2003
DOI: 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2004.00335.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fashion groups, gender, and boredom proneness

Abstract: This study examined differences between men and women and among fashion consumer groups (fashion innovators, fashion opinion leaders, innovative communicators, and fashion followers) in propensity toward boredom. Participants (126 male, 130 female university students) completed questionnaires measuring fashion group membership, boredom proneness, and demographics. anova revealed significant effects for fashion group for two dimensions of boredom proneness: internal stimulation and constraint. Innovative commun… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
28
1
2

Year Published

2005
2005
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
5
28
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The range of observed scores on the Need For Touch scale (À32 to þ 36) encompassed nearly the entire possible range (À36 to þ36). The mean score of 15.38 was consistent with earlier research: M ¼ 18.1 (Stanforth, 1995); M ¼ 15.29 (Studak & Workman, 2004); M ¼ 16.89 (Workman & Kidd, 2000). The range of scores on the Fashion Innovativeness and Opinion Leadership scale encompassed the entire possible range of 0-24.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The range of observed scores on the Need For Touch scale (À32 to þ 36) encompassed nearly the entire possible range (À36 to þ36). The mean score of 15.38 was consistent with earlier research: M ¼ 18.1 (Stanforth, 1995); M ¼ 15.29 (Studak & Workman, 2004); M ¼ 16.89 (Workman & Kidd, 2000). The range of scores on the Fashion Innovativeness and Opinion Leadership scale encompassed the entire possible range of 0-24.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 86%
“…Peck and Childers (2003a;2003b;2006) did not report testing the Need For Touch scale for gender differences. Thus, it may be possible that Stanforth, 1995 Higher need for mental stimulation Studak & Workman, 2004 Higher optimum stimulation level Kwon & Workman, 1996 Workman 131 Women expressed a want-based (psychological) approach to fashion problem recognition (Workman & Studak, 2006); individuals who score high on the autotelic dimension of Need for Touch use hedonic-directed touch to stimulate pleasurable emotions.…”
Section: Gender and Need For Touchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This procedure yielded the following breakdown of consumer groups: fashion innovators ( n = 46, 15.6%), fashion opinion leaders ( n = 18, 6.2%), innovative communicators ( n = 23, 7.8%), and fashion followers ( n = 207, 70.4%). This breakdown is consistent with previous studies 17,18,20,21 that have used Hirschman and Adcock’s 16 procedure. In addition, the breakdown is proportionate to what would be expected in the consumer market 30 …”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Moreover, fashion leaders tend to know which information is needed at the time of searching since they are knowledgeable in fashion information and be confident in evaluating the (Polegato & Wall, 1980;Studak & Workman, 2004). Thus, it is expected that those with a high level of fashion leadership are more comfortable in expressing their tastes and themselves.…”
Section: ) Fashion Leadershipmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Individuals with a high level of fashion leadership tend to be more interested in fashion, explore new information, and possess more information about fashion than others with a low level of fashion leadership (Studak & Workman, 2004). Also, fashion leaders tend to be more confident in their information and their own taste (Kaiser, 1990).…”
Section: ) Fashion Leadershipmentioning
confidence: 99%