3), 301–312.
F. Evans et al.
Sproles, G.B., Kendall, E.L., 1986. A methodology for profiling consumers’ decision
making styles. J. Consum. Aff. 20 (2), 167–179.
Stanescu, M.D., 2021. State of the art of post-consumer textile waste upcycling to reach
the zero waste milestone. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 28 (12), 14253–14270.
Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S., 2007. Using Multivariate Statistics, fifth ed. Pearson: Allyn
and Bacon, Boston.
ThredUP 2021, 2021. Resale Report. United States of America, Oakland, CA viewed 29
September 2021. www.thredup.com/resale.
11
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 67 (2022) 102991
Wagner, T., Rudolph, T., 2010. Towards a hierarchical theory of shopping motivation.
J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 17 (5), 415–429.
Yan, R.N., Bae, S.Y., Xu, H., 2015. Second-hand clothing shopping among college
students: the role of psychographic characteristics’. Young Consum. 16 (1), 85–98.
Zaman, M., Hyejune, P., Youn-Kyung, K., Soo-hee, P., 2019. Consumer orientations of
second-hand clothing shoppers. J. Global Fash. Market. 10 (2), 163–176.
Zhang, B., Kim, J.-H., 2013. Luxury fashion consumption in China: factors affecting
attitude and purchase intent. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 20 (1), 68–79.