Socioeconomic characteristics of consumer applicance innovators and non-innovators within a defined social system are assessed. Such characteristics are derived from the innovation-diffusion literature and represent variables of highest predictive ability in previous research. The relative importance of each characteristic and the predictive value of the set of characteristics are measured with multiple discriminant analysis techniques.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
America's Tastemakers, Research Reports Nos. 1 and 2, Princeton, N. J.: Opinion Research Corporation, 1959.
2.
AndersonT. W., An Introduction to Multivariate Statistical Analysis, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1958, 130–1.
3.
RaymondA. Bauer, “Consumer Behavior as Risk Taking,” in RobertS. Hancock, ed., Proceedings of the American Marketing Association, Chicago, June 1960, 389–98.
4.
WilliamE. Bell, “Consumer Innovators: A Unique Market for Newness,” in GreyserStephen A., ed., Proceedings of the Winter Conference of the American Marketing Association, Chicago, 1963, 85–95.
5.
FrancisS. Bourne, “Group Influence in Marketing and Public Relations,” in LikertRensis, and HayesSamuel P.Jr., eds., Some Applications of Behavioral Science Research, Paris: UNESCO, 1957, 217–24.
6.
JamesS. Coleman, KatzElihu, and MenzelHerbert, Medical Innovation: A Diffusion Study, Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1966.
7.
RichardP. Coleman, “The Significance of Social Stratification in Selling,” in BellMartin L., ed., Proceedings of the 43rd National Conference of the American Marketing Association, Chicago, December 1960, 171–84.
8.
ScottM. Cunningham, “Perceived Risk as a Factor in the Diffusion of New Product Information,” in HaasRaymond M., ed., 1966 Fall Proceedings of the American Marketing Association, Chicago, 1966, 698–721.
9.
RonaldA. Fisher, Statistical Methods for Research Workers, London: Oliver and Boyd, 1958, 285–9.
10.
RonaldE. Frank, and MassyWilliam F., “Innovation and Brand Choice: The Folger's Invasion,” in GreyserStephen A., ed., Proceedings of the Winter Conference of the American Marketing Association, Chicago, 1963, 96–107.
11.
RonaldE. Frank, and MorrisonDonald G., “Bias in Multiple Discriminant Analysis,”Journal of Marketing Research, 2 (August 1965), 250–8.
12.
CyrilH. Goulden, Methods of Statistical Analysis, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1952, 378–93.
13.
KatzElihu, “The Social Itinerary of Technical Change: Two Studies on the Diffusion of Innovation,”Human Organization, 20 (Summer 1961), 70–82.
14.
KatzElihu, and LazarsfeldPaul F., Personal Influence, Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1955.
15.
MauriceG. Kendall, A Course in Multivariate Analysis, London: Charles Griffin and Co., Limited, 1957.
16.
CharlesW. King, “Fashion Adoption: A Rebuttal to the ‘Trickle Down’ Theory,” in GreyserStephen A., ed., Proceedings of the Winter Conference of the American Marketing Association, Chicago, 1963, 108–25.
17.
MostellerFrederick, and WallaceDavid L., “Inference in an Authorship Problem,”Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58 (June 1963), 275–309.
18.
EverettM. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, New York: The Free Press, 1962.
19.
EverettM. Rogers, “Characteristics of Agricultural Innovators and Other Adopter Categories,”Studies of Innovation and of Communication to the Public, in SchrammWilbur, ed., Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1962, 63–97.
20.
VeblenThorstein, The Theory of the Leisure Class, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1912.
21.
WilliamH. WhyteJr., “The Web of Word of Mouth,”Fortune, 50 (November 1954), 140–3, 204–12.
22.
ZaltmanGerald, Marketing: Contributions from the Behavioral Sciences, New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1965, Ch. 3.
